Technical 4x4 ta, mpg question

Currently reading:
Technical 4x4 ta, mpg question

Joined
Feb 22, 2013
Messages
927
Points
192
Location
isle of wight
I had my car serviced (by fiat) 2-3 weeks ago. Since then my ave mpg has dropped from mid 40's to mid 30's. I don't think my driving has altered at all. Could this and the recent service be connected? Any thoughts?
 
Could it be because the air con was working harder during that very hot spell a week or so ago?

On a related theme, I had to make my regular 65 mile commute at a brisker-than-usual pace last week (all but 3 miles on uncrowded dual carriageway, mainly in 6th, and nothing above an indicated 77). I reset the trip at the start, and my mpg for the journey was 31. That's a new low for me. At that pace, my old DS3 (petrol turbo, 155 hp) would have comfortably given over 40.
 
Last edited:
Could it be because the air con was working harder during that very hot spell a week or so ago?

On a related theme, I had to make my regular 65 mile commute at a brisker-than-usual pace last week (all but 3 miles on uncrowded dual carriageway, mainly in 6th, and nothing above an indicated 77). I reset the trip at the start, and my mpg for the journey was 31. That's a new low for me. At that pace, my old DS3 (petrol turbo, 155 hp) would have comfortably given over 40.

I would have hoped the aircon (climate control) would not make that much difference but I'll put it to the test this week on a longer trip to include motorways...
 
Hi all, have began to wonder how much MPG difference there is between the twin air and the MJ engines. I have never driven a twin air, but a lot of the Fiat salesman have steered me away from them, mainly because of poor MPG. The best mpg I have had is from a Mk 3 MJ Panda, always 50-60 mpg. The 4x4 2013 MJ Panda I had was mainly 45-47 and maybe 50-55 if I had a longer trip and kept the speed down. So looking at previous posts on twin air mpg seemed that 40-50 mpg is the norm, obviously this should be better in each case for non 4x4's. I have never found air con making a great deal of difference. But I do think the MJ may be better suited to the 4x4's mainly for off road driving. I will test drive a twin air one day,as they sound excellent and exciting to drive.
 
I have had 46 out of the Cross MJ with about only 150 miles on it, so a lot of running in to do yet, and will be interesting to see if the small increase in bhp will make a difference to.
 
Sorry for wavering off topic Triumph, I think a call back to the dealers may be the key, if anything performance and mpg should be maintained with good servicing, so a drop in mpg would be concerning. Like I said previous I don't think air con would make a vast difference, as I think you would have noticed before, good luck with it, and keep updating if you get a solution ?
 
triumph7 - have they adjusted-up your handbrake a little tight? Any drag could create problems.... Otherwise, the only thing they could potentially have done is uploaded a new fuelling map, but you'd expect that this wouldn't be rolled out if it reduced economy. And there'd be more folks grumbling about it!

Air-con definitely dents economy figures, especially in smaller engines. Even on our other car, a 200bhp 2.2 diesel, leaving air-con/climate control on will knock 2-3mpg off on a steady motorway run! On smaller cars the power drawn is proportionately higher, so may be even more noticeable? I have air-con off unless it's really needed, at which point I accept the loss in economy! (Phew! Scorcher!)
 
Last edited:
I'm assuming you didn't have any accessories fitted (eg. Roof bars), the drag from those can knock off a couple of mpg if they're not the WingBars/Whispbar variety....

No accessories! To be honest its mainly just country road driving most of the time and I've been averaging 43-46, but its now indicating 33! I really don't think the aircon is going to make that difference. I think I might 'have a word'....
 
This thread has quite a few comments on the aircon's effect on mpg:
https://www.fiatforum.com/panda-iii/329598-panda-4x4-twin-air-mpg-6.html
including my observations with/without the aircon on at a steady 70mph.
I travelled down the M4 to London, and back, today, so I checked the mpg at 70mph with/without AC on.
(I didn't bother measuring with the ECO button on - that's just a button for when my wife or daughter is driving).

Driving for about 20 minutes at close to 70 mph, with the aircon on, fan speed 2 and windows closed, gave about 49 mpg.
Driving for about 30 minutes at close to 70 mph, with the aircon off, fan speed 2 and windows closed, gave about 55 mpg.
These mpg figures varied with uphill and downhill stretches, so they are not exactly comparable, but they indicate about a 10% effect on mpg at 70 mph, due to the aircon.

I have to say that I was surprised that the difference was so high. I have not seen any significant effect with the AC on the Multipla (although this is a 1.9 JTD).

The test was with a TA Lounge, not a 4x4, with 1600 miles on the clock.
 
I'm sure that aircon has relatively little influence on mpg. I generally get just under 40 - say 38 mpg and this is with or without aircon doing its stuff. However, I do suspect the effect is slightly offset by the fact that I tend to have the aircon working harder when the ambient temperature's higher as this seems to have a noticeable beneficial effect on the TA engine's thirst.
 
I've just picked my TA Cross from it's first service. The fuel consumption for the first 8880 miles was 50.5mpg. In the 26 miles driving home the average consumption was 51.4mpg. This is exactly the same as for the previous 3000 miles (Trip B). So no deterioration in fuel consumption.

Interestingly Fiat have a modification to the rear brakes to eliminate the noise. The information from Fiat, via the dealer, was that earlier attempts at a cure involving changing pads, guide pins, greasing etc. were not effective. The parts are on order so I'll be able to report back soon as to how effective the modification is.
 
Back
Top