In alt.autos.ford.focus David Millen <notdmillen@newsfeeds.com>:
> Just put the third tank of fuel through our recently acquired 2003
> Focus TDCi 100. It's averaging 37.5 - 39.5 mpg (Imperial gallons),
> 7.2 - 7.6 litres/100km on a mix of long and short trips, lightly
> loaded. This our first diesel-engined car, and I'm beginning to
> think the diesel "economy" thing is b**s**. Is this consumption
> normal, or is there something wrong with the engine?
Had a Ford Sierra TD for ages and always mentioned if letting
someone drive not used to a diesel, they'd always turn gears/revs
much to high. Like driving a petrol engine with little
displacement which is common over here. Sure this will lower your
mileage easily without making you a second faster. Best idea would
be getting an eye on the torque plot of your engine and compare
it with one of a petrol engine in the size/power and you should
see.
--
Michael Heiming (X-PGP-Sig > GPG-Key ID: EDD27B94)
mail: echo zvpunry@urvzvat.qr | perl -pe 'y/a-z/n-za-m/'
#bofh excuse 387: Your computer's union contract is set to
expire at midnight.
I've had my 115 TDCI focus from new (march 03) and it's never returned more
than 48-49 mpg. My previous 306 HDi was much better, but not as good to
drive. It's had the egr valve changed and it didn't make any difference to
the mpg. It's got 49,000 mile on it now and I'm thinking of changing to anew
focus 2.0 TDCI 136 bhp version - any comments??
Cheers
Geoff
"Michael Heiming" <michael+USENET@www.heiming.de> wrote in message
news:h6gbn2-ef8.ln1@news.heiming.de...
> In alt.autos.ford.focus David Millen <notdmillen@newsfeeds.com>:
>> Just put the third tank of fuel through our recently acquired 2003
>> Focus TDCi 100. It's averaging 37.5 - 39.5 mpg (Imperial gallons),
>> 7.2 - 7.6 litres/100km on a mix of long and short trips, lightly
>> loaded. This our first diesel-engined car, and I'm beginning to
>> think the diesel "economy" thing is b**s**. Is this consumption
>> normal, or is there something wrong with the engine?
>
> Had a Ford Sierra TD for ages and always mentioned if letting
> someone drive not used to a diesel, they'd always turn gears/revs
> much to high. Like driving a petrol engine with little
> displacement which is common over here. Sure this will lower your
> mileage easily without making you a second faster. Best idea would
> be getting an eye on the torque plot of your engine and compare
> it with one of a petrol engine in the size/power and you should
> see.
>
> --
> Michael Heiming (X-PGP-Sig > GPG-Key ID: EDD27B94)
> mail: echo zvpunry@urvzvat.qr | perl -pe 'y/a-z/n-za-m/'
> #bofh excuse 387: Your computer's union contract is set to
> expire at midnight.
Geoff wrote in message ...
>I've had my 115 TDCI focus from new (march 03) and it's never returned more
>than 48-49 mpg. My previous 306 HDi was much better, but not as good to
>drive. It's had the egr valve changed and it didn't make any difference to
>the mpg. It's got 49,000 mile on it now and I'm thinking of changing to
anew
>focus 2.0 TDCI 136 bhp version - any comments??
>
>Cheers
>
>Geoff
>
>
>"Michael Heiming" <michael+USENET@www.heiming.de> wrote in message
>news:h6gbn2-ef8.ln1@news.heiming.de...
>> In alt.autos.ford.focus David Millen <notdmillen@newsfeeds.com>:
>>> Just put the third tank of fuel through our recently acquired 2003
>>> Focus TDCi 100. It's averaging 37.5 - 39.5 mpg (Imperial gallons),
>>> 7.2 - 7.6 litres/100km on a mix of long and short trips, lightly
>>> loaded. This our first diesel-engined car, and I'm beginning to
>>> think the diesel "economy" thing is b**s**. Is this consumption
>>> normal, or is there something wrong with the engine?
>>
>> Had a Ford Sierra TD for ages and always mentioned if letting
>> someone drive not used to a diesel, they'd always turn gears/revs
>> much to high. Like driving a petrol engine with little
>> displacement which is common over here. Sure this will lower your
>> mileage easily without making you a second faster. Best idea would
>> be getting an eye on the torque plot of your engine and compare
>> it with one of a petrol engine in the size/power and you should
>> see.
>>
>> --
>> Michael Heiming (X-PGP-Sig > GPG-Key ID: EDD27B94)
>> mail: echo zvpunry@urvzvat.qr | perl -pe 'y/a-z/n-za-m/'
>> #bofh excuse 387: Your computer's union contract is set to
>> expire at midnight.
>
>
Try to get a stage III engine, the stage IV has poorer consumption even
according to ford. This probably one Ford consumption statistic that you can
believe in.
I have read that early Cmaxs were returning poor consumption and that this
had been fixed from 54 plate cars onwards. My Ford dealer refused to be
drawn on speculation of poor fuel performance recently so it's possibly
true!
After having had a test drive in the 2.0 TDCi - I must have one!!!
Seriously though, I hope it does a little better than my particular car,
maybe the 6th gear will help??
Cheers
Geoff
"Bob Minchin" <bob.minchin@OEnewsreader.com> wrote in message
news:y_wBe.1384$si5.1226@newsfe7-gui.ntli.net...
>
> Geoff wrote in message ...
>>I've had my 115 TDCI focus from new (march 03) and it's never returned
>>more
>>than 48-49 mpg. My previous 306 HDi was much better, but not as good to
>>drive. It's had the egr valve changed and it didn't make any difference
>>to
>>the mpg. It's got 49,000 mile on it now and I'm thinking of changing to
> anew
>>focus 2.0 TDCI 136 bhp version - any comments??
>>
>>Cheers
>>
>>Geoff
>>
>>
>>"Michael Heiming" <michael+USENET@www.heiming.de> wrote in message
>>news:h6gbn2-ef8.ln1@news.heiming.de...
>>> In alt.autos.ford.focus David Millen <notdmillen@newsfeeds.com>:
>>>> Just put the third tank of fuel through our recently acquired 2003
>>>> Focus TDCi 100. It's averaging 37.5 - 39.5 mpg (Imperial gallons),
>>>> 7.2 - 7.6 litres/100km on a mix of long and short trips, lightly
>>>> loaded. This our first diesel-engined car, and I'm beginning to
>>>> think the diesel "economy" thing is b**s**. Is this consumption
>>>> normal, or is there something wrong with the engine?
>>>
>>> Had a Ford Sierra TD for ages and always mentioned if letting
>>> someone drive not used to a diesel, they'd always turn gears/revs
>>> much to high. Like driving a petrol engine with little
>>> displacement which is common over here. Sure this will lower your
>>> mileage easily without making you a second faster. Best idea would
>>> be getting an eye on the torque plot of your engine and compare
>>> it with one of a petrol engine in the size/power and you should
>>> see.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Michael Heiming (X-PGP-Sig > GPG-Key ID: EDD27B94)
>>> mail: echo zvpunry@urvzvat.qr | perl -pe 'y/a-z/n-za-m/'
>>> #bofh excuse 387: Your computer's union contract is set to
>>> expire at midnight.
>>
>>
> Try to get a stage III engine, the stage IV has poorer consumption even
> according to ford. This probably one Ford consumption statistic that you
> can
> believe in.
> I have read that early Cmaxs were returning poor consumption and that this
> had been fixed from 54 plate cars onwards. My Ford dealer refused to be
> drawn on speculation of poor fuel performance recently so it's possibly
> true!
>
> Have you lurked on http://www.ffoc.co.uk/forum/ to see what they reckon?
>
> Bob
>
>
I’ve only had my 2003 115 TdCi a couple of weeks but the first figures
show 5.6 to 5.7 / 100 km for a 1500 km round trip on autoroutes plus
300 km in and around town. Most of this was with the air-con switched
on and with a fuel leak on the injector ramp (see other posting). Not
bad at all.
However, I am VERY careful on the use of the accelerator - pulling
away from lights/tollbooths/stops etc and anticipating when overtaking
to minimize speed loss/ recovery. It’s a major factor in economy -
maybe more for diesels than petrol engines, I don’t know.
"Geoff" wrote:
>I’ve had my 115 TDCI focvs from new (march 03) and
>it’s never retvrned more
>than 48-49 mpg. My previovs 306 HDi was mvch better,
>bvt not as good to
>drive. It’s had the egr valve changed and it didn’t make
>any difference to
>the mpg. It’s got 49,000 mile on it now and I’m thinking
>of changing to anew
>focvs 2.0 TDCI 136 bhp version - any comments??
>
>Cheers
>
>Geoff
>
>
>"Michael Heiming" <michael+USENET@www.heiming.de> wrote in
>message
>news:h6gbn2-ef8.ln1@news.heiming.de...
>> In alt.avtos.ford.focvs David Millen
><notdmillen@newsfeeds.com>:
>>> Jvst pvt the third tank of fvel throvgh
>ovr recently acqvired 2003
>>> Focvs TDCi 100. It’s averaging 37.5 - 39.5 mpg
>(Imperial gallons),
>>> 7.2 - 7.6 litres/100km on a mix of long and short trips,
>lightly
>>> loaded. This ovr first diesel-engined car, and
>I’m beginning to
>>> think the diesel "economy" thing is b**s**. Is this
>consvmption
>>> normal, or is there something wrong with the engine?
>>
>> Had a Ford Sierra TD for ages and always mentioned if letting
>> someone drive not vsed to a diesel, they’d always
>tvrn gears/revs
>> mvch to high. Like driving a petrol engine with little
>> displacement which is common over here. Svre this will lower
>yovr
>> mileage easily withovt making yov a second faster. Best
>idea wovld
>> be getting an eye on the torqve plot of yovr engine and
>compare
>> it with one of a petrol engine in the size/power and yov
>shovld
>> see.
>>
>> --
>> Michael Heiming (X-PGP-Sig > GPG-Key ID: EDD27B94)
>> mail: echo zvpvnry@vrvzvat.qr | perl -pe
>’y/a-z/n-za-m/’
>> #bofh excvse 387: Yovr compvter’s vnion
>contract is set to
>> expire at midnight.
On 20 Jul 2005 14:35:56 -0400, marp <UseLinkToEmail@AutoForumz.com>
wrote:
>I’ve only had my 2003 115 TdCi a couple of weeks but the first figures
>show 5.6 to 5.7 / 100 km for a 1500 km round trip on autoroutes plus
>300 km in and around town. Most of this was with the air-con switched
>on and with a fuel leak on the injector ramp (see other posting). Not
>bad at all.
>
>However, I am VERY careful on the use of the accelerator - pulling
>away from lights/tollbooths/stops etc and anticipating when overtaking
>to minimize speed loss/ recovery. It’s a major factor in economy -
>maybe more for diesels than petrol engines, I don’t know.
>
Thanks to all. Looks like either the TDCi 100 is thirstier than the
115, or I need to modify my driving style. I have suspected for a
while that much of the supposedly better economy of diesels is a
result of the driving habits of the folk who select them in preference
to petrol engines because of their greater economy - a bit of a
circular argument, and probably one for another thread!
"David Millen" <notdmillen@newsfeeds.com> wrote in message
news:8jhtd11n694a94s0gom8gi65euds6k9ijt@4ax.com...
> On 20 Jul 2005 14:35:56 -0400, marp <UseLinkToEmail@AutoForumz.com>
> wrote:
>
>>I've only had my 2003 115 TdCi a couple of weeks but the first figures
>>show 5.6 to 5.7 / 100 km for a 1500 km round trip on autoroutes plus
>>300 km in and around town. Most of this was with the air-con switched
>>on and with a fuel leak on the injector ramp (see other posting). Not
>>bad at all.
>>
>>However, I am VERY careful on the use of the accelerator - pulling
>>away from lights/tollbooths/stops etc and anticipating when overtaking
>>to minimize speed loss/ recovery. It's a major factor in economy -
>>maybe more for diesels than petrol engines, I don't know.
>>
> Thanks to all. Looks like either the TDCi 100 is thirstier than the
> 115, or I need to modify my driving style. I have suspected for a
> while that much of the supposedly better economy of diesels is a
> result of the driving habits of the folk who select them in preference
> to petrol engines because of their greater economy - a bit of a
> circular argument, and probably one for another thread!
>
Over 40'000 km of driving my TDCi has averaged a real-world 5.8L/100km
(don't believe the onboard computer; it is hopelessly optimistic). For
general commuting I move with or faster than the flow of traffic, on the
open road I tend to boot it quite a lot (that torque is sooooo tempting).
Motorway speeds are in the range of 130 - 140 kph (80 - 85 mph) and I charge
up and down Swiss alpine passes quite regularly. I have mountain bikes or
kayaks on the roof half the time. Summary: I am *not* careful and still
manage great economy. If I really try to baby it, I have managed under 5
for a motorway trip (flat, 110 - 120 kph). The absolute record, however,
goes to my girlfriend who managed 2.8 L/100km for the 10km from the filling
station to home! (lots of downhill)
On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 08:19:45 +0200, "Stephen F."
<ferguson@NOJUNKbluewin.ch> wrote:
>
>"David Millen" <notdmillen@newsfeeds.com> wrote in message
>news:8jhtd11n694a94s0gom8gi65euds6k9ijt@4ax.com...
>> Thanks to all. Looks like either the TDCi 100 is thirstier than the
>> 115, or I need to modify my driving style. I have suspected for a
>> while that much of the supposedly better economy of diesels is a
>> result of the driving habits of the folk who select them in preference
>> to petrol engines because of their greater economy - a bit of a
>> circular argument, and probably one for another thread!
>>
>
>Over 40'000 km of driving my TDCi has averaged a real-world 5.8L/100km
>(don't believe the onboard computer; it is hopelessly optimistic). For
>general commuting I move with or faster than the flow of traffic, on the
>open road I tend to boot it quite a lot (that torque is sooooo tempting).
>Motorway speeds are in the range of 130 - 140 kph (80 - 85 mph) and I charge
>up and down Swiss alpine passes quite regularly. I have mountain bikes or
>kayaks on the roof half the time. Summary: I am *not* careful and still
>manage great economy. If I really try to baby it, I have managed under 5
>for a motorway trip (flat, 110 - 120 kph). The absolute record, however,
>goes to my girlfriend who managed 2.8 L/100km for the 10km from the filling
>station to home! (lots of downhill)
>
That sounds like my driving style, pointing to the 100 engine as the
culprit; over 4000km so far, I'm averaging 7.5l/100km - nearly 30%
worse than your 115.
The AutoGuide.com network consists of the largest network of enthusiast-owned enthusiast-operated automotive communities.
AutoGuide.com provides the latest car reviews, auto show coverage, new car prices, and automotive news. The AutoGuide network operates more than 100 automotive forums where our users consult peers for shopping information and advice, and share opinions as a community.
Linear Mode
