What will your servicing plan be, Mike? Will you be taking the car out for a good high-speed blast when you don't have a pupil? Best Regards....

is not the normal run-in process 'no prolonged use above XXXrpm'. there are also several different theories on how best to treat a new engine from kid gloves to full power. i'll have to balance to engines use and revs between lessons, so if that means a blast up a dual carriageway then so be it.

Having used shell V Power for a few tankfuls and getting good results I was disappointed to see my last fill up back down to 47 mpg. I filled up at my local Tesco yesterday with their Super unleaded. Not sure if it will improve the MPG but I know the car flew down the road like a rocket. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/grin.gif)
The way I work out my MPG is like this. Fill up tank to brim and reset trip meter. Record millage to next fill up be it either half a tank or what ever. Record amount of liters that you fill up with. Divide this by 4.546 or times it by 0.22 (pretty much same result). This gives you the amount of gallons you have filled up with. Then divide total millage by amount of gallons. This gives you your average MPG. These are based on UK figures and gallons. This works pretty well for me. Just checked my my figures against one of the sites posted earlier. Exactly the same result.

This post has been edited by talkalot: Aug 6 2009, 05:42 PM

I don´t mean to be a smart*ss (IMG:style_emoticons/default/unsure.gif) , but if you are really interested in the MPG of your car, I wouldn´t rely on the cars trip meter, rather use a GSP to get a correct travel distance and calculate that - or compare to the trip meter reading. Since very few spedometers are correct, 5-10 % off is not unusual, the same is probably the case for trip meters.

Since I have wider tyres, aircon on, extra amplifier cranking and a towbar (detachable) to occasionally tow stuff, I haven´t bothered to calculate the MPG. But I´m happy, since I pay a lot less for gas than for my old Santa Fe...and I think that the real economy saver is the total quality of the car and low costs for maintenance, insurance and taxes. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)
/Lars

This post has been edited by Lars: Aug 7 2009, 07:37 AM

....and whether you fill up to the first click of the pump, or to the top of the neck, always fill to the same level......

Lars

Never considered the trip meter could be wrong so checked it against my Garmin nuvi 200w satnav.

Found a 2% difference between the two. The satnav read 204.3 miles against the trips 200 miles.

The satnav also shows that the speedo overreads by about 7% so where it say reads 56mph the speedo shows 60mph.

Will try and check it against the distance posts on the M25 next week when I go and see my daughter.

MPG over the first 1110 miles has been 50.42 (or maybe 51.5 if the trip is wrong and the satnav correct). Not bad but want it to be better as I do not use it in town so much.

I do agree with you however as it is the overall package that matters not just the mpg.

After nearly 4500km, I took the car for a 400km outing. 3 on board, total load appx 200kg. All open road, temp 32ºC and airco on. Barely made 36mpg. Delighted with every aspect of the car but its consumption.

Excellent arithmetic!

IMHO 2% disagreement in odometer (aka tripmeter) compared to satnav is quite normal. In fact the odometer can be considered very accurate. However, the speedo mismatch is a bit disturbing. The primary sources of errors in tripmeter and speedo are (i) change in tire diameter with load, air pressure, tire dimension tolerances etc. (ii) tire-road slip, typically 2% to 4%, increases with higher speed and acceleration. More slip means speedo will show more.
If tire diameter is less, the tripmeter should read less than the satnav, at the same time, the speedo should also read less by the same factor. Granted that satnav speed is less accurate than the satnav position. The error due to tire slip cannot be this much (2% +7%). Awaiting your distance post check.
Cheers.

Haven't checked the trip meter against the sat nav but I get the same results on the speedo and mines a Navman. I think the satnav is correct as I've always believed that speedo's show a faster speed than what you doing otherwise there would be lots of people suing the speedo manufacturers over speeding tickets !! Also on my commute I pass through a couple of speed traps that display your speed and they always match the satnav not the speedo.

My i10 has just had it's first service (rolled round to 10000 miles as I entered the garage !) after 10 months. I've averaged 49.96 MPG over the 10 months. Not bad but less than what I was expecting.

I drove a Daewoo matiz (2000 x reg) for 8 years from new which has a extra urban figure of 54.3 mpg. I regularly got 46 to 48 mpg driving without thinking about getting the best mpg out of it. The last 6 months of having it I tried different driving techniques and got 50 to 52 mpg with ease.

So when I got the i10 I expected to get a lot better than I am doing considering how well I did with the Matiz. My commute run is 21.5 miles (43 round trip). First 5 miles takes anything upto 20 minutes than after that I have 3 miles at 40 to 50 mph then a run of 12 miles at 70 mph and the rest at 40 to 50 again.

When I realised I wasn't getting the mpg I was expecting I had the car checked over by the dealer who found nothing wrong and then I started experimenting with my speed on the one section I could, first slowing down to first 65mph and then to 60 mph (didn't enjoy being a mobile chicane !!). Both of these produced worse mpg than driving at 70 mph !! so I now stick to 70 (speedo not satnav).

Last three tank fulls I've averaged 53 mpg so it's getting better but it's the school holidays and the traffic on the first part of the commute is a lot better.

Overall I love the car but the MPG is not what I was expecting.

Sorry for rambling on !!!!

Dave

Many thanks for your comments.

Well the distance posts on the M25 appear to show the Satnav is correct and the speedo is in fact around 2% out (under reading)

Over a distance of 54 Kilometres the car speedo read 32.9 miles.

54K divided by 1.6093 equals 33.555 miles

32.9 divided by 33.555 equals 98.05%

So my MPG is a little better than I thought.

Trouble is I may have now found myself a new hobby and may start checking other peoples cars.

Car speedometers are allowed up to a 10% innaccuracy though I think this may be only in the over-read direction, don't think they should under-read. Main reasons for it are - different wheels, same car ships with a variety of wheel and tyre sizes which effect the speedometer and odometers accuracy, manufacturers don't bother adjusting them for the different wheels and tyres. An overread obviously also has a PR benefit making people think they're going faster than they are, oh and it can be considered a safety feature as well, reducing speeding. A lot of people who say they're doing 80mph.. are really doing 72mph.

Once you factor in a 10% over-read with police guidelines on setting speed cameras (10% +2/3mph, though they aren't bound by this) you end up with a fairly large margin to work with.

Hi all
I got my i10 three weeks ago, first trip was on A roads, Cannock to Rutland and back, round trip of 160 miles with a fuel consumption of 51mpg on petrol. My car is now converted to LPG and now gets 40 mpg on LPG on same trip at 35 pence litre.
£1500 to convert
160 miles used 18 litres at 35pence = £6.30
630pence / 105 pence for 1 litre of petrol = 6 litre of petrol
6 litre = 6*.22 = 1.32 gallons

160 / 1.32 = 121 mpg

First time to Rutland cost £15 on petrol at 51 mpg, on gas at 40 mpg cost £6.30 on LPG, got the LPG fuel at 2000 litre at 35 pence now 40pence at the moment but still have 1960 litres to use or get some more when price is low.

Great car, Best in class for Mpg and power with 450 kgs for towing. Got £2000 for my LPG Volvo 740 estate, not quite the same drive but love the low cost for touring France.
Got this car to tow around my Musto skiff.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rfrbyNJ8hbQ Not me in film.

Very pleased with the car on all counts. Will get back the £1500 at
160 = £15- 6.30 = £8.7
(1500 /8.7)*160= 27586 miles

Got my money back on my LPG Grand Vitara in 12 months now 2 years old. 22 mpg on gas around town and 27 on the run,
normal mpg petrol, for gas (*.8) = mpg, and very slight loss of power.

160 miles = 27 litres of gas x .35 pence = £9.45 for Grand Vitara so not happy with the mpg of the i10 so far, I still love the car but the mpg for a 1248 engine is too good to be true. I would still buy the car but may have gone for a 1400 engine for more power as the mpg for this car looks like a pipe dream.

I have Vauxhall agila that should do 55 mpg on the run official figures and it gets 56 on this run. This agila is so efficient that in the winter with the heaters on full, the thermostat does not open and the temperature will not go to normal, all the wasted heat is being used to warm the inside of the car.

If the I-10 did 65 on the run the same would be the case if not worse unless you give it some stick?

As for the speedo 60 on the car = 57 on the gps
100 miles on the car = 102 on the gps, distance traveled that is, not speed.
GPS is within 2 feet between 27 km of motorway markerposts that are 100m apart and number in km.



Chris

This post has been edited by wrighty: Aug 19 2009, 04:42 PM

Still hoping to learn what other owners of automatic i10s are getting.

Ours has now reached 5000kms. The last 2 fills showed consumptions of 38 mpg and 37 mpg. We do have the airco on but most of these litres were used on open roads rather than in town.

I have tried switching the airco on and off while driving and note no change in engine note or road performance, so I find it hard to believe that the additional load is very significant.

Auto i10 owners, please share your experiences.

Well, the opportunity to check another car came up earlier than I would have liked (see thread Disaster).

I have been given a Nissan Micra while my i10 is being repaired and I have found out that the trip meter reads 106 miles when my satnav says I have done 100 miles. So 6% out.

That along with my i10 which under reads by 2% means a difference of 8% between the two cars.

So all those people, including me who have been so confident about how good our bad the mpg of a particular car was will have to consider more than the way they drive and the road conditions. An accurate check of the speedo trip meter needs to be done first.

A mpg of the micra of say 45 would in fact be true 42.45 and for my i10 a mpg of 45 would be true 45.9 an overall difference of 3.45.

I wonder how the car magazines calculate the mpg of the cars they test?

I have done about 1500 miles in an i10 Classic. It takes 280 miles before the fuel low light goes on - whatever sort of driving I am doing. I make that about 46 mpg or 6.3l/100km. I am driving alone with no air-con. I am hoping mileage will improve as the engine gets run in.

but then again, GPS sensors will only give your position to within 5m.

so not totally accuracte.

as far as mpg's are concerned i only use this as a comparison between cars. and a new engine will take time to get to its best performance.

Hi all
1000 mile now, still on hyundai oil.
Mpg average on LPG 40 MPG = divide by .8 = 50mpg if on petrol ( gas mpg is 1/5 less at worst?)
Best 43 mpg on Gas/ LPG = 53 on petrol
Worst 37 on gas/LPG = 46 ON Petol

chris

How much space does the LPG tank take? Have you got a picture that you can share? Cheers.....

Has nobody else bought an automatic version of this splendid little car?

I'm beginning to feel isolated and would soooo like to learn of auto consumption figures.

Sorry to hear about your dissapointing mpg , i am disabled and drive an auto cavalier 1.8 which i am getting about 30 mpg
so when i decided to downsize to a smaller more economical car and chose the i10 i too wanted the automatic but every review i read
claimed that the performance and mpg were severely compromised ,something to do with an old obsolete mechanical gearbox i think
apparently there are more modern types of auto box that give better fuel economy and performance for small engines but alas not yet
fitted to the i10 so like many others it seems went for the manual