I’m looking for a mk7 fiesta , I had one before which was written off. I had a 1.4 tdci which was slow but steady and great on fuel.

also bonus was tax at £30.

which engine should I look for? I’m not a turbo fan I had a corsa Sri 1.2 turbo for a courtesy car which drank fuel. 
so I was thinking of the 1.25 which should be similar performance to what I had before if not a bit faster, but still good on fuel and tax?

 

Hi Ben,

If you're looking for a Mk 7 Fiesta (2009 - late 2012) none of the petrol engines are turbo. The facelift or Mk 7.5 (2013 on) introduced the 1.0 ecoboost turbo and, later, the 1.6 turbo in the ST.

If looking at a 1.25, be aware that there are 60ps versions in some lower spec cars which are best avoided if you want reasonable performance. Most however will be the 82ps version.

My Mrs had one of these and it was quite fun to drive but needed lots of revs/gearchanging to make reasonable progress. Mpg overall was pretty similar to the 45mpg I average in the 140ps ecoboost I have now.

None of the Mk 7 petrols are particularly economical. I still have an original brochure from when we got ours and the claimed combined mpg for the 82ps 1.25 is only slightly better than the 120ps 1.6, at 50.4 versus 48.7. 

Road tax (VED) is not great either. You'd need to check the V5C of any car you were looking at to confirm the exact CO2 at the time it was registered, but the brochure figures are 129g/km for the 1.25, so £135 tax. The 1.6 was 134g/km, so £165.

26 minutes ago, Eric Bloodaxe said:

If you're looking for a Mk 7 Fiesta (2009 - late 2012) none of the petrol engines are turbo.

Solid reliable good all round work horse 👍. You can't go wrong with a 1.25 Mk7 but as Rodger says try and avoid the 60ps versions and go for a decent spec if possible, some of the base models were quite poor, drivers seat and a steering wheel was about the only things included 🤣

I’m not saying don’t buy a 1.25 petrol but I think you will find it very weak compared to the 1.4tdci.  Whilst bhp looks favourable, compare the torque figures. Depends where you drive and your driving style.   For me I find the diesels very good because of the superior torque.  1.25 petrol is a pretty trouble free engine (but like with all engines with timing belts, don’t chance it, make sure it’s done on time)

This info is from mk6.5 but same engine.   1.4tdci about 45% more torque than 1.25 petrol. And it’s at half of the rpm of the 1.25 petrol. 

1 hour ago, Eric Bloodaxe said:

Road tax (VED) is not great either. You'd need to check the V5C of any car you were looking at to confirm the exact CO2 at the time it was registered, but the brochure figures are 129g/km for the 1.25, so £135 tax. The 1.6 was 134g/km, so £165.

Interestingly, the 1.25 did eventually make it into the £30 tax band.  Though possibly only after the facelift.  

4 hours ago, Ben97397284 said:

I’m looking for a mk7 fiesta , I had one before which was written off. I had a 1.4 tdci which was slow but steady and great on fuel.

also bonus was tax at £30.

which engine should I look for? I’m not a turbo fan I had a corsa Sri 1.2 turbo for a courtesy car which drank fuel. 
so I was thinking of the 1.25 which should be similar performance to what I had before if not a bit faster, but still good on fuel and tax?

 

What are you actually looking for?  Fuel economy or performance?

1.2L and Turbo's don't really mix, same as the 1.0L EcoBoost's.  Your got to kick their heads in all the time, which isn't very sympathetic to the mechanicals.

If you want fuel economy, then get an oil burner.  If you want to feel like you're actually pedalling it, Flintstones style, get a 1.25.  If you want a bit of both, performance and fuel economy, get a NA 1.6L.

1 hour ago, TomsFocus said:

Interestingly, the 1.25 did eventually make it into the £30 tax band.  Though possibly only after the facelift.  

Yes, I think they must have shaved a few grams CO2 off the later cars, which is why I stressed the need to check before you buy. I got the impression Ben was looking for an earlier car though.

The odd extra gram can make quite a difference, as per the table linked below:

https://www.gov.uk/vehicle-tax-rate-tables/rates-for-cars-registered-on-or-after-1-march-2001

3 hours ago, TomsFocus said:

Interestingly, the 1.25 did eventually make it into the £30 tax band.  Though possibly only after the facelift.  

 

2 hours ago, Eric Bloodaxe said:

I think they must have shaved a few grams CO2 off the later cars

Yes, just found it. The 2013 brochure for the facelift shows the 82ps 1.25 as 120g/km so just qualifying for the £30. 

The 1.4 tdci didn’t feel like it had much torque, I often had to change down gears when it would struggle.

I think personally I prefer a bigger engine. In the past I’ve had a 90s golf gti 2.0 and a 1.6 polo both engines were flexible with good torque and required less gear changes. 
It’s a shame the bigger engines are more to tax as they can still be economical if driven smoothly.

I don’t think the small turbos are as economical as they make out, as soon as you use the turbo ( to get any kind of performance) the fuel consumption shoots up. 

 

I learnt to drive in a 206 1.4 HDi...same engine, pretty much the same weight as the Fiesta, and it was awful, even as a learner!  I then bought a 75bhp 1.4 petrol which felt 'faster' in comparison due to the wider, more progressive powerband, but still wasn't exactly quick!  

As someone said above, you need to think carefully about what you actually want from the car.  Both the 1.4 TDCI and 1.25 will be fairly cheap to run, but both take some effort to drive.  1.6 petrol costs more to run, but gives an easier drive.  

The 1.0 EcoBoost can do decent MPG - but it's either Eco OR Boost...you can't have both due to basic physics!

Have you considered the 1.6 TDCI?  Many of those were in the free tax band, and you'll barely notice the difference in fuel between that and the 1.4 TDCI.  Nicer to drive too...

8 hours ago, TomsFocus said:

Have you considered the 1.6 TDCI?  Many of those were in the free tax band, and you'll barely notice the difference in fuel between that and the 1.4 TDCI.  Nicer to drive too...

Yes, I had one of those for a short while (and have driven several others). Nipped along quite smartly (certainly got more go than a 1.25!) and good on fuel.

Trouble with a diesel nowadays of course (apart from it being regarded as the fuel of Satan!😀) is the fuel cost eating away the mpg advantage. I've seen diesel at a premium of 16-20ppl over E10 quite regularly around here.

Edit: I meant E10 not E5 which in some places is getting near diesel price - if they have any.

Edited May 8, 20224 yr by Eric Bloodaxe
Extra sentence

I have the 1.6 mk7 on a 2011 plate,its a rock solid car with not 1 engine problem in 8 years (3 years old when i had it)

As for the fuel, It's ok around town i can get 35 mpg and high 40's on a run around 48  say.

It's a very nippy engine and no turbo,i love it.

as above - 1.6 petrol ticks all the boxes, and they are ULEZ compliant as they are so less polluting vs the same age diesels.... you might not care but the next buyer might, and in a few years from now who knows what restrictions the GOV will put onto stinky old diesels?

Annual tax is really an irrelevant part of running a car, so although you might think 'arrgh an extra 100 GBP' but how many tanks of fuel is that?  two? over the year?

I don't get stuck in traffic, but do quite a few short 40-50 mph journeys and can always get just over 50mpg unless I'm being stupid.

25 minutes ago, orangecurry said:

as above - 1.6 petrol ticks all the boxes, and they are ULEZ compliant as they are so less polluting vs the same age diesels.... 

This again?  Diesel tax is cheaper because they produce less CO2.  Petrols are ULEZ compliant because they produce less NOx.  Neither is 'less polluting'.  You just have a choice of which pollutant you prefer...

(Also, you're the only person getting anywhere near 50mpg from a 1.6 petrol Fiesta.  Most just about manage low 40's.)

Diesel emissions are significantly more damaging to human health.  This is a fact.  It's why the older diesels get hit by the extra ULEZ tax in cities.  Not sure why you think this is some kind of personal crusade by little old me.  I'm pointing out the facts to people who may not understand the taxation changes that were introduced by New Labour 15-20 years ago, when the GOV got it wrong about promoting diesels.

And thanks for the accolade.  Though I only go by the highly advanced Ford computer on the MPG.