I was astonished at the size of car being offered with these new, smaller turbo petrol engines.

IOne in particular that I got given on a work trip a while ago : Ford Mondeo. 1 litre ecoboost engine (125PS), in nearly 1.5 tonnes of car. I seriously wondered if the (electric) parking brake was stuck on. You have to rev the balls off it to pull away, slipping the clutch as you do so. I'm sure it works fine in the Fiesta, but the Mondeo is a ridiculously large and heavy car to have such a small engine fitted.

Merc seem to be going the same way, with a 1.6, 136hp engine in the 1.5 tonne C class.

BMW offer the 318i - a 1.5 litre, 136hp engine in a 1.4 tonne car.

Audi's A4 is probably the most sensible - and backed up by reports on here from owners with the same engine in other models - the 1.4TFSi, 150hp engine in a car weighing 1320kg.

actually, while im here, i recall reading a group comparision test review on 'auto express' not too long ago - dated 22 october 2016 - for vw up facelift v pre-facelift skoda citigo. im not so sure about linking to non-HJ websites, so i suggest just to google for it.

they made mention of how the two test cars performance felt different, despite having stated same engine power, and being pretty much the same car; quote, ''We were shocked by the slow performance of the up!. Tall gearing has blunted acceleration, and on the motorway the car is frustratingly hard work. By comparison, the identically engined Skoda feels nippy and eager whatever the situation.''

citigo test car was a euro 5 with 98g/km rating; the vw up facelift a euro 6 with 96 g/km rating. turns out now the mii and citigo both have the same engine settings as the facelift up of last year, so probably will feel sluggish like that now too. shame no tsi engine for the recent citigo update.

many thanks.

Running ever leaner and ever smaller capacity engines when compared with overall vehicle weight has been going on for years, not helped as said by ever higher gearing, which is odd because so many cars have 6 speed boxes there is no earthly reason why 1st and reverse can't be sensibly low enough in order to help get the cars moving.

Audi's A4 is probably the most sensible - and backed up by reports on here from owners with the same engine in other models - the 1.4TFSi, 150hp engine in a car weighing 1320kg.

The same engine is fitted to our Superb which also has a kerb weight of 1320kg. Kerbweight is defined as "all equipment but no driver". The car is absolutely fine when pulling away.

For the past three years, Toyota have been using engines in their non-hybrid cars which change from the Otto to the Atkinson cycle when running under low loads. The 1.0 litre used in the Aygo and the Yaris, and the 1.2T used in the Auris and C-HR.

The wifes Nissan Note 1.2 DIG-S has an engine that runs as a N/A on the Miller cycle under low loads and turns into a supercharged Otto cycle on the go. Its been on the market since 2013 in this country. So Nissan were ahead of Toyota. It also pulls away with no issues but despite the incredible official mpg figures they do not translate into the real world. Its about the same as the Skoda which has 52 more PS, 80 more torques and a load more space and weight. Don't get me wrong, its not a bad car, we like it. But the Miller cycle bit clearly only works in the lab when they do the tests since on the road you can clearly hear the supercharger all the time when you are on the gas.

Toyota Hybrids are not and never will be the answer. A work colleague had an Auris Estate which he loved simply because of the very low company car tax he was paying. He could get just over 60 mpg out of it driving at no more thatn 50-55 mph even on motorways which he admitted anoyed other road users immensely. Drive at normal speeds i.e. 70 mph on Mways etc and the mpg dropped to 50 mpg. My Leon could beat that at the same speed and at 50-55 mph it could probably have beaten 60 mpg as well. But wheras the Auris was a noisy slug with the CVT ensuring the revs hit the roof as soon as you hit the throttle the Leon was like a racing car. Any VAG car with the 1.4 150PS Tsi is a far better car in all respects.

Going back to 2005 we were looking for a small car for the wife. Having had a 1 litre Metro in the past she was most assertive that she did not want a slug again, the Metro was slow to the point of being dangerous. We shortlisted many including the original Ka which we had quite liked as a courtesy car (it was even fine on the motorway) but discounted it since it was too small in the boot and had a very poor interior, the glove box was a joke. She like the Micra so we tried a 1.4 and it was rubbish. It had no go whatsoever and pulling away form lights needed the patience of priest. Disbelieving it was possible to be that bad we went to another dealer and tried and other and it was the same. That dealer suggested we tried the 1.2 before we left and within a few hundred yards we loved it, compeletely different car. Got a 30% discount on a brand new unregistered car. A couple of years later dad bout a 1.2 Micra with better trim and 5 doors to replace his Jazz and he loved it, had it in the family for 8 years.

There is more too it than just the Euro spec. Manufacturers sometimes fit stupidly long gearing just to get goo EU mpg figures which wreck the car. We love our Note but we are of the opinion that if Nissan lowered the gearing a bit it would be a far better car. It pulls away fine but the higher gears are too long for urban driving and sometimes 5th is too long on steep A road hills. Even though it would not alter the real world mpg the EU figures would suffer and they would no longer be able to sell a car with under 100 CO's (not that it really matters now).