fuel consumption

This is the place for posts that don't fit into any other category.

Moderator: RichardW

Posts: 230
Joined: 13 Apr 2003, 00:47

fuel consumption

Post by mark_sp » 12 Sep 2003, 22:25

I'm just amazed at some of the figures reported on this site.
My xantia 1.9TD aquired in March returns on average 34 MPG. This figure is significantly above the book figure of 31.7
The car is in excellent condition and was serviced end of March including air filter.
I recently did 1600 miles on a trip to Brittany. I used a very light touch on the throttle and cruised at 65 - 70 MPH [with one forray into the 80's when it looked like I might be late for the Ferry]. The car rewarded me with an average of 37 MPG.
At the risk of upsetting everyone I wonder if the figures that are being reported are possibly a tad optomistic.
Incidentally a colleague has a company VW Bora TD and he claims that it returns on average 27 MPG. It does however go like the wind compared to the Xantia.

Posts: 1801
Joined: 19 Dec 2002, 15:46

Post by tomsheppard » 13 Sep 2003, 01:48

Wow! don't Xantias drink! My well serviced BX (NA) diesel can always be relied on to exceed 50 MPG but If I don't drive it like a thug, I can get 59. I am staggered that this engine won't return at least 40 and I would be looking at the fuel and air filters with a very hard stare!

Posts: 230
Joined: 13 Apr 2003, 00:47

Post by mark_sp » 13 Sep 2003, 04:16

I think your kind of agreeing with me, but I have one small anomally. I also own a BX TZD Estate which I consider extremely frugal, only thing is it averages 38 MPG which is about 12% better than the Xantia but far short of your figure ?
Its saving grace is two fold: I use it as a van [and get lots of work out of it] and its fun, its rapid once rolling especially uphill, I can't help myself I just have to embarrass the £20K crowd.
With regard to perception:
I work in a support role and many a time a piece of kit is reported faulty by a user, after much testing and head scratching no fault can be found so the item is returned into general use. Almost always it is then reported to be functioning far better than before. I think the fuel consumption reports fall in to that category, its not a deliberate exageration but a sort of a perpetuated myth.
Anyway while I'm on a roll here are few average fuel consumption figures from cars I've previously owned:
Citroen BX 19 TRS 1986 26mpg - my all time favourite car, bury me in it instead of a coffin.
Citroen XM Ser 1 2.0 Auto HA 1 1991 - 19 mpg - when filling it up an elderly gent once asked me if it was worth him waiting, think it had 18 gallon tank. This car almost gave me a nervous break down it is without doubt the worst car ever manufactured, a trabant is reliable compared to it.
Fiat 128 1300 1977 - 24 mpg
Ford Granada Mk3 2.0 auto - 22 mpg, rear wheel drive without TC so it was lethal in wet/icy conditions.
Peugeot 504 GL 1.8 1978 - 24 mpg - second all time favourite car, would still own it if rust proofing had not been completely omitted.
peugeot 504 Ti auto 1976 - 22 mpg - third all time favourite car, see above.
Triumph Vitesse MK1 1600 1965 22mpg - 5 gallon tank meant a fill up every 3 days, bought it to keep mobile while the 504 Ti was waiting on a part from France with a 6 week lag time. It was damp, uncomfortable, noisy beyond belief, suffered from scuttle shake and on start up the engine used to thump for 30 seconds while the oil eventually circulated. Unbelievably it is to this day the only car I have ever made a profit on. I advertised both the 505 Ti and the Vitesse for sale once the 504 was repaired and decided to let fate decide. Didn't have a single call for the 504 but was plagued with calls for the Vitesse for weeks.
Jaguar XJ6 Ser1 4.2 auto - no emission controlls on this one, enough torque to rip your head off, think thats why they fitted the head rests as standard [you activa owners are only deluding youselves if you think you have experienced G force] well worn long stroke engine that drank oil and petrol in equal quantities. Thats one of the ten things to do before I die off the list anyway.
Wolseley 1500 1958 28 mpg - 2nd most economic car I ever owned. Bought 2 non runners for £130 and made 1 reasonable car out of the 2, sold the bits I had left over for £40. Ran the car for 2 years on a shoe string and sold it for £80 as a restoration project. £10 depreciation for 2 years motoring, where have those days gone ?
I've owned many other cars usually near the end of their life and the fuel consumption has always been low to mid 20's.
Think this is my longest posting but this fuel consumption business has been brewing up in me for a while and I needed to get it off my chest.

Posts: 1801
Joined: 19 Dec 2002, 15:46

Post by tomsheppard » 13 Sep 2003, 07:25

My 128s , usually estates, always returned 33 and I drove them very hard! The 3p berlinetta was fitted with a 1500 engine and a 65cl strada box. good for 115, it was so long on top that I got nearly 50 out of it and could converse with the passenger at 70!

Posts: 360
Joined: 05 Jan 2002, 02:10

Post by ghostrider » 14 Sep 2003, 01:28

My MIL claims to regulary get nearly 60 out of her 19txd estate some 850 miles per tank full (65l)! I dont think I've ever seen much over 675 - 690 out of Bxs with the 65 l tank which equates to just over 50 if you can only get 60l in. I have done somewhere around 400K in various diesel Bxs and to be fair I nearly always have 100Kg of tools in the back but I don't think I've ever done better than around 48 normally 43-45.
I had a 16TRS which struggled to do 28-30. My CX gti turbo could get about the same if you could resist that huge surge of torque when you nailed it!
GS/GSA did nearly 100k in one of these 34 was about average.
I suspect that the traffic conditions today play as big a part as driving style, when you take 6hrs to manage a paltry 200 miles on the motorway, there is no chance of getting good consumption figures.
All my best returns have been late at night doing a steady 70 on the motorway, no braking, gear changing, and presumably improved volumetric efficiency due to the colder air
My recently purchased 1.9td xantia is getting better since it has had the injector cleaner treatment, its got to about 39-40 from a starting point of 35 (which I only managed driving it very gently)My mate across the road has a 2.0 HDI 110 brake xantia estate and he reckons on nearly 50 which bearing in mind he works for ex rally driver Steve Bannister taking sacks of spuds everwhere is pretty good.
He also does huge mileages ( the current 3 yr old one has got 180k on the clock!) could this be a factor? in as much as the use keeps everything working?
Last edited by ghostrider on 22 Feb 2011, 06:39, edited 1 time in total.

Posts: 1801
Joined: 19 Dec 2002, 15:46

Post by tomsheppard » 14 Sep 2003, 02:45

Sitting here with my beloved beside me (woman, not Citroen) I have just read the posting and remarked that I must have a good one, then or maybe I just drive it very gently. The instant reply was "I don't think so" , now what do you make of that?

Posts: 1801
Joined: 19 Dec 2002, 15:46

Post by tomsheppard » 15 Sep 2003, 01:13

A friend with a Xantia diesel estate, living near Aberdeen called today. I haven't spoken to him in ages. He drives 20, 000 miles a year and on being asked, said that he gets between 45 and 50 MPG. Is this a question of build quality on the engines or have half of the cars built got treacle in the gearbox? I have no reason to doubt his figures and |I know that neither he nor his right foot are lightweight-most intriguing.

Posts: 221
Joined: 01 Sep 2003, 16:05

Post by kafkaian » 15 Sep 2003, 01:49

This has inspired me to check my consumption Tom. I'll quote mine for each week on my automatic quote. I fill up (to the top) once a week so it'll start recording in two weeks.


Post by Interwired » 15 Sep 2003, 03:44

Was very suprised by the Fuel economy figures you posted mark.
I get a regular 23mpg average in my Bmw 535i, and as much as 27-28mpg if I take it steady (80mph) on a long motorway journey, but thats in a big heavy car with a 3.5 litre straight six. (it will drop to around 18mpg as an average if Im heavy footed around town though)
My previous car(s) - VW Passat 1.8T(150bhp) would get around 32mpg average and the little Audi A3 1.8(125bhp) around 33mpg...cant remember the others.
..and nobody would ever say Im a light-footed driver...
Im not convinced my Wifes little AX GT actually uses any fuel !

User avatar
Posts: 328
Joined: 15 Jul 2002, 15:14

Post by rabenson » 15 Sep 2003, 14:53

I get 49-53 mpg out of my ZX 1.9d. I drive a forty mile round trip daily to work on dual carriageway at around 85 then into the town centre. This compares with the 55-58mpg I used to get from my pug 205d. I do sround 25-30k miles per year and (sad git that I am) check consumption fairly regularly. My wife gets into the 50s with her bx 1.9d and that includes two trips from northern England to mid France per month.....

Posts: 111
Joined: 22 Oct 2002, 21:45

Post by FFX-DM » 15 Sep 2003, 16:18

Rabenson, that sounds very similar to what I get from my 1.9D (and a similar daily commute for me also).
Best ever was up to 72 mpg driving like a granny in my AX 1.4D, but generally that was more like 55pmg.

Posts: 1801
Joined: 19 Dec 2002, 15:46

Post by tomsheppard » 15 Sep 2003, 16:54

seeing Rabenson's post made me think. Who outside of the citrophile community would believe that a ten or more year old Cit could be relied upon to cover long continental journeys on a fortnightly basis? Truly the venerable BX is an underrated jewel! How many miles Has this BX done, I wonder?

Posts: 230
Joined: 13 Apr 2003, 00:47

Post by mark_sp » 15 Sep 2003, 17:26

well I can only conclude that there is something wrong with my car, or my driving or maybe both.
Maybe someone should be brave enough to lend me one of these super frugal vehicles so that I can experience the frugality in the flesh [don't get many new experiences these days].
I'm going to monitor my mpg and driving style again.

Incidentally I recall a piece by Clarkson on Top Gear [caught it by accident as I don't like the boy racer style of the programme] where he was slating the manufacturers fuel consumption figures. If I recall correctly he said that his car returned only one third of the manufacturers quoted figure.

alan s
RIP 2010
Posts: 2542
Joined: 26 Jan 2001, 16:53
x 5

Post by alan s » 15 Sep 2003, 18:45

Ok, you've got me in.
That really is pretty ordinary fuel consumption for a diesel powered fairly modern aerodynamic car. I used to pull approx. 34 MPG in a 1.5 ton Mazda E2200 panel van being used for work. It was designed like a brick so it pushed a fair wall of air in front of it all the time, as a result it only did less than 30MPG on highway work.
As a comparison in this case though, my BX16V does around 38MPG on the highway (but remember we have only 100 & 110 kph maximun speed limits out here) so you can say average speeds around 60 - 70 MPH and does about 28 around Town but again, we don't have the gridlock traffic where I am. If I give it a bit of stick, the consumption increases markedly.[}:)]
My CX 2400 C-matic goes between 24 & 28MPG but this car rarely sees open road work and does predominantly 20klms runs at a time. As a clue on this one though, if I take my son to school through the suburbs, I get around 28MPG yet if I go "the back way" which includes a bit of open road, bit of traffic, bit of dirt road and a hill, it drops to around 24 so obviously driving conditions can play a part.
Having said that though, I always found my diesel very consistent with its consumption regardless of driving style and the only marked difference I ever had was as I said; city vs open road, so I would suggest firstly get the car checked for filters, timing and the like and then I'd tend to keep a constant monitoring of fuel useage for a while particularly on trips over unfamiliar territory in case you are tending to drive in areas that give you the same negative result on fuel consumption due to conditions, that "the back way" does to my CX.
Alan S

Forum Treasurer
Posts: 9100
Joined: 07 Aug 2002, 17:12
x 339

Post by RichardW » 15 Sep 2003, 19:48

My 95 Xantia was appaling when we got it - no pull, no low end tractability, and about 38 mpg. Since, er, working the engine a bit, it now goes much better and returns somewhere about 40 - 43 mpg (it always gets filled to the brim, usually fill when the light comes on, at around 500 miles, and get in about 55-57 litres. Our driving is a mix of country roads, M-way, and occasional town - no crawling in commuter traffic (we don't have that in the direction I go to work!). Returns around 10% better MPG if I am driving rather than my wife [:0] I don't hang around either, but I do stick where possible to 2000 rpm, cane it to the red line if necessary etc. Distances are taken from the mileometer, but it seems pretty accurate when speed is compared against m-way marker posts, and it gives the same results on journeys as the BX used to.
The old BX TD's by comparison always returned 45 - 48 mpg - even if you absolutley caned them or sat in traffic for ages. Only once got down to around 40mpg after I filled it with ASDA diesel - so I didn't do that again! I prefer Shell diesel, as it seems to give better running and better economy.
For some reason the 1.9 TD has never been very good - it returns only around 40mpg in the ZX also, which is about the same weight as a BX AFAIK, which seems a bit odd?