Small diesel cars - Amazing fuel economy

[Discomark]

Did a round trip from Sydney to Port Macquarie (360km x2) this weekend in the Wifes Hyundai i30 diesel. On the trip North we used 4.9lts per 100km (no aircon) and on the return trip 5.1lts per 100km (Aircon on and 36c).
This is as good or better than my 800cc motorcycle :o

Who needs a hybrid :)

[V8Ian]

About half the numbers I get from a four litre Fairlane.

[sheerluck]

Yep. I've posted a couple of times about my Mk VI Golf Bluemotion. It's only a 1.6 turbo diesel, but still goes like a cut cat, and the best fuel economy I've had on one of my 40km commutes is 3.3l/100km. The long term average (I've had it for 31 months and 48,000km from new) is only 4.2l/100km.

Official rating is 3.8l/100km, same as the Prius.

[MR LR]

Bet you don't get the same smile as when I bury my foot and burn through 17L/100km in my Classic Rangie ;) :D

[superquag]

... Wish I could get 'only' 17 litres/100.... Mine guzzles 20 l/100

- Which is why I now drive a Mazda 121, around 7.5 litres/100 and three times quicker than the Classic. :D:D:D

[uninformed]

whats the consensus on the engines shutting off and restarting automatically in regards to long term ware and tare?

[Sprint]

a workmate recently drove to mackay and back, was expecting a pretty expensive trip given he drives a HZJ79 landcruiser with an aftermarket turbo fitted...

what nobody expected was 786km on 70 litres....

[Jojo]

The weird thing is, about 20 year ago I was running a Citroën BX Diesel (had the 1.9l XUD engine). I had the car for about ten years, covered 270.000kms and the average fuel consumption was 5l/100kms. Featherfoot driving would return about 4.5l/100kms and pressing the throttle down made it go up to 5.5l/100kms. Never more than this. And the car was by no means sluggish, rather a pleasure to drive. Seems not that much has happened since...
A bit sad I could not keep it any longer :(.

[Sitec]

The little euro diesel has been running around for years, I've always had a small diesel Golf. If its not doing 5lt/100km then Im not happy.. It runs on VWO when I get hold of it. I'm surprised people are still buying the lazy gas guzzling V6 and V8's. If (big if too) Holdens had put a decent revvy 6 pot turbo diesel in the Commode 10 yrs ago, they might have a healthier future. I know the Cummins 6Bt that's currently going into the 101 will not exactly be fuel efficient, but it'll be a damn sight better than the 20+LT/100km that I had to suffer with the V8. The wife's Golf GTD puts a smile on my face every time I boot it, and makes a few of those V8's who think they're fast think twice!! :D

[sheerluck]

whats the consensus on the engines shutting off and restarting automatically in regards to long term ware and tare?

I'm not entirely sure I would want a 10year+ example. :D

[sheerluck]

Bet you don't get the same smile as when I bury my foot and burn through 17L/100km in my Classic Rangie ;) :D

Bet you I do. ;)

It's small and nimble, corners like it's on rails, has enough go to overtake easily on a highway, and costs me $90 a month to do 1600km to and from work.

But it's comparing chalk and cheese.

[amtravic1]

We have a Passat 125 tdi. Loaded with 4 people on board and the boot full it easily runs at 4.5 litres per 100 ks when cruising. One trip we filled up in Sydney, drove to the Blue Mountains and out to Lithgow then back to Melbourne the next day. My wife then did the school and shopping trips around home for over a week before needing more fuel. It is surprisingly quick as well. We love the thing.
As said, why Holden and Ford did not fit similar motors amazes me. They might still be around if they had. We would have been more than happy t drive a diesel locally made car.

[101 Ron]

I used to own a Datsun 120 Y station wagon......1978 year model
Only Two valves per Cylinder push rod 1200c motor and a Carburettor.
It was fun to drive with only a 4 speed gearbox simple to fix , not that anything went wrong with it.
It was happy cruising at 100kph.
I never got anything worse than 40 MPG and that being a young bloke at the time.
One time I did a trip and drove the thing for economy and accurately recorded 60 mpg.
All done without electronics including points ignition.
The A12 Nissan motor even as a push rod motor was happy with revs with max torque at 4000rpm and max power at 6000rpm.
The above figures match the modern Diesels..........and using petrol.
We have advanced very little.
40 mpg equals......5.88 litres per 100
60mpg equals ...3.92 litres per 100km

[roobar_and_custard]

I just handed back a Fiesta Zetec Diesel (I get my cars through work) and without doubt it was the best car I have ever run - overall...
I drive mostly hilly back roads, and do around 800kms/week commuting. I ran the car hard for 35,000kms and it gave me a constant 4.3lt/100. I used to love getting up behind ute drivers and then teasing them into all the corners - no need to slow down in a Fiesta :p

1 trip to the pumps every week set me back around 50bucks - brilliant!

I now have a Falcon:(

[sheerluck]

.........The above figures match the modern Diesels..........and using petrol.
We have advanced very little.
40 mpg equals......5.88 litres per 100
60mpg equals ...3.92 litres per 100km

Disagree Ron.

My Golf is officially rated at 3.8l/100km, or 74mpg. Nearly 25% better, than your "drive carefully" economy.

My "drive carefully" economy at 3.3l/100km or 86mpg is nearly 50% better. And has more safety features, better emissions......

[JDNSW]

Disagree Ron.

My Golf is officially rated at 3.8l/100km, or 74mpg. Nearly 25% better, than your "drive carefully" economy.

My "drive carefully" economy at 3.3l/100km or 86mpg is nearly 50% better. And has more safety features, better emissions......

And is also a lot heavier.

My son now has a Hyundai I30 - gives around 5l/100km, better than twice the economy of the Commodore that it replaced. But it weighs significantly more than the Commodore, and hence costs more to register. It also has airbags, better aircon, much better performance, better ride, quieter, better brakes, than the Commodore.

John

[PhilipA]

Hmmm.
My Honda Jazz 1.5 GD regularly gets about 5.5 L per 100 on a long trip at 110 , using unleaded 91 which in cities is about 15-20% cheaper than diesel.

On a recent trip toBowral it did 5.5 for the overall trip and that is uphill all the way there and downhill back and included Pennant Hills Road, arguably the most congested road in Australia. When we bought the car in Bathurst the consumption to the Central Coast was 5.2, and I believe this would be achievable on a 100Kmh say Pacific Highway run. ( 5.2 is the listed country economy)

In the suburbs in a very hilly area , the Central coast of NSW, I get about 6.5, as long as not too many cold starts and short trips.

I have seen it reported that the major European car makers including VW see little future in light duty diesels except in heavy FWD, I guess mainly due to the higher emissions.

So although small diesels give great economy, the cost of operation is not much less than an efficient petrol engine, and you don't get your hands dirty or have to be paranoid about fuel quality or looking after your particulate filter. A friend had a $3000 bill on his Jetta for a DPF plus half of a DSG failure but he still loves it!!!.
On this note I cannot understand why the listed fuel efficiency in Australia do not discriminate by octane requirement. It is far more expensive to run a VW requiring 98 than a jazz running 91 as the cost for 98 is usually about 17 cents a litre more , so IMHO the listed economy should be reduced by at least 10% maybe 15%.
Regards Philip A
BTW, I also own a TD5 so am not biassed against diesels.

[Reads90]

Australia is just coming around to the difference in economy of the diesel

I am a rep and I do 70,000ks a year.

In the uk all my company cars were diesel and I did the same sort of k's and here they are all petrol


At the moment I have a brand new Hyundai ix35 and when it was due to be changed before Xmas I asked for a diesel instead if the 2 ltr petrol model.

My company thought it was great idea but went to the parent company and came back No due to the car costing $50 a month more to lease the diesel to the petrol. Would get that back in a week.

Gave up most Australia don't understand the difference in the economy between a petrol and diesel.
Ix35 petrol 450k's a tank, diesel version 750k's a tank.


I just said ok thanks for the extra flybuys points ( as we have to fill up at shell).

[DoubleChevron]

Bet you don't get the same smile as when I bury my foot and burn through 17L/100km in my Classic Rangie ;) :D

You wouldn't know .... You'd only be able to see a rapidly receding view of the back of his head.

For a few months (before the baby was born a couple of years back) my wife has a Citroen C4 ... My mother bought the car new and it has only done 28,xxxkms. The bloody thing was so grunty it was hard not to run over all the traffic around you ( strangely the spec's on them don't read as very fast, or very powerful), but out of the now old technology 1.6 litre diesel it was pumping 260Nm of torque on overboost ( far more than the 3.5litre V8 in my classic). It used to average around 4.2L/100kms :eek: :eek: :eek: Pitty the suspension under it crappy.

That was replaced with a 2litre poogoe 407 sedan. This thing was an ex-company car out of melbourne. A 6spd manual gearbox meant it had only 42,000kms on it from new (even though it's '07 model). Other than riding like a bucket of ****, being so stuipidly low it's forever smashing it's nose into the ground and breaking **** underneath.... it hasn't been bad. It's bloody fast for something that weighs a staggeringly 1.7tons ... the little diesels in them are 340Nm on overboost (likely as much as the 4.2+ litre V8's fitted to the later Classics) yet return < 7.00L/100kms. I'd love to tear it's motor/6spd manual gearbox out and stick it into one of my old Citroens :twisted:

Now australia has finally caught up with the diesel craze (that the rest of the world has driven for 20years), they are moving away from it back to tiny capacity high pressure injection turbo charged petrol motors.

My sister has just purchased a 900cc Renault Clio .... I couldn't imagine buying anything with such a tiny motor, but my old man test drove it and he reckons it's brilliant. I guess it's 300cc bigger than the motor in there 2cv though :angel:

seeya,
Shane L.

[PhilipA]

Data from the Federal Chamber of Automotive Industries shows 7 per cent of passenger cars sold to private buyers in the past year have been diesels, compared with hybrids with only 1 per cent of the market.
From carsales.
Not exactly setting the world on fire.
I wish that more would be sold, then diesel might begin to be discounted like petrol.LOL
Regards Philip A

[DiscoMick]

We flogged a Ford Focus diesel around the UK for 3 weeks and were very impressed to get 1000km out of a tank, fully loaded with four people. It was great.
Our current petrol Yaris is 'only' giving 7 l/100km and I reckon it will be replaced with a diesel next time. Why would anyone buy a V8?
I read the Holden Cruze diesel was also pretty good.

[3toes]

For a period of about 12 months over 2011/12 through work I had a replacement car at intervals of between 2 and 6 weeks. Never had the same car more than once although I could have the same model allocated again. These ranged from a small Peugeot 206 through Clio, Golf, Astra, Vectra, Mondeo, Megane, BMW 3 series, Mercedes c Class, Audi A5 to a Peugeot 5008. These were all 4 cylinder and a mix of petrol and diesel - auto and manual. None were new all had between 5k and 50k on them before I got them.

Was doing about 600 to 800 miles a week mixture of motor way and city driving. What did strike me was that the petrols all achieved about 35 mpg and the diesels all did about 50 mpg. Did not seem to matter the size of the car or if manual or auto. The Peugeot 5008 achieved the best fuel economy despite being the biggest car.

Have found in my own car which is a diesel auto that the best economy is on the motor way at about 75 miles per hour. Go over 80 miles an hour and the fuel consumption goes up to a level similar to that seen at 60 miles per hour.

[Dougal]

Bet you don't get the same smile as when I bury my foot and burn through 17L/100km in my Classic Rangie ;) :D

My 2.0tdi scout will beat my 93 V8 rangie to 100km/h, will beat it to 200km/h (rangie won't get there) and has more torque while weighing a ton less. So I think it gives me a better smile.
Uses 1/4 of the fuel (V8 has some issues) and corners like a medium height 4wd car shouldn't.

I run about 6.5 litres/100km in the scout average (I have calibrated both the speedo and the fuel readout) with a bit under 6 on an open road trip.
I have done as low as 5.3 over 200km in holiday traffic.

https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2014/02/868.jpg

This car is a VW golf with 4wd, a bigger boot, higher ground clearance, steel underbody protection, bigger wheels, different interior and different panels. It's also 6sp manual.
Yet it burns fractionally more fuel than my 4wd nissan diesel work-car. I think that's down to electrical load.

I have only one vehicle that isn't diesel. It's a V8 classic rangie and that engine (with it's auto box) are temporary residents at my place.

[Dougal]

I used to own a Datsun 120 Y station wagon......1978 year model
Only Two valves per Cylinder push rod 1200c motor and a Carburettor.
It was fun to drive with only a 4 speed gearbox simple to fix , not that anything went wrong with it.
It was happy cruising at 100kph.
I never got anything worse than 40 MPG and that being a young bloke at the time.
One time I did a trip and drove the thing for economy and accurately recorded 60 mpg.
All done without electronics including points ignition.
The A12 Nissan motor even as a push rod motor was happy with revs with max torque at 4000rpm and max power at 6000rpm.
The above figures match the modern Diesels..........and using petrol.
We have advanced very little.
40 mpg equals......5.88 litres per 100
60mpg equals ...3.92 litres per 100km

Your figures don't work.
40mpg (UK) = 7 litres/100km.
60mpg (UK) = 4.7 litres/100km.

Fuel Economy Conversion (Online Units Converter) (http://www.convert-me.com/en/convert/fuel/)

[Sprint]

As for why anyone would want a v8....
1994 falcon xr8 sprint, V8 manual, averaged 10-10.5L/100km
2002 vu commodore ute v6 auto averaged 10.5-11L/100km
2005 Bba falcon rtv ute, 4.0L 6 cylinder..... averages 12.8L/100km

and the worst part? The v8 gave the best fuel economy, but got driven harder.....

[Keithy P38]

With technology comes weight...

My 1150kg Torana with one of these new little turbo diesels would be a hoot to drive, while only drinking bugger-all...

Am I onto something?

[Dougal]

With technology comes weight...

My 1150kg Torana with one of these new little turbo diesels would be a hoot to drive, while only drinking bugger-all...

Am I onto something?

I'd like to put a small tdi diesel in a prius and see the fuel economy.
All those aero mods, tiny low-rolling-resistance tyres etc should make fantastic fuel economy with a real engine.

[MR LR]

You wouldn't know .... You'd only be able to see a rapidly receding view of the back of his head.

For a few months (before the baby was born a couple of years back) my wife has a Citroen C4 ... My mother bought the car new and it has only done 28,xxxkms. The bloody thing was so grunty it was hard not to run over all the traffic around you ( strangely the spec's on them don't read as very fast, or very powerful), but out of the now old technology 1.6 litre diesel it was pumping 260Nm of torque on overboost ( far more than the 3.5litre V8 in my classic). It used to average around 4.2L/100kms :eek: :eek: :eek: Pitty the suspension under it crappy.

That was replaced with a 2litre poogoe 407 sedan. This thing was an ex-company car out of melbourne. A 6spd manual gearbox meant it had only 42,000kms on it from new (even though it's '07 model). Other than riding like a bucket of ****, being so stuipidly low it's forever smashing it's nose into the ground and breaking **** underneath.... it hasn't been bad. It's bloody fast for something that weighs a staggeringly 1.7tons ... the little diesels in them are 340Nm on overboost (likely as much as the 4.2+ litre V8's fitted to the later Classics) yet return < 7.00L/100kms. I'd love to tear it's motor/6spd manual gearbox out and stick it into one of my old Citroens :twisted:

Now australia has finally caught up with the diesel craze (that the rest of the world has driven for 20years), they are moving away from it back to tiny capacity high pressure injection turbo charged petrol motors.

My sister has just purchased a 900cc Renault Clio .... I couldn't imagine buying anything with such a tiny motor, but my old man test drove it and he reckons it's brilliant. I guess it's 300cc bigger than the motor in there 2cv though :angel:

seeya,
Shane L.
Sounds like your classic is rooted, according to Wikipedia my '83 had 280Nm when it was new, I have no doubt it still has close to this as it was rebuilt only 20,000kms ago, and it goes nearly as well as a slightly tired td5 (when you give it the stick).

My initial comment was not actually based on power or economy, in actual fact it's the exhaust note that sold me on a V8 as a weekend car, it sounds better than any diesel hatch! (Hang on, why are we comparing a 2 tonne 4WD to diesel hatchbacks that can't tow half as much, or go offroad?). My V8 weekend car makes me smile every time I open it up through the gears, and my XR6 Falcon with dual fuel is cheap to run and will flog up the highway better than any hatch on the way to UNI. I also wouldn't own a front wheel drive POS if someone payed me!

To sum up, my comment was about the sound of a V8 making up for the fuel use.

Cheers
Will

BTW: my range rover is manual, much faster than auto ones.

[Dougal]

Sounds like your classic is rooted, according to Wikipedia my '83 had 280Nm when it was new, I have no doubt it still has close to this as it was rebuilt only 20,000kms ago, and it goes nearly as well as a slightly tired td5 (when you give it the stick).

My V8 put out 320Nm new. Still beaten in torque by my 2.0tdi.


(Hang on, why are we comparing a 2 tonne 4WD to diesel hatchbacks that can't tow half as much, or go offroad?).

My one can legally tow exactly half as much (1750kg) and does extremely well offroad.
Лакированны� �̆ Off Road - YouTube

Work often takes me around a mine-site. When it's wet and muddy I'll take the diesel work car over a rangerover.
Because the car has a flatter under-belly (it slides over mud better) and weighs a ton less it doesn't sink as much.
I haven't had it stuck offroad yet and it's been through some nasty bogs.



To sum up, my comment was about the sound of a V8 making up for the fuel use.

To sum up. You were trolling and suck at it.

[MR LR]

My V8 put out 320Nm new. Still beaten in torque by my 2.0tdi.

Congratulations :thumbsup: my comment was directed at Double Chevron. :D


My one can legally tow exactly half as much (1750kg) and does extremely well offroad.

No it can't, my Rangie is rated at 4000kg, you've never seen my Rangie off road, and by off road I don't mean a muddy dirt road like you do.



Work often takes me around a mine-site. When it's wet and muddy I'll take the diesel work car over a rangerover.
Because the car has a flatter under-belly (it slides over mud better) and weighs a ton less it doesn't sink as much.
I haven't had it stuck offroad yet and it's been through some nasty bogs.

That's probably because you have a strange fetish for 29" tyres, which are pretty well useless in mud, I think my Rangie on 32's with flexy suspension and huge belly clearance would leave your Skoda in it's ruts... there's also this thing called a tyre deflator, when I get the chance I'll calculate the ground pressure from my RR with deflated tyres and your Skoda and report back, I doubt there'd be very much difference.



To sum up. You were trolling and suck at it.

If I'm a troll, what are you? :confused:, I was merely giving another point of view in the thread with my original post, life is too short to spend it with clenched buttocks in a useless diesel hatch IMO, it doesn't suit me and I wouldn't be smiling as I accelerated off in an appliance. (literally all my first post spoke about, incase you forgot when you got all butthurt about your rattly tractor car).

Cheers
Will

ADDIT: I really hope you're not suggesting that video shows any decent 4WD capability... on a Land Rover forum, I do heavier offroading with an XE Falcon ute on the farm.

[Redback]

My 2.0tdi scout will beat my 93 V8 rangie to 100km/h, will beat it to 200km/h (rangie won't get there) and has more torque while weighing a ton less. So I think it gives me a better smile.
Uses 1/4 of the fuel (V8 has some issues) and corners like a medium height 4wd car shouldn't.

I run about 6.5 litres/100km in the scout average (I have calibrated both the speedo and the fuel readout) with a bit under 6 on an open road trip.
I have done as low as 5.3 over 200km in holiday traffic.

https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2014/02/868.jpg

This car is a VW golf with 4wd, a bigger boot, higher ground clearance, steel underbody protection, bigger wheels, different interior and different panels. It's also 6sp manual.
Yet it burns fractionally more fuel than my 4wd nissan diesel work-car. I think that's down to electrical load.

I have only one vehicle that isn't diesel. It's a V8 classic rangie and that engine (with it's auto box) are temporary residents at my place.

Was trying to figure out what a VW Scout was, so I Googled it, it's released here as a Scoda.

We are looking into buying a small diesel for to and from work, putting way too many Ks on the D4.

Baz.

[Dougal]

No it can't, my Rangie is rated at 4000kg, you've never seen my Rangie off road, and by off road I don't mean a muddy dirt road like you do.

And where do you buy these 4,000kg tow-balls?

You said "off-road" and I showed that. You'll have to forgive us all for not having your specific "super awesome" definition of offroad.


That's probably because you have a strange fetish for 29" tyres, which are pretty well useless in mud, I think my Rangie on 32's with flexy suspension and huge belly clearance would leave your Skoda in it's ruts... there's also this thing called a tyre deflator, when I get the chance I'll calculate the ground pressure from my RR with deflated tyres and your Skoda and report back, I doubt there'd be very much difference.

You do that.
Keep in mind the stock has 225mm wide tyres to start with. 245mm fit and clear everything.
I can't fit 245mm wide tyres in my rangie without clearance issues.

Last I checked 4 tyres at 225mm wide on a 1.4 ton vehicle give less ground pressure than 4 tyres at 225mm wide on a 2.3 ton vehicle.

When you've deflated your 32" tyres to decrease your ground pressure, your ground clearance is now comparable to the car on 27" rubber. But the car has a smooth underbelly that slides very well and doesn't get stuck.
It also has traction control that keeps driving when it picks up a wheel.
But mostly I've just saved 20 minutes in airing down wheels and then pumping them back up. You'd be standing out in the rain letting the tyres down after the tarmac drive out there and then pumping them back up for the tarmac drive home.

BTW, I also own a set of tyres ~32" diameter. But I'm secure enough in life that I can run 29" and still drive to the mall.


If I'm a troll, what are you? :confused:, I was merely giving another point of view in the thread with my original post, life is too short to spend it with clenched buttocks in a useless diesel hatch IMO, it doesn't suit me and I wouldn't be smiling as I accelerated off in an appliance. (literally all my first post spoke about, incase you forgot when you got all butthurt about your rattly tractor car).

Cheers
Will

Yes troll, and not even a good one. Entering a topic where you have absolutely no interest just to stir up people.
Your comments above reinforce that.


ADDIT: I really hope you're not suggesting that video shows any decent 4WD capability... on a Land Rover forum, I do heavier offroading with an XE Falcon ute on the farm.

I'll bet you do. Just remember, not everyone can be as "super awesome" as you.
Some of your "super awesome" ness will wear off as you get older. We sure hope so.

[Dougal]

Was trying to figure out what a VW Scout was, so I Googled it, it's released here as a Scoda.

We are looking into buying a small diesel for to and from work, putting way too many Ks on the D4.

Baz.

Yes it's a Skoda. Part of the VAG empire. The same chassis is used in the Skoda Octavia, Seat Leon, VW Golf and Audi A3. I didn't mean it was literally badged as a VW, just using the golf as the most well known variant.

Sadly they don't make the scout right now. They changed to the new model Octavia (and golf and A3 and leon) early this year and the sub-models like this one always take another year or so to be released.

[BMKal]

Was trying to figure out what a VW Scout was, so I Googled it, it's released here as a Scoda.

We are looking into buying a small diesel for to and from work, putting way too many Ks on the D4.

Baz.

Friend of mine has one of these Baz. Brilliant little wagon. He doesn't mind putting it through a bit of rough stuff either - and it surprises a lot of people.

On the road - very similar ride to the Passat wagon I had (hire car) in Germany last year (there's probably more similarities than I'm aware of between the two). ;)

My mate's previous ride was a Subaru Forrester - he has been a Subaru owner and big fan of them for as long as I've known him, but says he'd prefer the Skoda over the Forrester any day.

[Redback]

Might post another thread on this, so I don't hi-jack this anymore than I have.

Thanks guys,

Baz.

[DoubleChevron]

Sounds like your classic is rooted, according to Wikipedia my '83 had 280Nm when it was new, I have no doubt it still has close to this as it was rebuilt only 20,000kms ago, and it goes nearly as well as a slightly tired td5 (when you give it the stick).



You mean 250NM .... Don't believe me ??

https://sites.google.com/site/tuscan1972/Home/land-rover-brochures/range-rover---australia

And I've got this theory about power/torque specifications of anything made prior to the 1990's ............. That being take the manufacturers specs, and multiply them by 0.75 and you'll probably be closer to reality. So yes, less torque than a weeny 5year old weeny little 1.6litre diesel engine.

I'm not arguing with you about the sound/enjoyment of driving a big old (very slow) V8 Rangie though. Given I don't drive a car that's younger than 30years old ... yep, I do get it :D I'm driving a 51year old car today ... bobbing, floating and hissing my way down the roads ... cornering on the doorhandles... weeny little motor breathlessly trying to propel the car with a stupid big grin on my face. Try enjoying tediously boring modern turbo diesels that much.

seeya,
Shane L.

[Dougal]

You mean 250NM .... Don't believe me ??

https://sites.google.com/site/tuscan1972/Home/land-rover-brochures/range-rover---australia

And I've got this theory about power/torque specifications of anything made prior to the 1990's ............. That being take the manufacturers specs, and multiply them by 0.75 and you'll probably be closer to reality. So yes, less torque than a weeny 5year old weeny little 1.6litre diesel engine.

I'm not arguing with you about the sound/enjoyment of driving a big old (very slow) V8 Rangie though. Given I don't drive a car that's younger than 30years old ... yep, I do get it :D I'm driving a 51year old car today ... bobbing, floating and hissing my way down the roads ... cornering on the doorhandles... weeny little motor breathlessly trying to propel the car with a stupid big grin on my face. Try enjoying tediously boring modern turbo diesels that much.

seeya,
Shane L.

Sounds like you need a Fiat Chroma turbo diesel. It'd be right at home in your fleet.

[MR LR]

You mean 250NM .... Don't believe me ??

https://sites.google.com/site/tuscan1972/Home/land-rover-brochures/range-rover---australia

And I've got this theory about power/torque specifications of anything made prior to the 1990's ............. That being take the manufacturers specs, and multiply them by 0.75 and you'll probably be closer to reality. So yes, less torque than a weeny 5year old weeny little 1.6litre diesel engine.

I'm not arguing with you about the sound/enjoyment of driving a big old (very slow) V8 Rangie though. Given I don't drive a car that's younger than 30years old ... yep, I do get it :D I'm driving a 51year old car today ... bobbing, floating and hissing my way down the roads ... cornering on the doorhandles... weeny little motor breathlessly trying to propel the car with a stupid big grin on my face. Try enjoying tediously boring modern turbo diesels that much.

seeya,
Shane L.
Maybe mine goes well... I don't know, but I can assure you it goes better than a Tdi Disco which has 264Nm from factory. But I'm never going to claim it's zippier than a small car, just more fun IMO,

We both have interest in historic/special vehicles I see!

Cheers
Will

[carjunkieanon]

Damnit guys, you're giving me reasons to sell the D2 and buy something else…


...anyone know a 7 seater with the kind of economy you've been describing?

[sheerluck]

Damnit guys, you're giving me reasons to sell the D2 and buy something else…


...anyone know a 7 seater with the kind of economy you've been describing?

Yep.
https://www.aulro.com/afvb/

:D

[uninformed]

any other feed back on the engine shut down/restart at lights etc?

[sheerluck]

any other feed back on the engine shut down/restart at lights etc?

In terms of it's operation, it is very impressive. My Golf restarts before the clutch is even half way dipped. It's clever enough to sense when there has been repeated stop/starts, and then turns the feature off. It constantly monitors the battery state of charge, and turns the alternator clutch on when needed (you can tell because it revs slightly higher than normal at idle).

It is seamless in operation though, not really noticeable at all.

It is very friendly for a learner driver though. My daughter was using it to learn in - if you ever stall it, all you do is dip the clutch and instant restart!

[carjunkieanon]

Yep.
http://www.aulro.com/afvb/attachment.php?attachmentid=72723&stc=1&d=1392096405

:D

:D

That'll have to be a few years down the track. I think only myself & my wife could reach the pedals at the moment - and she usually falls asleep in the car. Tricky to balance a child capsule as well.

[PhilipA]

It is very friendly for a learner driver though. My daughter was using it to
learn in - if you ever stall it, all you do is dip the clutch and instant
restart! __________________

What happens when she gets in a car that doesn't do that? I suggest you disable it if possible when she is learning. Aircon on?
I hope you haven't got auto parking also.LOL Or collision avoidance for that matter.
Regards Philip A

[sheerluck]

What happens when she gets in a car that doesn't do that? I suggest you disable it if possible when she is learning. Aircon on?
I hope you haven't got auto parking also.LOL Or collision avoidance for that matter.
Regards Philip A

She's not a learner any more. ;)

And she did have 50% of her 100 hours logbook experience in other cars, so she knows all about the standard restart routine. And I made her learn in a manual - easier to go from manual to auto than the other way round. ;)

[PhilipA]

She's not a learner any more.

That's great to hear and congratulations if you still have your sanity.

I just had this vision of a learner in one of those all singing , dancing cars like a Ford Focus with park assist, collision avoidance voice activation and auto restart, driving an old Corolla for the first time.

Being stuck at the lights waiting for restart, then rear ending someone because they expected the car to stop itself, then having no idea on how to park it after the accident because the car did it for him/her and having no idea on how to call and then talking to the car about it.
Would be a great utube , and hey I saw a trailer last night promoting a TV show about just that type of thing.
Regards Philip A

[vnx205]

I have that same vision.

Maybe some of the world's navies have the right idea. Don't some of them do some of the new recruits' early training in sailing vessels?

Perhaps learners should start in a vehicle like the one in which my mother learned to drive. It was Dad's 30cwt Commer truck with no synchro on any gears, no power steering, no ABS, ESC or any other acronym.
:p

[benji]

Yep, a series 2a was great to learn in - unforgiving.

I was talking to a new A class merc owner the other day.

A consistant 2.7lt/100 on the newell he was saying. Now that is staggering!!!

Apparently the Ford Territory wad supposed to have a puma derived motor not long after it's release; however the project manager went to work in the U.S and an American took the reigns and scrapped the idea.

[JDNSW]

Yep, a series 2a was great to learn in - unforgiving.

......

I have been teaching my twelve and fifteen year old grandchildren to drive (on the property) in the 2a. They are actually finding it fairly easy - don't know any better!

John

[VladTepes]

Did a round trip from Sydney to Port Macquarie (360km x2) this weekend in the Wifes Hyundai i30 diesel. On the trip North we used 4.9lts per 100km (no aircon) and on the return trip 5.1lts per 100km (Aircon on and 36c).
This is as good or better than my 800cc motorcycle :o

Who needs a hybrid :)


... and significantly better than my 1400cc bike.

Oh and nobody needs a hybrid.


Bet you don't get the same smile as when I bury my foot and burn through 17L/100km in my Classic Rangie ;) :D


... Wish I could get 'only' 17 litres/100.... Mine guzzles 20 l/100


My LSE would use 22+ with the foot buried. If you think they are bad on the road try in Sand.... ahem, 30l/100kms anyone?



- Which is why I now drive a Mazda 121, around 7.5 litres/100 and three times quicker than the Classic. :D:D:D

You know what's intriguing? We are buying Christine (my missus) a new Mazda3. It's flash as bro. We are getting the 2l petrol engine. Combined cycle 5.7l/100kms It's more efficient than the current Mazda2 !


whats the consensus on the engines shutting off and restarting automatically in regards to long term ware and tare?

The new Mazda3 has this system too. (I may be mistaken but I think the FL2 was the first car on the Aus market with this feature?)

Anyway it worked seamlessly on the test drive I was impressed. We are getting the auto and as soon as you let your foot off the brake the engine restarts in less time than it takes for your foot to get to the go pedal It will also restart with any significant steering input. It's manually switchable though in case it starts infuriating you in stop start traffic. I do love a switch.

[benji]

Oh and nobody needs a hybrid.[/QUOTE]

Oih ! I drive a hybrid! It runs on lpg AND petrol - ergo it's a hybrid!

Can't wait to park in the hybrid only spaces in at knox shopping centre :D

[PhilipA]

Did a round trip from Sydney to Port Macquarie (360km x2) this weekend in the
Wifes Hyundai i30 diesel. On the trip North we used 4.9lts per 100km (no aircon)
and on the return trip 5.1lts per 100km (Aircon on and 36c).
This
is as good or better than my 800cc motorcycle :o

After I posted about my Jazz last time I did a trip to Port Stephens and return to Avoca at 5.5 Lper 100Km at 110 or a bit more with 3 people and air on.
Price for fuel estimate say per 400Km =$30.80 ( 5.5x4x1.40)
Price for your diesel for equivalent distance and aircon use=$33.04 (5.1x4x1.62)
Regards Philip A

[Dougal]

After I posted about my Jazz last time I did a trip to Port Stephens and return to Avoca at 5.5 Lper 100Km at 110 or a bit more with 3 people and air on.
Price for fuel estimate say per 400Km =$30.80 ( 5.5x4x1.40)
Price for your diesel for equivalent distance and aircon use=$33.04 (5.1x4x1.62)
Regards Philip A

What are you basing a diesel equivalent on?

Vw polo would be about right and much less than 5.1 litres.

[PhilipA]

Huh?
I quoted Discomark at 5.1 with an i30.
The Jazz may be a little smaller than an i30 but it is much bigger than a Polo.
Regards Philip A

[Dougal]

Huh?
I quoted Discomark at 5.1 with an i30.
The Jazz may be a little smaller than an i30 but it is much bigger than a Polo.
Regards Philip A

Polo and Jazz are within a few cm: Dimension: Honda Jazz vs Hyundai i20 vs Volkswagen Polo - CarWale (http://www.carwale.com/expert-reviews/honda-jazz-vs-hyundai-i20-vs-volkswagen-polo-7808/p4/)

Fuel economy wise, there difference is a lot bigger in the i30 and Polo's favour than your example:

Honda Jazz Vibe
1.3L 4cyl, Man 5 speed
Hatch, 5 seats, 2WD
Petrol 91RON
5.8 litres/100km

Volkswagen Polo 66TDI Comfortline
1.6L 4cyl (T), Auto 7 speed
Hatch, 5 seats, 2WD
Diesel
4.6 litres/100km

Honda Jazz Vibe
1.3L 4cyl, Auto 5 speed
Hatch, 5 seats, 2WD
Petrol 91RON
6.6 litres/100km

Hyundai 2012 i30 1.6 CRDi
1.6L 4cyl (T), Man 6 speed
Hatch, 5 seats, 2WD
Diesel
4.5 litres/100km

Hyundai 2012 i30 1.6 CRDi
1.6L 4cyl (T), Auto 6 speed
Hatch, 5 seats, 2WD
Diesel
5.6 litres/100km.

All figures from AU Greenvehicleguide.
If you'd acheived better than list figures on your Jazz on that run, it would stand to reason that you'd acheive better than list on other cars driven the same way.

[joel0407]

Where do Greenvehicleguide get their figures from?

I always use Fuelly.com as they are real life figures. Not what a manufacture says or some other tester is getting with a controlled test.

https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2015/05/1341.jpg (http://www.fuelly.com/driver/joel0407/yeti)

Happy Days

[*RR*]

On Top Gear Jeremy got an easy 900 miles out of 1 tank of diesel in a diesel X350 Jag (same 2.7 in our Landies)...

[3toes]

Oh and nobody needs a hybrid. Oih ! I drive a hybrid! It runs on lpg AND petrol - ergo it's a hybrid! Can't wait to park in the hybrid only spaces in at knox shopping centre :D[/QUOTE]

Agree that these are the only hybrids that make economic sense. Have run a number of them all of which have achieved significant savings over the non hybrid versions. - With the price of fuel in the UK could not have afforded to run a V8 otherwise!

One place I worked I was running a diesel Skoda Octavia wagon. The accountant had a Toyota Prius. We both had a similar commute of about 20 miles each way and similar driving conditions. Fuel cost of commute was cheaper for me and my car cost half as much. Toyota was no better to drive and not as practical due to the space taken up by the hybrid system.

[bee utey]

I've always wanted to fit a gas injection system to a Prius. (a hybrid hybrid!) Sadly my mate's wife traded the Prius shortly after the "service transmission" message appeared for the first time. She bought a Rav4 and got the gas injection on that instead.

[Dougal]

Where do Greenvehicleguide get their figures from?

I always use Fuelly.com as they are real life figures. Not what a manufacture says or some other tester is getting with a controlled test.

https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2015/05/1341.jpg (http://www.fuelly.com/driver/joel0407/yeti)

Happy Days

They use standard test figures. While the numbers vary from most people's usage the comparison between vehicles is better than any other.

Fuelly unfortunately has a lot of errors recorded. There is a camry with 1.6 litres/100km. Typo in the km for the tank. Good resource but you have to dig and check the numbers.

[3toes]

Standard test figures are intended as a comparison between engines based on each doing the same cycle. They were never intended to represent what you would actually achieve.

Real life driving will produce different figures for each driver based on conditions locally. These too can be collected and used to produce actual consumption results.

So as a comparison both figures here are correct in their own way.

[JDNSW]

Standard test figures are intended as a comparison between engines based on each doing the same cycle. They were never intended to represent what you would actually achieve.

Real life driving will produce different figures for each driver based on conditions locally. These too can be collected and used to produce actual consumption results.

So as a comparison both figures here are correct in their own way.

Yes, the standard test figures are the only way of comparing different vehicles, but the real life figures the only way of assessing what is the likely real life consumption .

You can also get some insight into what you can expect by looking at how the standard tests are done and comparing that to your own pattern of driving, but don't expect too much from that.

John

[Dougal]

For example. If you compare joel's Yeti to my Scout (both vehicles share a lot of drivetrain and chassis components, but I have the earlier PD engine and manual box, his is CR and auto).
His Yeti has a claimed combined figure of 6.0 litres/100km.
My Scout has a claimed combined figure of 6.4 litres/100km.

So driven in the same manner in the same places you'd expect the Yeti to do better.
But I've got an eco remap in my scout and my driving is more open road. So My average is between 6.5 and 7 litres/100km and his (from his fuelly records) is 7.6.

[joel0407]

For example. If you compare joel's Yeti to my Scout (both vehicles share a lot of drivetrain and chassis components, but I have the earlier PD engine and manual box, his is CR and auto).
His Yeti has a claimed combined figure of 6.0 litres/100km.
My Scout has a claimed combined figure of 6.4 litres/100km.

So driven in the same manner in the same places you'd expect the Yeti to do better.
But I've got an eco remap in my scout and my driving is more open road. So My average is between 6.5 and 7 litres/100km and his (from his fuelly records) is 7.6.

In defense of my Yeti's poor consumption. I drive pretty hard, I always seem to be accelerating to 80km/h from stop lights and Diesel in Darwin is pretty rubbish.

I particularly notice how my fuel economy on both the Yeti and the Disco improves once I cross the boarder to QLD and fuel up at Mt Isa. All the fuel in the NT comes from Ausfuel who ship it from Asia (Singapore?). It dosent matter where up here you buy it, it's all the same fuel. I find it funny when people like BP or Shell or whatever over the other. All the franchises are also owned by Ausfuel so it doesnt matter eitherway.

On the open road loaded up with the family of 4 it sits around 6.2L/100km which ends up just shy of 1000km per tank. The best I have got was just myself and the oldman going from Bathurst to Sydney, over the Blue Mountains. It got down to 4.5L/100km. Around Darwin it's pretty bad but I rarely see it over 9L/100km.

I drove it to Darwin just after we moved up here in April last year. I towed a trailer with all the stuff that the removalist wouldn't take (like the dogs). I went across a weightbridge and I think we came in a 2600kg? 2800kg? or something and we averaged 8.0L/100km for the trip of almost 4000km. I thought that was pretty good considering we were still wrapping up road trains at 140km/h (or a bit more).

Happy Days.

[Dougal]

In defense of my Yeti's poor consumption. I drive pretty hard, I always seem to be accelerating to 80km/h from stop lights and Diesel in Darwin is pretty rubbish.

I particularly notice how my fuel economy on both the Yeti and the Disco improves once I cross the boarder to QLD and fuel up at Mt Isa. All the fuel in the NT comes from Ausfuel who ship it from Asia (Singapore?). It dosent matter where up here you buy it, it's all the same fuel. I find it funny when people like BP or Shell or whatever over the other. All the franchises are also owned by Ausfuel so it doesnt matter eitherway.

On the open road loaded up with the family of 4 it sits around 6.2L/100km which ends up just shy of 1000km per tank. The best I have got was just myself and the oldman going from Bathurst to Sydney, over the Blue Mountains. It got down to 4.5L/100km. Around Darwin it's pretty bad but I rarely see it over 9L/100km.

I drove it to Darwin just after we moved up here in April last year. I towed a trailer with all the stuff that the removalist wouldn't take (like the dogs). I went across a weightbridge and I think we came in a 2600kg? 2800kg? or something and we averaged 8.0L/100km for the trip of almost 4000km. I thought that was pretty good considering we were still wrapping up road trains at 140km/h (or a bit more).

Happy Days.

That's not poor consumption for a tdi Yeti, getting below 5 litres/100km is exceptional. But it does appear the 6sp DSG versions use up to a litre more every 100km than the manuals.

Have you calibrated the fuel consumption readout? Most are optimistic, mine was out by about 8%. Unless you've got the double trip computer you need a second way to monitor consumption as the single trip computer resets every day. Unless you can burn whole tanks of fuel in a day several times in a row.

I used a scan-gauge to keep track of whole tank consumption and calibrated that over several fill-ups. Then I used VCDS to calibrate the trip computer so it matches the scan-gauge read-out.

[nat_89]

That's not poor consumption for a tdi Yeti, getting below 5 litres/100km is exceptional. But it does appear the 6sp DSG versions use up to a litre more every 100km than the manuals.

Have you calibrated the fuel consumption readout? Most are optimistic, mine was out by about 8%. Unless you've got the double trip computer you need a second way to monitor consumption as the single trip computer resets every day. Unless you can burn whole tanks of fuel in a day several times in a row.

I used a scan-gauge to keep track of whole tank consumption and calibrated that over several fill-ups. Then I used VCDS to calibrate the trip computer so it matches the scan-gauge read-out.

Ive got a new discovery 4 and find its about a litre or 2 out with its read out can i fix that with a scan gauge or something like that do you know?

[sheerluck]

Ive got a new discovery 4 and find its about a litre or 2 out with its read out can i fix that with a scan gauge or something like that do you know?

I know that this can be done with a Faultmate, not sure of any other devices that can do it.

[Dougal]

Ive got a new discovery 4 and find its about a litre or 2 out with its read out can i fix that with a scan gauge or something like that do you know?

The scan gauge is only to determine the error. From there you need landrover diagnostics to correct it and I can't help.
My solihull products pre-date all that.

[joel0407]

That's not poor consumption for a tdi Yeti, getting below 5 litres/100km is exceptional. But it does appear the 6sp DSG versions use up to a litre more every 100km than the manuals.

Have you calibrated the fuel consumption readout? Most are optimistic, mine was out by about 8%. Unless you've got the double trip computer you need a second way to monitor consumption as the single trip computer resets every day. Unless you can burn whole tanks of fuel in a day several times in a row.

I used a scan-gauge to keep track of whole tank consumption and calibrated that over several fill-ups. Then I used VCDS to calibrate the trip computer so it matches the scan-gauge read-out.

Yep. Maxidot is out by about 0.5L/100km but I just use Fuelly to calculate my consumption.

I have been able to use more than a tank in a day several times. It's just under 4000km from Bathurst NSW to Darwin NT. I've down the trip 3 times now and I usually knock it over in under 3 days.

I don't know how much of my stuff you can see in fuelly but if you look at the graph, you'll see a few tanks in quick succession in April and October 2013. That was when I drove to Darwin and then a trip from Darwin to Bathurst and back.

I wish there was someone close to me with VCDS. I got the usual changes done like fog light for come and go light and needle sweep while I was in Canberra but I can't justify the cost to buy VCDS to just change the fuel figure.

Happy Days

[nat_89]

I know that this can be done with a Faultmate, not sure of any other devices that can do it.

Thanks mate i didn't know which one was the correct one to get, but thanks for that i might look into it!!

[Discomark]

Well the Wifes i30 Diesel has done 65,000km now and the fuel economy keeps improving and on a 200km trip up the coast on the weekend the overall fuel consumption was 4.5 litres per 100km. That was mostly sitting at 110kph on the freeway and not much wind. Who needs a hybrid!

[Avion8]

We are at 7.2/100kms in our 2.2 Peugeot 4007, not the 6/100 as advertised but I'm quite happy. Most of our trips are 60 kms at 100kph or so & for a 7 seater it's not bad. Same engine as the Freelander 2 but with the extra seats - which we have used once in nearly 2 years!

[Toxic_Avenger]

Our i30 diesel is sitting on 5.5l/100km according to the dash computer.
That's predominantly cold starts and short(ish) drives around town, and not giving a damn.
Most efficient car I own is the work car. Has never cost me a cent :p

[Eevo]

1 thing ive notice, most diesels in these small cars, between 5 and 10 years all seem to smoke.

[Jojo]

I drive a Tesla now (to complement the Land Rovers, of course). About 22kWh/100kms. Goes like a scalded cat. No smoke. Who needs a hybrid :cool:

[amtravic1]

Our Passat easily uses below 5 litres/100kms fully loaded on a trip. One thing I find amazing is after 5 years you can wipe your finger around the inside of the exhaust pipe and it is still clean.

[Redback]

We finally got our small diesel, it's a 2007 Golf 1.9l TDi 6 speed manual, with 54,000ks, goes like the clappers, handles brilliantly, quiet, just a great little car.
I have been averaging between 5l to 5.5l/100ks to and from work, and the best we have got was, 8 days to and from work and a couple of trips to Wollongong and back, 4.5l/100ks for that tank, I put this down to freeway most of the way to the Gong and no inner city driving by the daughter from my work to Strathfield and back, I filled it up with 920ks on the trip meter, I reckon I could have cracked the 1000k mark for a tank if I didn't fill it.

This little gem of a car has now done 80,000ks and is so much fun to drive, we love the Golf.

Baz.

[DiscoMick]

Its amazing how some petrol cars are also becoming so economical. We just traded our Yaris 1.5 auto, which was averaging 7 l/100kms, on a Mazda 2 1.5 with the six-speed auto.
I was impressed to read Mazda claims the six-speed auto can get as low as 4.9 l/100kms when driven economically, although ours is so far averaging about 6 l/100kms in all sorts of driving. Its a demonstrator and had been flogged for 4000 kms, so I expect that average to fall, since we drive pretty gently by comparison with salesmen who drive it like they stole it.
Mazda claims the six-speed auto is actually more economical than the manual.
I guess it just shows how high-pressure fuel injection with precise monitoring is so much more economical than past systems, for both diesel and petrol motors.

[Rextheute]

I think that the petrol technology will continue to improve - customers really want diesel economy and power , but in a petrol car .....
Manufacturers seem to following this trend also , patrol no longer diesel ,toyota may discontinue the diesel v8 ...

[JDNSW]

I think that the petrol technology will continue to improve - customers really want diesel economy and power , but in a petrol car .....
Manufacturers seem to following this trend also , patrol no longer diesel ,toyota may discontinue the diesel v8 ...

Reinforcing that these are no longer targeted at rural buyers. Someone living on a property out of town does not want to have to store two types of fuel.

John

[Kev the Fridgy]

Some interesting figures being quoted here for economy, since December last year I have been driving a new VW Transporter, regularly see close to 1000 Km to a tank of diesel with all the weight I carry..... sadly that's the only thing worth noting about it

[Redback]

Reinforcing that these are no longer targeted at rural buyers. Someone living on a property out of town does not want to have to store two types of fuel.

John

Unfortunately John, most companies are not interested in what the Rural community/property owners think, as with anything that is happening in the bush at the moment.

Baz.

[Homestar]

Well, not all modern diesels are economical. I drive a current model Captiva (no choice - a work car) and while not a small car like some here are talking about, it is by no means a big car. It only carts my fat arse and a laptop around in the first 15,000KM it has averaged 9.1 L/100KM. Not what I'd consider economical at all. I drive it just the same as I drove the old Dunny Door - which averaged 9.5 over it's life (200,000KM in 4 years).

The L322 averages 11.2 and is damn near twice the weight and that's 12 years old.

Glad I have a fuel card for it - I would be very disapointed if I had lashed out my hard earnt and then found this. They went to the diesel engine as the petrol version was horrendeous - around 14's. They didn't really do very well...

[Eevo]

Unfortunately John, most companies are not interested in what the Rural community/property owners think, as with anything that is happening in the bush at the moment.

Baz.

im guessing rural buying would make up less than 5% of the market

[Tombie]

And is also a lot heavier.

My son now has a Hyundai I30 - gives around 5l/100km, better than twice the economy of the Commodore that it replaced. But it weighs significantly more than the Commodore, and hence costs more to register. It also has airbags, better aircon, much better performance, better ride, quieter, better brakes, than the Commodore.

John

Old thread - Old post... But it came up in the feed today..

John - how do you figure this?

I30 is 1310-1413kg for a Diesel
VN Commodore is 1310-1403kg (V6 base to SS V8)
VE Commodore is 1690-1825kg

Rego in NSW is:
1155 to 1504kg - $284
1505 to 2504kg - $433

The I30 and earlier Commodore are same bracket, the Later Commodore is next level..

How can the I30 be costing more / weigh more :cool:

[JDNSW]

Old thread - Old post... But it came up in the feed today..

John - how do you figure this?

I30 is 1310-1413kg for a Diesel
VN Commodore is 1310-1403kg (V6 base to SS V8)
VE Commodore is 1690-1825kg

Rego in NSW is:
1155 to 1504kg - $284
1505 to 2504kg - $433

The I30 and earlier Commodore are same bracket, the Later Commodore is next level..

How can the I30 be costing more / weigh more :cool:

I'm just going on his complaints about it costing more to register. Not being at all familiar with Commodore models, I don't know which one it was - it was a station wagon, about twenty years old.

John

[Grumbles]

The L322 averages 11.2 and is damn near twice the weight and that's 12 years old.

............as the petrol version was horrendous - around 14's.



To put that into a positive perspective.

My 2013 4 door Grand Vitara Sport - auto, 2.4 petrol & 4x4 by the log book consistently uses between 9.2 and 13.6 litres per hundred kms with most consumption figures slotting in to the 11 to 12 L per 100 kms.

[JDNSW]

To put that into a positive perspective.

My 2013 4 door Grand Vitara Sport - auto, 2.4 petrol & 4x4 by the log book consistently uses between 9.2 and 13.6 litres per hundred kms with most consumption figures slotting in to the 11 to 12 L per 100 kms.

And to put that in perspective, my 1986 110 diesel, with much greater payload does about the same or a little better (usually 10.5-11), even at 560,000km. Admittedly it is manual, but it would be higher drag, as well as a lot heavier.

John

[Eevo]

And to put that in perspective, my 1986 110 diesel, with much greater payload does about the same or a little better (usually 10.5-11), even at 560,000km. Admittedly it is manual, but it would be higher drag, as well as a lot heavier.

John

but the Vitara goes over 70km/:wasntme:h