Fuel For Thought!! - The Blogging Persons Small Car

Thursday, August 31, 2006

Picanto News: Fuel For Thought!!

Readers regularly email us regarding the fuel economy on their Picanto's. Some are disappointed with the fuel return, others are extremely suprised how frugal their Picanto petrols can be.

One reader in particular points out that the latest Whatcar research into fuel economy, should be enough to convince Kia to sit up and produce a Diesel Picanto variant for UK shores. While we totally agree the Diesel Picanto should be available in RHD (Right Hand Drive) in the UK, we doubt it'll ever happen.

So is the Picanto petrol really that bad on fuel? Can a vehicle ever match it's official fuel economy claims? It depends on who you talk to, but a quick scan at the chart reveals the Picanto 1.1 is better than the Nissan Micra 1.2SE, Fiat Panda 1.2, Ford Fiesta LX, Renault Clio 1.4, Toyota Yaris 1.3, VW Polo 1.2, Vauxhall Agila, Vauxhall Corsa Easytronic and a smidgen off the Corsa 1.0. That's pretty much everything in it's class.

The report, carried out by Peter de Nayer, a former AA senior research engineer who invented the motoring organisation's own fuel economy tests in the 1980s, suggested that both the Kia Picanto 1.1 and it's bigger stablemate, the Rio 1.5 CRDi, struggled to match their manufacturers' claims and were both 11.6mpg less efficient than claimed. The Picanto only achieving 46.0 mpg.

The tests were carried out by inserting a special meter in the fuel line to measure the precise amount of fuel used over a series of pre-determined road routes used in identical conditions.

While were not doubting this methodology, one wonders how the Government produce their own set of 'official figures' and why such a differential. Answers on a postcard please!!

So it's all subjective really. What is important however, is the opinions of what the real drivers say, those who actually own the cars, as conditions vary from one destination to the other. What we can't take seriously is the Whatcar 'top tips' on how to achieve 'real world' fuel figures and save ourselves a fortune on fuel bills.

Quite clearly today's top motoring experts don't live in the 'real world', or venture out on to todays roads if they seriously suggest you:

travel off-peak, avoiding the busiest, most congested times and you'll use less fuel". What if you work?
Switch off. If you're stuck in a traffic jam, turn the engine off so it's not using fuel needlessly. Are they being serious?
Avoid small fill-ups. A small amount of petrol evaporates when the fuel cap is removed. Are we really reading this?

What about these suggestions:

Boycott greedy fuel stations for a while, pedal or walk to work if possible, causing panic amongst the government and fuel moguls, eventually forcing fuel prices down.
Kia, build us a RHD Diesel Picanto so we can do 68.0 mpg or not!!

7 Comments:

Interesting article!!

Although i'm not quite sure what the survey set out to prove. Clearly they feel there's a discrepancy between what the Government official fuel consumption figures say and what Whatcar say. But then this differs from driver to driver anyway.

So who do we believe? Surely the Manufacturers fuel consumption figures must have been achieved, otherwise they wouldn't be able to claim them...would they?

I think the real motivation behind this survey is to stir up controversy in a vain hope fuel prices will come down. But it's like you say, the only way fuel prices will come down is when people stop paying over the odds for it.

So i think Whatcar would be far better using it's influence to get people to vote with their feet or in this case, their wheels.

At almost £1 a litre country wide, we clearly need to do something.

By Anonymous, at September 01, 2006 12:44 PM
I have carefully logged all fuel bought for our Picanto LX Automatic since new. Almost 6,000 miles and the figure is 36.1 mpg. This is some 20% off the official figures and in accord with my expectations.

The way the official figures are arrived at means achieving them in real conditions is almost impossible.

My experience with other cars indicates taking 20% off the official figures (for petrol cars) will provide a very reasonable guide to what the average user can expect to achieve.

By Tony Ellis, at September 02, 2006 12:18 PM
I drive a 2005 (November) 1.0 GS & to date i have covered 13,500 miles. The best mpg i ever got out of it was 51 mpg, but normally i get about 45mpg.

The problem i have is, i have to get the tank as full as possible, i.e overflowing so that i can do the mileage i need. I do 76 miles a day, so i get 4 days. The car is great & is loosening up nicely.

By Simon Mayer, at October 03, 2006 7:36 PM
My 1.1 LX auto returns on average around 28 mpg. That's taking into account short runs to-from work in a city. Yes I drive with a light
right foot and yes, I do turn the engine off at long phased lights (its not a difficult habit to adopt).

It does seem odd that once the momentum is there the car can travel for some distance without the need to depress the gas pedal. However, the engine needs quite some stirring before the car picks up road speed and can account for the extra petrol being burnt just to get the vehicle
catching up with cars that have moved on more briskly.

So I guess the engine is somewhat lacking in low down torque below the 2000 rpm mark. A small cc/ low torque engine coupled with an auto box is not the best recipe for fuel economy. Although I have to say that the convenience of not having to change gear (and being in more control of the car) out weighs any fuel penalty.

If Kia were to bring out a rhd Diesel, and if it were an auto, that' be the best combination of all.

Still theres more chance of North and South Korea kissing and making up than the Diesel (Picanto) ever making these shores.

By Lee Onslow, at October 03, 2006 7:40 PM
This post has been removed by a blog administrator.

By Simon Mayer, at October 07, 2006 9:08 AM
I've had my 1.0s for a year, and average 55-58mpg (once managed 61mpg!).
My 40 mile a day commute is on mainly quiet B roads, and very little congestion, and I'm very gentle on the throttle and break.
So good fuel economy is possible, but lots of factors have to be in your favour.
Andrew M.

By Anonymous, at October 19, 2006 5:31 PM
I've filled up my LS twice from new and on the first oaccasion got 44mpg. The second tankfull produced 51 mpg. I don't drive like a granny, nor do I drive like Lewis Hamilton but I do try to vary my driving 'style' as much as possible. Firstly because the little beast is being'run in' and secondly I want to get a good idea how it performs over a range of conditions. I love it to bits so far. Yes, it does appear to have a 'power band'. Between 2.8 and 3.8 rpm X 1000 seems most economical. Haven't used (needed) the Air con yet though.

By Anonymous, at September 22, 2007 9:27 PM