Fuel Economy: Real vs Official

Forums › Transport (cars, bikes and boats) › Fuel Economy: Real vs Official

1 | 2 | 3 | 4

1402 posts

Uber Geek

#1624451 6-Sep-2016 10:21

Prius C. Auckland. Urban + SH1.

Average ~4.6 L/100 kms (Could be 3.3 sometimes or 4.1 or over 5 sometimes but between pumps - it is 4.6 L/100)

Tank is 36L. 30 L at the pump ~ 650km (real records)

Computer is accurate.

This morning for example - according to computer - trip to work 4.4L/100km

trig42

5814 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

#1624457 6-Sep-2016 10:50

Mazda3 MPS.

I think official spec is around the 9L/100km mark. Around town I get about 10-11. Open road would be just over 9. It is quite thirsty, and the heavier the foot (which is very tempting) the thirstier it gets.

jonb

1771 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#1624465 6-Sep-2016 11:28

VW Polo 2015 TSi - claimed 4.7L/100 mixed

Last journey - 5.3L/100 clear run North Shore to Parnell return.

Since refuel - 5.7L/100 mixed motorway and mainly suburban.

nakedmolerat

4629 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1624472 6-Sep-2016 11:32

Fuel economy: Rating vs "How I drive"

I am heavy with my acceleration. I always end up using more fuels than the rest in the family (same car, same distance/road)

MikeAqua

7785 posts

Uber Geek

#1624520 6-Sep-2016 12:19

trig42:

Mazda3 MPS.

Always wanted one of those.

Even with he SP25, giving it a bit of 'jandal' is hard to resist.

Mike

Dingbatt

6756 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1624553 6-Sep-2016 12:42

Camry Hybrid
Manufacturer 5.2l/100km
Me (so far ) 5.4
Mixed urban and motorway.
My old 3.5l Maxima 10.2l/100km for the same usage. (11.2 official)

2015 Ford Focus
Us 7.8 Official 6.7 Mostly urban.

Suzuki Swift
Us 6.8 Official 6.7 Mostly urban.

All figures using car's economy indicators, not refuel to refuel calculations. Official figures from EECA Energywise website.

“We’ve arranged a society based on science and technology, in which nobody understands anything about science technology. Carl Sagan 1996

NzBeagle

962 posts

Ultimate Geek

Trusted

#1624557 6-Sep-2016 12:47

2016 Camry Hybrid - Mfr Quotes 5.2L/100, Dash matches that on most refills, but the fuel bill for the last 4 months suggests it's around 5.4L per 100. As with all the other cars, definitely the foot factor has a big influence.

Mixed motorway, mainly city driving.

Sharesies

Trade NZ and US shares and funds with Sharesies (affiliate link).

trig42

5814 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

#1624560 6-Sep-2016 12:54

MikeAqua:

trig42:

Mazda3 MPS.

Always wanted one of those.

Even with he SP25, giving it a bit of 'jandal' is hard to resist.

Yep, it is a lot of fun. I read reviews of the car, a lot saying beware of the torque steer. Not a problem if you have your hands on the wheel :)

shk292

2857 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1624583 6-Sep-2016 13:34

Changed car recently and have been pleasantly surprised

Toyota 86. Official: 7.2. Actual (mixed motorway/urban rush hour commute): 6.8-7.2. Would probably be more if not stuck behind traffic so much

Jase2985

13463 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Lifetime subscriber

#1624623 6-Sep-2016 14:47

Not many people getting the advertised economy or even below it. but as most of you have alluded to its down to driving style

2007 Honda Jazz Sport 1.5L

quoted fuel consumption on the combined rate is 6.1L/100km

Over the last 10 fuel ups its been 6.1L/100km

Over the 46,000km we have owned it its been 6.4L/100km.

My wife used to drive it and she is more heavy footed than I.

Ive just put some eco tyres on it so hoping that will drop a little now

2007 Honda Accord Euro 2.4L

Claimed 8.6 l/100km
Actual over 20,000km is 8.9L/100km

Lowest ive had it is 7.2L/100km on the open road. Got from Christchurch to Rotorua on a tank.

Linuxluver

5828 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Subscriber

#1624625 6-Sep-2016 14:53

MikeAqua:

I thought it might be interesting to compare manufactures fuel economy with what people experience in real world driving.

For example in our case: -

2015 Mazda 3 SP25 (2.5L petrol)

Manufacturer: 6.0L/100km

Actual average: 8.1L/100km

Driving: Mix of 50 and 100 with a little bit of 80.

Speed is everything. You'll use at least 20% more fuel at 120kph than you will at 80kph.

You'll use more fuel driving into the wind (and make it even worse by driving into the wind fast).

You can achieve heroic, God-like fuel economy by doing 90kph 50 metres behind a big tall truck.....

If the road is wet, your mileage decreases.

If your tyres are not the optimum pressure....your mileage decreases.

If you didn't buy low rolling-resistance eco tyres......your mileage decreases.

If you drive with your windows open.....your mileage decreases.

If you tail gate and have to constantly brake and accelerate your mileage REALLY decreases.

So many variables.

I've become aware of them all because I now drive an electric car and all these factors reduce my potential range....in EXACTLY the same way they reduce the potential range of a petrol car (but never really thought about because the fuel gauge doesn't show your fuel consumption as precisely as an EV does.....unless perhaps you drive a hybrid.)

For the record, I'm seeing a lifetime average of 6.9km / Kw. (I just checked - it was 6.8, but I've improved it to 6.9) I should be able to get to 7.1, but the previous owner must have had a heavy foot. With max capacity at 24Kw, that is 6.9km * 24kw - 165.2km maximum range (unless behind a big truck...then count me in for close to 200km on a long highway run.)

_____________________________________________________________________

I've been on Geekzone over 16 years..... Time flies....

Jase2985

13463 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Lifetime subscriber

#1624629 6-Sep-2016 15:05

@linuxluver dont you mean increases for all the above? because less is better and all those you mention above make the economy worse, ie higher/increased

MikeAqua

7785 posts

Uber Geek

#1624632 6-Sep-2016 15:07

Linuxluver:

Speed is everything. You'll use at least 20% more fuel at 120kph than you will at 80kph.

You'll use more fuel driving into the wind (and make it even worse by driving into the wind fast).

You can achieve heroic, God-like fuel economy by doing 90kph 50 metres behind a big tall truck.....

If the road is wet, your mileage decreases.

If your tyres are not the optimum pressure....your mileage decreases.

If you didn't buy low rolling-resistance eco tyres......your mileage decreases.

Are you secretly the EECA guy?

Mike

Linuxluver

5828 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Subscriber

#1624636 6-Sep-2016 15:11

Jase2985:

@linuxluver dont you mean increases for all the above? because less is better and all those you mention above make the economy worse, ie higher/increased

If I go less far for the same amount of fuel....I see that as decreased mileage. If people see it the other way, round I'm happy to add the appropriate words to adjust it. :-)

_____________________________________________________________________

I've been on Geekzone over 16 years..... Time flies....

Linuxluver

5828 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Subscriber

#1624638 6-Sep-2016 15:12

MikeAqua:

Linuxluver:

Speed is everything. You'll use at least 20% more fuel at 120kph than you will at 80kph.

You'll use more fuel driving into the wind (and make it even worse by driving into the wind fast).

You can achieve heroic, God-like fuel economy by doing 90kph 50 metres behind a big tall truck.....

If the road is wet, your mileage decreases.

If your tyres are not the optimum pressure....your mileage decreases.

If you didn't buy low rolling-resistance eco tyres......your mileage decreases.

Are you secretly the EECA guy?

I wish....then they'd pay me. :-)

_____________________________________________________________________

I've been on Geekzone over 16 years..... Time flies....

1 | 2 | 3 | 4