Ffoxy Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 All depends how you drive. If you don't like it, sell it. See what does meet with your approval. Or try a change of driving style of economy is most important. Sent from my iPhone using Ford OC mobile app Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil 87 Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 Here is my 6 month chart attached, I'm averaging 34.4, not amused. I've been thinking of doing a graph too, been keeping track of my mpg with a different app for nearly a year including actual mpg and what the trip computer says. So when I have a year of data I'll export it to Excel and do a quick graph. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cjay1 Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 last week finished my eco driving challenge all urban driving mostly short journeys 76% cold engine average speed 17 mph and managed 51 mpg. the trick is gentle acceleration and avoid breaking as much as possible (keep car in gear and take your foot off the accelerator and slow naturally). due to low friction you can go a long way down the road without burning any fuel.on current tank of fuel i'm driving "normally" averaging 43 mpg so far same journeys. drive like the mpg tests and you will get close to official figures. have fun with the turbo and expect a lot less. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StripeyMiata Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 All depends how you drive. If you don't like it, sell it. See what does meet with your approval. Or try a change of driving style of economy is most important. Sent from my iPhone using Ford OC mobile app My problem is the difference between the official figures and what it does in real life. And the fact Ford are selling this as an economical car to rival diesels when it's nothing of the sort. I'm in a lucky position that I have been driving the roughly the same routes for 5 years so can compare different cars, my driving styles should be the same. My previous car was a FIAT Panda 100HP, it averaged 37.5MPG over the 2 years I had it, the Fiesta as I said is doing 34.8MPG http://www.fuelly.com/car/fiat/panda-100hp/2007/stripeymiata/118551 But here is the problem I have, the Fiesta's official MPG is 65MPG. And the Panda's is 42.6MPG. So the Fiesta is doing 1/2 what it's meant to be but the Panda was pretty close. Same driver, same roads, same driving style, same commuting times. And now I think of it same colour :) How can Ford explain that? Hell my 25 year old Mazda MX5 sometimes averages 30MPG and I rev the nuts off it. I actually think the Fiesta is a great car, but it's salesmen push the 60MPG+ figure when they sell it, when I have no doubt they know it's a load of !Removed!. And I'm sure Ford UK know it as well. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
panjuices Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 'Normal' driving for me which still contains some full throttle and also some traffic on what I consider to be a bad route for economy gets 45mpg. 'Spirited' driving shall we say gets around 40mpg -/+ 2. I saw 50+ once on a particularly warm day with vpower and the stars aligned. I have NO IDEA how anyone could get even approaching 60. So I would totally agree that the official figures are utter !Removed! but the entire industry is at fault and there are other cars on the market with similar engine setups are also showing a big disparity. In general a small engine + turbo + engine management means that for the test run they seem to be able to keep it out of boost and extract a figure which is tosh. The only solution to this sadly is to do your research before you buy a car and look at sites like Fuelly. I went into this car knowing the official figures were a dream so I'm not so frustrated. And I'm not blaming you at all but I think the lesson is to assume everything you hear is a lie and look at actual owner experiences prior to buying. Sooner or later hopefully the test will be overhauled - it is badly needed for sure. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ffoxy Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 I agree Panjuices Sent from my iPhone using Ford OC mobile app Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ffoxy Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 My son in law sells Fords for a well known national dealership and he was top salesman months running at the last place he worked at. He sells these cars as "the most fun for the money" rather than on pure economy. Petrol is lots cheaper to buy over a year than diesel, the petrol engines are MUCH more refined and also make the Fiesta light and nimble. It's not all about economy. If economy is everything try an electric as diesels don't do well on short journeys. Sent from my iPhone using Ford OC mobile app Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StripeyMiata Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 Pretty much agree 100% with you Panjuices, I gather the Peugeot PureTech engine in the 308's MPG is pretty horrific as well. Not to bad in the 208's but suffers with the extra weight in the 308 and averages high 20's for some people. I noticed that the fuel consumption seems to drop off a cliff when the car has to go uphill, compared to the Panda's naturally aspirated 4 cylinder which is interesting. If you notice on my chart I have managed 52.2 MPG on a run, filled her up, did a 50 mile round trip on mostly A-Roads. But nearly impossible to do that daily. I'm also a bit annoyed they put the 5 speed box in the Fiesta instead of the 6 speed in the Focus. I drove the Focus and it was a nicer gearbox to drive. I wonder what the fuel economy would have been with that box in the Fiesta. I used to have a Ford Focus ST3 which averaged 18MPG while I had it so there is that :D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigDaveZS125 Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 This is still my best ever as I posted awhile ago after a steady drive back from Liverpool through country lanes and dual carriageways Sent from my iPhone using Ford OC 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StripeyMiata Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 My son in law sells Fords for a well known national dealership and he was top salesman months running at the last place he worked at. He sells these cars as "the most fun for the money" rather than on pure economy. Petrol is lots cheaper to buy over a year than diesel, the petrol engines are MUCH more refined and also make the Fiesta light and nimble. It's not all about economy. If economy is everything try an electric as diesels don't do well on short journeys. Sent from my iPhone using Ford OC mobile app It's sold on Economy here in Northern Ireland more than fun drive (which it is), probably because we have the highest fuel prices in the UK. I'd like to clarify to the other owners here, I adore the car. Think it's one of the best cars I have ever owned from an overall package point of view and that engine is a technological marvel. And all the toys you get in a TitX are awesome. Sure, my Racing Puma handled better and my Focus ST was quicker, but as a family car that's fun to drive as well it's hard to beat. It's number one in the UK for a reason. But I think (with the EcoBoost engine) it's being mis sold. But then again you could argue so is the Peugeot PureTech range. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattDRX Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 Fact of the matter here is, whether you call it mis-selling or not, the car can actually do the desired figures, both petrol and diesel, even the ST can do so. It's a bit unfair to assume that a car will do 50+MPG when killing it round the A roads and traffic light GP's when the car when used properly will do well over 55MPG and even 67MPG as stated above, it's been proven. I also have no doubt ford never intended for these cars to be marketed as hot hatch either but as always you capitalise where there is a market, Ford+Turbo+Fiesta+potential good economy x Cheap insurance = everyone will buy it, does pretty much what it says on the tin really. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fiestalux Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 I have to say I bought it for the fun to drive qualities first and second economy so I am reasonably happy with 45+ mpg. More would be great and it can achieve it when driven relatively constantly on motorways although perhaps not the German autobahn. That said given what I paid for it, it ticks all the boxes and assuming no technical faults I'd probably stick with Ford after this car as a result. As they used to say "it does (almost) exactly what it says on the tin". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StripeyMiata Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 I kind of get what you are saying Matt, but I personally I think I was mis sold the car in my case. When I asked the dealer if I really would get 65MPG he said no (and I knew the answer to that was no anyway) I would comfortably average 55MPG. But I'm getting 20MPG less than that. But it's OK, the benefits of the car outweigh that. I was actually more annoyed when they stuck £400 on the quote for Diamondbrite when I told them in advance not to. It's a shame the Ford no longer own Mazda as I think sticking the 125PS Ecoboost engine into the MK4 Mazda MX5 chassis would make a cracking car. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paramanic Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 Anything's better than last car...... 33mpg on a good day and on bad a was getting 27mpg ....... And 120 tax a year well this car is 33mpg lowest (winter) summer 43mpg and free tax a can't really complain Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paramanic Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 I kind of get what you are saying Matt, but I personally I think I was mis sold the car in my case. When I asked the dealer if I really would get 65MPG he said no (and I knew the answer to that was no anyway) I would comfortably average 55MPG. But I'm getting 20MPG less than that. But it's OK, the benefits of the car outweigh that. I was actually more annoyed when they stuck £400 on the quote for Diamondbrite when I told them in advance not to. It's a shame the Ford no longer own Mazda as I think sticking the 125PS Ecoboost engine into the MK4 Mazda MX5 chassis would make a cracking car. What! No way Got ma car second hand for £9,750 (talked dealer down from 11k odd) Only a year old the original owner had it diamondbrited and they tryed me for 200 a said al take it for free so a got it for free plus full tank of fuel and interior protection too which they threw in for free .....400 I woulda hit him! Lol 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
winemart2 Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 I'm happy with 36 just for the fun of the turbo :) It's 10 more than my Trafic :D 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StripeyMiata Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 This is interesting -http://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/new-cars/comparison-three-cylinder-engines-test Test of a range of turbocharged 3-cyinder cars, all meant to do mid 65MPG but averaging 35MPG to 42MPG depending on car, with the EcoBoost averaging 36.7MPG. So there is something about these engines and the gap in the official MPG figures compared to a naturally aspirated 4 cylinder petrol or a diesel. So it's not just a Ford thing, all of these types of engines seem to have the same characteristics. I have a 3 cylinder Opel Corsa booked as a hire car next month, be interesting to do a comparison. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StripeyMiata Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 What! No way Got ma car second hand for £9,750 (talked dealer down from 11k odd) Only a year old the original owner had it diamondbrited and they tryed me for 200 a said al take it for free so a got it for free plus full tank of fuel and interior protection too which they threw in for free .....400 I woulda hit him! Lol Well he did look a bit sheepish, I think he forgot as I had emailed him about it before the test drive. He told me Aston Martin use the same kit as they do and charge £2000. Did you take the free one weeks driveaway insurance? I did and they wanted £630 for the rest of the year. With my current insurer it was only £190, it actually was cheaper to insure than the Panda. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paramanic Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 Well he did look a bit sheepish, I think he forgot as I had emailed him about it before the test drive. He told me Aston Martin use the same kit as they do and charge £2000. Did you take the free one weeks driveaway insurance? I did and they wanted £630 for the rest of the year. With my current insurer it was only £190, it actually was cheaper to insure than the Panda. Lol chancer! A didn't because they couldn't insure me for what I wanted to do (i carry disabled person in my car when I'm working) so they couldn't really gee me it a phoned my admiral and they charged me for rest of year......20quid lol A get business insurance and this car was cheaper than last car with about 200quid lol 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StripeyMiata Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 I mentioned earlier when I compared the Fiesta and my Panda they were the same colour. As you can see I wasn't joking :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattDRX Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 my old 1.0 100Eboost did 52MPG comfortably and almost everyday without fail, even carrying a full load paintball gear for 4 people and 4 actual people it managed 40MPG, biggest issue I found is cold mornings, it takes aaaaaaaaaaages to warm up, esp compared to the ST which is at temp within about 1min, I remember driving to work one morning and I actually did like 30miles before I felt some warmth, guess it needs a smaller rad. the 65MPG cycle though is based on a cruise journey, not even the starting up process, it's something stupid like several runs at 50MPH over several KMs and seeing what it does, which it does no doubt do, but it would be unrealistic to ask them to give an everyday figure, like my old ST always did 43MPG daily, some on here are still only hitting high 20's. I also think the reason stop start was introduced wasn't to reduce emissions and raise customer economy in the long run it was just to try and hit as high a figure on the urban run in testing, back in the day they were known to switch engines off when idling to save 1-2MPG over the testing. You should be getting over 45MPG on these things, I guess if you took the traffic out of it you'd hit a much higher figure, I remember posting on here doing over 430miles on a tank on the ST @ 44.3MPG with the CPU saying it had 17left, so had about 30left in it, unheard of on this car but it was Xmas School holidays and the roads were empty in the morning, once they were back it was down to about 360ish on a tank. huge difference crawling along behind a fleet of idiots in the wrong lane. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ffoxy Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 How does Stop Start improve fuel economy? Sent from my iPhone using Ford OC mobile app Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StripeyMiata Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 How does Stop Start improve fuel economy? Sent from my iPhone using Ford OC mobile app It's an interesting question, the Wikipedia entry does mention it improves fuel economy - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Start-stop_system But as MattDRX has said, there is a theory it's only there to "massage" the official fuel figures or bring down the average CO2 in the test rig and in the real world makes no real difference. Personally, I don't think it makes a big difference, the car has a bigger, heavier battery to log around for starters (no pun intended) I'm interested in what happens once the school holidays start, traffic is a lot lighter then and maybe combined with the better weather the Panda's average MPG went up by between 5 and 7 MPG during July and August, I wonder if the Fiesta will do the same or perhaps better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ffoxy Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 I can see it reduces emissions over each journey, but no fuel use and no miles travelled saves nothing. I'd call stop/start an aid to hitting reduced emissions targets to get low or zero road tax benefits. Sent from my iPhone using Ford OC mobile app Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StripeyMiata Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 I'm inclined to agree. If it does save any fuel it's probably just a few pence a week. I was never warned that the climate control can turn the engine on and off, I thought the car was possessed for the first week I had it :D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Ford UK Shop
Sponsored Ad
Name: eBay
Ford Model: FordUK Shop
Ford Year: 2024
Latest Deals
Ford UK Shop for genuine Ford parts & accessoriesDisclaimer: As the club is an eBay Partner, The club may be compensated if you make a purchase via the club
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.