General Poor fuel consumption

[Pandaactiveman]

Hello All. I recently bought a 2012 low mileage Panda Active (Not the latest shape), full main dealer service history etc. It starts and runs very well. But the fuel consumption (based on amount going into tank and recorded mileage) is only 44mpg. A mix of town driving and long motorway runs with only me on board. I am not a boy racer and do drive economically, but no matter how careful I am I cannot get better than 44mpg. One of the factors that swayed my decision to buy the car was a fuel consumption of well over 50mpg. Am I alone in this poor consumption? I see many people claim over 50 mpg. Other than that I am delighted with the car, it was an excellent decision to buy it and I love it, so no regrets there. All suggestions appreciated, Many thanks

 

[jrkitching]

but no matter how careful I am I cannot get better than 44mpg.

Depends how you define being careful.

There are many factors which affect economy, some of which are outside your control.

Two things which cost you a lot of fuel in the Panda are short journeys with a cold engine, and sustained cruising at speeds >55mph.

If you're driving in what most folks would regard as a 'normal' fashion and cruising on motorways/dual carriageways at about the legal limit, then 44mpg sounds about right, and in line with what others here are getting when similarly driven.

Also, the 1.2 is known to be a little more economical than the 1.1 in real world driving.

If you keep below 55mph at all times, avoid using the brakes whenever possible, and use a bike for any journey less than five miles, then 60mpg overall is possible (just).

With a tailwind, I've seen 80mpg on the trip on a 100 mile motorway journey at 50mph.

 

[daveofkent]

I used to have an 08 Active. Driving 'normally' Got 42-44. On a motorway trip where you're extremely disciplined and you never go over 60mph then it shoots up. You'll notice your average increases with the ambient temp too.

If your expectations come from the printed figures then you're going to be disappointed and likewise with every other car built, the higher the printed figure the more % the disappointment in my experience.

40+mpg is a good figure for mixed driving.

 

[jrkitching]

If your expectations come from the printed figures then you're going to be disappointed and likewise with every other car built, the higher the printed figure the more % the disappointment in my experience.

:yeahthat:

And what's even worse, the difference between expectation and reality keeps getting larger with each new generation of cars .

You can't even rely on the official figures to predict differences between cars any more - as lots of folks who bought a TA over a 1.2 have discovered.

If it really matters to you (and it should, even at 55mpg I've spent £6930.17 on fuel for my Panda, which is more than I paid new for the car), then hiring a similar model for a weekend before committing to purchase should tell you what you need to know.

 

[SB1500]

...and use a bike for any journey less than five miles...

hahaha, I do this myself these days, managing the Panda and the bicycle to try and maintain longevity of the car and myself!!

But for reference, my 1.2 Petrol gets 55.6 according to the trip computer, surprised to hear that the 1.2 FIRE can be more economical than the 1.1 FIRE. I mostly cruise at 60 - 65 by accident and aren't afraid to rev it up in start/stop traffic if it helps.

ANY Time spent 'accelerating' or going up in speed in the Panda causes the live-MPG figure to drop easily to 20-30mpg, maybe if you're spending a lot of time always building speed this is where your figure of 40 on AVERAGE is coming from?

 

[AB100]

Hello All. I recently bought a 2012 low mileage Panda Active (Not the latest shape), full main dealer service history etc. It starts and runs very well. But the fuel consumption (based on amount going into tank and recorded mileage) is only 44mpg. A mix of town driving and long motorway runs with only me on board. I am not a boy racer and do drive economically, but no matter how careful I am I cannot get better than 44mpg. One of the factors that swayed my decision to buy the car was a fuel consumption of well over 50mpg. Am I alone in this poor consumption? I see many people claim over 50 mpg. Other than that I am delighted with the car, it was an excellent decision to buy it and I love it, so no regrets there. All suggestions appreciated, Many thanks

Assuming as yours is 2012 it will be the Euro 5 1.2 engine, rather than the 1.1 engine (my son has the same model).


We have a 2011 1.2 Dynamic with the same lump. Mainly mixed driving with no motorways and driving normally, not economically, we average 42mpg. Happy with that.

 

[Pandaactiveman]

Dear All

Very many thanks for your extremely useful replies

By driving carefully, I only ever use 1/4-1/3 throttle, I have never floored it, and am gentle on braking allowing the car to slow down naturally as much as possible.

My motorway cruising, I admit is at 70 mph on the sat nav (around 73-74 on the speedo), (as an aside if the odometer also over reads then the fuel consumption is even worse!)

I know manufacturer's figures are meaningless in the real world, but as the Panda is quoted in the Fiat brochure as doing 44.1/70.6/57.6 (urban/extra-urban/combined) mpg I was expecting to get at least the low 50s to the gallon.I also run on the Synergy plus/supreme/super whatever good quality fuels. That said I do not know the history so do wonder if it is "carboned up" from cheap fuel - I may try some injector cleaner and see if it helps

As the Active base model (1.2 Fire, Euro 5 69 bhp), it has no power sapping aircon, skinny steel wheels so lower rolling resistance than the alloys, no roof bars etc, so it is the lightest model with the least power sapping features they produce.

Still, it seems from your very helpful feedback that it is not especially bad, so very many thanks for taking the time to reply, much appreciated

 

[jrkitching]

My motorway cruising, I admit is at 70 mph on the sat nav (around 73-74 on the speedo)

Given what you've posted, reducing your cruising speed will have the biggest impact on your real-world economy.

The 169 Pandas aren't particularly aerodynamic (it is a city car, after all); cruising at 50mph saves about a third of the fuel you'd be using at 70mph.

If the majority of your driving is on motorways & dual carriageways, keeping to an indicated 60mph is probably all you need to do to hit 50mpg.

as an aside if the odometer also over reads then the fuel consumption is even worse!

Don't be overly worried about this one; I've cross checked the odometers on both my Fiats and they're within a tiny fraction of a percent of a decent GPS.

Unlike the speedo, which typically overreads by 5%-7%.

 

[Sweetsixteen]

Injector cleaner sometimes works. I've tried a few, and the one that really does seem to make the engine run smoother is Archoil (see website). Not the cheapest, but good.

Have you checked to make sure your brakes aren't binding? The pistons on the calipers have a tendency to 'stick' without easing off properly once you've braked.

My multijet was averaging around 59mpg, but once I'd given the brakes a bit of tlc this has improved to 62mpg. One front pad was not freeing off properly. I do a lot of stop/start driving, low gear up farm tracks, so this consumption is fine by me. Tracking snd tyre pressures are worth checking also.

 

[jrkitching]

Injector cleaner sometimes works. I've tried a few, and the one that really does seem to make the engine run smoother is Archoil (see website). Not the cheapest, but good.

Have you checked to make sure your brakes aren't binding? The pistons on the calipers have a tendency to 'stick' without easing off properly once you've braked.

My multijet was averaging around 59mpg, but once I'd given the brakes a bit of tlc this has improved to 62mpg. One front pad was not freeing off properly. I do a lot of stop/start driving, low gear up farm tracks, so this consumption is fine by me. Tracking snd tyre pressures are worth checking also.

Some good ideas on things to check by sweetsixteen .

If you can arrange to stop after having driven a decent distance without using the brakes, try feeling the front discs & rear drums (but be careful not to burn your fingers

). If one side is noticeably hotter than the other, that side is binding.

 

[bluaz]

What kind of pressures is recommand ? Front and back tyres

 

[Pandaactiveman]

Thank you to jrkitching for the information on odometer accuracy, very useful to know, and for slower motorway cruising advice and to Sweetsixteen for the Archoil injector cleaner recommendation. I have looked at the website as suggested and I see it contains PEA, which I have read elsewhere is the best "cleaner" additive on the market, so I will certainly order a bottle. I will check the brakes for binding. The car had a full service before I bought it at a main dealer and they fitted new discs and pads, but I will jack it up after a run and see if the hubs are hot and if the wheels turn freely

 

[Pandaactiveman]

What kind of pressures is recommand ? Front and back tyres

Normal load (up to 3 passengers)

Petrol models

155/80R13, 165/65 R 14 and 175/65R14 Front 2.0 bar (29 psi) rear 1.8 bar (26 psi)

All other sizes front 2.2 bar (32 psi) rear 2.1 bar (30 psi)

Diesel models front 2.2 bar (32 psi) rear 1.8 bar (26 psi)

Fully laden

Petrol front 2.2 bar (32 psi) rear 2.2 bar (32 psi)
Diesel front 2.3 bar (33 psi) rear 2.2 bar (32 psi)

 

[bluaz]

So for my 1.1 Panda , 165/70 r13 79 T front = 2.0 ,and in winter is the same ?

 

[Pandaactiveman]

So for my 1.1 Panda , 165/70 r13 79 T front = 2.0 ,and in winter is the same ?

165/70 is "other size" - not one of the listed sizes in my earlier post

The book says

All other sizes front 2.2 bar (32 psi) rear 2.1 bar (30 psi)

So front is 2.2, rear 2.1 for 165/70 tyres

Yes, same in winter

 

[murfman53]

Hi, On the issue of petrol consumption, here's what happened to me. I bought my 1.2 2007 panda last October 2015, and when I got familiar with it I checked the trip switch and it said 5.3 per 100kms. I was happy enough, and didn't check it anymore until last weekend before a 150km journey ahead of me. It said 5.6, and I thought, that's a little heavier than before. I didn't pass any comment or give it another thought. When I was ready to head for home, I entered the motor way as usual and had the radio on, which I don't usually do, and after alittle while, say, 10 minutes I was over taking a lorry and just looked down at my rev counter and saw approx. 4,500 revs.......100kms per hour................IN THIRD GEAR!!!
I thought I was in top gear, finished the rest of the trip in 5th gear. Got home and checked the trip to see the info, and to my surprise.............5.3 per 100kms.
I check my gears when listening to the radio now!
John.

 

[varesecrazy]

.

If you can arrange to stop after having driven a decent distance without using the brakes, try feeling the front discs & rear drums (but be careful not to burn your fingers

). If one side is noticeably hotter than the other, that side is binding.

assuming the heads of the wheel retaining bolts ARE still accessible,

a finger tip on those on all 4 corners of the car could tell a tale

the rears generally run COLD unless there's an issue, the front just "warm"

it's a difference from LHS to Right that'll tell a tale.

our2004 1.1 has always done @40 mpg on it's mixed runs over the last 11 years.

 

[Pandaactiveman]

Well, I can assure you I have been in the correct gear!!! But I know it is easy to do. My Panda does not have a trip MPG computer, it is just the base model. I can easily touch the wheel bolts, it has steel wheels with standard Panda wheeltrims and the bolts (which were rusty until I painted them silver) are very easy to feel. Good tip, thank you!

 

[murfman53]

Hi Pandaactiveman,
Thanks for your comments regarding my thread. The point I was trying to raise was that, revving an engine for awhile in a lower gear at higher speed might just increase better fuel return. Many a guy does this before bringing a car to get tested. Most do this to increase engine temperature in order to get a better result for their emission test. It might also clear out an engine and make it return improved miles per gallon. It happened in my case that's for sure. It might work for you as well.
John.

 

[Pandaactiveman]

Hi Pandaactiveman,
Thanks for your comments regarding my thread. The point I was trying to raise was that, revving an engine for awhile in a lower gear at higher speed might just increase better fuel return. Many a guy does this before bringing a car to get tested. Most do this to increase engine temperature in order to get a better result for their emission test. It might also clear out an engine and make it return improved miles per gallon. It happened in my case that's for sure. It might work for you as well.
John.

Hi John

I see, thank you, I will give it a try! It may well be that I can use less throttle in a lower gear to keep the same speed. I will also, when it has warmed up, give it some welly and see if that helps to blow "cobwebs" out the system. Many thanks for the advice, much appreciated