|
Swmbo was talkng about buying a new car and is wanting an automatic. She was wondering which automatic was the most frugal. Can anybody point me in the direction of road tests or reviews for such. She likes 4 door hatchbacks (or should I say 5 door).
|
Probobly the most economical auto is the Toyota Prius.
Also I think they do a diesel auto Golf which should be pretty good.
Really anything thats not too big and diesel would be pretty good, although in the main, only the germans consistantly put autoboxes on smaller diesels although from time to time, the french do it too.
Small petrol autos tend to struggle thus dont give any MPG advantage over medium sized diesel autos and usually are somewhat worse.
Id prob look at the Prius, VW Golf, Merc A-Class, Audi A3 and check what Peugeot and Citroen offer.
The Prius is the daddy for autos though its not super economical compared to manual diesels, just in the context of an automatic it is very good.
|
|
|
Honda Jazz CVT claims to do 48 mpg combined, as does the Yaris 1.3 multimode.
|
|
I'd forget the Prius as any fuel savings are offset against the high purchase price plus when i have driven them i never got anywhere near the stated economy figures.
|
The Golf/A3/Seat/Skoda DSG gearbox is effectively a manual gearbox, but with automated changing (including the working of the clutch). So you get the economy of a manual - well worth a look.
I'm still not convinced about the long term durability of the DSG clutches or gearbox. But if you're buying new it'l be covered under warranty.
|
My car definitely isn't the most economic automatic car in the country, but I just thought I'd pitch in with 42 MPG.
Not the biggest figure in the world, but it was from a Chrysler 300C with a 3lt V6 over a 250 mile motorway run.
Not to bad at all I thought.
MTC
|
Sorry to be boring - it's got to be the Jazz.
I was amazed how well it goes and how frugal it is, even with four adults and luggage.
My 2.0 and 2.2 Honda autos consistently give 35mpg no matter how hard they are driven.
|
In Spain a couple of weeks ago hired a (non-Grande, old shape, 5sp-manual) Fiat Punto and covered some heavy-footed miles in it. It was extremely economical despite constant use of AC even when its neck was wrung on the motorway where, once there, it would hold 160k on the flat, but being small-engined and tuned for economy it was pretty gutless up steep hills. I believe there is a 1600 cc version which would carry an auto better and should also be fairly frugal.
Comfortable for a tiddler but not a sporting chassis, and could feel a bit jelly-like and unstable on tight Spanish motorway bends. A sweet little car when driven fairly gently though.
|
|
|
|
Generally speaking automatics that dont use a torque converter are often better on fuel.
Alot of small automatic cars now use automated manuals or CVT's.
Automated manuals have fuel effiency similar to a manual transmission, in many cases these automatics can improve fuel economy to a manual, the Corsa Easytronic is one example. However these types of transmissions do not have as smooth gear changes as the other types of autos.
CVT's have smoother gear changes with good fuel economy too. DSG is the best bet if you are buying new.
As been mentioned, the Honda Jazz CVT-7 auto has very good fuel economy, so maybe have a look at that.
|
> Honda Jazz CVT-7 auto has very good fuel economy
But is horribly, horribly slow.
--------------------
[Nissan 2.2 dCi are NOT Renault engines. Grrr...]
|
|
Its not "slower" than the manual Jazz. Unless you meean the mythical, meaningless 0-60 time? In reality, having driven both, I'd say the CVT is less obstructive to such performance as their is, than the 5MT. Of course all small engined cars are "slow" but then if that is the most important criteria, economy is irelevant:)
|
It is light years slower than manual Jazz. It's even slower than 1.2, and that's already slower than anything else on the roads with 1.2 engine. I know of quarterly bills that arrive faster than CVT equipped Jazz.
"Mythical 0-60 times"? Together with mythical mpg both are the most fundamental figure to sell cars. Do not underestimate it.
--------------------
[Nissan 2.2 dCi are NOT Renault engines. Grrr...]
|
|
I think teenagers might be interested in the 0-60 time. As you say, its a sales aid but the most useless motorng measure ever. No-one sane would ever achieve it in their own vehicle, nor would the likely users wish to! Lets see what Autocar et al have to do to get the 0-60 time: rev to say 4000, slip left foot sideways off clutch, keep right foot flat to floor, change without the clutch, right foot still flat to floor. Repeat until lowest number achieved, or transmission fails. Sensible huh? Now 30-70 or 50-70 times etc will give some indication of real world performance, but 0-60 is for the comic books.
|
> No-one sane would ever achieve it in their own vehicle,
I'm certainly no teenager and partialy I agree with you on 0-60 methodology. And that there should be addition of 30-70 times to spec sheets. However. 0-60 is, and always will be more important - not because it's there to indicate how fast a hooded kid can get away from drag racing on McDonalds parking but because it is an indication of the best car can possibly do. As you noted, when the spec quotes 0-60 in 14 or 15 seconds, and that's while trashing the fastest car testing facility found in a batch god knows how big, you know yours will always be even slower. It might not be the perfect measurement but at least it give you the best real life indication whether you'll make it across 5 second lights in Central London or not. While 30-70 for a city car would tell you what - speeds you will never be able to drive at in town? :)
--------------------
[Nissan 2.2 dCi are NOT Renault engines. Grrr...]
|
|
In Central London I reckon you do well to get to 30! But there are drag strips like the Cromwell Road I suppose:)
|
In Central London I reckon you do well to get to 30! But there are drag strips like the Cromwell Road I suppose:)
YEEE HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW!
30!
BUMBOCLAAAAT!
AX A MINICAB DRIVER (BRITISH PREFERBLY, THEY AREN'T ALL QUICK).
|
|
|
|
|
I think the Punto auto is a CVT actually.
|
|
Honda Jazz without a doubt,i drove an Easy Tronic Meriva last week and thought i had broken it.It is so bad i could only think that that Vauxhall launched at as joke on the unsuspecting public.Dont even get me started on Peugeots 2 tronic.Mr Honda and Mr Toyota must just laugh every time the Euros launch small autos.
|
|
|
Yes, it certainly is, with the option of switching to the 6 speed semi-automatic (or 7 on the GHT 'Sporting' version). This option is a little clunky and not as smooth, but saves wear on the brakes and better for engine braking on long, downhill sections, or in stop-start traffic. That said, the car's at 12,500 and the recent FIAT service showed only 40% wear on the front pads...
My little 1.2 16v CVT goes like the proverbial of a shovel to about 40 from a standing start, as, of course, there's no clutch to fiddle with, so it's just sheer acceleration all the way, sitting at about 3500 rpm. Don't do it very often, though. Puts too much stress on the system, but good at exploiting smaller gaps in traffic when emerging into flow. BP Ultimate Unleaded seems to offer the best mpg.
|
|
Sorry, the above message refers to LUD, not HJ!
|
|
Check 'View Threaded' and you will see that it is.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
corsa diesel easytronic vauxhalls most economic car, but test drive it first,its not great.
|
|
Megane comes as an auto diesel but only with the 1.5 engine.
|
|
Citroen c3 or a fiesta both the same 1.4 tdi tiptronic box 60mph
|
|
|
Megane comes as an auto diesel but only with the 1.5 engine.
>>
I think it now comes with the 1.9 diesel engine.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Merc A170 diesel auto, mine does constant 50mpgs. These cars pre 2005 are excellent value if you can live with some shortcomings in ride quality. The new A class (with CVT type auto) shd be 10% better in A160/180CDI form, and there are some exceptional deals via brokers at the mom.
|
|
I've had a Golf 2.0TDI DSG for almost a year now - overall average 48+ mpg - this compares with the previous BMW 320td manual which averaged 49+ mpg, for the same type of motoring.
|
Drove a late example of the very first commercially sold CVT car, perhaps the first Volvo-badged DAF which later became the boring and ubiquitous small Volvo.
A very curious device, gold in colour, with a Renault engine I think and an evolved version of the DAF rubber band transmission. This made an endearing whistling noise on the overrun, but it wasn't that nice a car and not all that economical.
Daughter's BF, the right initials in this case, wrote it off tailgating some other idiot in the rain in Surrey.
|
On Sunday visited Nr.1 son and his family Frome to Warfield & return, total round trip 170miles. Fuel consumed (brim to brim)17litres. = 44mpg elapsed time 3hrs20min. Av.speed 51mph
'94 Metro 1.4 cvt. 2 passengers:self and SWMBO (abt 133Kg load)
Pottering about town shopping et etc. MPG sinks to around 35.
Petrol costs (ASDA fuel) at 91.9 = £15.62
Something of a no brainer to let the train take the strain.
Happy Motoring Phil I
|
|
|
|
