Fuel consumption

S

skyhawk

Expert Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2010
Messages
1,569
Reaction score
2
Location
Hillbrow
Based on carmag's +/-20000km test


Toyota Auris HSD XR (73kw/142nm) 6.64/100km

Opel Corsa 1.4T sport (110kw/220nm) 6.67/100km

VW Jetta 2.0tdi highline (103kw/320nm) 6.12/100km

Isuzu KB300 DTEQ lx 4x4 DC (130kw/380nm) 9.67/100km

Toyota 86 High (140kw/204nm) 9.58/100km

Audi A7 sportback 3.0 bitdi quattro (235kw/650nm) 8.86/100km

VW gOLF 1.4 tSI comfortline dsg (90kw/200nm) 8.3l/100km

Honda civic tourer (104kw/174nm) 8.99/100km

Hyundai i20 1.4 fluid (74kw/133nm) 9.1/100km

VW Amarok 2.0 bitdi highline (132kn/420nm) 4 motion at 9.78/100

How is a lighter and less powerful engined car like the i20 use more fuel than a bakkie which is way heavier and more powerful ?
 
skyhawk said:
Based on carmag's +/-20000km test


Toyota Auris HSD XR (73kw/142nm) 6.64/100km

Opel Corsa 1.4T sport (110kw/220nm) 6.67/100km

VW Jetta 2.0tdi highline (103kw/320nm) 6.12/100km

Isuzu KB300 DTEQ lx 4x4 DC (130kw/380nm) 9.67/100km

Toyota 86 High (140kw/204nm) 9.58/100km

Audi A7 sportback 3.0 bitdi quattro (235kw/650nm) 8.86/100km

VW gOLF 1.4 tSI comfortline dsg (90kw/200nm) 8.3l/100km

Honda civic tourer (104kw/174nm) 8.99/100km

Hyundai i20 1.4 fluid (74kw/133nm) 9.1/100km

VW Amarok 2.0 bitdi highline (132kn/420nm) 4 motion at 9.78/100

How is a lighter and less powerful engined car like the i20 use more fuel than a bakkie which is way heavier and more powerful ?
Click to expand...

Diesel vs petrol.
 
skyhawk said:
How is a lighter and less powerful engined car like the i20 use more fuel than a bakkie which is way heavier and more powerful ?
Click to expand...

Lol, unit fail... It's litres per 100km, lower numbers are better. Fecxking retarded way of measuring fuel consumption IMHO but I'll be shot down violently by the next 10 replies stating it's the most accurate blah blah blah. Still don't care how many litres it take to do 100km(I don't drive in 100km blocks), I want to know how many km I can get per litre I put in.

And those little 1.4's don't have great fuel consumption because they're generally an older design of engine and you have to thrash them to go anywhere. Is why I will never buy a normally aspirated car smaller than a 1.6.
 
ScottulusMaximus said:
Lol, unit fail... It's litres per 100km, lower numbers are better. Fecxking retarded way of measuring fuel consumption IMHO but I'll be shot down violently by the next 10 replies stating it's the most accurate blah blah blah. Still don't care how many litres it take to do 100km(I don't drive in 100km blocks), I want to know how many km I can get per litre I put in.

And those little 1.4's don't have great fuel consumption because they're generally an older design of engine and you have to thrash them to go anywhere. Is why I will never buy a normally aspirated car smaller than a 1.6.
Click to expand...

its simple really..

You take the l/100kms value... and calculate how many kms per litre if you want to..

Now stop being difficult and measure it like the rest of us normal folk.
 
skyhawk said:
How is a lighter and less powerful engined car like the i20 use more fuel than a bakkie which is way heavier and more powerful ?
Click to expand...

I drive the 1.4D i20 and get 5.3-5.5 on average.
47L of diesel gives me 850-950km depending on how I drive :P
 
This isn't exactly apples vs apples comparison.
I mean you're comparing a under powered N/A petrol car against a well equipped Turbo Diesel Bakkie.
 
Another thing to consider is that the fuel consumption manufacturers put out is based on ideal conditions. Not sure what exactly they are. A 2 litre doing 110km/h is a lot more efficient than a 1.1l doing the same speed.

I remember one episode of Top Gear where they had a normal car (think it was a Toyota Prius) going round their track flat out with an M3 behind just keeping up. The M3 ended up using less fuel than the Prius.
 
signates said:
Another thing to consider is that the fuel consumption manufacturers put out is based on ideal conditions. Not sure what exactly they are. A 2 litre doing 110km/h is a lot more efficient than a 1.1l doing the same speed.

I remember one episode of Top Gear where they had a normal car (think it was a Toyota Prius) going round their track flat out with an M3 behind just keeping up. The M3 ended up using less fuel than the Prius.
Click to expand...

Source?

Higher throttle opening actually is more efficient then lower throttle opening (less pumping loss).
The major factor at 110km/h is aerodynamic drag, anyway.
 
dsimonse said:
This isn't exactly apples vs apples comparison.
I mean you're comparing a under powered N/A petrol car against a well equipped Turbo Diesel Bakkie.
Click to expand...

You know turbochargers get overfueld just to cool them down and prevent enging pinging? Increases fuel consumption!
 
2013 Honda Jazz trend get 5.7l/100km avg. Range of 5.4-5.9l/100km. Thats a mixture of bumper to bumper and 120km/h with aircon on.
 
signates said:
Another thing to consider is that the fuel consumption manufacturers put out is based on ideal conditions. Not sure what exactly they are. A 2 litre doing 110km/h is a lot more efficient than a 1.1l doing the same speed.

I remember one episode of Top Gear where they had a normal car (think it was a Toyota Prius) going round their track flat out with an M3 behind just keeping up. The M3 ended up using less fuel than the Prius.
Click to expand...

If you believe everything you see on Top Gear then I'm sure you believe everything you see on Facebook - and help like those posts so that little girl will get her operation.

You need to realise that in this test the Prius was driven at speeds that the owners would never drive at. I'm also going to get bad fuel efficiency from my i10 if I drive at max speed (150km'ish) compared to BMW doing the same speed. But how fuel efficient is the beamer when driven at max speed?
 
cbrunsdonza said:
If you believe everything you see on Top Gear then I'm sure you believe everything you see on Facebook - and help like those posts so that little girl will get her operation.



You need to realise that in this test the Prius was driven at speeds that the owners would never drive at. I'm also going to get bad fuel efficiency from my i10 if I drive at max speed (150km'ish) compared to BMW doing the same speed. But how fuel efficient is the beamer when driven at max speed?
Click to expand...


The point of the top gear test was that fuel efficiency comes down to driving style as well, not just the size of the engine. Which is exactly what you just said. Driving the Prius at 150km/h is less fuel efficient than driving an M3 at the same speed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X