Which would you pick?

SauRoNZA said:
Is it heavier than some others cars? Yes.

Is it actually heavy? Not really.

Is it completely out of whack for like for like comparisons? Not at all.

If anything I feel the Chinese cars are more in line with their real world expectation and don’t lie about it like the rest. I seem to remember they use a more realistic testing mechanism than the European cars.
Click to expand...
Fully agreed.

Also, even if a car uses 2l/100km more than its competitor, that's R400ish on a 1000km. It's not nothing, but it's more than made up for by the significantly better upfront vehicle cost (and hence cheaper insurance too).
 
SauRoNZA said:
Is it heavier than some others cars? Yes.

Is it actually heavy? Not really.

Is it completely out of whack for like for like comparisons? Not at all.

If anything I feel the Chinese cars are more in line with their real world expectation and don’t lie about it like the rest. I seem to remember they use a more realistic testing mechanism than the European cars.
Click to expand...
Yeah the claims are always off. My Clio was supposed to get 5.5 to 6 average. But it was never that unless you nursed it everywhere.
 
One does not always realize the impact of higher fuel consumption.
I drove a Defender for 12 years and I got 6-7km/l on average, does not matter town or highway. I always laughed it off.
Sold it and got a 1.4tsi. Now I get easily 13km/l or better in town and 18km/l long distance.
It changed my perspective. I don't care to drive anywhere, It almost feel if its free. Used to tell the kids they must at least try organize trips so we get everything on one trip.
Now I don't care, almost look for a reason to drive somewhere.
 
SauRoNZA said:
Is it heavier than some others cars? Yes.

Is it actually heavy? Not really.

Is it completely out of whack for like for like comparisons? Not at all.

If anything I feel the Chinese cars are more in line with their real world expectation and don’t lie about it like the rest. I seem to remember they use a more realistic testing mechanism than the European cars.
Click to expand...
My frame of reference would be a co-director of my wife's company. She drives a Merc A200 petrol, so 1500 cc turbo, delivering a substantial amount of power under a rather heavy body. She drives like she stole the car, yet average consumption shows 6.3 l/100km.

Jolion - 1500cc turbo , 105kw/210nm, 1345kg.......8.9 l/100km
A200 - 1500cc turbo, 135kw/280nm, 1505kg.......6.3 l/100km
BMW 118i - 1500cc turbo, 115kw/230nm, 1390kg........6.4l/100km
(Specs and weights from Google, also the BM's fuel consumption)

In comparison, the Chinese cars are then exceptionally thirsty. Real world comparison? Looks like a Western World and Eastern World have different concepts of "real world"........?......or what would then be "like for like comparisons"?
 
Pax said:
My frame of reference would be a co-director of my wife's company. She drives a Merc A200 petrol, so 1500 cc turbo, delivering a substantial amount of power under a rather heavy body. She drives like she stole the car, yet average consumption shows 6.3 l/100km.

Jolion - 1500cc turbo , 105kw/210nm, 1345kg.......8.9 l/100km
A200 - 1500cc turbo, 135kw/280nm, 1505kg.......6.3 l/100km
BMW 118i - 1500cc turbo, 115kw/230nm, 1390kg........6.4l/100km
(Specs and weights from Google, also the BM's fuel consumption)

In comparison, the Chinese cars are then exceptionally thirsty. Real world comparison? Looks like a Western World and Eastern World have different concepts of "real world"........?......or what would then be "like for like comparisons"?
Click to expand...

Real world as in what the car actually does, not the claimed figure on a spec sheet which is all tested on a rolling road at 80km/h with no wind etc.

Case in point your Mercede A200 in the real world gets wildly varying fuel economy across different model years so likely one of those cars that is great in the city but sucks longer distance or vice versa.


But neither of your comparison cars are fair to the Jolion which is a completely different more SUV style and hence even with those same engines inside it would get worse economy.

But in the real world it does 7.8l/100 albeit it from a smaller data set and I expect newer models to be better.

Haval Jolion MPG - Actual MPG from 5 Haval Jolion owners

The most accurate Haval Jolion MPG estimates based on real world results of 101 thousand miles driven in 5 Haval Jolions
www.fuelly.com

The BMW is actually the worst and gets nowhere near 6.4l/100 in any model year other than 2021 which is likely a data anomaly.

People need to stop looking at claimed figures and do real world comparisons, nobody drives a constant 80km/h on a rolling road with zero resistance.

Also people need to stop posting a single good tank as a reference of how economical a car is and use the total lifetime figures and stop being dishonest about it.

Don’t know where you pulled 8.9 out for the Jolion anyway, the claimed figured is 8.1. Ironically the more powerful version of the engine is more economical at a claimed 7.5l/100 which is probably because it hits the torque curve better at the stupid 80km/h rolling road speed.
 
Pax said:
My frame of reference would be a co-director of my wife's company. She drives a Merc A200 petrol, so 1500 cc turbo, delivering a substantial amount of power under a rather heavy body. She drives like she stole the car, yet average consumption shows 6.3 l/100km.

Jolion - 1500cc turbo , 105kw/210nm, 1345kg.......8.9 l/100km
A200 - 1500cc turbo, 135kw/280nm, 1505kg.......6.3 l/100km
BMW 118i - 1500cc turbo, 115kw/230nm, 1390kg........6.4l/100km
(Specs and weights from Google, also the BM's fuel consumption)

In comparison, the Chinese cars are then exceptionally thirsty. Real world comparison? Looks like a Western World and Eastern World have different concepts of "real world"........?......or what would then be "like for like comparisons"?
Click to expand...

A200 base spec is R813k
118i is R713

They're getting 1l/100km less in real life. Do you know how many km you need to drive to make up the difference? And then we haven't even considered insurance costs. And services.
 
Speedster said:
A200 base spec is R813k
118i is R713

They're getting 1l/100km less in real life. Do you know how many km you need to drive to make up the difference? And then we haven't even considered insurance costs. And services.
Click to expand...

THIS.

Can literally buy two cars from Haval for the same money.

Or put a **** load of money in your pocket.

The real joke is both those cars will be landing some features compared to the Haval at that base spec.

People still buying new German cars are unsound in their financial decision making logic.
 
Lol people comparing petrol to diesel, SUVs to hatchbacks. May as well start comparing penis sizes to vaginas...
 
Speedster said:
A200 base spec is R813k
118i is R713

They're getting 1l/100km less in real life. Do you know how many km you need to drive to make up the difference? And then we haven't even considered insurance costs. And services.
Click to expand...
Yes, the prices differ, so do overall quality, but this was only about fuel consumption, and the quoted one for the Merc IS real life, one being used from day to day whereto I have physical access, so, no, they do Not use more fuel than quoted......2.5 l/100km less than the Chines equivalent, but delivering more power and having a heavier body.

I can't wait to see a Chinese car approaching a half mil kms vs a Merc with the same kms......last mentioned, I have experience of. I am yet to find any Chinese car still on the road with over 200k km, not to mention like 463k km (the Merc I refer to)
 
Pax said:
Yes, the prices differ, so do overall quality, but this was only about fuel consumption, and the quoted one for the Merc IS real life, one being used from day to day whereto I have physical access, so, no, they do Not use more fuel than quoted......2.5 l/100km less than the Chines equivalent, but delivering more power and having a heavier body.

I can't wait to see a Chinese car approaching a half mil kms vs a Merc with the same kms......last mentioned, I have experience of. I am yet to find any Chinese car still on the road with over 200k km, not to mention like 463k km (the Merc I refer to)
Click to expand...
I'm not sure where you got 8.9 for the Jolion. The sticker on my windscreen says 8.1 and I'll be very surprised if it ends up at over 7.5l/100km across a month.

Fuel consumption is indeed a thing, but I think it's less of a thing than people make of it, especially if we're looking in the region of 1l/100km.
 
Pax said:
Yes, the prices differ, so do overall quality, but this was only about fuel consumption, and the quoted one for the Merc IS real life, one being used from day to day whereto I have physical access, so, no, they do Not use more fuel than quoted......2.5 l/100km less than the Chines equivalent, but delivering more power and having a heavier body.

I can't wait to see a Chinese car approaching a half mil kms vs a Merc with the same kms......last mentioned, I have experience of. I am yet to find any Chinese car still on the road with over 200k km, not to mention like 463k km (the Merc I refer to)
Click to expand...
You are still not comparing like for like.

For reference my hatch is claimed to do 8.2 l/100km, which is heavy for a hatch and about the same as the Haval. In the real world I average 12.5 l/100km. I have no doubt that with my driving style the Haval would use less. If you want to compare, then you need to use real world figures and the same body style.

Also Merc's quality is kak. If you wanted to use an example, you could have chosen any of the other Germans. And we're not discussing quality anyway, you brought the Merc into this...
 
Last edited:
Speedster said:
I'm not sure where you got 8.9 for the Jolion. The sticker on my windscreen says 8.1 and I'll be very surprised if it ends up at over 7.5l/100km across a month.

Fuel consumption is indeed a thing, but I think it's less of a thing than people make of it, especially if we're looking in the region of 1l/100km.
Click to expand...
Post no 216 above.
 
Mike Hoxbig said:
You are still not comparing like for like.

For reference my hatch is claimed to do 8.2 l/100km, which is heavy for a hatch and about the same as the Haval. In the real world I average 12.5 l/100km. I have no doubt that with my driving style the Haval would use less.

Also Merc's quality is kak. If you wanted to use an example, you could have chosen any of the other Germans. And we're not discussing quality anyway, you brought the Merc into this...
Click to expand...
Ok, let's know how many Mercs of 'kak' quality you've owned? None of mine ever was of 'kak' quality. Many other brands I had can however be described as such, not any Merc, Bm or Volvo I owned though.

...............And 12.5 l/100km.....a 8 cylinder V8 with carburettors I must assume, or you have a fuel leak somewhere.

"You are still not comparing like for like.". So, if I may not compare compact 1500cc turbo petrol cars, what would in your mind be 'like for like'?
 
Pax said:
Ok, let's know how many Mercs of 'kak' quality you've owned? None of mine ever was of 'kak' quality. Many other brands I had can however be described as such, not any Merc, Bm or Volvo I owned though.
Click to expand...
Don't need to, you chose Merc as the benchmark for your quality comparison. They can't even beat a Kia.

1000061519.jpg

Now you can answer your own question - how many Havals have you owned?

Pax said:
..............And 12.5 l/100km.....a 8 cylinder V8 with carburettors I must assume, or you have a fuel leak somewhere.
Click to expand...
V8 in a hatch, lol. It's a 1.8T.
Pax said:
"You are still not comparing like for like.". So, if I may not compare compact 1500cc turbo petrol cars, what would in your mind be 'like for like'?
Click to expand...
Exactly my point. Anyone can bring in a random comparison. Doesn't make it a valid one unless you are comparing something that competes in the same segment...
 
LOL a study where Nissan and Ford beat Merc. BMW, Toyota, VW
For me quality is more the quality of parts and material used. The road noise. The stitching of upholstery. The smoothness of the engine and gearbox.
Problems per 100 vehicles sound more like a reliability thing.
Also, the more basic things you have the less chance of it going wrong. Less chance of shocks and springs giving a problem than air suspension.
 
Mike Hoxbig said:
You are still not comparing like for like.

For reference my hatch is claimed to do 8.2 l/100km, which is heavy for a hatch and about the same as the Haval. In the real world I average 12.5 l/100km. I have no doubt that with my driving style the Haval would use less. If you want to compare, then you need to use real world figures and the same body style.

Also Merc's quality is kak. If you wanted to use an example, you could have chosen any of the other Germans. And we're not discussing quality anyway, you brought the Merc into this...
Click to expand...
VW quality isn't great either, leaving BMW??
 
Jean Claude Vaaldamme said:
LOL a study where Nissan and Ford beat Merc. BMW, Toyota, VW
For me quality is more the quality of parts and material used. The road noise. The stitching of upholstery. The smoothness of the engine and gearbox.
Problems per 100 vehicles sound more like a reliability thing.
Also, the more basic things you have the less chance of it going wrong. Less chance of shocks and springs giving a problem than air suspension.
Click to expand...
Lol I thought the chart was upside down but then saw the Lex on top then the rest of it didn't make sense. The Tesla is also notoriously kak build quality.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X