General 1.2 mpg ?

[DannyBoy88]

your point was coasting is illegal my point not, now you've admitted it is and proven that it is by re-quoting everything i've just said, well done mate

 

[98dizzard]

your point was coasting is illegal my point not, now you've admitted it is and proven that it is by re-quoting everything i've just said, well done mate

My original belief was that it was illegal, however, after initially reading the Highway Code I corrected myself, and then came to the conclusion it could be a contributing factor to dangerous driving.
Infact my first post was merely an explanation of why it is bad to coast, even though at the time I did think coasting was illegal. However your comment of:

and to which ever f**kwit claimed coasting is illegal you are wrong in EVERY sense, its only as illegal as engine breaking, not having both hands at 10 and not checking your mirrors , , , which non of are illegal

Despite being highly F**KING insulting, did not explain the legalities and was merely an attempt at belittling everyone. However I consulted the relevant legal documentation and continued to argue that it is dangerous and could be seen as dangerous driving due to not being in control of the vehicle. This could, if an accident did occur as result, mean you being found to be at fault or even possibly criminal prosecution.

This is still my point, however you are still seeming to be under a misguided impression despite my constant reclarifications of my position.

I suggest that in future you try and explain your view with more grace than calling a large number of members 'f**kwits'. This would result in less offence and help in the primary purpose of these forums, the education of other members in matters where they may not have perfect understanding.

 

[98dizzard]

Getting back to the thread title, i have now p/x my 1.4 punto 8v, for 1 of the reasons being mpg not being wot i hoped for. I do 220 miles a week of which 200 were motorway at 70 no more. i was getting 40 mpg, i got 43 mpg when on a trip mainly a roads at 60. Was going to question mpg myself but never got round to posting. Was it me expecting too much? Btw i was getting 40mpg in a 13 year old 406 same conditions.
Many thanks

Sorry for the slight change in topic. I have a 1.3Mjet, and am averaging 42-44 mpg out of a tank with varying conditions. Generally petrol models should expect to get less mpg than diesel. I find the main problem is the car is underpowered, I can get 63mpg driving very carefully at about 40-50mph. Nowhere near close to the stated figures.

The current trend to reduce engine size and incrase power output seems great for getting good 'official' figures but in rality obtaining them is far more difficult. My 10yr old 106 did better mpg, averaging 50mpg at 80mph on the motorway at full throttle (wouldnt go any faster, poor little thing). This GP only manages about 40mpg. I initially thought something was wrong, or it would improve as the engine loosened up. Im now just past 4000 miles and there has been no real improvement.

Its more disappointing considering i know alot of the 1.9Mjet owners get similar mpg, with alot more ooomph, and the economy was a main decider in getting this car.

 

[DannyBoy88]

My understanding of the RTA is that if you have an accident while coasting, then you are at fault as you were not correctly in control of your vehicle. Even if you cannot be charged for it, this and the fact it is a dangerous practice makes coasting irresposible and pointless.

i was pointing that your understanding of the RTA was incorrect which it was, not carrying on telling you it was not illegal ^^^^^^read the thread

Despite being highly F**KING insulting,

come on its the internet for gods sake, get over it

continued to argue that it is dangerous and could be seen as dangerous driving due to not being in control of the vehicle. This could, if an accident did occur as result, mean you being found to be at fault or even possibly criminal prosecution.

check post 31, i already made this point 9 post earlier in my arguement regarding coasting not being illegal, with the slight difference, i stated that a judge would never put "coasting" in any of the 3 definitions of driving offences, meaning you'd never get a criminal prosecution based on someone coasting

so in summary you've taken everything i've said, and re-quoted it in post 40

anyway you've gone to bed, night night :wave:

 

[DannyBoy88]

Getting back to the thread title, i have now p/x my 1.4 punto 8v, for 1 of the reasons being mpg not being wot i hoped for. I do 220 miles a week of which 200 were motorway at 70 no more. i was getting 40 mpg, i got 43 mpg when on a trip mainly a roads at 60. Was going to question mpg myself but never got round to posting. Was it me expecting too much? Btw i was getting 40mpg in a 13 year old 406 same conditions.
Many thanks

i was expecting more out of mine, i have the same engine as you had and i average about 43 when driving carefully, i forget about the fact that the MPG isn't as stated when the actual BHP on RR is 86 standard rather than the stated 77

 

[Tris Harris]

Sorry for the slight change in topic. I have a 1.3Mjet, and am averaging 42-44 mpg out of a tank with varying conditions. Generally petrol models should expect to get less mpg than diesel. I find the main problem is the car is underpowered, I can get 63mpg driving very carefully at about 40-50mph. Nowhere near close to the stated figures.

The current trend to reduce engine size and incrase power output seems great for getting good 'official' figures but in rality obtaining them is far more difficult. My 10yr old 106 did better mpg, averaging 50mpg at 80mph on the motorway at full throttle (wouldnt go any faster, poor little thing). This GP only manages about 40mpg. I initially thought something was wrong, or it would improve as the engine loosened up. Im now just past 4000 miles and there has been no real improvement.

Its more disappointing considering i know alot of the 1.9Mjet owners get similar mpg, with alot more ooomph, and the economy was a main decider in getting this car.

diesels take longer to run in than petrols... 4000 miles is nothing.

if your still getting that after 15000 i would be worried though. Im sure GP1416valver said he got 700 miles out of a tank from his 1.3 m-jet

 

[Shropshire_lad]

maybe if you state what you think is wrong with the statement we might get somewhere, what evidence do you think i could supply on that?

Just cut the crap and back your statements with some fact not some anecdotal conjecture...

Can't be doing with idiots that answer a question with a question... Only one Fukcwit on this thread fella

 

[DannyBoy88]

Just cut the crap and back your statements with some fact not some anecdotal conjecture...

Can't be doing with idiots that answer a question with a question... Only one Fukcwit on this thread fella

i was speaking from personal experience, you go in car, drive 25mph, in 5th, put your foot down a bit and you start going faster, put it down more and your acceleration increases, but then there is normal about a 1 inch gap down at the bottom where you can freely move your foot up and down without it effecting your rate of acceleration, as there isn't enough torque in the engine to accelerate any more, as you speed up this gap slowly gets smaller and by the time your doing 35-40 it dissapears, go in any car 1.4 or under and you can experience this, if the car has an instant MPG readout you will note as you move your foot down within this gap the MPG goes down considerably, therefore your using more petrol without getting any more acceleration(admit that there would probably a small amount, but this isn't even noticable as you can pump your foot up and down without jerking the car) for me SEEING that this is happening is proof enough

since when are people not allowed to post their opinions based on personal experience? 90% of the advice given on this site is based on, "when i did it this happened" or when i did it it worked best this way" as this is always the best advice

you just posted saying "i think your wrong" and then no explanation as to why you thought i was wrong, or what you thought could be happening, so what the hell would my response be to that?

 

[Caravadossi]

Hi,we have a GP 1.2 360 Active it's just over a year old now with 3500 on the clock.
The problem is we bought the car for the wife as a run around and on the advice by the dealer that we should get around 45 per gallon.Well even on a long run it will only get 37 mpg max on the motorway @ 70mph and 25mpg on local roads.Were not heavy footed or boy racers by no means.What gets me is we P.X our 7 year old VW polo 1.2 in for the GP but even that did more to the gallon.The dealer checked the car on the first service but no faults was found.The engine sound fine,tyres pumped up to handbook specs,no mods etc.
Has any one else been disappointed with the fuel consumption on their 1.2 and what should it do to the gallon ?.

How are you measuring your mpg?

I’ve a 56 GP 1.2/8v Active (28K miles) & notice that around 55mph the trip computer reads around 55 av. mpg. I constantly log my fuel consumption etc. by brim2brim & find the trip computer reasonably accurate.

Can you post-up your trip computer readings? Not just the mpg readings – but all of them.

.

 

[Tris Harris]

I find my trip computer to be about 5% inaccurate... ie, when it was showing 40mpg, i was actually getting 38mpg (when worked out manually). So its not brilliant, but not too bad either.

 

[Shropshire_lad]

i was speaking from personal experience, you go in car, drive 25mph, in 5th, put your foot down a bit and you start going faster, put it down more and your acceleration increases, but then there is normal about a 1 inch gap down at the bottom where you can freely move your foot up and down without it effecting your rate of acceleration, as there isn't enough torque in the engine to accelerate any more, as you speed up this gap slowly gets smaller and by the time your doing 35-40 it dissapears, go in any car 1.4 or under and you can experience this, if the car has an instant MPG readout you will note as you move your foot down within this gap the MPG goes down considerably, therefore your using more petrol without getting any more acceleration(admit that there would probably a small amount, but this isn't even noticable as you can pump your foot up and down without jerking the car) for me SEEING that this is happening is proof enough

since when are people not allowed to post their opinions based on personal experience? 90% of the advice given on this site is based on, "when i did it this happened" or when i did it it worked best this way" as this is always the best advice

you just posted saying "i think your wrong" and then no explanation as to why you thought i was wrong, or what you thought could be happening, so what the hell would my response be to that?

I see now, you make it up as you go a long...

Oh and when someone says that you are wrong, it means they disagree/dispute your points, sorry I assumed you might understand this salient point.

I based this on evidence from what I've read about N/A and turbo charged engines (As I stated)regarding driving them economically, using the acceleretaor in an on/off fashion as explored a while ago in Autoexpress. That publication also "shot down" your dumbass theory that coasting in neutral saves petrol.

Probably best you keep your ill conceived opinions to yourself to save confusing others and wasting their time!

Have a nice day!

 

[DannyBoy88]

I see now, you make it up as you go a long...

in what way am i making it up as i go along? are you saying i'm lying about what i have experienced? just made up it?

I based this on evidence from what I've read about N/A and turbo charged engines (As I stated)regarding driving them economically, using the acceleretaor in an on/off fashion as explored a while ago in Autoexpress. That publication also "shot down" your dumbass theory that coasting in neutral saves petrol.

at no point did i claim it saved petrol!! you have no idea what your talking about!! i said to the question why do people coast does it save fuel? was

there is no reason any more, it used to save fuel in the days before ECU's and the like, now it uses more fuel, so there is no advantage to it

Probably best you keep your ill conceived opinions to yourself to save confusing others and wasting their time!

the only person i seem to have confused is you as you clearly can't even remember what has been said,

all i've done is correct peoples understanding and interpretation of the law, and put forward my advice to the poster in regards to what could be the problem with him not getting good MPG, i think anyone would find this useful

so either read the thread properly before posting or don't bother at all!

 

[punto_matt]

Your all ****s

 

[Shropshire_lad]

the only person i seem to have confused is you as you clearly can't even remember what has been said,


so either read the thread properly before posting or don't bother at all!

Sorry but your experiments prove fukk all... I'll base my trust in what Autoexpress say.

As regards memory, your's aint so hot either....

I actually never said you were wrong, I said your theories didn't sound right and asked you for some substance to back tham up..All you've done is come up with the same retarded bullsh!t...

Go away and practice your pseudo science with your trip computer somewhere else....

Oh and Matt you're a Kunt as well....

 

[punto_matt]

I didnt say that i just typed stars

 

[Stu DemonD]

Keep this thread ON TOPIC - or else

 

[DannyBoy88]

As regards memory, your's aint so hot either....

I actually never said you were wrong, I said your theories didn't sound right and asked you for some substance to back tham up..All you've done is come up with the same retarded bullsh!t....

and i advised you what i had based it on, and asked what i could possibly provide in relation to proving that?

how are my experiences bullsh!t? you still havn't advised why you think that is wrong, only " i read it somewhere"

your just getting shot down at every corner mate, i'd give up now while your only 6 foot under

anyway back to TOPIC to the poster as i have explained in my experience this is one of the worst things for using too much fuel, its also difficult to realise your doing it

have you got blue and me? as i said before download eco drive, it'll tell you exactly where you might be going wrong, it increased my average MPG a few when i used it for a while, every car is different to drive and it will just teach you how to drive the GP just right

 

[sboy66]

Just done a run of 1400 miles averaged 47 mpg. Motorways, A roads and b roads.

 

[DannyBoy88]

Just done a run of 1400 miles averaged 47 mpg. Motorways, A roads and b roads.

what engine?

 

[sboy66]

what engine?

1.2 engine. Just serviced prior to that trip by the good guys at Ayr Fiat