Corolla Cross - Claimed vs actual consumption

neoprema said:
Unless you're VW, then its a standardized test with IF statements in all the onboard code to check if its being tested.. ;)
Click to expand...
No, that's just for emissions :ROFL: If you're looking for companies who lie about their fuel consumption, look a bit further East.
 
dj_jyno said:
It's a standardised test, which unfortunately does not match how the average person uses their vehicle. If you put two cars side-by-side, and the one has lower fuel consumption on paper, that will generally be the one that is more economical.

I usually match or achieve better fuel economy than the tested figure, in all the cars I've driven.
Click to expand...
Driving miss Daisy?
 
Gtx Gaming said:
Yup thats normal, was disccused just other day on mybb about the not so good feul consumption on these models.

The answer is always the 320D, more than 10 years old with an even older than that engine design and still beat modern day cars in feul consumption and power delivery.
Click to expand...
Typical BMW driver, can't even spell fuel.
 
As someone who's beginning to dip my toe into shopping for a newer car (second hand), this is quite surprising. Corolla Cross is currently at the top of my list but this does put a bit of a dampener on my thoughts. It also makes the hybrid even more enticing. @Snyper564, what is your consumption at?
 
I wish there was a standard for a proper fuel consumption test under real life conditions. My car does about 4l/100km more than that claimed consumption
 
Gtx Gaming said:
Yup thats normal, was disccused just other day on mybb about the not so good feul consumption on these models.

The answer is always the 320D, more than 10 years old with an even older than that engine design and still beat modern day cars in feul consumption and power delivery.
Click to expand...
316i

1712388080214.png
 
Speedster said:
As someone who's beginning to dip my toe into shopping for a newer car (second hand), this is quite surprising. Corolla Cross is currently at the top of my list but this does put a bit of a dampener on my thoughts. It also makes the hybrid even more enticing. @Snyper564, what is your consumption at?
Click to expand...
Winter 4.8l per 100 summer with aircon blasting 5.6l per 100

Still super happy with the car zero regrets!
 
Speedster said:
As someone who's beginning to dip my toe into shopping for a newer car (second hand), this is quite surprising. Corolla Cross is currently at the top of my list but this does put a bit of a dampener on my thoughts. It also makes the hybrid even more enticing. @Snyper564, what is your consumption at?
Click to expand...

Thankfully its a company car and company petrol

With the 40L tank I average around 380 - 420KM before I need to fill up

If I had bought it myself, I probably would have traded it in already

Spending like R3600 on fuel for 4 fill-ups a month isn't a plan when its your own RRR

Before this I was driving a 1.4L Polo, and could easily crack 850KM on a tank
 
Speedster said:
Driving miss Daisy?
Click to expand...
Not really. Reading traffic, coasting to a stop instead of barreling at it and then using the brakes, and keeping the accelerator pedal as stable as possible. I actually accelerate quite briskly to get up to my desired speed as quickly as possible without looking like a tool.
 
SHL said:
My Honda CR-V (2.0) averages 7.5-8.0L/100km on the freeway so something definitely off with the Cross.
Click to expand...
My Honda 5th gen 1.5T AWD had a sticker saying 7.0 - I never saw that value in the 90K of driving I did with it even on long >500km trips. It went back to the fleet company last month. I drive to speed limits.

To the OP, the consumption was crazy on the car , in the first year. I told Honda at the service. Unsure what they did or it was just the service, but it came down significantly after that. My average when car was handed in was about 8.5L/100km . As I didn't choose the car and I didn't pay for petrol I wasn't so miffed. But if I had bought it, would have sold quickly.

It was a nice car otherwise. I miss the space. Now driving a damn t-cross which is frugal - but vw turbo engines normally are.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SHL
Speedster said:
So hybrid saves roughly 4l/100km? At current fuel prices that's R100/100km, i.e. R1/km saving. On new pricing, hybrid is R43k more...
Click to expand...
I went through the same mental gymnastics when deciding non hybrid vs hybrid. Eventually I decided the extra amount was worth it, but not because of consumption. It would take a couple of years of savings to break even.

My main reasons for going hybrid were:
  • eCVT gearbox - i.e. not a CVT gearbox. Super reliable and all around pretty cool when you research it. Thinking long term reliability
  • Performance - not looking at a racing car, but the petrol version just felt sluggish. The Hybrid was a lot "peppier"
  • Long term maintenance - No alternator or starter and even the brakes last longer due to regenerative braking
  • Fuel consumption - based upon lots of reviews and reading, the consumption is really good.
But my 1st and 2nd point were the real reason to go hybrid.
 
Dubious_outlook said:
I went through the same mental gymnastics when deciding non hybrid vs hybrid. Eventually I decided the extra amount was worth it, but not because of consumption. It would take a couple of years of savings to break even.

My main reasons for going hybrid were:
  • eCVT gearbox - i.e. not a CVT gearbox. Super reliable and all around pretty cool when you research it. Thinking long term reliability
  • Performance - not looking at a racing car, but the petrol version just felt sluggish. The Hybrid was a lot "peppier"
  • Long term maintenance - No alternator or starter and even the brakes last longer due to regenerative braking
  • Fuel consumption - based upon lots of reviews and reading, the consumption is really good.
But my 1st and 2nd point were the real reason to go hybrid.
Click to expand...
Those eCVT's look really good, bodes well for the future of Hybrids, another reason they are low cost to run, well the Toyota and some Honda ones at least.

"It's an incredibly elegant engineering solution. All cars with a gearbox (manual or auto) have numerous gears that are meshed, synchronised and unmeshed frequently. Over time, they wear and chip and grate off each other, especially if you're clumsy on the gearstick.

The eCVT is fixed - the gears are assembled in the factory and never un-mesh. So much less movement, friction and shocks - just rotating gears.

Additionally, the engine isn't mechanically linked to the wheels - it's linked via the motor's electric field. This doesn't transmit the shocks and backlash from the drivetrain into the engine, it tends to get absorbed by the electric field.

Finally, the infinitely variable nature of the CVT means you can run the engine at the sweet spot of RPM no matter what speed the wheels are travelling, so that means less strain on the engine."
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X