Following on from my thread about changing our Xsara for a £4k Focus I'm wondering what the real life fuel consumption figures are for 1.6 petrol vs diesel??
David
|
Wife had a 2.0 TDCi cmax which did 43mpg average
Now has 1.6 Petrol Focus which does 38mpg average
By the time the cost difference is taken into account, they cost more or less the same to run (fuel-wise).
The Diesel was more powerful and lots more grunt and much more fun... The Petrol is smoother and quieter and much more relaxing...
Buying a 2nd hand version, I'd go for the petrol all day long. They seem to be much more reliable and no worries over expensive DMF or misfuelling or EGR valve problems etc etc.
Edited by whoopwhoop on 05/12/2008 at 15:44
|
My 1.8Tdci does 49/50mpg in mixed use, more on a steady run.
Equates to just under the combined figure.
|
The 1.6 Focus is very good on fuel if you're careful with it. The diesel is very good on fuel unless you mercilessly thrash it. The diesel is much quicker and more entertaining, but the 1.6 has sharper handling (lighter engine) and better throttle response. The Focus chassis is brilliant, and the latter is what would steer me towards the petrol, but the grunt of the diesel is very appealing.
In short, drive both and see what you think, but costs wise there's not much in it when you factor everything in, including interest (cost or lost) on the extra you'll have to stump up for a like for like diesel. Diesel's cost advantage is not what it was, and really only applies to high mileage users.
|
|
|
|
|
In general terms (not just Ford) you should get about 30% more miles from a gallon of diesel than petrol, all else being equal. But with the present price difference at the pump, I should think annual mileage would have to be huge to offset the cost difference of the cars; you will be saving fossil fuel with the diesel though, which should be factored in.
Edited by Andrew-T on 05/12/2008 at 17:14
|
A very rough guesstimate on costs for me would see a diesel save you somewhere in the region of £200 - £250 a year per 10k miles. Frankly that means that there is no cost difference between the two, as the diesel will cost more to buy, so chose the one that you like driving more.
Saying that, if the cost of diesel approaches parity again next year as more refining capacity comes online, then that could change back again. Who knows. To be honest, I'd be spending about £300 on a car and sticking to bangeromics at the present time.
Gord.
|
|
|
|
My '02 Tddi Focus (as opposed to the more recent Tdci), is presently doing about 48mpg. My O/H's Fusion 1.4 petrol is currently doing about 40mpg, which considering the price per litre is not costing much more.
The Focus does about 55mpg during the summer, the Fusion about 44mpg.
I only mention the Fusion, as I think it may be similar mpg to the Focus petrol.
One other point, I prefer driving a petrol to work during the colder months, due to the far quicker heating...Getting older and less tolerant now...
|
Thanks guys. Unless a diesel Focus exceeds 45mpg with 50mpg plus on runs it doesn't make sense for us over a 1.6 petrol. The petrols locally are more plentiful and much cheaper. The moment you ask for the diesel model dealers harden up on their discounts. To be honest a Mondeo TDCi may even make more sense as they seem even more plentiful and lower in price at the moment. One local used specialist is valuing clean good spec Fiestas at £1k more than similar age/spec Mondeos.
Been a bit depressed looking at loads of sad cars that have been standing a while today and disapointed that many have more body blemishes than our 1998 Xsara that will probably sell for less than £500 when we get a new one.
Oddly the most genuine and best quality car we've seen at our price point is a Skoda Octavia TDi estate!! It seems these may have better fuel consumption than a Focus.
David
|
|
VAG group engines (as in the Skoda) are generally thought to be more likely to achieve quoted MPG figures, and this has been the case for me and other posters on here. be aware though - if it's the 1.9 TDi in the Skoda it can sometimes sound rather agricultural compared to more modern offerings. My old Golf with the 90bhp lump always returns a minimum of 50, and the newer 2.0 litre TDi can be coaxed to high 50's. You might also like to compare cam belt changes - frequency and cost - and factor these in. VAG Diesels still on belts.
|
A friend has a Y reg Octavia diesel estate. Without a doubt, it sounds agricultural but .... he averages about 64mpg. I was with him on a straight 60mph 30 mile run when it achieved 74mpg (onboard computer).
It has now done 165K miles and I understand that it has had nothing done to it other than routine servicing. It's still on its original exhaust.
When my wife bought her Focus 1.6 petrol Chic, we tried the diesel. The diesel pulled like a train, but was £2000 more than the 1.6 petrol - so we opted for the latter which has proved to be a superb car. It averages 38mpg but on a steady run will easily achieve 42mpg. Its handling is rock steady.
|
Thanks for the Octavia info... going to start a new thread on it.
David
|
|
|
|
Interesting thread - bought a `55 Oct Focus 2m 1.6TDCI DL Estate in July 2007 for £9500: on 13000, bit pricey? But my whizzo ole banger was really getting a bit dog-eared in the body if not the mechanics after 250,000 miles.
MPG answer is 38 - 45 mpg which at 1.00 - 1.25/litre makes me thoughtful. Could get 30+ from ole Ford 2.0liter petrol banger (`twas a 4X4 too).
Focus 2 TDCI 2.0 gave 32 mpg on test (from readout). Forget it! Unless very cheap.
So are diesels a waste of time? I am beginning to think so. On the other hand - well I`ve got this one. It would cost me £2000 to swap it - and Focus 2 1.6 110 TDCI is not all that bad - `part from anything else, it goes like smoke.
Not of course if you red-line it like JC.
But if you use the bottom end grunt (much better than the 2.0) - change up MUCH earlier than you think reasonable - and let the turbo over-boost work for you - it flies.
What I mean by all this is that these characteristics allow you to accomplish astonishing velocities for a boring little cart on rural A and B roads. "Watch your licence!"
My "other" car is a mid `80`s Rover V8 Vitesse, improved by a John Eales 3.9 litre "Dakar" conversion. Dunno the outputs - the rolling road ran out at 200bhp in those days - it showed that at 4000 rpm, so at 6000 rpm it was a guess, and still is; torgue was much better than the std Vitesse. (A "cammy engine")
From 50 mph in 4th gear, the Rover will reach 70 in 6+ seconds - good stuff for those days. In 3rd gear it would do it in just under 4 secs which was quick then and still is.
The Rover weighed 1.4 tonnes - a heavy car. 100mph was under 20 secs which is still pretty quick, even today.
The Focus 2 Estate weighs a smidge under 1.4 tonnes. A very heavy small car. From 50 mph in 4th gear it will reach 70 mph in 6 secs+ if you use the over-boost intelligently. The gearing and weights of these cars are surprisingly similar - around 30 mph/1000rpm in 5th gear.
Focus 2 1.6 TDCI 110 won`t hit 60 in -7 secs like my old Rover - but it does what it does, without recourse to redlines, valve bounce, old ladies diving into nettle beds, and policemen with ricked necks.
In other words, it goes "whoosh". One does not want to draw attention to oneself these days - does one? Or, does one?
So forget mpg - it`s still worth it!
AS
Edited by Dynamic Dave on 06/12/2008 at 20:07
|
Another interesting load of thoughts Cabusa. Your Rover sounds interesting... in our young days we were fans of the P6 Rover V8 and owned several... including the desireable manual 3500S which went like the wind for that era. I still remember the first trip behind that V8 engine.
I think you are saying pick a petrol or diesel Focus with no obvious winner and overall the Focus isn't the best car in the world but it will get you about in an entertaining way??
David
|
|
|
>So are diesels a waste of time?
On the evidence of this thread, they certainly seem like a waste of diesel. I haven't yet owned a Ford, but on the basis of my Peugeot, a 2-litre diesel (HDi) should be capable of over 50mpg in all but extreme conditions, and just about 60 when driven frugally. So why shouldn't a Mondeo get close - PSA and Ford collaborate with diesel engines, don't they?
|
|
>a Mondeo ... sorry, I meant Focus. You can see I know nowt about Fords ...
|
|
|
|
|
MM, from my pseudonym you can see I'm a proud Focus driver. It's not glamourous but it's never been anything other than a complete joy to own. I've had it since Jan 2002 (it's a '99T 1.6 Ghia petrol / 40 av mpg / 67k). The original battery died 8 years after its manufacture (an impressive record according the the poor AA man called out to diagnose) and, apart from a stuck electric window (irritating but that's not going to strand you in a forest of zombies on a dark night) nothing has ever gone wrong with it.
I really want a new(er) car but can't really justify it as I can't 'really' afford it and my current car (to date!) has been exceptional and does not suffer even endearing idiosynchasies.
Personally I'd avoid the diesels but that's only on the basis that there are so many immaculate and cheap petrols out there that prices are lower in the first place and the petrols seem to receive a more favourable response from commentators.
|
|
FD, the history of your Focus matches almost exactly that of my 306: 99T, 71K, owned since June 2002, battery lasted 8 years - but mine is diesel, 57mpg overall. However as long as it keeps going I don't really want a newer car; like yours nothing has gone wrong with it, tho I suppose something might have if I hadn't kept up with the scheduled maintenance. Is yours still on the original exhaust? :-)
|
|
|
Thanks for that FD. My Dad has a 2001 1.6 Ghia Focus plus I've both driven and serviced both a 2000 2.0 Ghia with leather int and a 2003 1.6 Zetec belonging to a friend. My only real gripe of these cars was of a firm ride on the very bumpy Fen roads that make up our daily route. However for a medium size hatch everything seems pretty well in balance for the market they are aimed at. But... I've never driven them thinking in terms of our own use hence the questions on the forum.
After not finding any cars about last week that appealed I'm going to look at a 2003 TDCi with lowish mileage in a couple of days when it arrives as a main dealer trade in. Its premium over a similar petrol will be £300 or less and at that the diesel will make sense... unless something comes up on the test drive that I don't like.The price is competative as I've agreed to take it off the forecourt for cash (subject to test drive) within hours of it arriving and the dealer is *very* keen for the quick cashflow.
David
|
2007 VCT-ti 1.6 Zetec:
Best 44mpg
Average 40 mpg
worst 36 mpg
Dropped to 38mpg the last week or so due to the much colder weather.
Don't know about the diesel. I don't like diesels as regulars will know...
The Focus is a great car. Not much to criticise it at all. A few annoyances but only minor points really.
TMS
Edited by The Melting Snowman on 07/12/2008 at 18:47
|
|
|
AndrewT
Yes, the original exhaust. I hadn't really thought about it. I went for a Focus on reliability but from what you (and my cousin) say, the 306 diesel has many fans for the same reasons. Long may we enjoy cheap motoring.
MM
It sounds like you're more familar with Focuses than I am really. After a few flaky Citroens in my younger days I've happily got used to the firmer ride of the Ford though the relatively smooth roads around here don't test the suspension very hard and I'm a bit of a dawdling doris on speed humps. Have often read that bumpy environments suit Japanese suspension better but this is not an area I'm knowledgeable in. I agree that a £300 difference means the diesel makes more sense than the petrol. After all MPG is what this thread is about.
Good luck anyway and I hope whatever your choice serves you well.
RM
|
|
|
|
|
