Welcome to Motorhomefacts, we are a thriving motorhome community (Largest in Europe). Why Not JOIN NOW and get instant access to more of the website. It costs nothing to join and only takes a few minutes. We have 200,000 different people visiting our site monthly and this amount of motorhomers in one place guarantees a fast response to any questions you may have. We also have unique facilities not found elsewhere such as our Online Logbook, stopover tracker, Motorhome directory with Ebay type feedback and the largest repository of motorhome campsites reviews found anywhere
My 2008 2.2 Ducato on board computer tells me I am getting 30-33mpg but I have no idea how accurate this is. I have not done a full tank to full tank measurement yet but perhaps it would be interesting to make comparisons.
Has anyone else calibrated the computed results with the tank to tank results??
The computer on my Renault master giver mpgs from around 23 to 33 but no matter where I travel with it (mountains, plains, towns, motorways) my average mpg is always 28.5 plus/minus 1,0.
I have kept a full record over the 10000 miles I have had the MH
The same is true for my Yaris. Computer ranges from 35 to 65 but the recorded average over 5000 miles is always around 55 mpg.
Last edited by oldun on Wed Feb 17, 2010 8:07 pm; edited 1 time in total ______________________________________________________________ Old but still game
Weve only done 160 miles in our 2.5 TDi so far but I topped it up from full and it was giving 25mpg - bear in mind in any of that it was stop start non motorway stuff - I shall expect better on a good run and would expect 35 mpg
ps - I have been showing off the turbo future during most of these miles
When I see the test results from a professional run series of tests done by an independent organization then and only then will I consider the merits of buying one.
There have been dozens of similar devices in the past that have made similar claims regarding the fuel consumption, torque and power.
So far none have stayed the course and have become hugely popular.
You must remember three things.
1. The manufacturers must keep their vehicle engine with tight pollution limits. Third party devices have no such limitations so your vehicle could be operating outside the law (Though I don't know how anyone could normally tell).
2. The manufacturers try a keep the vehicles running at conditions which will give a reasonable engine life. No such considerations for third party suppliers.
3. The manufacturers try and get an all-round engine performance and it is possible to mod the engine map to change to change this. So perhaps more power and torque at lower revs (as per the new Ducato engine mods), greater economy etc.
If it was so easy to radically improve the engines by simply adding on a very cheap box then why haven't the manufacturers installed this type of technology?
______________________________________________________________ Old but still game
When I see the test results from a professional run series of tests done by an independent organization then and only then will I consider the merits of buying one.
There have been dozens of similar devices in the past that have made similar claims regarding the fuel consumption, torque and power.
So far none have stayed the course and have become hugely popular.
You must remember three things.
1. The manufacturers must keep their vehicle engine with tight pollution limits. Third party devices have no such limitations so your vehicle could be operating outside the law (Though I don't know how anyone could normally tell).
2. The manufacturers try a keep the vehicles running at conditions which will give a reasonable engine life. No such considerations for third party suppliers.
3. The manufacturers try and get an all-round engine performance and it is possible to mod the engine map to change to change this. So perhaps more power and torque at lower revs (as per the new Ducato engine mods), greater economy etc.
If it was so easy to radically improve the engines by simply adding on a very cheap box then why haven't the manufacturers installed this type of technology?
When we did a calculation our 2000 AutoSleeper Medallion, on a VW LT35 2.5 engine base, had done about 28 MPG over the 6 months that we'd been keeping a record. At a recent service we had a new air filter fitted, but that was after the above calculation. Haven't done enough mileage since to know if MPG has improved.
I would expect your Clubman to be on a T4 originally with the normally aspirated 2.4 diesel and presumably a later turbo modification. In this cold weather I'm not surprised you are getting an average 25 mpg.
I have the T4 with 2.5 Tdi and auto gearbox. On long trips it does 38-40 mpg if I cruise at around 60 to 65 mph, and depending on headwinds, but running locally with mixed driving conditions 26-28 mpg is more likely.
I would expect your Clubman to be on a T4 originally with the normally aspirated 2.4 diesel and presumably a later turbo modification. In this cold weather I'm not surprised you are getting an average 25 mpg.
I have the T4 with 2.5 Tdi and auto gearbox. On long trips it does 38-40 mpg if I cruise at around 60 to 65 mph, and depending on headwinds, but running locally with mixed driving conditions 26-28 mpg is more likely.
SD
Indeed it is a T4 Speedy - don't know why I've been blathering about a T2. Senior moment. It has an intercooler turbo retro-fitted by TB Turbos of Lancaster. We're looking at a long trip in March, down to Cornwall via Swindon and Oxford it will be interesting to see how the MPG works out.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You cannot download files in this forum
All times are GMT + 1 Hour Page 2 of 2Goto page Previous1, 2
France
