60 MPG over 175 miles is possible.. Well nearly! - Page 2

Mike Trident · 10th December 2018, 06:40

Maybe more people should get their 4 wheel alignment checked more often. Even slightly out will cause more rolling resistance. In fact, that is what I noticed the most after it had been set. The car just wanted to roll under its own momentum far more.

I also note that the OP, he is driving a 2004 car, like mine. Don't the later cars have a lower emission stamped onto a plate somewhere? If that is the case, then they must run leaner than the earlier ones.

Heddy · 10th December 2018, 07:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rogue

I assume you are quoting the combined figure?

34.9/64.2/48.7 UK MPG urban/extra-urban/combined ... So a steady run on mostly dual or motorway would qualify as extra urban i would guess. Only according to the manufacturer though, I mean, what do they know?

Nah, just from memory, we've been here so many times now. Don't know where these stoopid figures come from really. Maybe a proud owner thinks he has something special.

Rogue · 10th December 2018, 07:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by Heddy

Nah, just from memory, we've been here so many times now. Don't know where these stoopid figures come from really. Maybe a proud owner thinks he has something special.

I would guess there are many proud owners on here that think they have something special

Heddy · 10th December 2018, 07:25

I just don't feel anyone, particularly newbies, should be misled.

https://www.parkers.co.uk/rover/75/saloon-1999/specs/

CivilSteve · 10th December 2018, 07:26

Tuning boxes or bad remaps can message with the dash figures.

The M47 engines can be good on fuel. My 320d sips almost nothing at 60 in 6th, but the extra gear really helps. Shame the 75/ZT didn't have such an option from factory.

I suspect the weight of the 75 chassis doesn't help much either.

Diesles run 'lean' all the time

Rogue · 10th December 2018, 07:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by Heddy

I just don't feel anyone, particularly newbies, should be misled.

https://www.parkers.co.uk/rover/75/saloon-1999/specs/

The figures i used to calculate from a previous post ... perhaps you could explain where i went wrong?

Round journey was 412 miles and i used 32.8 litres of diesel.
Now assuming my calculations are correct

32.8/4.55 to convert to gallons = 7.21 ish
412 miles/7.21 = 57.1 mpg

I think you will find that Parkers are quoting an avg figure which is probably about right.

Heddy · 10th December 2018, 07:47

Ha ha, yes they probably are. Enjoy your car, it's a 'one off'.

Rogue · 10th December 2018, 07:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by Heddy

Ha ha, yes they probably are. Enjoy your car, it's a 'one off'.

Thank you, I do enjoy my car but i hardly think it's a one off

marinabrian · 10th December 2018, 08:01

An automatic diesel driven conservatively will achieve between 40 and 44 mpg, and a manual between 42 and 48 mpg.

The most you can reasonably expect to achieve is low to mid 50s and that is a manual car cruise enabled, driven at 60MPH without traffic, and automatics driven with the same conditions 46mpg at a push.

Anyway if you want to make yourself feel good about fuel consumption, reset the MPG meter while travelling downhill and tickle the throttle, you might see an impressive figure then.

60 MPG may be seen as an instantaneous figure, but it is not a realistic one

Brian

bendrick · 10th December 2018, 09:02

Rather sadly just out of a fixation with MPG figures I used to measure brim to brim continuously my previous manual CDT saloon which I had for three years it was remarkably consistent.

Mainly urban (mixed with a couple of bypasses around the area) 45 MPG smack on every tank

Mainly motorway/dual carriage driving on longer distances 54/55 MPG smack on every time.

With the CDT Auto saloon that I bought a year ago.

Mainly urban (mixed with the occasional bypass around the area) 36/37 MPG

Long runs on A roads ( about 4 x 400 mile round trips up to North Wales ) no motorway stretches and passing through the outskirts of a number of small towns and through villages including the bottleneck that is Hereford.

46/47 MPG every single time.

I not long ago had a 4 wheel alignment done on the car after replacing all the rear arms and both rear dampers and though no doubt due to the old placebo effect I have to confess that when driving about I do repeatedly catch myself thinking that the car is moving incredibly freely under it's own momentum. So whether the alignment has really made such a difference or whether it's just my mind subconsciously wishing it has I don't know.

Unfortunately because I'm still trying to pay off for all the work and parts I haven't been fully filling my tank when running low so haven't been able to assess if any difference has been made to MPG figures after the work and 4 wheel alignment, I'll report back when I start my brim to brim working outs again in the new year.

But best of luck to any others who consistently get better figures out of their vehicles.

10th December 2018, 06:40	#11
Mike Trident Posted a thing or two Rover 75 CDTi Saloon & Citroen C1 Join Date: Jun 2016 Location: Oakenshaw, Near Bradford Posts: 1,622 Thanks: 385 Thanked 552 Times in 328 Posts	Maybe more people should get their 4 wheel alignment checked more often. Even slightly out will cause more rolling resistance. In fact, that is what I noticed the most after it had been set. The car just wanted to roll under its own momentum far more. I also note that the OP, he is driving a 2004 car, like mine. Don't the later cars have a lower emission stamped onto a plate somewhere? If that is the case, then they must run leaner than the earlier ones. __________________ Rover 75 2.0 CDTi (131Ps) Conn SE Saloon. (Manual) 160 Remap, cruise control, electric window blind, temp gauge, Real walnut / ZT interior, FBH with GSM control. BORN Tuesday, 5th October 2004 @ 12:35:52 This vehicle was the 104,679th 75 to run off the production line, out of 112,381 This vehicle was the 3,318th 75 CDT Connoisseur SE (135) to be made out of 4,744 This vehicle was the 12,440th 75 in Starlight Silver (code: MBB) to be made out of 14,280 Starlight Silver 75s Last edited by Mike Trident; 10th December 2018 at 06:50..

10th December 2018, 07:25	#14
Heddy This is my second home None Join Date: Feb 2013 Location: None Posts: 5,556 Thanks: 465 Thanked 1,161 Times in 924 Posts	I just don't feel anyone, particularly newbies, should be misled. https://www.parkers.co.uk/rover/75/saloon-1999/specs/

10th December 2018, 07:26	#15
CivilSteve Avid contributor MG ZT Join Date: Oct 2017 Location: Manchester Posts: 237 Thanks: 20 Thanked 108 Times in 56 Posts	Tuning boxes or bad remaps can message with the dash figures. The M47 engines can be good on fuel. My 320d sips almost nothing at 60 in 6th, but the extra gear really helps. Shame the 75/ZT didn't have such an option from factory. I suspect the weight of the 75 chassis doesn't help much either. Diesles run 'lean' all the time

10th December 2018, 07:47	#17
Heddy This is my second home None Join Date: Feb 2013 Location: None Posts: 5,556 Thanks: 465 Thanked 1,161 Times in 924 Posts	Ha ha, yes they probably are. Enjoy your car, it's a 'one off'.

10th December 2018, 08:01	#19
marinabrian MG ZT Join Date: Jan 2011 Location: Newcastle Upon Tyne Posts: 20,151 Thanks: 3,565 Thanked 10,837 Times in 5,718 Posts	An automatic diesel driven conservatively will achieve between 40 and 44 mpg, and a manual between 42 and 48 mpg. The most you can reasonably expect to achieve is low to mid 50s and that is a manual car cruise enabled, driven at 60MPH without traffic, and automatics driven with the same conditions 46mpg at a push. Anyway if you want to make yourself feel good about fuel consumption, reset the MPG meter while travelling downhill and tickle the throttle, you might see an impressive figure then. 60 MPG may be seen as an instantaneous figure, but it is not a realistic one Brian

10th December 2018, 09:02	#20
bendrick Gets stuck in Ex CDT Auto Join Date: Oct 2017 Location: Barry Posts: 655 Thanks: 76 Thanked 266 Times in 155 Posts	Rather sadly just out of a fixation with MPG figures I used to measure brim to brim continuously my previous manual CDT saloon which I had for three years it was remarkably consistent. Mainly urban (mixed with a couple of bypasses around the area) 45 MPG smack on every tank Mainly motorway/dual carriage driving on longer distances 54/55 MPG smack on every time. With the CDT Auto saloon that I bought a year ago. Mainly urban (mixed with the occasional bypass around the area) 36/37 MPG Long runs on A roads ( about 4 x 400 mile round trips up to North Wales ) no motorway stretches and passing through the outskirts of a number of small towns and through villages including the bottleneck that is Hereford. 46/47 MPG every single time. I not long ago had a 4 wheel alignment done on the car after replacing all the rear arms and both rear dampers and though no doubt due to the old placebo effect I have to confess that when driving about I do repeatedly catch myself thinking that the car is moving incredibly freely under it's own momentum. So whether the alignment has really made such a difference or whether it's just my mind subconsciously wishing it has I don't know. Unfortunately because I'm still trying to pay off for all the work and parts I haven't been fully filling my tank when running low so haven't been able to assess if any difference has been made to MPG figures after the work and 4 wheel alignment, I'll report back when I start my brim to brim working outs again in the new year. But best of luck to any others who consistently get better figures out of their vehicles.