C5 2.2 Hdi Manual Saloon Fuel economy

This is the Forum for all your Citroen Technical Questions, Problems or Advice.

Moderator: RichardW

Post Reply
KevMayer
Posts: 1051
Joined: 12 Sep 2003, 22:01
Location: Staffordshire, United Kingdom
My Cars:
x 2

C5 2.2 Hdi Manual Saloon Fuel economy

Post by KevMayer »

With 5 adults and picnic gear. On a run to the Welsh coast (280 miles round trip) for a day out the trip computer reported 38.7 mpg average when I got back home.

Thats with the suspension set to Sport mode and not hanging about on twisting roads with lots of breaking and acceleration.

I'm happy with that.
Cheers, Kev

02 plate C5 2.2 Hdi Exclusive SE (now 170k miles 03/21).

Used to have:- Xantia 1.9 TurboD SX. 1996 Blue & 1998 Silver Activa. + 1992 BX TZD Turbo.
meeper
Posts: 27
Joined: 13 Sep 2005, 14:01
Location: United Kingdom
My Cars:

Post by meeper »

I've been thinking that mine was a bit poor on economy but I think I get similar figures to you.

On a 500 mile run from Loire department 42 up to Calais on Saturday I managed about 38mpg driving between 110 and 130kph. 2 up, not much luggage

Best I've managed is about 41mpg running at 110kph. Was expecting better thought, my 1.8 Xantia returns about 35mpg out of town and I thought the difference would be greater.
bencowell
Posts: 507
Joined: 20 Oct 2002, 13:47
Location:
My Cars:
x 1

Post by bencowell »

I get 44 to 46 average in my 2.0 HDI 110, but if I do a long motorway trip at 70 I get more like 50mpg.

I have only once got below 40mpg.
KevMayer
Posts: 1051
Joined: 12 Sep 2003, 22:01
Location: Staffordshire, United Kingdom
My Cars:
x 2

Post by KevMayer »

The 2.0 Hdi 110 do seem to be a lot more economic on fuel. I had a test drive in a 110 some time ago and it seemed pretty quick aswell.

My 2.2 Hdi has power but doesn't feel particularly quick. It feels like a much bigger car than the Xantia. It's very comfortable. My wife just goes to sleep in the passenger seat.

The 2.2 has an urban economy of just over 32 mpg. I always believe that the urban cycle figure often reflects what you can get if you drive a car hard. So getting 38.7 was a real surprise. I didn't monitor the avarage consumption during the journey. I went back out to the car once we had got home and turned it on. Then turned the computer to the car diagnostic screen. Seeing that figure was pleasing considering how I'd not used an economic driving style.
Cheers, Kev

02 plate C5 2.2 Hdi Exclusive SE (now 170k miles 03/21).

Used to have:- Xantia 1.9 TurboD SX. 1996 Blue & 1998 Silver Activa. + 1992 BX TZD Turbo.
User avatar
Kowalski
Posts: 2557
Joined: 15 Oct 2003, 17:41
Location: North East, United Kingdom
My Cars: Ex 05 C5 2.0 HDI Exclusive 145k
Ex 97 Xantia 1.9TD SX 144k
Ex 94 Xantia Dimension 1.9TD 199k

Post by Kowalski »

How would you say the economy compares to a 1.9 TD Xantia.

The reason I ask is that I have a 1.9 TD Xantia and if I drive it very gently I can get 50 mpg on a tank, I've managed that over the last 5 or so tanks and was wondering whether a C5 would do the same with the 2.2 HDI, I've been getting more and more tempted to upgrade. The HDI is direct injection so it should be more economical than the smaller indirect injection XUD but it appears that the 2.2 has a much greater capacity to drink fuel if you're not very light footed, but driven gently do you think the C5 could break the 50mpg barrier?
KevMayer
Posts: 1051
Joined: 12 Sep 2003, 22:01
Location: Staffordshire, United Kingdom
My Cars:
x 2

Post by KevMayer »

No. I don't think you'd get 50 mpg in a 2.2 Hdi.

You'd get better mpg from a Hdi 110.
Cheers, Kev

02 plate C5 2.2 Hdi Exclusive SE (now 170k miles 03/21).

Used to have:- Xantia 1.9 TurboD SX. 1996 Blue & 1998 Silver Activa. + 1992 BX TZD Turbo.
User avatar
Kowalski
Posts: 2557
Joined: 15 Oct 2003, 17:41
Location: North East, United Kingdom
My Cars: Ex 05 C5 2.0 HDI Exclusive 145k
Ex 97 Xantia 1.9TD SX 144k
Ex 94 Xantia Dimension 1.9TD 199k

Post by Kowalski »

So is the 2.2 in a C5 going to be more thirsty than a 1.9 TD Xantia?

Based on the combined figures, the early 1.9TD Xantias do about 43 mpg and the later catalyst equipped models are worse. The combined figure for the 2.2 HDI C5 is better at 44 mpg so it should be more economical unless you've got a heavy foot.

You could find out for me, just drive VERY gently for a tank. The rules of the game are as follows.... Don't use more than 1/2 accelarator, keep the revs low at all times, when you're on the dual carriageway follow trucks rather than overtaking them. ;)
meeper
Posts: 27
Joined: 13 Sep 2005, 14:01
Location: United Kingdom
My Cars:

Post by meeper »

Mine is an estate, so will use a bit more than the saloon. I don't drive very fast or hard, but I have never managed to better 42/3mpg even when I'm trying. I do leave the aircon in auto mode, turning it off didn't seem to make much difference.

I was disapointed that I couldn't even achieve the combined figure of 44mpg, but I gues the comment above is about right, the official urban gives a good idea of real world economy, it's a rule of thumb I've also seen suggested by the telegraph motoring chap "Honest John".
JohnD
(Donor 2022)
Posts: 2632
Joined: 14 Mar 2001, 23:41
Location: Epsom, Surrey
My Cars: 2010 Citroen C5-X7 tourer
1998 Citroen Saxo 1.5D
2018 Citroen C4-B7
1998 Peugeot 306. 1.9D
2011 Citroen C1
x 72
Contact:

Post by JohnD »

I have a C5 estate (138HDi) with 10K on the clock so it's got loosened up. I did a run down to Dover yesterday and not being in a hurry, I set the cruise to 67mph. Traffic was good and the computer gave me 53mpg average on arrival. On the return, I set the cruise to 75 and got back home in about 80 minutes. Computer reading gave me 42mpg average. I couldn't help wondering if the little bit of time saved on the return was worth the huge increase in fuel consumption.
mezuk04
Posts: 1125
Joined: 03 Sep 2004, 19:15
Location: Nottinghamshire, England
My Cars:

Post by mezuk04 »

Of course it is if there is the chance you may miss an episode of House on Channel 5 at 9pm on a Thursday :lol:
Volkswagen Golf 59' 1.6TD S :(
406 V6
Posts: 593
Joined: 02 Sep 2004, 01:52
Location: Lisboa, Portugal
My Cars:

Post by 406 V6 »

You guys seem to be forgeting something important: the C5 is heavier than the Xantia, so even the XUD gets better mpg than the HDI. And this comparing two similar engines, 1.9TD and 2.0HDI, as the engine block is shared with some boring differences, mostly.
Now, if you were comparing, for instance, a Xsara TD with an HDI, that'd be another story.
Francisco
C5 2.0HDI smoothly riding on 1.8l version spheres :D
When the hearts beats like a pressure regulator you know it means one thing: Love
Citroën - pacemaking since 1955
User avatar
Kowalski
Posts: 2557
Joined: 15 Oct 2003, 17:41
Location: North East, United Kingdom
My Cars: Ex 05 C5 2.0 HDI Exclusive 145k
Ex 97 Xantia 1.9TD SX 144k
Ex 94 Xantia Dimension 1.9TD 199k

Post by Kowalski »

406 V6 wrote:You guys seem to be forgeting something important: the C5 is heavier than the Xantia, so even the XUD gets better mpg than the HDI. And this comparing two similar engines, 1.9TD and 2.0HDI, as the engine block is shared with some boring differences, mostly.
Now, if you were comparing, for instance, a Xsara TD with an HDI, that'd be another story.
Like for like, the C5 is something like 100kgs heavier than a Xantia. The vast majority of my driving is cruising at a constant speed, in fact I can cover 3/4 of my dailly commute without changing out of 5th gear or touching the brake pedal, so the weight difference doesn't make a lot of difference to me.

Now the reason I'm comparing a TD Xantia to a 2.2 HDI C5 is that I've got the Xantia and I'm thinking of changing to the C5. If the fuel economy of the 2.2 isn't as good as the Xantia, I may have to have a 2.0 instead.
jeremy
Posts: 3959
Joined: 20 Oct 2002, 16:00
Location: Hampshire, UK
My Cars:
x 2

Post by jeremy »

The HDi should be considerably more efficient than the TD as:

Its a direct injection engine - and the flame doesn't have to negotiate the tortuous comet combustion chamber

Its an electronic engine running at an enormous injection pressure which means that everything is rather better controlled, and more of the fuel is burnt.

How accurate are fuel consumption indicators these days - I'd still measure consumption by brimming the tank for an accurate consumption figure.
jeremy
JohnD
(Donor 2022)
Posts: 2632
Joined: 14 Mar 2001, 23:41
Location: Epsom, Surrey
My Cars: 2010 Citroen C5-X7 tourer
1998 Citroen Saxo 1.5D
2018 Citroen C4-B7
1998 Peugeot 306. 1.9D
2011 Citroen C1
x 72
Contact:

Post by JohnD »

jeremy wrote:
How accurate are fuel consumption indicators these days .
Answer: Very! I recently did a tow from Southern Spain with my C5 estate. I brimmed the tank before starting and again at Calais. Totting up all the fills and dividing the miles driven by the fuel used gave me an average of 31mpg. I was impressed to see the fuel computer agreed.
User avatar
mooseshaver
Posts: 886
Joined: 27 Apr 2006, 10:50
Location: Cumbria
My Cars:

Post by mooseshaver »

My 2.2 Esate averages 48.9mpg Driving from Cockermouth in Cumbria to Monmouth in Wales.
Driving to and from work, and for work, which tend to be journeys of 8-10 miles each way, its 36.2mpg.
If I'm being a boy racer its 32-33, but I've got old fast and tend not to do that anymore.
These were all using the onboard computer, which in Volkswaggens at least, makes your economy better than it actually is.
Post Reply