Grande Punto 1.3 Dynamic 90 Mjet
Official fuel figures: 61mpg combined
Actual figures (best): 51.6 mpg (driving like a granny)
Actual figures (worst): 43.5 mpg (running in, playing with the power)
Fuel: Shell V-power (really seems to make a difference)

So why am I asking? Well, just look at the 'official' figures against the best of what I can achieve, by driving like an old granny who's forgotten where the accelerator pedal is. Disappointing, just a tad.

The last tank load gave me 400.4 miles and 51.5 mpg - it's annoying that there was still roughly 15 litres of fuel in the tank but those damn petrol gauges are too conservative. Well, would YOU drive with the damn fuel light on?

Definition of "driving like a granny": absolutely NO acceleration to speak of, keep the revs below 2250, change from 1st to 4th within the first 30mph and then to 5th and 6th at around the 2000 rpm mark (50 and 60 mph respectively). Keep your foot off the accelerator as much as possible. Never overtake anything unless it is a milkfloat, or you can do so without increasing the revs above 2250. And do it SLOWLY! :yuck:

Funny thing is, there were SO many people driving the same way as me. Made for a very stress-free daily 40 mile round trip, mainly cross-country (apart from the self-induced stress of driving like a granny).

However, this is NOT why I bought a 90 BHP Punto, so this week I'm going to increase the revs to about 2,500 before I change up and see if that has an adverse effect on my mpg. So far (40 miles) I'm averaging 54.2 mpg. Whoo Hoo!

So, what's YOUR mileage?

Driving like this on motorways and open roads, I get just under 60mpg in my 1.9 Sporting.

My long-term average is 43mpg - but I do a lot of urban driving.

1.9 MJ - 47 mpg 70% city,jams 30% suburban roads. Normal driving.

1.9 mjtd sporting, 45 - 47 mpg and i dont particulary drive it gentley any of the time. I mainly drive on the motorway 70% of the time and the rest fo the time stuck in town or hairing it down country roads.

Now that my cars had its first service its improved quite a bit was only getting 40 - 42 mpg before hand.. .

I hope mine (1.9 multijet sporting) gets as good figures as you guys... granted, mine isn't run in yet (1,800 miles) but I'm only getting 42mpg from my working day, I used to get 49-52 from the fabia vRS, but that didn't give those figures till it'd covered about 10k.... so here's hoping the GP will loosen up a bit....

There has been one of two discussions on this (mainly me voicing my displeasure for the same reason as you)

The car has also got less economical now it has more millage on it which is the opposite of what i was expecting

I'm getting similar figures to you although if i stick it in 6th on the motorway at 80 mph i find i get the best ecomony then. best i have seen was ~55mpg when it was almost new. Part of the problem i think is that you end up driving around the turbo lag so end up using more revs than you normaly would otherwise. But I have found that the harder you drive it and the more you keep the Turbo spinning the more economical it is (typical bloody italian car drive it with your foot to the floor)

Mine goes in for it's first service next week so i'll have a moan at the dealer while i am there, my problem has always been that the car is less economical than the 307 diesel it replaced and that was a darn sight bigger car

allanhelen said:

The car has also got less economical now it has more millage on it which is the opposite of what i was expecting

Click to expand...

Interesting - by how much? I've noticed in the last few weeks mine has gone down a bit as well - used to be ~7L/100km, now its more like ~8L/100km. No change in driving style, air con is off most of the time, same petrol station all the time, tyre pressure seems ok.. anything I've missed?

I've got a 1.3 90, I get about 46mpg with careful town/A road driving, or about 52mpg on the motorway.

Definately not as good as I was hoping for TBH

:yeahthat:

luvduvs said:

Interesting - by how much? I've noticed in the last few weeks mine has gone down a bit as well - used to be ~7L/100km, now its more like ~8L/100km. No change in driving style, air con is off most of the time, same petrol station all the time, tyre pressure seems ok.. anything I've missed?

Click to expand...

Mine went from low 50's to the gallon to mid 40's (sorry haven't got to grips with these new fangled units of measure yet) so i'd say it is about 5-6 mpg less but it has stabilised at this level now.

It goes in for a sevice next week so i'll see if that has any effect

It seems that there is little point in getting small diesel engines as the economy gains over a larger more powerful engine seem so small as they learly have to work too hard to lug a car around, despite what manufacturer figures suggest.

I am thinking of changing my Active Sport for the 1.3 diesel for economy rather than performance reasons, but might as well save up a few extra pennies and get the sporting so i can have performance too and get roughly the same mpg as the 1.3.

The difference between my gf's 1.4 Fiesta diesel and my old Pug 2.0 HDI was only 5mpg (58 against about 53mpg) so you might as well go for extra power. It seems the optimum size for a diesel must be a 1.9/2.0 litre. Anyone agree/disagree?

It looks like it's best to have the optimum engine size to weigh ratio to get the best economy, some guys have reported rather good economy figures from their 1.9s. I would have thought the 1.3s could do better than that, maybe it's because of the turbo lag?

My girlfriend has a 1.5dCi Megane, and that seems to do low 60's MPG whatever the driving conditions. I was expecting similar from the GP, in which case I would have been happy, but not so.

My old chipped TDi Ibiza which pushed out 180bhp/310lb ft, could keep up with Civic Type R's etc and used to get better blooming economy than the GP does! Whats all that about?

Turbodiesel said:

I would have thought the 1.3s could do better than that, maybe it's because of the turbo lag?

Click to expand...

Yes, I second that thought.

In hindsight, the 1.9 130 Mjet (driven gently) could probably get much better mpg than me, whilst at the same time not having the turbo lag problems.

I also notice that if I accidentally use any of the power of my car (eg rev it to 3000 to get a wriggle on out of a junction) then the AVERAGE mpg immediately drops 2-3mpg even though for the last 50 miles it averages 53 mpg. How does the maths work on that then?

I did notice that the average mpg would become more tolerant of minor infringements of this nature at the 100 mile points (eg after 100 miles, 200 miles etc). Perhaps the maths used is different!

Anyway, I'm down to about 52.5 mpg now (driving like a granny and getting really fed up of doing so) whilst increasing revs to 2,500 in the first four gears only.

How on earth did FIAT get 61mpg combined?

Steve_R said:

My girlfriend has a 1.5dCi Megane, and that seems to do low 60's MPG whatever the driving conditions. I was expecting similar from the GP, in which case I would have been happy, but not so.

My old chipped TDi Ibiza which pushed out 180bhp/310lb ft, could keep up with Civic Type R's etc and used to get better blooming economy than the GP does! Whats all that about?

Click to expand...

mm your beeza had the same engine as my vRS, and I was running 160bhp , and getting 50 mpg most days....

edit:however I've made 48 mpg so far today! (woot) and I'll see if I can better that this arvo.....

sharkrider said:

mm your beeza had the same engine as my vRS, and I was running 160bhp , and getting 50 mpg most days....

Click to expand...

Was that with a tuning box? Mine had Revo code, and was really good. Would get mid 50's without too much effort, and 60ish on a run.

Steve_R said:

Was that with a tuning box? Mine had Revo code, and was really good. Would get mid 50's without too much effort, and 60ish on a run.

Click to expand...

yeah, a tuning box.... I've heard good things from revo though, driven a few vRS's that had custom code and stuff... running 170-180. I was just too skint for a good remap at the time! lol...

Now here's something worth knowing (regarding MPG) and the GP 1.3 90 Mjet:

30mph in 3rd gear = 1800 rpm
40mph in 4th gear = 1800 rpm
50mph in 5th gear = 1800 rpm
60mph in 6th gear = 1800 rpm

Peak torque for the GP 1.3 90 Mjet is at --- you've guessed it --- 1800 rpm, give or take 50 rpm or so.

So I've adapted my "experiment" of driving like a granny to always keeping it in that gear so that I'm at peak torque or higher, and not dropping down to 1500rpm just because the car will let me.

So far, the mpg has climbed to 53.4mpg on today's 40 mile round trip. We'll see how the next few days pan out using the above information...

i get 38mpg out the 1.4 sporting

been waiting for someone to say the 1.4 sporting! how do you drive it? fairly normally or, a bit on the racey side?

Hi Aresby,

According to the computer, my 2007 6 speed Dynamic 90 (3000 miles) has returned between 57 and 64 mpg. It has been considerably more economical than my Mk 2 Active Sport 16 valve - which was good. My journey to work is 35 miles but the average speed has been typically 30mph. I tend to keep the revs between 1200 and 2200rpm and cruise at 60mph but occasionally give it a blast!

The 6th gear is another overdrive. I am amazed that the car can do 70mph at 2000rpm. The ratios may be found on the Italiaspeed website. Those who wish to compare the 5 and 6 speed gearboxes might be interested in my spreadsheet which includes the effect of the different final drive ratios (yawn!). This should be attached.

It is sad that Fiat have decided to ditch the most advanced engine, gearbox and nicest interior trim combination for the Grande Punto.

I have found FIAT's website and brochures inaccurate and obviously designed / written by people who appear to know nothing about cars!

Mike (New member)