Redbook Fuel Consumption figures

[spetz]

Hi guys,

Does anyone know anything about the accuracy of the stated fuel consumption figures on car sites like Redbook?
I assume they are just factory claims, but wondering how accurate they are in comparative terms?

For example, if car A is claim at 8L/100km and Car B at 10L/100km, would it be safe to say given the same driving conditions car B would use 25% more fuel than Car A?

The reason I ask is because I am looking at some figures, and a car may have a 3.5L V6 and it's stated that it only uses 0.5L more per 100km than another which has a 2L 4 cylinder.

[curtis265]

The figures are the results of standardised tests which are supposed to represent realistic driving habits (however they usually aren't really that accurate) They are not conducted by the manufacturer.

Yes, you can use them for comparison,but u can't say that car B uses 25% more than A because it all comes down to your driving habits

[dougie_504]

Also depends on the condition of the engine do its hard to say, but if the difference is only 0.5l I wouldn't care TBH. Just get the car you want - accord?

[spetz]

The thing is I am looking at consumption figures and some cars are so close that I don't know if I should take any note.
For example, a 3.5L Verada has .5 or so difference to a 1.8 Mazda 323 Astina hatch. This seems unrealistic.

I am considering many cars but fuel consumption is a priority and without concrete data it is hard to decide.
At the moment the list consists of:
03 Verada
03 Euro
E46 BMW
The Verada is appealing because it is big, comfortable, has lots of power, parts are cheap and available, but the 3.5L may be thirsty.

[spetz]

The thing is I am looking at consumption figures and some cars are so close that I don't know if I should take any note.
For example, a 3.5L Verada has .5 or so difference to a 1.8 Mazda 323 Astina hatch. This seems unrealistic.

I am considering many cars but fuel consumption is a priority and without concrete data it is hard to decide.
At the moment the list consists of:
03 Verada
03 Euro
E46 BMW
The Verada is appealing because it is big, comfortable, has lots of power, parts are cheap and available, but the 3.5L may be thirsty.

[1900-hustler]

The consumption figures are based on a mix of highway and city driving (often exaggerated as noted above).
You have to ask yourself where will you be driving the car MOST of the time.
Alot of us do drive in traffic (in sydney) and do make short trips, say from home to the local shops, friends place, gym etc.

Therefore these figures are slightly skewed because we know that traffic, short frequent trips etc will result in higher fuel consumption.

And FYI a verada can be very thirsty - my uncle had one and out of his tank he would go between 550 and 650 on 70L tank - so thats around 12.7L/100km based on a range of 550km

[dougie_504]

Also factor in the cost of maintaining the car. The Nissan parts might be cheaper than any European car etc. What's more reliable?

[curtis265]

my mate's got a 3.5 vs magna using about 15L/100. Just so you know.

[DakDak]

My gf bros evo fuel consumption its like 16lper100km in suburban traffic stock. Compared to the 12.5l stated on red book

[spetz]

The car will be driven in Canberra where traffic isn't that bad and it is very normal to drive at 80km/h.
From what I can gather from talking to a few owners, if I am careful on the throttle 10-11L/100km isn't unreasonable for a Verada.
I am also thinking between the 2.3L 2002 Accord in manual, but just thinking how much less can it use? If it is just 1-2L/100km then maybe the extra torque of the Verada may be useful at times when I want to tow, or take long trips interstate.

From research it seems the E46 BMW might be somewhat unreliable

[stndrd]

Would not waste your time with a Magna/Verada. Noisy lifters, water pumps seizing, auto's packing up due to clutch pack failure (and this is with a full service history, single owner who is an older gentleman). If you are wanting to tow & get good mileage, go buy a GU 3.0L turbo diesel patrol. You can can get a combined total of between 800-1000km (if doing highway driving, you should get easy 1200km as a close friend made it from melbourne to sydney without re-filling & still had majority of his sub tank left) when using both main & sub tanks. Also as they are built tuff as, there isn't much that goes wrong on them.

[spetz]

I want the option of towing, but do not need it as such.
An offroader is a definite no, I want something smooth, soft, silent and comfortable.
With the Verada yes the 4 speed auto is unreliable (relatively) but it seems the 5 speed is fine, which is what I would be aiming for. The biggest concern is fuel costs but the car itself is cheaper than the other cars I am considering (except the CG Accord).

[integraR]

fuel consumption is based when the car is basically new or near new

overtime cars age and become less efficiency due to factors such as wear and tear etc.

also as stated above the figures are also exaggerated

[marquee]

Figures are also from the manufacturer.

And manufacturers use it as a marketing point and like to exhagerate it