Fuel consumption on my 2006 Panda 1.2 dynamic seems high, 40 mpg max sometimes just under. I would expect 50 mpg.


Workshop told me it's all set in the ECU and it cant be tweaked. why so high?

velvet said:

Fuel consumption on my 2006 Panda 1.2 dynamic seems high, 40 mpg max sometimes just under. I would expect 50 mpg.


Workshop told me it's all set in the ECU and it cant be tweaked. why so high?

Click to expand...

Fuel economy in the panda is very dependent on average length of journey and driving style.

So, three questions:

- how long have you owned the car?

- what is the average length of your journey?

- how hard are you driving it?

and we'll take it from there.

Hi,

I have found my panda 1.2 eleganza to be great on fuel. Even on particular weeks where the car only does short trips.

I followed your advice JRKITCHING on replacing both o2 (lambda) sensors and found the car idles much better and drives so much smoother! Plus the car idles properly, rather than all over the place. As a result, my MPG has improved too!

Matt.

Get it diagnosed for any stored engine faults, this can indicate dodgy sensors, injectors etc.

Check that the brakes aren't binding!

My bike (bear with me) fuel consumption dropped like a stone when I had an ignition coil problem. It was misfiring so unburnt fuel was going down the exhaust along with unused oxygen. The ECU increased fuel flow which sooted all spark plugs and the Lambda sensor. I didn't really find the problem until the dodgy coil totally packed up.

Spark plugs are easy to replace. If they give a temporary improvement you may have a dodgy ignition coil.

I have had the car 2 years. it is now ten years old. Average journeys 15 to 20 miles ; often less sometimes 40 plus.

Have never had a diagnostic test as the garage said fuel consumption is all set by the ECU and cant be adjusted - unlike with the older carbs. Oil consumption is minimal. acceleration in fourth seems poor.

I always felt it is a rather heavy car( feels heavy when I push it in and out of garage).

i've driven a 500 and i know they are good on fuel

jrkitching said:

Fuel economy in the panda is very dependent on average length of journey and driving style.

So, three questions:

- how long have you owned the car?

- what is the average length of your journey?

- how hard are you driving it?

and we'll take it from there.

Click to expand...

I never go above 70 mph except by mistake. air cleaner ok

Fuel consumption is determined by the ECU, but it is doing what it does in response to the inputs it gets.
It will keep trying to adjust the fuelling when something is not quite right, until it gets to the point where it can't adjust any further. It will then ask for help (by putting the management light (EML) on).
However, just because it hasn't lit up the EML doesn't mean it is running well.
Even if it shows no stored errors, I suggest you should check for:
Tyre problems (low pressures, knackered sidewalls)
binding brakes
Ignition problems (plugs, leads, etc.)
Fuel problems (try putting a bottle of injector cleaner in a tank of petrol)
Surprised you find it to be a heavy car... It should roll easily on a reasonably level surface, so if it doesn't I suspect brakes or tyres may not be quite right.

velvet said:

Fuel consumption on my 2006 Panda 1.2 dynamic seems high, 40 mpg max sometimes just under. I would expect 50 mpg.

Check tyres and pressures. Brakes for dragging/ binding
Workshop told me it's all set in the ECU and it cant be tweaked. why so high?

Click to expand...

see above &
Also if you remove battery power overnight it will reset the ECU to original factory
settings. And will adapt and learn as you drive..
worth a try for Free..!!

Charlie

My money is still on a faulty spark coil causing the ECU to run a rich air fuel mixture because excess oxygen is fooling the system.

Alternatively the car has been driven slowly from new causing the engine to be tight. My Seicento 900 with 45K on the clock needed an extreme Zen driving technique it was so lazy.
After a few long motorway journeys it freed up and became the really quite sprightly** car that it should have been.

I know 40bhp was never going to be quick and top speed was unlikely to get me a ticket. It eventually gave 50 to 55 mpg driven flat out on the motorway. A modest engine tune so no stress about speed limits.

irc said:

Fuel consumption is determined by the ECU, but it is doing what it does in response to the inputs it gets.
It will keep trying to adjust the fuelling when something is not quite right, until it gets to the point where it can't adjust any further. It will then ask for help (by putting the management light (EML) on).
However, just because it hasn't lit up the EML doesn't mean it is running well.
Even if it shows no stored errors, I suggest you should check for:
Tyre problems (low pressures, knackered sidewalls)
binding brakes
Ignition problems (plugs, leads, etc.)
Fuel problems (try putting a bottle of injector cleaner in a tank of petrol)
Surprised you find it to be a heavy car... It should roll easily on a reasonably level surface, so if it doesn't I suspect brakes or tyres may not be quite right.

Click to expand...

OK thanks. as it happens the engine light does not come on. I'll see if the garage can check for binding on brakes. It idles smoothly. Last MPG test ; 7 litres in 64 miles (roughly gallon and half)

7 litres in 64 miles equates to 41.56 mpg.

I'm not yet convinced there's anything wrong with it. Most faults which could impact economy will put the EML on. A dirty air filter will have no effect whatsoever on closed loop fuel economy; the ECU will adjust the fuelling to compensate.

40-45mpg is typical of a 1.2 Panda/500 when driven in the usual way at the posted speed limits. It's in line with a large majority of the 1.2's currently registered on fuelly.com.

Fuel economy is very dependent on journey length and driving style. The 1.2 is capable of averaging a real-world 60mpg, but you'll have to drive very carefully to achieve this, keeping below 55mph & treating the brake pedal as a control for emergency use only. Running the A/C in hot weather will easily knock 10mpg off the best achievable figure.

Next time you're driving on a dry, level motorway, put the trip computer into average mpg mode, then once you're established in the cruise, reset it, continue for 30 miles or so at a steady 50mph, and post the trip mpg you get. I'd expect to see a figure well into the 70's.

Tyres and oil grade will also make more of a difference than you might think.

A binding brake is the most likely cause of abnormally low mpg; this is easily found if you check the temperature of the wheel bolts immediately after a long journey.

jrkitching said:

7 litres in 64 miles equates to 41.56 mpg.

I'm not yet convinced there's anything wrong with it. Most faults which could impact economy will put the EML on. A dirty air filter will have no effect whatsoever on closed loop fuel economy; the ECU will adjust the fuelling to compensate.

40-45mpg is typical of a 1.2 Panda/500 when driven in the usual way at the posted speed limits.

Fuel economy is very dependent on journey length and driving style. The 1.2 is capable of averaging a real-world 60mpg, but you'll have to drive very carefully to achieve this, keeping below 55mph & treating the brake pedal as a control for emergency use only. Running the A/C in hot weather will easily knock 10mpg off the best achievable figure.

Next time you're driving on a dry, level motorway, put the trip computer into average mpg mode, then once you're established in the cruise, reset it, continue for 30 miles or so at a steady 50mph, and post the trip mpg you get. I'd expect to see a figure well into the 70's.

Tyres and oil grade will also make more of a difference than you might think.

Click to expand...

Ok. So that's the solution-pensioner style driving! I'm having the brakes checked for any binding. Are the newer (2012 onwards) models any better? I do know the more recent 500 is good on fuel..

velvet said:

Ok. So that's the solution-pensioner style driving! I'm having the brakes checked for any binding. Are the newer (2012 onwards) models any better? I do know the more recent 500 is good on fuel..

Click to expand...

Depends how much you want to save on fuel!

From what I've seen, most folks could likely save 25% of the fuel they use without significantly increasing their journey times.

The 500 uses less fuel during warmup, but more fuel in the cruise. In the Panda, very short journeys (<3 miles) from cold will probably halve your mpg figure. In ideal conditions, averaged over 30 miles at a steady 50mph, the 500 will just about give you 70mpg on the trip; the Panda will return about 74mpg. Once, with a good tailwind, my Panda managed an 80.1mpg average on a 100 mile trip from a cold start. The best similar result from my 500 was 76.9mpg.

Not bad at all for a petrol car .

The current model Panda has wider tyres and is heavier; it is probably less economical than the 169, but I've no real world experience.

velvet said:

Ok. So that's the solution-pensioner style driving! I'm having the brakes checked for any binding. Are the newer (2012 onwards) models any better? I do know the more recent 500 is good on fuel..

Click to expand...

For what it's worth, I ran a 2007 1.2 Fiat Euro 4 Panda and a 2009 1.2 Euro 5 Fiat 500 for 5 years. Neither were driven to maximise fuel economy but both had a similar duty cycle, the Panda averaged 46mpg, the 500 48mpg.

What is your annual mileage?

Agree that you should check the brakes are not binding you should be getting more than this as the 1.4 engine does 38 -43 normally and can easily do 50 on a run.

Strip the brakes down/out and clean out the rust, binding brakes can sometimes feel free when checked so strip them down to be sure.
Check valve clearances, I bet 99% of garages don't check them. There wasn't many that didn't need any shims when I was at the fiat dealer.
The shims have the size marked on the underside, measure your valve clearance with feeler blades, cam lobe on its back, push valve down with heel tool, hold shim bucket down with wide flat blade screwdriver, remove shim with small pick/screwdriver, shim sizes normally in increments of 0.05mm but ones you remove are not.
The difference between the valve clearance measured and the correct valve clearance is the amount you add on to the shim size.

matty23 said:

Hi,

I have found my panda 1.2 eleganza to be great on fuel. Even on particular weeks where the car only does short trips.

I followed your advice JRKITCHING on replacing both o2 (lambda) sensors and found the car idles much better and drives so much smoother! Plus the car idles properly, rather than all over the place. As a result, my MPG has improved too!

Matt.

Click to expand...

Also an eleganza owner '05 plate' and ive had some really good returns on my MPG. my worst has to be 47mpg on the short journey to work which is just over 2 miles. best was on a longer run of about 12 miles on mainly straight roads and achieved a whopping 57mpg
Mind you I know my brakes aren't binding as when I let the hand brake off the car will roll away on even the slightest inclines! so rolling resistance is very minimal . Perhaps a check of tyre pressures and to see if brakes are binding are in order to see if this is the culprit.

I had a binding front brake on my Punto that was so bad it started to smoke. Caliper overhauled problem solved

Fuel consumption hardly changed.

Excessive consumption is much more likely to be a fuelling issue. O2 sensors, sparks are the first places to look.