MPG HELP

toot · Post by **toot** » Wed Dec 31, 2003 1:10 pm

Regardless of the weather or warming up, your initial MPG will be low when you move away from a stationary position. Usually about 13 for me. I drive from south london to bracknell for work (40 miles with about 12 miles being in traffic) and the drive through the traffic will give me an average of around 25MPG but with the motorway part I can get 42/43 MPG.

When I drive on a full tank in London traffic, I'll get between 250 and 300 miles out of the tank depending on how heavy footed I am. When I drive to Doncaster (thats where the girlfriend lives) its 200 miles, on pretty much all motorway, I can achieve over 400 miles from a tank if I stick between 60-70 MPH and don't put my foot down too far. The MPG drops every time you build speed but will settle when you maintain a constant speed. This also accounts for the low MPG when you start from stopped.

If I apply a relaxed driving principle in traffic (accelerate gently and change gear before the revs go over 2k), i can get similar MPG to motorway driving.

My opinion is, pug can get 35MPG because they know the car and how to work it whereas you've only had it for a few miles and aren't used to it yet. plus you've come from an escort which I would guess is a different engine size etc which means you can't compare the MPG anyway.

london-99 · Post by **london-99** » Wed Dec 31, 2003 3:58 pm

Many fair coments

What cc is your PUG 1.6 or 2l
But as for my old escort it was a 1.6 and for around half a tank i would get around 150 miles.
As for the motorway if you look over the forum you will see that i did London to Warrington and back and it cost me almost Â£60 in petrol, the same trip in my Escort would cost me around Â£35.
I feel that if the car does not do the MPG that the dealer and the manual says it should do then WHY NOT?

toot · Post by **toot** » Wed Dec 31, 2003 4:12 pm

Mine is a 1.6.

On average, i get about 150 miles per half tank which is the same as you quote for your escort. Different engines work differently as do pedals blah blah so I would put it down to you just needing to learn how the car needs to be driven to achieve that. You've only done 1200 miles, I've done 27k miles in my 52 reg so I would say stick with it and try different driving methods.

How do they test the MPG anyway? Try getting them to drive you in it and see if they really do achieve what they say. I would also suggest letting someone you trust drive the car and see what happens. My mother manages much better MPG in her cc and mine than I manage in either of them.

Esselle · Post by **Esselle** » Mon Jan 05, 2004 12:58 pm

Hi Esselle
Many thanks for the up date.
How many miles have you got on the clock?
Ive just done another half a tank and i got 112 miles with an Average of 24.7 MPG and a average speed of 12 MPH with 1200 Miles on the clock.
I hope it gets better or the PUG will have to go

I've now done 1300 miles. Just realised that yours is a 1.6 though and mine's a 2.0. Sorry, should've spotted that earlier

london-99 · Post by **london-99** » Mon Jan 05, 2004 1:06 pm

Hi Esselle
Thats ok
But dont you think that you should be getting more MPG than 124MPG ?
I dont know what the manual says it should be for a 2L

carl · Post by **carl** » Mon Jan 05, 2004 9:48 pm

Out of the last 2200 miles ours (2.0) got an average of 28.8 mpg. Lots of short trips and mixed driving. I reckon that's pretty good

Esselle · Post by **Esselle** » Tue Jan 06, 2004 10:04 am

Hi Esselle
Thats ok
But dont you think that you should be getting more MPG than 124MPG ?
I dont know what the manual says it should be for a 2L

124MPG (!) - if only

I do think you should be getting more from a 1.6L than I do from my 2.0L. I do a lot of short trips, even to work so looking at others I assume mine is about right. I had a few problems with my last CC which was a 1.6 but the Service chap said he could see I was getting really good fuel consumption - if only I could remember what it was :rolleyes: . I tried to forget as much as I could, as fast as possible

london-99 · Post by **london-99** » Tue Jan 06, 2004 9:15 pm

Hi
Many thanks all you answers to the MPG problem

please keep posting with any tests or readings that you might have.
I am going to give the car another test untill half a tank and if i dont get over 120 miles i will get the car booked into another dealer to be looked at, my dealer Warwick wright Holloway as had the car twice for the MPG and they take the car to Warwick Wright City so the only one left is Warwick Wright Brent cross.
Ill keep you all posted.

carl · Post by **carl** » Tue Jan 06, 2004 9:39 pm

I don't know why you're that worried, to be honest. If you'd wanted an economical car you should have bought an Ibiza TDi or something. A CC is heavy and short-geared, so it's never going to be economical.

Cotswolds · Post by **Cotswolds** » Tue Jan 06, 2004 10:45 pm

I don't know why you're that worried, to be honest. If you'd wanted an economical car you should have bought an Ibiza TDi or something. A CC is heavy and short-geared, so it's never going to be economical.

Actually my cc averages around 44.8mpg for some reason

Not driving like a granny, but do travel on busy roads so end up coasting around 50mph, which I assume is the reason for the good mpg (or my computer is out!)

However if I only do 50 miles in one day, its unusual and most journeys tend to take 45mins or more, so guess my cc is pretty warmed up!

london-99 · Post by **london-99** » Wed Jan 07, 2004 11:24 am

Hi Carl
You should read all the post on the forums and you will see that there are many people with the same problem.
As i have said before if the car is sold as a car that does 35mpg then it should do 35 mpg, not 22-26 mpg
Peugeot seem to be making alot of cock ups when it comes to the specification of there cars, (i bet its not just the 206 cc)
For Example:-

.In the manual it says that my Allure should have electric fold in mirrors.

.On there web site when i was looking for a car it said that the 1.6 Allure came with digital air con, but it does not (and it still on the web)

And i bet there are many others

So theres no need to tell me that if i want an economical car what i should have brought, i want the car i brought (for cash not on the never never) to comply with what they say it should be and do.

By the way what Pug do you have?

carl · Post by **carl** » Wed Jan 07, 2004 2:22 pm

I have (or rather my wife has) a 2.0 206CC. I've also previously had a 2.0 406 that I could just about get 35mpg from on a series of long runs.

To expect 35mpg from a 1.6 litre engine pulling a heavy car is expecting too much, IMHO. In fact you may find that the 2.0 is actually more economical, because it's not under so much load all the time.

The Allure is listed on the Pug website with the following MPG figures:
Urban drive cycle MPG (litres/100km) 29.7(9.5)
Extra Urban drive cycle MPG (litres/100km) 49.6(5.7)
Combined drive cycle MPG (litres/100km) 40.9(6.9)

These give the MPG under three sets of fixed conditions. Unless your daily driving exactly replicates these conditions, you won't get the same figures.

Darth Bourj · Post by **Darth Bourj** » Wed Jan 07, 2004 2:35 pm

I have a 2.0l and I get between 28 and 34mpg. That is if I have calculated it correctly. :rolleyes:

I always use super unleaded and fully synthetic oil, but I do not drive in an economical manner (Changed my tyres at 15000miles

) Although I do tend to let the car warm up before I floor it. 50% of this driving is very short trips. So I am reasonably happy with this result.

I do not have a multiplexed car so I do not have a computer telling me what I am getting mpg wise. I wonder if the results from the computer are that reliable. Just a thought.

I also noticed that my car was more economical after its first real service.

Do you get the same result if you calculate the amount of miles you get per amount of fuel?

I generally get 280miles out of a tank. From full to warning lamp coming on. Although this isn't the best way of calculating it.

london-99 · Post by **london-99** » Wed Jan 07, 2004 9:39 pm

Many thanks carl for the past post and the advise.

Having driven to work and around London today and tonight, and taken your notes on the revs and having set the display to show the MPG and not the one that keeps moving as you speed up and slow down, i have seen the display rise frm 22.1 MPG to 26 MPG.(in traffic) So the driving style does affect the MPG.

I will be keeping an eye on it and and see how it goes.
Once again many thanks.

phonic · Post by **phonic** » Sun Jan 11, 2004 11:46 pm

Since Im yet to pick up my 206cc (wednesday its ready) what sort of diference should I expect MPG wise from the 2.0 model compared to my current (crap) corsa 1.4 SRi (52 reg). I can get 100 miles out of Â£10, but I do drive it a bit silly sometimes cos I hate it LOL. So if I drive sensibly could I get the same sort of MPG as my old corsa?