MPG on 1.6L TI-VCT 2005 Titanium very poor 29.1MPG

[Redspudder]

I am only getting 29.1MPG out of my ford focus 1.6TI-VCT 2005 55 plate model,how does this compare with other peoples cars?

I have had the car for 4 years(since new)and my wife drives it daily mainly around town,i was sold the car on the basis that the engine would very economical,well i have found this to be a great let down and would seriously think twice before purchasing another ford.I traded in a 307xsi 2.0L for this car and i used to give that a bit of hammer and used to get 28MPG out of that i would expect the ford to be a but more economical than it is.I have had the car serviced by Ford and asked about this but have been told there is nothing they can do and "engines these days cannot and do not need to be tuned"I would not be expecting 50MPG but a bit closer to 40MPG as was advertised when i bought it.

[catch]

I am only getting 29.1MPG out of my ford focus 1.6TI-VCT 2005 55 plate model,how does this compare with other peoples cars?

I have had the car for 4 years(since new)and my wife drives it daily mainly around town,i was sold the car on the basis that the engine would very economical,well i have found this to be a great let down and would seriously think twice before purchasing another ford.I traded in a 307xsi 2.0L for this car and i used to give that a bit of hammer and used to get 28MPG out of that i would expect the ford to be a but more economical than it is.I have had the car serviced by Ford and asked about this but have been told there is nothing they can do and "engines these days cannot and do not need to be tuned"I would not be expecting 50MPG but a bit closer to 40MPG as was advertised when i bought it.

That sounds very poor, I have a 2005 55 plate 1.6 Zetec and just knocking around town and say the odd 7 mile trip to the vnext village once a week, is bringing in 29.8 MPG on the trip meter. And I'm not hammering it, and don't drive on my brakes. [i'm in the process of brimming the tank, to see how that pans out] But I was expecting 32.5 mpg like it says in the hand book.

Just swapped from a Volvo S40 2.0D SE Turbo Diesel and that was returning 38mpg doing the same tasks, and I hammered that, because it went like stink. Before you ask, I changed it because the wife wanted another Focus. And considering our driving requirements I could see there possibly being trouble with the Diesel Patriculate Filter. In that with the every 3 year additive top up for the DPF at circa £100. And every 6 years a new DPF replacement at £500 it would added £100 a year to servicing cost just for having a DPF. And with our low annual mileage we would not recoup the costs of running a diesel. And servicing the Ford petrol even at a Ford garage is way cheaper than having a Volvo serviced / repaired at a Volvo garage, because of the Volvo computer hook up.

[catch]

That sounds very poor, I have a petrol 2005 55 plate 1.6 Zetec and just knocking around town and say the odd 7 mile trip to the next village once a week, is bringing in 29.8 MPG on the trip meter. And I'm not hammering it, and don't drive on my brakes. [i'm in the process of brimming the tank, to see how that pans out] But I was expecting 32.5 mpg like it says in the hand book.

Just brimmed the tank again after doing 255 miles since I last brimmed it. The maths says it is returning 29.3 mpg, the trip computer says 29.2 mpg. So way of the mark in relation to the manual saying it does 32.5 mpg in the urban cycle.

However the brimming maths appears to back up the reliability of the trip computer readout in regard to actual consumption.

[InstructorPiggy]

Just brimmed the tank again after doing 255 miles since I last brimmed it. The maths says it is returning 29.3 mpg, the trip computer says 29.2 mpg. So way of the mark in relation to the manual saying it does 32.5 mpg in the urban cycle.

However the brimming maths appears to back up the reliability of the trip computer readout in regard to actual consumption.

thats sounds ok for winter conditions to be honest...use a lot more fuel in cold...cold start, longer to get to optimum running temp, more fuel to get moving etc

Also, not offence, but driving style will vary it a lot...in a recent DIA mag, they did a MPG, and on average with proper driving styles managed to get with all different cars 20-30% more MPG than manufacturers reccomended!

:)

[catch]

thats sounds ok for winter conditions to be honest...use a lot more fuel in cold...cold start, longer to get to optimum running temp, more fuel to get moving etc

OK I will rest my judgement until I've cover a few miles in warmer weather :D

[Foz77]

That sounds very poor, I have a 2005 55 plate 1.6 Zetec and just knocking around town and say the odd 7 mile trip to the vnext village once a week, is bringing in 29.8 MPG on the trip meter. And I'm not hammering it, and don't drive on my brakes. [i'm in the process of brimming the tank, to see how that pans out] But I was expecting 32.5 mpg like it says in the hand book.

Just swapped from a Volvo S40 2.0D SE Turbo Diesel and that was returning 38mpg doing the same tasks, and I hammered that, because it went like stink. Before you ask, I changed it because the wife wanted another Focus. And considering our driving requirements I could see there possibly being trouble with the Diesel Patriculate Filter. In that with the every 3 year additive top up for the DPF at circa £100. And every 6 years a new DPF replacement at £500 it would added £100 a year to servicing cost just for having a DPF. And with our low annual mileage we would not recoup the costs of running a diesel. And servicing the Ford petrol even at a Ford garage is way cheaper than having a Volvo serviced / repaired at a Volvo garage, because of the Volvo computer hook up.

I think owner's manuals always exaggerate these sort of things

[profjlowe]

I honestly don't trust the average MPG and dist. to empty on the trip computer, maybe it's just my car. I find it very misleading as often, it will say dist. to empty is 1 mile and then you find it will keep going for at least another 10mls even when it says 0. Seems like it's better to work it out the old fashioned way.

[Sid_WRC]

on my 1.6 TRI-VCT i only get 30mpg at best on a mix between motorways and town, driven hard about 21, i managed about 40mpg from manchester to aberdeen : ]

[artscot79]

on my 1.6 TRI-VCT i only get 30mpg at best on a mix between motorways and town, driven hard about 21, i managed about 40mpg from manchester to aberdeen : ]

my 1.8 zetec 2001 gives me never anty less than 35mpg around town

[artscot79]

no car does what is advertised thats been proven time and time again hence why a toyota aygo is actually more economical and gives more mpg than a prius 40mpg is more than possible if you are not driving in town all the time the sad truth is no one reads the mpg figures prioperly nor understands how they are calculated.

they calculate them by taking that vehicle and putting x amount of fuel in they then take it to a test track with no lights roundabouts or heavy traffic then drive at certyain sopeeds for a certain distance then they do the same again at lower speeds chucking in some starting and stopping we dont drive like that we drive on busy roads heavy traffic with lights speed bumps and roundabouts every 5 yards while doing this were demisting the front window demisting the rear and listening to the radio all of this uses more fuel.the official town figures are 32mpg combined figures are 42.8 on the motorway you could expect more so what youre getting at this time of the year is normal i hate to sound horrible and no offence but either manufacturers should show the figures more clearly or people should do there research before buying

[poshpawsfiesta]

my cousin absolutly canes his focus 2006 zetec climate 1.6 tivct and he gets 19 mpg he is only 19 , but if he drvies propally he can get 45 mpg .

[catch]

on my 1.6 TRI-VCT i only get 30mpg at best on a mix between motorways and town, driven hard about 21, i managed about 40mpg from manchester to aberdeen : ]

The 113bhp engine is the better engine of the two available engines in the 1.6 petrol 05 - 07. Unfortunately at the time I was in the market for a Focus, there was none fitting my criteria so I have the 99bhp variant.

What Car review

quote the article

"The Focus was face-lifted in late 2007, but our judges still prefer the pre-face-lift version with the 113bhp 1.6-litre petrol engine, rather than the newer 99bhp 1.6-litre model. The extra power means it's far more entertaining to drive, and it's also slightly more fuel efficient"

[RRTeam]

Hello,

I know the thread is old, but I just wanted to tell something, which might help people in future not to do same mistake.

You all do forget, that the numbers from every company are not from a real drive test, but from universal test, which is done in labs, not on road. The point is, this test is just for comparing reasons, which means, all engines must be tested the same way, so it makes sense. That's why it is a engines' test on a stand, with always same factors. Has nothing to do with driving or whatsoever. You can use these numbers to compare cars' engines fuel efficiency, they are not the numbers that you will see while driving. Or mostly you cannot see them while driving. Out on the road there are many factors which change that number ...

So do not be disappointed if you do not see the numbers which were "promised" in the book. These numbers were not made on the road and are only for us to be able to compare the engines from different car makers and/or models.

[MrGrumpy]

My 1.6 Ti-VCT, I get between 29 and 37 MPG.

Currently on 31.5 around town

[btmaldon]

My 1.6 Mk2.5 has never delivered less than 37.5mpg. I get 42 on an 80mph run over 200 miles and would get more if I tried. I dont think its true that the older 1.6 was more efficient. I havent seen evidence of that in fuel economy anyway. The Mk3 appears to be worse.

[DJ_Andy_M]

I would question when the last service was, and if it was done well. I would also question how you are driving the car because over 100 miles if driven sensibly my MK2.5 1.6 Diesel gets 62.2mpg.

[artscot79]

the trick with the ti-vct is to remember you have the max torque very low down so the accelerator ony needs feathering doing this you get the mpg today ive done 146 miles all mioxed with traffic b roads and town and got 46mpg