MK8 ST-Line X, first impressions

[Daggerit]

Yeah, definitely aware that the short journey to work won't be helping.  I guess I'll just see what I do the next time I go for a longer drive at a constant speed and compare that.

[tef89]

7 minutes ago, Daggerit said:

Yeah, definitely aware that the short journey to work won't be helping.  I guess I'll just see what I do the next time I go for a longer drive at a constant speed and compare that.

What I'd do is, the next time you're on a long journey at motorway speeds, reset Trip 2 and see what that generates.  If you're getting 50-55 MPG then I'd be happy with that.

My commute used to be 10 mins door to door and my little Mazda 2 (similar to the Fiesta although NA) used to give me 33-35 MPG so I know what a difference it can make 😉

[Daggerit]

Will do.

[Eric Bloodaxe]

3 hours ago, tef89 said:

Short journeys will always skew your MPG results to a lower scale in comparison.

Very much agree with this. My Mrs's SEAT Mii is only usually driven on short runs of 4/5 miles and only gets a few mpg more than the Fiesta. On the odd occasion I've used it on a decent run, such as when I've been between cars (as when waiting 6 months for the Fiesta😡) it shoots up well into the 50's.

I think whether the engine gets good and warm can have more influence than driving technique. I've just been up the Dales to our caravan which is 70 miles or so on the kind of roads I described earlier. I filled up before I set off on Monday, drove up in a very relaxed way and glanced at the trip when I got there - average mpg 49.0. Came back this morning which was lovely and sunny, roads pretty clear, and had a bit of a blast - wide throttle, lots of revs (Mrs not with me!😀). Checked the trip again on arriving home and average mpg was..........49.0.

[Blatto]

Just done my first Brim to brim mpg check I Covered 427 Miles on 40.2 Litres. Which works out at 48.2 mpg. 

Not a typical weeks driving for me as I was on holiday from work for a few days and did some extra trips into town, and for about 100 miles of that I was playing around with the eco mode.

Car now has 670 miles on the clock. My next weeks brim to brim will be a better comparison as I will be back on my normal 5 day commute to work of 64 miles round trip/day  + a weekend shopping trip of about 10 miles.

Based on that I'm guessing it will be about 50mpg once it's loosened up after a few thousand miles. 

Once I've got it run in I will start using the cruise control to see if that makes any difference to mpg.

 

 

[Daggerit]

Dammit... Fuelled up and then on the dual carriageway after I was only getting high 30’s over the 20 miles at an indicated 70 mph. Only managed to bring it up to just below 40 mpg once I was going through town in 4th at 30 for a couple miles. No AC on, or any heating bits for that matter.

Don’t know what’s up with my car.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[tef89]

51 minutes ago, Daggerit said:

Dammit... Fuelled up and then on the dual carriageway after I was only getting high 30’s over the 20 miles at an indicated 70 mph. Only managed to bring it up to just below 40 mpg once I was going through town in 4th at 30 for a couple miles. No AC on, or any heating bits for that matter.

Don’t know what’s up with my car.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Did you reset the tripometer? 

[Daggerit]

Did you reset the tripometer? 

Yup!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[tef89]

Does sound strange, especially as you mentioned it's been the same since before you had it remapped from 100ps to 155ps.

[Daggerit]

I’ll maybe just bring it back to stock for a bit now that it had more miles and see if there’s a difference or not.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Blatto]

2 hours ago, Daggerit said:

Dammit... Fuelled up and then on the dual carriageway after I was only getting high 30’s over the 20 miles at an indicated 70 mph. Only managed to bring it up to just below 40 mpg once I was going through town in 4th at 30 for a couple miles. No AC on, or any heating bits for that matter.

Don’t know what’s up with my car.

Did you say it was an automatic? Automatics always used to knock off at least 15% from the mpg not sure if that's still the case with more modern Autos.

I see you are apparently in Aberdeenshire which is generally a lot cooler and certainly much hillier than Hertfordshire, that won't help your average mpg.

I'm surprised you got the same MPG before the remap. Would have thought adding over 50% to the BHP would make it a lot thirstier if you use it.

At a steady 70mph in 6th gear on the level my instantaneous mpg readout on dash says 52 mpg, if I take it up to 80 (not that I'd ever go that fast of course, I'm just imagining😆😉)

it shows 46mpg

 

[Eric Bloodaxe]

 

1 hour ago, Daggerit said:

I’ll maybe just bring it back to stock for a bit now that it had more miles and see if there’s a difference or not.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Sounds like a good idea - at least you'll establish a base with the stock map.

Noted that you say you use 4th in a 30 limit. I use 3rd in my 140 (which is lower geared than the 100), and find it feels much more controllable.

30 in 4th on a 100 is around 1500 rpm. Looking at the "before" and "after" curves on Superchips site, the standard 100 produces max torque around 2,700-3,000, which is a lot higher up than Ford literature suggests. I normally try and keep mine spinning at 2,000 or more and it seems happier doing so.

 

15 minutes ago, Blatto said:

Did you say it was an automatic? Automatics always used to knock off at least 15% from the mpg not sure if that's still the case with more modern Autos.

😆😉

I remember Dan fitting a quckshift, so a manual.

[Blatto]

20 minutes ago, Eric Bloodaxe said:

Noted that you say you use 4th in a 30 limit. I use 3rd in my 140 (which is lower geared than the 100), and find it feels much more controllable.

I'm using 4th at 30 in my ST-Line 140 feels ok unless you are on an incline or not wanting to accelerate quickly, but yes on the 100/125 versions it would probably be a bit too high a gear for 30mph. I'm also using 5th at about 40mph and 6th at 50mph.

 

[Eric Bloodaxe]

I perhaps tend to change up at a few more revs than you Michael, but I think we're more of less singing from the same hymn sheet there, and more importantly both seem happy with our resulting mpg! 

I wonder if we sometimes get hung up on the ecoboost being "only" 1.0 instead of thinking of it as just (in our case) a 140ps car. Certainly I think it compares very favourably on mpg with cars of similar performance from a few years ago and when you compare a Mk 8 with, say, the original Focus, it's no longer that small a car.

[Blatto]

44 minutes ago, Eric Bloodaxe said:

I perhaps tend to change up at a few more revs than you Michael, but I think we're more of less singing from the same hymn sheet there, and more importantly both seem happy with our resulting mpg! 

Yeah I think so. Obviously if I'm wanting to get a bit more of a move on or if the traffic dictates, I'll be changing up at higher revs, the speeds/gears I was quoting were just if I'm cruising along trying to stay fairly economical. For the size of the engine and the BHP/Torque it produces I'm more than happy with around the 45-50mpg I'm getting.

Hopefully I'll get  bit more once it's done a few thousand miles.

And yes it's no longer a small car and like most modern cars they are getting quite heavy. My Old MK I Golf Gti was only about 870Kg a good 300 less than my Fiesta, produced about 115 BHp from an 1800 cc engine and did low 30's mpg if I wasn't being a hooligan.

[tef89]

4th feels right in my 125 as long as it's not uphill.   Pretty much do the same as you Michael through the range.

[Eric Bloodaxe]

Lol I'm sticking with 3rd as I find it easier to stop it drifting over 30. Bit wary of this after being "re-educated" a couple of years back. The instructors on my course (who were ex-traffic officers) also recommended this - works for me anyway!😀

[tef89]

4 hours ago, Eric Bloodaxe said:

Lol I'm sticking with 3rd as I find it easier to stop it drifting over 30. Bit wary of this after being "re-educated" a couple of years back. The instructors on my course (who were ex-traffic officers) also recommended this - works for me anyway!😀

Yep, they said the same thing to me, also a couple of years back lol. 

I had a feeling we were the rogues of the forum 😎

[Guy Heaton]

On the 100 PS anything under 2k rpm when in any gear above 2nd and the engine labours.   I suspect its more to do with turbo not spun up yet than outright bhp.

[Eric Bloodaxe]

18 hours ago, Blatto said:

And yes it's no longer a small car and like most modern cars they are getting quite heavy. My Old MK I Golf Gti was only about 870Kg a good 300 less than my Fiesta, produced about 115 BHp from an 1800 cc engine and did low 30's mpg if I wasn't being a hooligan.

I had an Astra 1.8 SRi in the late 80's/early 90's which had very similar statistics - I used to get around 36-38 mpg from that but I was doing big mileages/decent runs back then. Found an old road test of that car and what stands out (apart from the lack of weight) is how low the gearing was. Top (5th) was 19.9mph per 1,000 so the top speed they recorded of 120.1 mph was pretty near the red line, whereas the 140, as with most modern cars,  won't pull max revs in 5th or 6th on the flat. (That's what the road testers say, btw, I haven't tried it myself!😀)

[Blatto]

6 hours ago, Eric Bloodaxe said:

whereas the 140, as with most modern cars,  won't pull max revs in 5th or 6th on the flat. (That's what the road testers say, btw, I haven't tried it myself!😀)

Yes they seemed great at the time but modern cars are generally much better at most things. Fond memories of the MK I Golf GTi though.

Well if my Current Fiesta could pull 6th gear to the Red Line I'd be doing close on 180mph. I'll give it a go once it's run in 😉