Just driven from Sunderland to Carlisle and back, along with quite a lot of pottering around Carlisle. My route to and from Carlisle involves climbing up and down hills on the road parallel to Hadrian's Wall. I drove at the speed limit virtually all the way as traffic was light.
The dashboard cmputer tells me that my Panda Cross with its 1.3 turbo-diesel engine has averaged 47.7mpg.
Just wanted to tell you all how pleased I am with that.
|
Very good, but it depends how you define 'by far'.
Assuming a mileage of, for instance, 200 miles, and a per litre cost of 97.9p, the journey would have cost you about £18.68.
My 'ex' '02 Terios, at 40mpg, and a per litre cost of 85.9 would have cost me £19.54, just 86p more.
Just shows how the diesel/petrol differential in price affects the overall cost.
Assuming my calculations are correct.
|
|
It's all sort of strange at the moment. The fuel cost per mile of equivalent diesel versus petrol cars is pretty much the same right now. That is not to say that there might not be other reasons to prefer one over the other but it's tough to argue why anyone might pay any significant premium for one type of engine.
|
|
and referring to it as green is a bold statement - there's more to green than MPG.
|
|
|
|
I wonder whether the smaller diesels tend to be run closer to their best efficiency point.
I have no wish to start a competitive bidding war on fuel consumption, but considering small diesels and efficiency, the best that I have actually achieved was 18 months ago in a 1.6 diesel Pug 307 S/W in France, Italy, and a bit of Switzerland. 66 mpg, give or take a bit for odometer accuracy. Fuel embarked was recorded, and trip computer ignored. Most driving was on ordinary roads [ I enjoy mountain pass driving, and hate tunnels ], but autoroutes / autostradae run at 130 / 140 km/hr by GPS when I was running late. An "economy" driver I am not !! At first, I thought that I had made a mistake, but, a year earlier with a 2-litre version, and including UK, returned 62 mpg, so it seemed roughly correct.
|
You can get 47 mpg from a small petrol these days if not alot more, so in the grand scheme of things, its not brilliant, however it is good for a 4x4 if its permanant.
Ive had 68 from a petrol car so with the price of diesel as it is, id want it to be outperforming a petrol by atleast 5-6 mpg.
Still, the Panda 4x4 is a very interesting little car, theres one locally and it is certainly striking.
|
Prior to running this diesel Panda 4x4 I had the 1.2 petrol Panda 4x4 and would have been lucky to see 40-41mpg on the same run.
However, I changed cars, not for the better fuel economy but because the diesel version is much faster and reqires fewer gearchanges to keep up with traffic.
|
|
|
|
