My fuel consumption problem

Axidium

Hello,

I bought a 2011 Opel Astra 1.3 CDTI EcoFlex at the end of October 2013 with the sole purpose of saving money on fuel. I drove a 1.8 Ford Mondeo before that, which quite honestly ripped me off. I mean it was really bad on petrol.

So...this is my problem. I top up by 10€ as a test which is approx 6.8 litres at 1.45€ per litre DIESEL.
I do 80km with that. I drive fairly normally, change gears at 2000rpm sometimes a little over but thats about it.

About a week ago, I topped up by 50€ once again to test. I top up as soon as the reserve light goes on by the way. 50€ got me 465km. So that's 34 litres of diesel. That's about 37MPG which in my opinion is absolutely dreadful.

My question is, why is my MPG so low?
Whatcar say's that on a full tank my car should be doing 800-900 miles.

Could someone please offer some info?

Stavros Murphy

Axidium wrote: »

Hello,

I bought a 2011 Opel Astra 1.3 CDTI EcoFlex at the end of October 2013 with the sole purpose of saving money on fuel. I drove a 1.8 Ford Mondeo before that, which quite honestly ripped me off. I mean it was really bad on petrol.

So...this is my problem. I top up by 10€ as a test which is approx 6.8 litres at 1.45€ per litre DIESEL.
I do 80km with that. I drive fairly normally, change gears at 2000rpm sometimes a little over but thats about it.

About a week ago, I topped up by 50€ once again to test. I top up as soon as the reserve light goes on by the way. 50€ got me 465km. So that's 34 litres of diesel. That's about 37MPG which in my opinion is absolutely dreadful.

My question is, why is my MPG so low?
Whatcar say's that on a full tank my car should be doing 800-900 miles.

Could someone please offer some info?

I see a flaw in the plan right there. Buying stuff /= saving money. Not buying stuff is where that's at.

Axidium

Stavros Murphy wrote: »

I see a flaw in the plan right there. Buying stuff /= saving money. Not buying stuff is where that's at.

Please, some useful input!

Jesus.

Axidium wrote: »

I bought a 2011 Opel Astra with the sole purpose of saving money on fuel.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/3b/Paris_Tuileries_Garden_Facepalm_statue.jpg

Bpmull

Firstly the only way to accurately measure fuel consumption is brim the tank with diesel then reset the trip and drive it to near empty or whatever level then brim again and note the litre used to brim / fill it and the km traveled you can work consumption from there.

Secondly what type of driving do you do short trips is the car cold a lot of the time you drive it? Is it city driving you mainly do?

Thirdly forget the 900mile to a tank idea no normal diesel car would do that but it could do 800-1000km to a tank depending again on your driving ie long trips would achieve this distance to a tank.

Axidium

Bpmull wrote: »

Firstly the only way to accurately measure fuel consumption is brim the tank with diesel then reset the trip and drive it to near empty or whatever level then brim again and note the litre used to brim / fill it and the km traveled you can work consumption from there.

Secondly what type of driving do you do short trips is the car cold a lot of the time you drive it? Is it city driving you mainly do?

Thirdly forget the 900mile to a tank idea no normal diesel car would do that but it could do 800-1000km to a tank depending again on your driving ie long trips would achieve this distance to a tank.

I don't understand the first part of your reply. When the reserve light comes on, I top up by whatever amount and reset the trip computer. When the reserve light comes on again, I see how much I've done. I mostly drive around a suburban area, never in the city and some M50 driving. Like I said, I rarely drive in the city. Mostly suburbs.

Axidium

Jesus. wrote: »

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/3b/Paris_Tuileries_Garden_Facepalm_statue.jpg

Please elaborate?

Stavros Murphy

What I said. Pretty much. Weeny wickle diesel engine going 90 to the dozen, stressed off it's tits, trying to pretend that it's all grown up. A 3.0 would probably use less.

Jesus.

Axidium wrote: »

Please elaborate?

You spent how many thousands changing your car to save money on fuel?

Six? Eight? Ten?

Axidium

Jesus. wrote: »

You spent how many thousands changing your car to save money on fuel?

Six? Eight? Ten?

A lot more.

Jesus.

Axidium wrote: »

A lot more.

http://i.stack.imgur.com/jiFfM.jpg

Gran Hermano

Jesus. wrote: »

You spent how many thousands changing your car to save money on fuel?

Six? Eight? Ten?

Surely the OP is also saving on motor tax.



/gets coat

Bpmull

Axidium wrote: »

I don't understand the first part of your reply. When the reserve light comes on, I top up by whatever amount and reset the trip computer. When the reserve light comes on again, I see how much I've done. I mostly drive around a suburban area, never in the city and some M50 driving. Like I said, I rarely drive in the city. Mostly suburbs.

What I mean is the reserve fuel light doesn't come on everytime at the exact same level of fuel. If you fill your tank until if pump clicks ie till it's full then reset the trip drive for 1/2 or 3/4 of a tank or whatever then refill the tank to full again until the pump clicks then use that litre reading from the fill up and the distance traveled. By doing this you are filling the diesel to the exact same level every time. Trust me using the reserve light is not accurate at all. Do you buy good diesel of main brands or do you go around trying to find the cheapest litre price. As the cheap diesel is generally crap and will lead to lower mpg and engine trouble.

Bigus

The reserve light will come on at deferent levels so it's not accurate.

The only way to accurately measure fuel as said above is to fill the tank to the brim, either until the pump cuts out or you can see diesel, whichever is repeatable for test purposes.
Drive at leat 300km or more, top up the fuel to brim again, take a note of Km's traveled an exact litres replaced, work out your consumption from this accurately.
That car should get 55 mpg at least, but cold weather, will reduce this.

delly

Using the reserve light as a marker is inaccurate as it can come on at different times or temperatures. Brimming and noting km and litres at next brim is the only accurate way.

Also if you are using mpg instead of litres per 100 km, make sure it isn't American mpg.

Axidium

Bpmull wrote: »

What I mean is the reserve fuel light doesn't come on everytime at the exact same level of fuel. If you fill your tank until if pump clicks ie till it's full then reset the trip drive for 1/2 or 3/4 of a tank or whatever then refill the tank to full again until the pump clicks then use that litre reading from the fill up and the distance traveled. By doing this you are filling the diesel to the exact same level every time. Trust me using the reserve light is not accurate at all. Do you buy good diesel of main brands or do you go around trying to find the cheapest litre price. As the cheap diesel is generally crap and will lead to lower mpg and engine trouble.

Oh I see what you mean there. Apple Green, Topaz, Texaco. Them three 99% of the time.

Axidium

I'll try the method mentioned above. I'll report back.

Mr Boom Boom

Axidium wrote: »

I'll try the method mentioned above. I'll report back.

You need to use litres per 100km rather than mpg. It's more efficient

Bpmull

Axidium wrote: »

Oh I see what you mean there. Apple Green, Topaz, Texaco. Them three 99% of the time.

I use topaz find them the best out of the 3 for distance. I'd try that filling the tank first before you worry. You said 37mpg in your op but going on the figures you gave that would be 38.63 mpg so almost 39 mpg. I had an astra like your older model same engine and was getting between 50-55mpg. Also worth checking your tyre pressure should be around 30psi although you can check the book to get the exact psi pressure. Do all that and see what you get then.

Axidium

Bpmull wrote: »

I use topaz find them the best out of the 3 for distance. I'd try that filling the tank first before you worry. You said 37mpg in your op but going on the figures you gave that would be 38.63 mpg so almost 39 mpg. I had an astra like your older model same engine and was getting between 50-55mpg. Also worth checking your tyre pressure should be around 30psi although you can check the book to get the exact psi pressure. Do all that and see what you get then.

Thanks for your help!

Stavros Murphy

I chatted a lad today, he traded a 08 landcruiser and a 04 hiace in for a 141 Transit custom, along with 10k cash. He was delighted because he was saving €40 a week on diesel. I was confused, but there you go.

Axidium

Stavros Murphy wrote: »

I chatted a lad today, he traded a 08 landcruiser and a 04 hiace in for a 141 Transit custom, along with 10k cash. He was delighted because he was saving €40 a week on diesel. I was confused, but there you go.

Moral of the story?

I bought my car to save fuel, pay less tax, less insurance, it's newer, more comfortable, looks better than my old car.

My old car did 30mpg max. 700€ tax and 1200 quid on insurance.

Now I do (well should be doing) 55mpg, 190€ tax and 800 quid on insurance.

Stavros Murphy

Axidium wrote: »

Moral of the story?

I bought my car to save fuel, pay less tax, less insurance, it's newer, more comfortable, looks better than my old car.

My old car did 30mpg max. 700€ tax and 1200 quid on insurance.

Now I do (well should be doing) 55mpg, 190€ tax and 800 quid on insurance.

Good one. You'll save €900 quid a year by spending €15k. So, in 18 years, she'll be well up financially.

Axidium

Stavros Murphy wrote: »

Good one. You'll save €900 quid a year by spending €15k. So, in 18 years, she'll be well up financially.

I plan to sell it in 3 years. Therefore saving 900 quid a year is not too bad.

Stavros Murphy

Axidium wrote: »

I plan to sell it in 3 years. Therefore saving 900 quid a year is not too bad.

Spend €3 on a calculator. Could be a good investment.

road_high

But if we were all to do this no one would ever buy a new car and this forum would be a very dull place!
Op do you there's anything wrong with the car like blocked filters? When was it last serviced?

Axidium

Stavros Murphy wrote: »

Spend €3 on a calculator. Could be a good investment.

I don't understand what your point is in all of this?

Every car will lose value. My old car was costing me a lot yearly and was encountering mechanical problems that would cost quite a lot to fix. So I decided to buy a newer car. This new car saves me 900 quid a year despite costing 14k. After 3 years I will sell it for maybe about 10k? That's a 4k loss.

Over the three years, I have 1 year warranty, spend about 1000€ a year on tax and insurance.

I don't see your point. Every car loses value. If I kept my old car, the repairs would cost around 2000€, insurance and tax about 1600€ yearly, plus 60€ on petrol a week.

Please explain what you're trying to say? You seem to drop smart comments with little backup.

Axidium

road_high wrote: »

But if we were all to do this no one would ever buy a new car and this forum would be a very dull place!
Op do you there's anything wrong with the car like blocked filters? When was it last serviced?

It was last serviced in Sep 2013 I think with the oil being changed when I bought it, Oct 2013. Not sure if there are any blocked filters.

debabyjesus

Axidium wrote: »

I plan to sell it in 3 years. Therefore saving 900 quid a year is not too bad.

How did you finance the car?

On topic, I bet you will come up with a much better mpg figure by measuring as advised.

cruizer101

Axidium wrote: »

Moral of the story?

I bought my car to save fuel, pay less tax, less insurance, it's newer, more comfortable, looks better than my old car.

My old car did 30mpg max. 700€ tax and 1200 quid on insurance.

Now I do (well should be doing) 55mpg, 190€ tax and 800 quid on insurance.

Assume 10k miles per year, on old car thats 333 gallons or approx 1266l which at 1,50 a litre gives 1900; on new 181 gallons or 690l which gives 1036 and just to note the 55 is optimistic.

old 1900 + 700 + 1200 = 3800
new 1030 + 190 + 800 = 2020

saving 1780 a year
new car cost 'a lot more' than 10k lets say 16 thats nearly 9 years before the savings start to make financial sense, and thats before we take deprciation into account which for first few years is going to be fair bit.

Now I'm not saying don't get a new car you did say it is newer, more comfortable and comfier which are all good reasons but to ' save fuel, pay less tax, less insurance' your not savings anything.

navara man

op take no notice of the haters .there just jealous

Axidium

cruizer101 wrote: »

Assume 10k miles per year, on old car thats 333 gallons or approx 1266l which at 1,50 a litre gives 1900; on new 181 gallons or 690l which gives 1036 and just to note the 55 is optimistic.

old 1900 + 700 + 1200 = 3800
new 1030 + 190 + 800 = 2020

saving 1780 a year
new car cost 'a lot more' than 10k lets say 16 thats nearly 9 years before the savings start to make financial sense, and thats before we take deprciation into account which for first few years is going to be fair bit.

Now I'm not saying don't get a new car you did say it is newer, more comfortable and comfier which are all good reasons but to ' save fuel, pay less tax, less insurance' your not savings anything.

Yes but I don't plan to keep the car for 9 years. The car cost 14k, after 3 years I hope to sell it for 10k. Or close to that.

Axidium

debabyjesus wrote: »

How did you finance the car?

On topic, I bet you will come up with a much better mpg figure by measuring as advised.

Paid cash + my old car, valued at 1500€.

mickdw

This is all off topic nonsense. You wanted a better car, you got a better car. No issues there. You also moved to a car type that should be more efficient than the last - fuel wise, tax wise, insurance wise and repairs wise. Some people here run cars on the bangernomics idea - Buy as cheap a car as possible with NCT and a bit of tax and run it til it collapses. Thats fine too but everyone doesnt have to do the same.
The point is that the OP bought a newer car and went for what should be more efficient. Nothing wrong with that thinking financially as cars need to be upgraded periodically. As an aside, I had one of those astras with that engine on hire for a week or two and while they are a nice enough car, that engine is terrible in it. I got brutal economy but to be fair I was revving the nuts off it - it doesnt give any kind of reasonable low down torque so abuse was the name of the game.

Axidium

mickdw wrote: »

This is all off topic nonsense. You wanted a better car, you got a better car. No issues there. You also moved to a car type that should be more efficient than the last - fuel wise, tax wise, insurance wise and repairs wise. Some people here run cars on the bangernomics idea - Buy as cheap a car as possible with NCT and a bit of tax and run it til it collapses. Thats fine too but everyone doesnt have to do the same.
The point is that the OP bought a newer car and went for what should be more efficient. Nothing wrong with that thinking financially as cars need to be upgraded periodically. As an aside, I had one of those astras with that engine on hire for a week or two and while they are a nice enough car, that engine is terrible in it. I got brutal economy but to be fair I was revving the nuts off it - it doesnt give any kind of reasonable low down torque so abuse was the name of the game.

Thanks for clearing that up. And yes I know what you mean about the engine being under powered. Kind of regret not getting a 1.7 CDTI. But then again, some 2011+ Focus' have 90bhp, same with Megane's.

ION08

Every time somebody complains about their fuel economy it's always (a) somebody that doesn't know how to actually calculate it correctly , and (b) that stupidly believes they should be getting "55mpg" across the board because that's what it says in a brochure/magazine etc.

Y2KBOS86

ION08 wrote: »

Every time somebody complains about their fuel economy it's always (a) somebody that doesn't know how to actually calculate it correctly , and (b) that stupidly believes they should be getting "55mpg" across the board because that's what it says in a brochure/magazine etc.

True

Plus the difference between 50mpg and 60mpg isn't even worth talking about.

Even if you do above average 15k miles a year you barely save 300 euro over the year/ 5.75 a week.

People buying puny little 1.3/1.5 diesels over proper 2.0/2.2 diesels are getting screwed.

moc moc a moc

Axidium wrote: »

Please elaborate?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Facepalm

HTH.

Y2KBOS86

Axidium wrote: »

The car cost 14k, after 3 years I hope to sell it for 10k. Or close to that.

That will be a challenge.

08 Astra's 1.3 diesel's like yours are readily available from 6k and under.

http://www.driving.ie/used-cars/Opel/Astra/08-1.3/36313769831616700/

I like this 08 one for 8k.

SRI 150bhp.

http://cars.donedeal.ie/cars-for-sale/vauxhall-astra-sri-150bhp/5347251

ardle1

Yes, that fuel consumption seems pretty dyer in this day, my 01 Passat with 400,000mls could match that there or there abouts, I always found the best way to calculate fuel consumption was to: let car go into reserve, continue into oo mls(seems like reserve is gone and life is over!it's not), then do 10 more miles(old car I have hence mls)anyway then fill to neck, neck as in one click, count to 10 slow then 2nd click,. now zero trip, and repeat process!take a note off your miles, you can now calculate mpg.. p.s: some might say don't pass zero on your reserve, they are possibly correct! but I have done it several times over the years! entirely up to yourself......

MuppetCheck

Jesus lads, ye really are hitting this guy hard. He fell into the trap but he's not looking for financial guidance.

What type of driving are you doing OP? Is it around town? I had one of those in a saloon for a while as a loaner and the worst I got was 49.5mpg on N-Roads and Motorway. You are calculating this in such a way that you are open to error. Brim to brim is the only true measurement.

corkgsxr

Mr Boom Boom wrote: »

You need to use litres per 100km rather than mpg. It's more efficient

How does that work? Can I too save money in my van by changing to litres per 100

Bpmull

corkgsxr wrote: »

How does that work? Can I too save money in my van by changing to litres per 100

I assume that poster meant it was more time efficient to calculate ie less calculations although it's not exactly difficult to calculate it either way mpg or l/100km. If they meant litre/100 km make the car more efficient well then that's wrong and makes no sense.

Mr Boom Boom

corkgsxr wrote: »

How does that work? Can I too save money in my van by changing to litres per 100

Sure try it and report back your findings

jimgoose

Oh Cheeses this is textbook stuff. OP, if the thing is either roaring its little hole out all day, or doing a dozen little stoppy/starty trundles here-and-there it's going to burn a surprising amount of fuel. The right tool for the right job, and all that. What kind of driving do you do in a typical day?

beauf

Y2KBOS86 wrote: »

...People buying puny little 1.3/1.5 diesels over proper 2.0/2.2 diesels are getting screwed.

Tax and insurance might also be cheaper. People might argue that difference is not enough to justify the compromise. That depends on your objectives.

The problem with the 1.3 CDTI in the Astra is that it has a very narrow power band and no torque outside of it. You need to keep inside a very narrow band to get economy out of it, and drive sympathtically. If you are used to riding the torque of a bigger engine, I think anyone would struggle to adjust, and as a result get poor fuel economy out it. Also due to that narrow power band its less suited to city driving. Its best suited to someone driving it very smooth and steady, not hard acceleration or braking, on long drives with a constant speed.

I know someone with a older astra with this engine and they get very decent mileage out of it. But they are an older person, who drives very sedately. They don't drive in heavy traffic or at high speeds.

I drive it occasionally and I think it sorely needs a remap. But its all about driving the power band. Get it right and its perky little motor. Get it wrong and its a slug. I think its nice to drive though. Something different.

TestTransmission

Axidium wrote: »

My question is, why is my MPG so low?


Could someone please offer some info?

Just a reminder folks, this is what this thread is about

biko

Axidium wrote: »

Hello,

I bought a 2011 Opel Astra 1.3 CDTI EcoFlex at the end of October 2013 with the sole purpose of saving money on fuel. I drove a 1.8 Ford Mondeo before that, which quite honestly ripped me off. I mean it was really bad on petrol.

So...this is my problem. I top up by 10€ as a test which is approx 6.8 litres at 1.45€ per litre DIESEL.
I do 80km with that. I drive fairly normally, change gears at 2000rpm sometimes a little over but thats about it.

About a week ago, I topped up by 50€ once again to test. I top up as soon as the reserve light goes on by the way. 50€ got me 465km. So that's 34 litres of diesel. That's about 37MPG which in my opinion is absolutely dreadful.

My question is, why is my MPG so low?
Whatcar say's that on a full tank my car should be doing 800-900 miles.

Could someone please offer some info?

I am sorry that you received so many bad and frankly quite unhelpful responses so far.

You say you get 37 mpg, the car should get closer to 60 something mpg yeah?

When you measure in money like you do now it's prone to mistakes and can be misleading.
The only way to know for sure is the brimming method.
Fill up the tank to the top and reset mileage counter to zero.
Then drive until almost empty.
Fill up tank again and this time write down the number of litres used to fill it up again. Also write down the miles (or kms) you have traveled.

Enter the numbers in an online mpg calculator like fuelly.com or www.hypermiler.co.uk/mpg-calculator and see what real world numbers you get.

beauf

A lot of the time people who post high mpg figures are doing big motorway miles. So make sure you're comparing like with like.

Jesus.

Axidium wrote: »

My old car was costing me a lot yearly and was encountering mechanical problems that would cost quite a lot to fix. So I decided to buy a newer car.

With respect mate, you didn't say that in your OP. You said the reason you bought a new car was "with the sole purpose of saving money on fuel. I drove a 1.8 Ford Mondeo before that, which quite honestly ripped me off. I mean it was really bad on petrol."

As you can see from the responses, spending 15 grand to save money on fuel doesn't add up.

JackF1

OP taking some abuse here. The question at hand is about fuel consumption and saving money on fuel.

He wanted a newer fresher car with lower tax (easier to sell on in the future) and less maintenance (a warranty) and expected that his fuel bills would fall (1.8 petrol engined Mondeo vs. a 1.3 diesel Astra).


Personally OP I would expect a lot better. I have a 2010 525d automatic which with my heavy foot and mostly town driving does 39mpg (never reset) according to the computer. Its a company car so I haven't a notion of checking the real mpg as it simply doesn't affect my wallet. I would expect your car to comfortably beat this!

However I recently bought my partner a 5dr 1.6 Astra petrol with an automatic gearbox (he has an issue with his foot and can't comfortably operate a clutch - though I think its in his head too!).
Its CO2 emissions and general EU consumption figures make for sad reading in this day and age and yet its is averaging 7.8l/100km (mix of town and suburban).

I would suggest a trip to the dealer! something is a miss.