Fuel Economy

(05-05-2012 11:25pm)IvorRedOne Wrote:  15 years on and I am driving the latest in technology and cannot get 40MPG.

That's the problem - there's no new technology under the bonnet.

I agree, a Ford engine and Toyota gearbox. Nothing wrong with either except that BMW are really stealing a march with their latest engines.

(06-05-2012 10:30am)mark_n Wrote:  I agree, a Ford engine and Toyota gearbox. Nothing wrong with either except that BMW are really stealing a march with their latest engines.

Or a BMW 3.0 litre diesel engine... Would work wonders for the mpg conscious minded.

Land Rover used the BMW diesels in the L322 Range Rovers from 2002 until 2006 - this was the 3.0 straight 6 and it was a truly awful engine for a luxury car - slow to accelerate, rattly at all revs and wheezy, it was definitely a step backward after the very nice TD4 2.0ltr BMW engine fitted to the Freelander1. The Ford/PSA 2.7V6 was so much better than that straight 6 too. Speculation was that because BMW was about to launch the X5 at the time the FFRR got a lower tune and rough engine that Ford had committed to buy a couple of hundred thousand of after taking Land Rover off BMW's hands in 2002 while the X5 got the more powerful and better running version. On the basis of that engine I have never brought another BMW powered car as the motor was so awful and honestly I haven't been in a recent BMW that has proved to me that even the more recent engines are any quieter or smoother.

Personally, I would rather push my Evoque than drive any BMW. I too have had the odd BMW and was never impressed. Either from the Engine to the Interior. Whilst waiting for my Evoque I was enjoying driving my wife's X-Type Sport Estate. Super fuel economy and quick response. But since driving the Evoque I no longer have the desire to drive her car. Everything about the Evoque (except the fuel) Just oooooozes with class. Off out again later to see If I can improve on the 38 MPG I got yesterday along with enjoying the ride and the looks you get. Not many of these over here in Northen Ireland.

Another post about fuel economy . Nobody honestly believed that their evoque would match the claimed figures surely. LR are not the only manufacturer to have poor real life figures, the Kia rio was voted the worst and Peugeots 3008 diesel/electric hybrid also faired poorly.

First run this weekend in the td4 manaul pure, about 80 miles each way, guess what??



35 MPG!!! crap i think really.

Read it and weep. 48.9mpg only ever managed it once, mainly because my driving style isn't very Eco friendly. The bus company I work for have installed the green road system to encourage fuel efficient driving by using a traffic light system, apparently it's working. I tried the same driving style in the Evoque hence the above figure.

PS: The car has since been dusted.

(06-05-2012 01:59pm)J77 Wrote:  Another post about fuel economy . Nobody honestly believed that their evoque would match the claimed figures surely. LR are not the only manufacturer to have poor real life figures, the Kia rio was voted the worst and Peugeots 3008 diesel/electric hybrid also faired poorly.

I for one believed the figures. I had no reason to dispell the figures given to me by Volvo or Jaguar (previous vehicles) They were fairly accurate. I do think someones head should roll at LR though. It's an absolute disgrace that they can quote the figures they do and get away with their false advertising. I chose my SD4 over the Volvo XC60 due to the better fuel economy spec. A friend of mine who has the XC60 is claiming 48 MPG Average so not really impressed with LR PR machine.

Can someone lock this thread, same S**t different Day!! There are pages and pages of this crap on another equally Boring thread!!