I got my panda trekking multijet 2 months ago and have just reached 4000 miles of varied driving... Consumption since new has been pretty consistent. ..the newness now been offset with enthusiasm .
Over the 4k miles average has been 64 mpg (using fill ups and miles) rather than just on board computer
Cant knock it. Great fun, great economy

64mpg is good going. Cheap as chips to run.

I just hammer the ass off mine at all times lol. Turning into the station on a night time call it sounds as if in a teenager who's fitted a cherry bomb exhaust lmao

you cant break the laws of physics. pity. but fiat quoting unrealistically low consumption figures does get us cheap road tax so I wont complain. my panda is the 1.1 eco (£5000 new after scrappage ) and can return the 60mpg ish on a sedate motorway journey (boring) but usually does less than 40mpg as a runabout (dads taxi). my old car was a 3ltr merc which was twice the car my panda is and used twice the petrol. my next car will be made of superlight new materials and have brakes that both bring me to a speedy stop and returns most of the energy to storage. I don't plan getting a new car for about 30 years though and who knows what the future holds. probably have to cycle everywhere (I'm a poor boy)

Has anyone tried using the ecorive software - you download it to a PC and it uses the data you can collect from the car using a USB stick. In theory it should then tell me what I am doing wrong.

Not tried it yet, but I think I will give it a go.

jasonFazack said:

Has anyone tried using the ecorive software - you download it to a PC and it uses the data you can collect from the car using a USB stick. In theory it should then tell me what I am doing wrong.

Not tried it yet, but I think I will give it a go.

Click to expand...

I'm not sure the version of Blue&Me implemented on the Panda offers this facility.

Yes it does.
I have been using it for a year. Now you also have some kind of social ecodrive site where you can meet other people using ecodrive, collect badges and similar. Nothing really useful but fun to check out every week or two.

Hi all, I have been looking at these figures which seem to vary quite a bit. I have had my MJ 4x4 for just under a year now and have come to the conclusion that an accurate all round average is about 47mpg. That is with some motorway and urban driving. My Panda cross is slightly lower at about 44mpg. Both are well maintained tyre pressures checked regulary etc. Can't comment on twin air, but sales guy said the fuel consumption on them was poor, but performance was better.

My 62 plate 1.2 easy done 12k with an average of 42mpg (all around town driving).

babbo_umbro said:

I'm not sure the version of Blue&Me implemented on the Panda offers this facility.

Click to expand...

Yep, loaded it on the PC yesterday. Prepared the USB using the software and when I plugged it into the Panda this morning the nice lady told me it was loaded and collecting data.

Just put the USB back in the PC to see the data but it needs at least five days worth apparently.

Will try again in a week - but definitely has the feature, try it.

In hindsight, was buying the TA worth it? It seems you have to work hard to achieve the quoted figures, whereas I drive my 1.2 as hard as I wasn't and average 45mpg mostly traveling to work 7 miles each way. Car has now fine about 2000 miles from new.

http://www.fuelly.com/driver/krw62/panda

My ave is 41, but then it is a 4x4 so will be a bit less.... I hope it will improve as miles increase. Only done 3000 so far.

Bigredbus4468 said:

In hindsight, was buying the TA worth it? It seems you have to work hard to achieve the quoted figures, whereas I drive my 1.2 as hard as I wasn't and average 45mpg mostly traveling to work 7 miles each way. Car has now fine about 2000 miles from new.

Click to expand...

You will likely get better economy from a 1.2 than a TA.

I very much doubt it is possible to consistently achieve the TA's stated combined mpg figure in real world driving.

Anyone buying a 500 or Panda primarily for economy should buy a 1.2.

jrkitching said:

You will likely get better economy from a 1.2 than a TA.

I very much doubt it is possible to consistently achieve the TA's stated combined mpg figure in real world driving.

Anyone buying a 500 or Panda primarily for economy should buy a 1.2.

Click to expand...

I agree- but the TA's 85HP turbo gives the choice of sporty performance OR
reasonable economy (when driven gently...)

But only one of these at a time



Chris

My latest average (one tank) was 21mpg.....fascinatinghow much due piccolo cilindri can drink! (The WRC pilot wannabe driving style explains it).

21mpg? I salute you!

Super Uwe said:

21mpg? I salute you!

Click to expand...

Imagine what mpg a "proper" 4x4 delivers in snowy conditions:yuck:

driven HARD my 125cc motor bike does 14 miles on 2 gallons,
the TA slightly better ,

Charlie

It's not totally straightforward on a Mac as they don't like Adobe's plug-ins. However, I think I'm on track - presumably you can't hold the ecorive files on an Ipod?

Got in the Panda 4x4 this morning after being told by offspring the fuel is a bit low.... Smallest bar on E, then had to drive 10 miles over hill to get to nearest petrol station..... Put in 34.56L of petrol and didn't fill to brim....... How much fuel was in there before I started?

I think the furthest I've managed when the display shows zero bars is 17 miles?
That was at around 48mpg showing on the comp which I reset once the last bar disappeared. Put in just under 37 litres. This happened last Friday.

So there is fuel in there once the display shows none. Exactly how much further I could have gone is unknown.

I read a thread once where someone's dad said always run a new car to empty with some fuel in a can just so you'll know in future exactly how far you can try your luck. Maybe I'll try that?