General Multijet MPG

[trackdayqueen]

I took it easy for the first 1000 miles, and have been driving it like normal since. Only had it 5 weeks and clocked up 3k. Been to France and back in it averaging 70mph and 56.9 mpg
95% of my current miles are motorway running at 70mph - 80mph.

Hmm I don't really believe in running a car in too much, i didn't go over 3K for the first 100 miles and had it up to 4.5K on a daily basis by 300 miles. Mind you its not used a drop of oil which is good. On the motorway i tend to cruise at about 80-90mph and normally get about 50mpg average on a long trip. Round town it fairs better with mpg in the mid to high 50s as a rule, but i don't drive it gently and I do floor it a lot under acceleration as it seems to be the only way to make anything resembling decent progress.

 

[Derv drinker]

Just a little more on this one, at 24K the MPG figure is still creeping up, may be due to the roadworks on the M27 as well, average speeds are not worth worrying about as these are easily reduced with just a little slow traffic, as I have found out on my mainly motorway miles couriering. I have found that driving the MJ like diesels that I used to own makes it less economical, driving it a bit more like a petrol makes it better ie use the gears more and don't rely on the torque so much.

 

[Trimdoner]

driving it a bit more like a petrol makes it better ie use the gears more and don't rely on the torque so much.

I might give that a try - I've got 12300 miles on now with very gentle driving, and the fuel consumption still hovers around 52mpg.

Maybe I'm trying too hard - my old Peugeot 106 1.5D (the start of this thread!) was never treat gently, but was better on diesel. The bit that puts me off is that the odd spells I've had with the 'instant' mpg display on, anything other than very gentle use of the throttle sees figures in the 20s-30s unless cruising in fifth gear.........

 

[oilrag]

Try keeping it at 2,000 revs when in 30 and 40 zones and if possible at speeds above that. It would be interesting to know what the instantaneous reading is on flat roads doing that, at steady speed in 3rd and 4th gear.

( from everyone on the thread too, as it rules out driving technique)

Anyone up for that? At exactly 2,000 revs, different gears, flat road and no wind. To be extra accurate, double back and state the difference going the other way.
Warm engine with 5 miles after start up, and state mileage on engine.

Regards
( sorry can`t really compare myself as my Multijet is in a Punto van, not a Panda)

 

[ThisBitterPill]

This may be a stupid thing to ask so forgive me....

I assume people are actually resetting their trips for these readings?
Obviously an 'overall' mpg reading (ie over along period) will be less affected
by what you are currently getting than if you continually reset the trip (after filling up etc)...

Does that make sense?

Anyway all this talk of 55+mpg seems a world away from the 33mpg I get in
the 100hp....

 

[Trimdoner]

I assume people are actually resetting their trips for these readings?

I reset mine whenever I fill up, but the onboard computer is always far more optimistic than a litres/gallons tank-to-tank mileage calculation...
The trip computer always shows high 60's/low 70's mpg for the first few miles after a fill up and reset, then drops as the miles increase to 55-ish

Oilrag - I failed miserably to get a sensible instant mpg figure on a straight flat road over about 3/4 mile and steady speed. (one way and 5th gear) Computer readouts ranged from 23 to 141 mpg with barely perceptible throttle movement at 2000rpm.
I can easily get 90-100 plus mpg figures momentarily on the instant display but the slightest throttle and it drops into the 20's and 30's

But to put it into perspective:

Anyway all this talk of 55+mpg seems a world away from the 33mpg I get inthe 100hp....

I realise anything above 50 is still pretty good by most car standards, just it seems this Panda is really capable of much better.....:yum:

 

[oilrag]

Sorry about the suggestions for checking on the instantaneous readout. Found out myself its just too sensitive to do this.

However, yesterday I drove the Mk2b Multijet (2005, 70BHP)on a duel carriageway between two roundabouts 1 mile apart. Re setting the trip average reading I got 70.3 MPG. That was at a constant 2,000 revs in 4th gear, doing exactly 40MPH ( the speed limit on that inner city dual carriageway)

That`s setting the computer coming off one roundabout, going down to the other, round it and back up.

Engine has 19,000 miles on it and its using Mobil 1 0w40 engine oil.

Thought it worth a comment as the vans weight is almost identical to the Panda and air resistance (difference) would not really come into play at 40MPH.

Regards

 

[adnap]

I posted a thread a while back, about my MJ being a bit gutless, and not noticing any turbo boost. Since then, I drove a tank's worth like a complete hooligan, and really gave the engine a hard time. By the end, it was going much better - definite pick-up at about 1800, and quite nippy now. And I got over 50mpg off that tank.

Out of curiosity, I went really easy on the next tank - max 65mph, gentle acceln etc, just to see what it could do, and it gave 65 mpg to the tank.

So all in all I'm quite pleased with it now, either as nippy and quite economical car, or boring and really economical.

And it's orange.

Adnap

 

[tworome3]

Hi,

I purchased mine in September 2007 and i have found that the MPG varies between 55 and 70 depending on how i drive, i recently drove back from the south coast to Essex covering approx 150 miles and tried to keep the speed under 60 mph and it returned 69 mpg, on the other hand when i drive around town and really push it it will drop to 55 mpg. so i really think its all down to driving style.

As for the engine i have completed nearly 9000 miles and the noise level is relatively low outside for a diesel and i don't think you could tell the difference from petrol when inside with the windows closed.

The other point that's worth noting about the engine is the fact that it has a chain driven cam so hopefully no belts to break, that has got to be a plus ??????

 

[Derv drinker]

With 27K on mine since June last year I think it's fab, there may be more cars out there that claim / are more economical, but I bet they drive like an economical car. I find the MJ does'nt and when pushed surprises a lot of other road users.

 

[The Beard]

My MJ was 3 years old in March, and it's done 32K. I've mixed feelings about the fuel consumption. The worst figure I've had was 51 mpg and the best 62. I always measure consumption brim to brim with a calculator. It seems to give
its best figures on national speed limit cross country runs where it records in the low 60's. My regular commute is 17 miles, 15 on Motorway and the trip shows 51mpg as a rule, but in reality that works out at about 54. What I really like about the engine though is its flexibility. It is easily the smoothest small diesel on the market and in comparison with the 1.4 Peugeot engined Fiesta we have at work it's like comparing silk to sack cloth. Just by comparison though, we took The Wife's Stilo 1.4 petrol for a run a couple of weeks ago and zeroed the trip just as we got on the M60. Onto the M56 and then down the A49 to Delamere. 50.1 mpg. Zeroed it for the return trip and it showed 49.9. Interestingly, after another hundred miles of her commuting on her 6 mile a day trip to work it's still showing 42.2. Don't quite understand that. The only thing I can think of is the Panda body is nowhere near as aerodynamic as the Stilo.

 

[Trimdoner]

My mpg still hovers around the 52 mark after 13k, even with light use on local roads. It will be getting a longish - 80-odd mile either way - trip in a week or two, so I might give it a good thrashing (as suggested earlier) prior to that to see if it improves anything.......I'm getting desperate now

 

[trackdayqueen]

My MJ was 3 years old in March, and it's done 32K. I've mixed feelings about the fuel consumption. The worst figure I've had was 51 mpg and the best 62. I always measure consumption brim to brim with a calculator. It seems to give
its best figures on national speed limit cross country runs where it records in the low 60's. My regular commute is 17 miles, 15 on Motorway and the trip shows 51mpg as a rule, but in reality that works out at about 54. What I really like about the engine though is its flexibility. It is easily the smoothest small diesel on the market and in comparison with the 1.4 Peugeot engined Fiesta we have at work it's like comparing silk to sack cloth. Just by comparison though, we took The Wife's Stilo 1.4 petrol for a run a couple of weeks ago and zeroed the trip just as we got on the M60. Onto the M56 and then down the A49 to Delamere. 50.1 mpg. Zeroed it for the return trip and it showed 49.9. Interestingly, after another hundred miles of her commuting on her 6 mile a day trip to work it's still showing 42.2. Don't quite understand that. The only thing I can think of is the Panda body is nowhere near as aerodynamic as the Stilo.

Interesting that you say that you get the best mpg on national speed limit roads. I generally find on the motorway that i get the worst consumption figures generally in the mid to high 40s... though i do cruise at 80-90mph for the most part, partially because its just easier as acceleration between 80-90 is better than 70-80, so its an easier drive. I am very impressed with just how good the panda is at holding high speeds on the motorway, it just motors along feeling rock solid.

I generally get driving around town for the most part on lots of short trips, at around 56mpg or so, which i'm happy enough with.

 

[The Beard]

Interesting that you say that you get the best mpg on national speed limit roads. I generally find on the motorway that i get the worst consumption figures generally in the mid to high 40s... though i do cruise at 80-90mph for the most part, partially because its just easier as acceleration between 80-90 is better than 70-80, so its an easier drive. I am very impressed with just how good the panda is at holding high speeds on the motorway, it just motors along feeling rock solid.

I generally get driving around town for the most part on lots of short trips, at around 56mpg or so, which i'm happy enough with.

I think half of my problem is that I've become a bit anal when it comes to fuel consumption (among other things) and have the average fuel consumption displayed all the time. A case in point is that I filled up and reset the trip less than 1/2 a mile from the start of my mainly m-way commute and when I got there after 17 miles the display read 61 mpg, Oh Yes! But, as I made 3 more identical journeys I watched the figure come down from cold but then it gradually stabilised a little at a steady 60-70, but then improved in stop-start driving of about 5 miles at the end of the journey that I've had to make recently that I don't normally make. At the moment it's reading 55 mpg, although to be fair, when I work it out with a calculator the trip readout is generally 5-10% below the real figure. One thing that may have an effect, is that in the last month I've replaced the original 165/65 14 tyres with 175/65 14s but can't for the life of me can't remember if that increases or decreases the gearing with a slightly greater radius to the tyres. Any ideas anyone?

 

[dougl65]

Not a Panda but a 500 driven gently..

Refilled the tank at the bottom of the M11, which was the first tank on my 1.3 MJT. This had averaged 53 mpg and was mostly done on hilly motorways at 80 - 85 mph.

I then drove into the City of London, over Westminster Bridge and along the Albert Embankment, through Putney to Brooklands which is in Weybridge, down the A3. When I arrived I was on 71mpg.

Returned using the A3, M25, A2, A12 and when I got home after a round trip of 120 miles I had averaged 70 mpg. Didn't exceed 65 mph though.

 

[trackdayqueen]

I think half of my problem is that I've become a bit anal when it comes to fuel consumption (among other things) and have the average fuel consumption displayed all the time. A case in point is that I filled up and reset the trip less than 1/2 a mile from the start of my mainly m-way commute and when I got there after 17 miles the display read 61 mpg, Oh Yes! But, as I made 3 more identical journeys I watched the figure come down from cold but then it gradually stabilised a little at a steady 60-70, but then improved in stop-start driving of about 5 miles at the end of the journey that I've had to make recently that I don't normally make. At the moment it's reading 55 mpg, although to be fair, when I work it out with a calculator the trip readout is generally 5-10% below the real figure. One thing that may have an effect, is that in the last month I've replaced the original 165/65 14 tyres with 175/65 14s but can't for the life of me can't remember if that increases or decreases the gearing with a slightly greater radius to the tyres. Any ideas anyone?

It will increase the rolling radius. Tyre profile is a percentage of the width. So your speedo will under-read and your gearing will become slightly longer.

I have too spent some time driving with the average mpg displaying, but quite often i just flip back to the total miles and drive it how i want to. I tend to find that i lose about 4mpg if i drive it hard. However a mixture of pottering along and full throttle acceleration means that its not too bad. Besides if its generally averaging 52-56mpg in varied driving i'm not sure i'm going to worry about that too much.

 

[HP]

.....I've replaced the original 165/65 14 tyres with 175/65 14s but can't for the life of me can't remember if that increases or decreases the gearing with a slightly greater radius to the tyres. Any ideas anyone?

Using http://www.miata.net/garage/tirecalc.html

you will actually be going 2% faster than you were before at the same indicated speed. In reality, I'll put a hill of money on it making your speedo closer to accurate - most speedos over read by at least 5% or so anyway.

 

[adi]

All speedo's are caliberated above your actual speed by about 2 to 5 mph as has just been pointed out. Sat nav will give you your true speed.

Panda went down to brooklands and back to Staffs around a 280 mile trip 70 mpg, average speed 40mph on trip com. I did not exeed 65 mph on the m/way .

 

[ScoobyChris]

Sat nav will give you your true speed.

That's a bold claim

Chris

 

[adi]

But true Legal implication dictate that the speedo must read higher than it is

Thats why safety cameras will not capture you if you are doing say 33 mph as you pass one. Your true speed will be lower. I know about this stuff

Be careful about changing wheel dimensions as this could cause inacurate read outs.