08 Kia Ceed Estate Fuel Economy

16-11-2014 03:24PM

Jesus. wrote: »

We've a 1.5 diesel Rio, Mad Lad, and it returns 50-odd mixed.

There's something wrong in your situation alright

I'll have to drive it for a week when I start working again in Dublin and do a brim calculation.

It's the estate version but it shouldn't make that much of a difference.

I'll see what it's like after a weeks driving to Dublin and back I would have imaging that after the 90 or so miles total I did yesterday even after the Wicklow run I should have averaged more than 42 mpg.

Bpmull · 16-11-2014 05:54PM

If it was any good it should do 50 mpg without driving it particularly economically. Looking at similar engines the vag 1.6 tdi and 1.6 psa diesel engines would both easily do 50mpg. my golf with its 1.9tdi will do 50 mpg without trying to drive economically just normally. If I was trying to take it handy it would do over 55 mpg and thats a fairly ancient engine diesel compare to the newer 1.6 diesel. Although as I said above Kia and Hyundai always seem to be behind the competition when it comes to mpg. As you said op might be know harm to drive it yourself for a week and see what it does then.

22-11-2014 02:09AM

Down to 39.4 mpg lads, something not right. O.K I wasn't expecting Prius fuel economy but at least 50 mpg.

This car has been well maintained, no ecu errors, I just can't figure it out.

My partner mostly does short runs until she starts back work in January from maternity leave, so for the moment she's doing short runs which I could say should give 45 mpg . It's dropped from 42 to 39.4 mpg. O.K so I could say the short trips have dropped the mpg a bit. Short as in 20-25 kms and some town driving, but 39.4 mpg ?

WTF like ? tyre pressure is good, 33 psi .

Seweryn · 22-11-2014 10:31AM

Deleted User wrote: »

Down to 39.4 mpg lads, something not right.

Very strange. You would get better fuel economy from a 20+ year old Mercedes with a bigger engine. Even my 14-year old petrol engined Honda does 48 mpg on average.

Did you use the on-board computer or calculated the figures yourself this time?

_Brian · 22-11-2014 10:34AM

I'd pump up the tyres to 36-38. It'll not be as comfortable but helps a lot.
Also wonder about air filter??

Cleveland Hot Pocket · 22-11-2014 10:41AM

That's terrible.
My 99 1.8 fiesta regularly gives me 52-53 mpg of mostly motorway (70:30 motorway:backroads), and I've seen nearly 60 when I was pushing it.

One would expect at least 50mpg out of a so called more efficient modern diesel.

Mantis Toboggan · 22-11-2014 10:45AM

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Down to 39.4 mpg lads, something not right. O.K I wasn't expecting Prius fuel economy but at least 50 mpg.
.

How did you test it?

Jesus. · 22-11-2014 02:01PM

_Brian wrote: »

I'd pump up the tyres to 36-38. It'll not be as comfortable but helps a lot.

Those Kias are already very firm. He'd need to have a Chiropractor on call with all the tyres pumped up so high

22-11-2014 02:27PM

Lads I found out what's going on. You'll never believe what.

The fecking trip computer is in U. S MPG when I changed it to l/100 Kms it showed 6.0 so that's 47 mpg imperial.

Who changed it to mpg? Eah, me!

So on my trip last week it would have showed 50 mpg.

Seweryn · 22-11-2014 02:31PM

Deleted User wrote: »

Lads I found out what's going on. You'll never believe what.

The fecking trip computer is in U. S MPG when I changed it to l/100 Kms it showed 6.0 so that's 47 mpg imperial.

Now it sounds not too bad, just about as good as a 14-year old petrol car. Still, could be worse

.

22-11-2014 04:42PM

Seweryn wrote: »

Now it sounds not too bad, just about as good as a 14-year old petrol car. Still, could be worse .

Still better than 28-30 mpg in the 00 CRV !

I might take it to Dublin next week to see what she does, in the Prius the same run averages 60 mpg and 64 if I try harder.

Should do 50 mpg I'd say then, which isn't too bad but I'd be expecting more from a 1.6 Diesel.

Leonard Hofstadter · 24-11-2014 12:41AM

Deleted User wrote: »

I must say though I hate manual diesels, I hate that narrow torque band, Twin clutch or CVT are miles better with diesels.

On the plus, it's very well built, and it's chain cam. AFAIK no DMF either.

QFT. Manual diesels are horrible, horrible things. There is a narrow power band so you're changing gears all the time to keep them in their sweet spot. Naturally aspirated petrol engines may not have that low down punch when you need to overtake, but by Christ I'd rather have to drop a gear on the odd occasion for the superior flexibility they offer in every other situation. In a petrol engine (even a small capacity 1.4) you can go from 40-100 km/h with only one gearchange, you simply cannot do that with a diesel, too low a gear and it will be out of puff before you get to 100, too high a gear and it will bog down because it's out of the (narrow) power band.

MuppetCheck · 24-11-2014 12:50AM

captainspeed wrote: »

In a petrol engine (even a small capacity 1.4) you can go from 40-100 km/h with only one gearchange, you simply cannot do that with a diesel, too low a gear and it will be out of puff before you get to 100, too high a gear and it will bog down because it's out of the (narrow) power band.

Yes you can. You're taking bollocks. Again.

Bpmull · 24-11-2014 12:55AM

MuppetCheck wrote: »

Yes you can. You're taking bollocks. Again.

+1
My golf and my focus would have easily gone from 40-100 kmh in 3rd gear and probably more and they are both just standard diesels. As for changing gears more if you don't want to change gears get an auto. I've never found an issue with the amount of times I've changed gears while driving any diesel. I'd personally prefer a diesel to any low displacement NA petrol with there 60-80 bhp.

24-11-2014 01:19AM

MuppetCheck wrote: »

Yes you can. You're taking bollocks. Again.

Wonderful post, really

CaptainSpeed posts some of the most awful sh1t, and its usually long winded too.

And captain, you'll find 3rf gear does fine for 40kmh to 100kmh in modern diesels, even small ones.

24-11-2014 01:23AM

Just noticed.... 40 kmh to 100kmh with one gear change is the claim diesels can't do, Jesus, I thought initially it was in the same gear and that's rubbish.

Captain... Be honest.... Are you an adolescent pretending you are a grown up?

bazz26 · 24-11-2014 01:35AM

I've had PSA, BMW and VAG diesel cars, all have been manual bar my current 520d auto. None of them every felt lacking when shifting gears.

Leonard Hofstadter · 24-11-2014 02:42AM

MuppetCheck wrote: »

Yes you can. You're taking bollocks. Again.

Interesting, so having a different opinion is now "b000000s". This is a great forum isn't it, where if one poster doesn't agree with another's prescribed view it's ok to make personal digs. I've driven petrols and diesels from a variety of manufacturers with a variety of power and torque outputs and I just don't like them, end of story. When you have to play the man and not the ball like this, it shows that you know you've lost the argument.

Hachiko · 24-11-2014 02:47AM

most diesels unless you get big cc ones run out of steam and have a very low band of revs to work with, its hardly rocket science. And in Ireland almost everyone has a low cc diesel for the cheaaap tax.

24-11-2014 09:47AM

captainspeed wrote: »

Interesting, so having a different opinion is now "b000000s". This is a great forum isn't it, where if one poster doesn't agree with another's prescribed view it's ok to make personal digs. I've driven petrols and diesels from a variety of manufacturers with a variety of power and torque outputs and I just don't like them, end of story. When you have to play the man and not the ball like this, it shows that you know you've lost the argument.

Which diesel couldn't do 40 to 100 with a single gear change.

MuppetCheck · 24-11-2014 09:50AM

captainspeed wrote: »

Interesting, so having a different opinion is now "b000000s". This is a great forum isn't it, where if one poster doesn't agree with another's prescribed view it's ok to make personal digs.

Having a different view is not bollocks at all - it's what makes things interesting. What you stated was a untrue and all I'm doing is calling you up on it being untrue.

captainspeed wrote: »

I've driven petrols and diesels from a variety of manufacturers with a variety of power and torque outputs and I just don't like them, end of story.

Nothing wrong with that:)

captainspeed wrote: »

When you have to play the man and not the ball like this, it shows that you know you've lost the argument.

I'm not playing the man, I'm just stating that you're talking through your backside on this one.

What you said was:

captainspeed wrote: »

In a petrol engine (even a small capacity 1.4) you can go from 40-100 km/h with only one gearchange, you simply cannot do that with a diesel, too low a gear and it will be out of puff before you get to 100, too high a gear and it will bog down because it's out of the (narrow) power band.

To win an argument you have to prove someone wrong. Thankfully I have just the spot where I can do that and I did it this morning. So here you co CS, I made a little video especially for you to do just that. Level ground, private road.

Gear Changes = 0

Low CC Cheap Tax Diesel.

Henry Ford III · 24-11-2014 12:42PM

Conclusive enough for me.

Seweryn · 24-11-2014 02:08PM

MuppetCheck wrote: »

To win an argument you have to prove someone wrong. Thankfully I have just the spot where I can do that and I did it this morning. So here you co CS, I made a little video especially for you to do just that. Level ground, private road.

Gear Changes = 0

Low CC Cheap Tax Diesel.

Well, that is something I thought would be quite obvious that it is possible with a Diesel engine car. Surely, the power band is narrow, but the gears are taller than in petrol engine cars. Thanks for sharing the video anyway.

As a matter of interest, I have checked my own car (it is a 14-year old 1.5 Honda) flexibility in third gear and it is surprisingly wide, i.e. the engine pulls from 30 km/h to 175 km/h, which is the maximum speed on third gear. I have only checked this against the technical data though, as doing this on the road would be illegal.

Henry Ford III · 24-11-2014 02:10PM

175kph in 3rd!!!

The top speed must be monumental.

Seweryn · 24-11-2014 02:40PM

Henry Ford III wrote: »

175kph in 3rd!!!

The top speed must be monumental.

Not really, estimated around 200 km/h. Not enough power for any more than that.

08 Kia Ceed Estate Fuel Economy

Comments