Why your fuel consumption is worse than what your car says

[Toxxyc]

I've always gotten better than claimed consumption on my last 4 cars, and one was pretty modded. Drilled larger, new computer, a ton of upgrades, etc. Proton Gen 2, Hyundai i20 1.6 Manual, Honda Jazz 1.5 and the Honda CR-V 2.0 all give better economy than they claim, but then again I can drive like a grandma if I want to.

 

[supersunbird]

Suppliers hide behind the words " up to" to over up their sins and failure to deliver on so-called services.
So yes I agree, the words just irritate these days.

I'd love to see the end result of a car you'd design that advertises with definite fuel consumption, it would only allow acceleration at a specific throttle point, you'd have a team that washes and polishes it every night, and make sure the tires are always at same pressure and the exact same fuel is used...

 

[Foxhound5366]

No not really. Why add the complicated mechanism to a perfectly good manual transmission? Just adds to the weight and increases maintenance issues and break down risk?
nothing beats a simple well-constructed gearbox with a clutch and a simple gear lever. No relays, coils, electronic controls, wires to age and break, burn, short etc.

Aah but that's a slippery slope. The war on complexity is already lost. Modern cars all rely on computer systems which will all die eventually. We die too, as you may have noticed. At least if you buy a secondhand automatic car, you can hope the box prevented the driver from damaging the engine through over-revving or lugging.

 

[Foxhound5366]

I'd love to see the end result of a car you'd design that advertises with definite fuel consumption, it would only allow acceleration at a specific throttle point, you'd have a team that washes and polishes it every night, and make sure the tires are always at same pressure and the exact same fuel is used...

So a Tesla, basically?

 

[c3n0byt3]

I dunno, those Wesbank numbers look suspect.
~6l/100km for a Sorento?
Would've made more sense for Wesbank to try and replicate the route for the WLTP.
That way you get, our fuels, our environment, our roads and potentially our drivers.

 

[MrR]

Who cares about consumption?

It's who you can smoke at the next traffic light, amirite?

As long as you don't hit the pole.

 

[Foxhound5366]

I suspect that the WesBank thing was probably run like the Total Economy Run, in which I got to compete as a driver. You basically have one driver, one navigator and one auditor in each car. The fuel cap is sealed and the car can only refueled during carefully monitored stops where it is weighed and checked for signs of tampering. I remember in the last Total Economy Run I did, the diesel Ford Figos absolutely cleaned up. The format is basically highway driving at constant cruise, no aircon and all windows rolled up for maximum fuel efficiency. So definitely not "real-world", but still a hell of a lot of fun on the road

 

[Dan C]

Where's @LaraC , she can do twice the manufacture's claim in distance.

 

[Archer]

No not really. Why add the complicated mechanism to a perfectly good manual transmission? Just adds to the weight and increases maintenance issues and break down risk?
nothing beats a simple well-constructed gearbox with a clutch and a simple gear lever. No relays, coils, electronic controls, wires to age and break, burn, short etc.

And yet here we are with fuel injected cars controlled by wires and controls and stuff that are by far more reliable than their mechanical predecessor.
Reliability is also a non event, or do all the automatic cars in the USA last 500kkms by magic? I'd wager a modest amount of maintenance has far more impact on reliability, and manual or auto ain't gonna survive abuse
I'd also love to meet the average driver who knows the precise torque and power curve for his vehicle, and precisely adapts his right foot to optimise for the current conditions like car load, road slope, air intake, ambient temp, etc etc and thereby beats out a pre programmed ECU+TCU in any metric

 

[asshat99]

total economy run - I know for a fact that many of the (winning) manufacturers simply change the tuning so that the car can barely idle and has no top end. As stated above, it is more a test of willingness to drive in a ridiculous way and to get boozed up rather than a real world test of economy.

 

[chrisc]

Mine is less - 2012 Honda Jazz 1400. Fitted new Michelin tyres and use synthetic oil. Get between 5.0 and 5.2 litres per 100km

 

[Splinter]

a new word that I don't like, up to.
Internet speeds up to eg 4 meg
up to 15km per liter.

Agreed, but you are missing the "up to" I hate the most e.g. up to 50% off.....

 

[Geoff.D]

I'd love to see the end result of a car you'd design that advertises with definite fuel consumption, it would only allow acceleration at a specific throttle point, you'd have a team that washes and polishes it every night, and make sure the tires are always at same pressure and the exact same fuel is used...

Don't you use the same fuel in your car? From the same supplier (Engen whatever) and 95 or 93?.
And yes how often do you check your tyre pressures? I check at least once a week with a gauge I have in my car.
And the original comment was about the words "up to" in general, NOT just about fuel consumption.

 

[supersunbird]

Don't you use the same fuel in your car? From the same supplier (Engen whatever) and 95 or 93?.
And yes how often do you check your tyre pressures? I check at least once a week with a gauge I have in my car.
And the original comment was about the words "up to" in general, NOT just about fuel consumption.

No, it constantly has to meet whatever up to claim was used (l/100km in this instance) so that the up to is not required, or else some dumbass will sue them for not meeting that specification/speed/whatever exactly.

 

[asshat99]

a new word that I don't like, up to.
Internet speeds up to eg 4 meg
up to 15km per liter.

Suppliers hide behind the words " up to" to over up their sins and failure to deliver on so-called services.
So yes I agree, the words just irritate these days.

huh? Which manufacturer says things like "up to 15 km/litre"? Fuel consumption is from 0 km/litre to infinite km/litre depending on conditions. Never seen a car advert claiming things like that.

 

[asshat99]

Don't you use the same fuel in your car? From the same supplier (Engen whatever) and 95 or 93?.
And yes how often do you check your tyre pressures? I check at least once a week with a gauge I have in my car.
And the original comment was about the words "up to" in general, NOT just about fuel consumption.

You really have an inability to own your stupid comments. "Guyz It all depends on your fuel and tyre pressures but actually I was actually talking about something completely different". Clown.

 

[Geoff.D]

You really have an inability to own your stupid comments. "Guyz It all depends on your fuel and tyre pressures but actually I was actually talking about something completely different". Clown.

A real pity YOU did not take note of WHO made the comment about fuel and tyre pressures! Was not me that tried to be clever. The original post was about how irritating the words "up to" are these days and it is the original poster who used the words "up to 15km/hr" to illustrate his point. NO ONE said it was from an advert. But then clearly, you have a problem with comprehension and can't appreciate comments made partly in jest.

 

[Ivan Leon]

...unlike the claimed & actual fuel consumption figures for some manual transmission, naturally aspirated carburettor-equipped cars from the 70s & 80s...

 

[Geoff.D]

Ja, the fuel consumption figures quoted by manufacturers have always had car owners in a knot. Especially BEFORE and AFTER the "first service"!

I see the car manufacturers are all rather careful these days after the partial ruling in the favour of a complaint lodged with ASA.

See this extract from a randomly chosen car spec -- no particular reason for the choice. the make and model is irrelevant, just the lengths to which car manufacturers go to cover their bases these days.

The declared fuel consumption and CO2 emission figures were achieved during technical laboratory testing in accordance with the legislated technical specifications (SANS 20101: 2006 / ECE R101: 2005). Fuel consumption and CO2 emissions figures are used to compare different vehicle types under uniform conditions and are not necessarily indicative of real-life driving conditions. Note that the actual fuel consumption and emissions levels will depend on many factors including individual driving habits, prevailing conditions and vehicle equipment, condition and use.

 

[asshat99]

A real pity YOU did not take note of WHO made the comment about fuel and tyre pressures! Was not me that tried to be clever. The original post was about how irritating the words "up to" are these days and it is the original poster who used the words "up to 15km/hr" to illustrate his point. NO ONE said it was from an advert. But then clearly, you have a problem with comprehension and can't appreciate comments made partly in jest.

So then who and where did they say it?

You were the one who said "suppliers". And agreed with the clown who brought it up. Own your stupid comments. Clown.

Oh right, you were talking about something completely unrelated. Nothing to do with tyre pressures and fuel grades. On a motoring thread. Right. Senile.