38mpg at 70mph. 2004 C5 estate 110bhp
Moderator: RichardW
38mpg at 70mph. 2004 C5 estate 110bhp
Hi Guys,
it's all in the title. Good or bad? I'm hoping for bad, easily fixed and at least another 12mpg. The figures come from fill, drive and refill. No fancy computers here just maths. Nearly all my driving is motorway and I need better mpg than that or it's bye bye citroen, bye bye seat alhambra and back into a bmw 320d touring,
Thanks.
Torq
P.S. I'll be doing the usual. Can of diesel purge into the fuel filter, check brakes aren't binding, new air filter, clean egr valve, tyre pressures etc
it's all in the title. Good or bad? I'm hoping for bad, easily fixed and at least another 12mpg. The figures come from fill, drive and refill. No fancy computers here just maths. Nearly all my driving is motorway and I need better mpg than that or it's bye bye citroen, bye bye seat alhambra and back into a bmw 320d touring,
Thanks.
Torq
P.S. I'll be doing the usual. Can of diesel purge into the fuel filter, check brakes aren't binding, new air filter, clean egr valve, tyre pressures etc
Last edited by torq on 23 Sep 2011, 22:51, edited 1 time in total.
Was this mileage from one fill or over several. The 2l hdi normally gives me 11miles per litre when checked over several fills. Even when filling at the same pump it is hard to fill up consistently but the more fills the smaller the error. Im not sure how it reacts to 120KM/hr (+VAT) on the motorway. Such trips usually involve a lot of Dublin driving as well.
Any other symptoms like black smoke from the exhaust ?
Now using '00 Xantia LX HDI, pov spec
My past Citroens :-
'00 Xantia SX HDI, now dead due to accident
'99 Xantia HDI 110 Exclusive, RIP
'97 Xantia TD SX
'96 Xantia TD LX
'96 ZX TD
'89 BX TD
'88 AX GT
'79 CX2400 Pallas (scrapped )
& a couple of Peugeots !
My past Citroens :-
'00 Xantia SX HDI, now dead due to accident
'99 Xantia HDI 110 Exclusive, RIP
'97 Xantia TD SX
'96 Xantia TD LX
'96 ZX TD
'89 BX TD
'88 AX GT
'79 CX2400 Pallas (scrapped )
& a couple of Peugeots !
Did a proper test today. A 171 mile at 70mph or slightly under, round trip to ikea with a full tank and filled up when i got home. 17litres. Which works out at 45.9mpg, much better than i thought but still not good enough.
But i think have a bit of good news. Had a look under the front of the car and it looked wet. I hoped it was a diesel leak but it turned out to be a red fluid. Could this be the source of the dropping rear end? We'll see!
But i think have a bit of good news. Had a look under the front of the car and it looked wet. I hoped it was a diesel leak but it turned out to be a red fluid. Could this be the source of the dropping rear end? We'll see!
- myglaren
- Forum Admin Team
- Posts: 25366
- Joined: 02 Mar 2008, 13:30
- Location: Washington
- My Cars: Mazda 6
Ooops.
Previously:
2009 Honda Civic :(
C5, C5, Xantia, BX, GS, Visa.
R4, R11TXE, R14, R30TX - x 4888
Yep, LDS is orange.
Have you checked the reservoir? May be very bad news if it starts to scavenge for fluid.
Under the front of the car I would check the power steering/pump/hoses/rack.
The hoses are prone to leakage with age.
Miss-read the first part of your post and thought you must be from this general area as the A171 is close by. Not what you actually said though, on re-reading
Have you checked the reservoir? May be very bad news if it starts to scavenge for fluid.
Under the front of the car I would check the power steering/pump/hoses/rack.
The hoses are prone to leakage with age.
Miss-read the first part of your post and thought you must be from this general area as the A171 is close by. Not what you actually said though, on re-reading
-
- Posts: 1407
- Joined: 13 Apr 2009, 07:24
- Location: West Sussex U.K
- My Cars:
- x 9
Being doing some research on fuel consumption on various diesels and there appears to have been a seismic shift round about 2007 doesn't matter if you talk Citroen or BMW / Merc they all seem to have been able to do something to get their carbon levels down a couple of tax brackets, I wonder what was done and is it retrofittabletorq wrote:Did a proper test today. A 171 mile at 70mph or slightly under, round trip to ikea with a full tank and filled up when i got home. 17litres. Which works out at 45.9mpg, much better than i thought but still not good enough.
But i think have a bit of good news. Had a look under the front of the car and it looked wet. I hoped it was a diesel leak but it turned out to be a red fluid. Could this be the source of the dropping rear end? We'll see!
If you have a coroded or otherwise leaking hydraulic line to the rear suspension that would explain both the drooping rear and the oil underneath.
cachaciero
2006 Toyota Prius T Spirit
2001 2.2 C5 Exclusive SE
1996 XM 2.1 TD Auto VSX
1995 XM 2.1 TD Auto SX died @ 140K
1987 CX 2.5 Gti Turbo II dead
1984 Ford Scorpio
1981 CX 2.4 Pallas Auto
Renault 21
1220 GS Club
Rover P6 2000TC
2001 2.2 C5 Exclusive SE
1996 XM 2.1 TD Auto VSX
1995 XM 2.1 TD Auto SX died @ 140K
1987 CX 2.5 Gti Turbo II dead
1984 Ford Scorpio
1981 CX 2.4 Pallas Auto
Renault 21
1220 GS Club
Rover P6 2000TC
-
- Posts: 8125
- Joined: 04 Dec 2008, 22:08
- Location: Northeast
- My Cars: 07 Citroen C6 V6 HDi Exclusive - Red
07 Citroen C5 HDi VTR - Red
09 Citroen C3 1.4i VTR - Silver
01 Citroen Saxo 1.1i Forte - Mango Orange
93 Ford Mondeo 2.0i GLX
19 Hyundai i10 - x 110
The 2.0HDi 110 should do more than that on a steady run at 70. You should see much closer to 50mpg on the 110 from that kind of driving.
However, is your MPG calculated or from the trip computer?
I know when I check our 110 C5 its around 4-5MPG down on the actual MPG. So if ours is recording 45MPG then its really much closer to 50. Ive had the car getting on three years now and its always been the case, the car runs fantastically though and is great on fuel.
My late 2.0HDi 138 16v has a trip computer MPG which is as near as makes no difference spot on to the actual MPG. However the three 2.0 110s we have had have all been quite out on the trip compared to actual.
However, is your MPG calculated or from the trip computer?
I know when I check our 110 C5 its around 4-5MPG down on the actual MPG. So if ours is recording 45MPG then its really much closer to 50. Ive had the car getting on three years now and its always been the case, the car runs fantastically though and is great on fuel.
My late 2.0HDi 138 16v has a trip computer MPG which is as near as makes no difference spot on to the actual MPG. However the three 2.0 110s we have had have all been quite out on the trip compared to actual.
Chris
07 Citroen C6 V6 HDi Exclusive - Red
07 Citroen C5 HDi VTR - Red
09 Citroen C3 1.4i VTR - Silver
01 Citroen Saxo 1.1i Forte - Mango Orange
.
93 Ford Mondeo 2.0i GLX
19 Hyundai i10
07 Citroen C6 V6 HDi Exclusive - Red
07 Citroen C5 HDi VTR - Red
09 Citroen C3 1.4i VTR - Silver
01 Citroen Saxo 1.1i Forte - Mango Orange
.
93 Ford Mondeo 2.0i GLX
19 Hyundai i10
She's a poverty spec LX so no trip computer or cruise control. All mpg figures are calculated by fill, drive and fill. I'm know a bit about common rail engines after owning a couple of ducatos and a relay so I'll just have to work through the fuel system till I find the fault. No black smoke though which suggests it's a minor fault and possibly not fuel related, maybe binding brakes.
The more I look at figures for some cars, the more I think the manufacturers might almost make them up for their own convenience - not only are there are so many cars with CO2 figures ending in 9, like 99, 119, 129, but also a lot of cars have recently improved consumption by 10 or 15% without losing weight or any explanation of improvements to the fuel system or significant aerodynamic mods.cachaciero wrote: Being doing some research on fuel consumption on various diesels and there appears to have been a seismic shift round about 2007 doesn't matter if you talk Citroën or BMW / Merc they all seem to have been able to do something to get their carbon levels down a couple of tax brackets, I wonder what was done and is it retrofittable
There's one car which has improved from 56 to 74 mpg combined figure in 3 years. There have been some aero mods, but when they also add a stop start system I don't see how can that improve the extra-urban figures from 74 to 83 mpg. In real life, on a German site where people publish their own figures, only 3 people out of over 100 have bettered 65 mpg overall, only a dozen above 55 mpg, and the median is about 50.
-
- (Donor 2020)
- Posts: 7171
- Joined: 08 Jun 2011, 18:04
- Location: GL15***
- My Cars: 2006 C5 2.0 Litre HDI VTR Automatic Estate.(now sold on)
Currently Renault Zoe 2014 ZE - x 2500
I'm finding the C5 2.0 HDI hatch is much poorer on MPG than the Xantiia 2.0 HDI hatch so far, my fuel consumption on the Xantia over the whole 18 months I owned it averaged out at 41.56 MPG, the C5 is so far only averaging 32.9 MPG
I keep a log of all my fuel use and mileage, a habit formed while running a business.
Most of the travel is local semi rural with the occasional mixed 80 mile round trip.
Both cars ran clean and sweet and the emissions readings are as specified, maybe too much use of the air-con and I'm told there's extra weight in the C5 but I haven't checked.
I keep a log of all my fuel use and mileage, a habit formed while running a business.
Most of the travel is local semi rural with the occasional mixed 80 mile round trip.
Both cars ran clean and sweet and the emissions readings are as specified, maybe too much use of the air-con and I'm told there's extra weight in the C5 but I haven't checked.