Jump to content
Do Not Sell My Personal Information


Real Mpg


KingToy
 Share

Recommended Posts

Manufacturers have been squeezing ever better figures out of their cars during EC tests, in order to reduce CO2 emissions and, consequently, VED ratings. Those EC lab figures bear no relation to the real world and very few drivers are able to get near them. For proof, check here: www.honestjohn.co.uk/ realmpg. This site allows you to enter your real mpg for your model and see what is the real average mpg that motorists get.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Manufacturers have been squeezing ever better figures out of their cars during EC tests, in order to reduce CO2 emissions and, consequently, VED ratings. Those EC lab figures bear no relation to the real world and very few drivers are able to get near them. For proof, check here: www.honestjohn.co.uk/ realmpg. This site allows you to enter your real mpg for your model and see what is the real average mpg that motorists get.

2010 D4d saloon is quoted at 52mpg (I think), I get constant 49.6 - which I think is not too far off the mark.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your post suggests some sort of wrong doing by manufacturers, as if the figures are contrived in some way, it's a fact that real life driving is nothing like running a car on the test bed, most customers get figures that are near the mark, others dont, we all drive differently under different conditions, its not that the figures are fiddled!

Kingo :thumbsup:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2010 D4d saloon is quoted at 52mpg (I think), I get constant 49.6 - which I think is not too far off the mark.

if yours is a 2.0 D4D it's official combined is ~63mpg, if it's a 2.2 D4D it's ~52mpg & if it's a 2.2 D-CAT it's ~45mpg
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2010 D4d saloon is quoted at 52mpg (I think), I get constant 49.6 - which I think is not too far off the mark.

if yours is a 2.0 D4D it's official combined is 62.8, if it's a 2.2 D4D it's ~52mpg

Hi,

It's a 2.0 D4D....I'm sure I read that it was 52mpg.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


2010 D4d saloon is quoted at 52mpg (I think), I get constant 49.6 - which I think is not too far off the mark.

if yours is a 2.0 D4D it's official combined is 62.8, if it's a 2.2 D4D it's ~52mpg

Hi,

It's a 2.0 D4D....I'm sure I read that it was 52mpg. - there is no way I'd get 63mpg, I can assure you of that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's a 2.0 D4D....I'm sure I read that it was 52mpg. - there is no way I'd get 63mpg, I can assure you of that.

Toyota combined for the latest Avensis 2.0 D4D manual saloon is 62.8 mpg here

perhaps on your 2010 it's less.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's a 2.0 D4D....I'm sure I read that it was 52mpg. - there is no way I'd get 63mpg, I can assure you of that.

Toyota combined for the latest Avensis 2.0 D4D manual saloon is 62.8 mpg here"]http://www.toyota.co...cification]here

Kind of back up the op then, like I said - I do not think anyone could get 63 mpg from that unit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's a 2.0 D4D....I'm sure I read that it was 52mpg. - there is no way I'd get 63mpg, I can assure you of that.

Toyota combined for the latest Avensis 2.0 D4D manual saloon is 62.8 mpg here"]http://www.toyota.co...cification]here

Kind of back up the op then, like I said - I do not think anyone could get 63 mpg from that unit.

edit: Car has only done 9k, and I know from owning new diesel cars previously - they get better with a few miles on them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not suggesting that manufacturers fiddle the mpg figures. What they do is publish mpg figures that are obtained on the test bed and very few motorists are ever likely to achieve such figures. If this is correct (as proved on the Honest John website) then we might ask why on earth do manufacturers quote totally unrealistic mpg figures. I personally would prefer they quoted realistic mpg achievable by the average motorist.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What they do is publish mpg figures that are obtained on the test bed and very few motorists are ever likely to achieve such figures. If this is correct (as proved on the Honest John website) then we might ask why on earth do manufacturers quote totally unrealistic mpg figures. .

because those are the only figures that they are legally allowed to advertise.

What needs to be done is to change the EC directive test to one that more closely resembles real life results.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not suggesting that manufacturers fiddle the mpg figures. What they do is publish mpg figures that are obtained on the test bed and very few motorists are ever likely to achieve such figures. If this is correct (as proved on the Honest John website) then we might ask why on earth do manufacturers quote totally unrealistic mpg figures. I personally would prefer they quoted realistic mpg achievable by the average motorist.

Because it was an EC standard from the late nineties and are the only figures allowed to be quoted

Interestingly, the new Avensis was driven by Banzai magazine from Lands End to John O Groats, the extra urban cycle on that model is 72.4 and the idea was to do the trip on one tank of fuel. What was the actual MPG? 71.5 MPG

http://blog.toyota.co.uk/toyota-avensis-tackles-lands-end-to-john-ogroats-on-one-tank-of-fuel

If you changed the way it was done, how would you do it so it was fair and accurate?

Kingo :thumbsup:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some might say the cars are setup to do well in the tests i.e every car built (and they are), the Avensis i run will do the official figures if you drive to the test parameters. In normal usage (for me) it wont, all cars are the same in my experience.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just look way down the road, and time it so you never use the brakes.

All the fuel gets used on acceleration, if you don't brake, you won't have to accelerate.

BTW women drive with one foot on the brake and one foot on the throttle, this is how they maintain the 2" between them and the car in front.

If you are wondering why your wife only gets half your millage, just look at the front wheels after she has driven it...... see all that black you thought was just innocent brake dust ?

Wrong, that"s your money burnt on to them

:crazy:

Next time my misses is getting a car with the smallest engine I can find, and still I will loosen up the go pedal for less umpf, and more MPG.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share





×
×
  • Create New...




Forums


News


Membership