General 34mpg - wtf?

[JD82]

Been driving for carefully this week and pumped up the tyres etc. Currently on 39.9mpg and its not even hit red yet (well just hit it)

So I am hoping my shocking figures where just down to the extra traffic now the schools are open and that 4 mile 40 minute journey I did.

Will continue to monitor it.

I also drove round the block at 11:00 last night when there was no traffic, it was a big open road so no brakes, checked my drums and they were cold. So it seems they were only warm because of normal brake usage.

 

[Thunderbug]

I'm getting 44mpg at 70mph from my 100HP. A 1.1 should be getting over 50mpg as my partners 1.2 is 50+, When we take the 1.2 to London, it's 45 miles each way & the car uses £12 of fuel.

You must be driving everywhere at 80+ to get 34mpg from your 1.1

 

[doctorchris]

An interesting and partly relevant observation.
I finally got round to stripping down the rear brakes on the Cross last week. They're the notorious Panda disc set-up. I'd had the parts for months but as I rarely use a car these days I just couldn't be bothered to do the job. However, my son was around and willing to help out. These jobs are always easier with a willing helper and he wants to learn how to fix cars.
The discs were horribly corroded. The pads were well and truly jammed within the stainless steel guides in the calipers by a combination of muck and brake dust. Everything had a really good clean, a thin film of copper grease applied where appropriate, new pads and discs.
Anyway, the car is now much more sprightly and fuel consumption has gone from about 48mpg to 53 mpg. The discs were not getting red hot prior to the above work but the pads must have been binding a little.
The problem now is that most of my driving is at 30mph or below with just me in the car. My driving style, with plenty of planning ahead, means that I hardly use the brakes. Therefore, the discs are likely to corrode again and the pads will jam in the guides, due to lack of use.
I will probably remove the pads and clean everything up as part of the annual service in future. Don't really need to do it with the front discs as they get much more use.

 

[Matthen]

1.1 Should still return 40+ mpg at 80+ miles an hour... There's a sweet spot at about 81-83 mph... and its happier at the higher speed... right in its powerband i guess...Ours is anyway, either that or french petrol is sweeter than the british stuff...

 

[Most Easterly Pandas]

I am not, I simply fill up so the gauge is in the middle, wait till the light comes on, then work out how many litres I have used to do x amount of miles hence my MPG.

Either way the 13.2 litres I put in is only giving me apx 100 miles.

My method will be out by 2-3mpg but no way can it be out by as much as 10mpg.

The fuel tank isn't linear.

Just brim to brim it, so much more accurate

 

[The Beard]

You should really fill it, run it until the fuel light comes on and then fill it again. I find that those brim to brim figures are typically 5 - 10% higher than the trip computer would have me believe.

If the last service had been carried out correctly there should be no issues with binding rear brakes.Although I'm on the third set of front pads, the first two sets lasted about 30,000 each, the rear shoes are still the originals.

Using the trip computer as a guide only, there is a definite difference starting the engine from cold and running short distances as opposed to driving for over half an hour or an hour. Also, stopping and moving off at traffic lights when the engine is cold can really knock your figures down. As an example, if I trundle home on the motorway at 55 mph for 13 miles, I can improve the trip computer figure by 2 to 3 mpg. The next morning I can wipe out 13 miles of improving mpg figures in the two-thirds of a mile and three sets of lights I deal with on the way back to the M60.

You could try filling up on a Sunday morning, then drive through urban areas changing up and down at the same road or engine speed for about 50 miles. Then fill up at the same filling station, then do the same route again, but 5 mph or 500 rpm faster (or slower). It will probably help if you make a note of the figures.

 

[genman]

my 100hp is doing at least 42mpg through mixed driving....long runs touching 46 / 47.....crazy fun roads 38...so 34 from a 1.1 is sad...get the lambda sensor checked and clean the throttle body....no way should a 1.1 be that low.

 

[Ironwhip]

I calculated the fuel consumption of my Panda 4x4 1.2 8v Climbing (2005 edition), using the trip computer of the car. I think I did 50/50 urban and highway. The average consumption showed as 6.8 L/100km (41.54 MPG), just a bit higher than the Fiat specs (6.6 L/100km combined).