Peugeot 208 world record

[Dreijers]

maybe have been here and havenot spotted, but hdi FTW!
http://www.worldcarfans.com/115050493202...ion-record

I know that this is under strict control, and no traffic, but more than 1k miles on a single tank seems impressive.
and in real life even peugeot 5008 with 1.6 hdi on highway doing 65mph is 53 mpg.

[Dum-Dum]

That's pretty impressive, that's lands end to john o groats and back practically.

[bashbarnard]

That is impressive. Still wouldn't have one though. Lol.

[Piggy]

that is good.
Its not "real world" figures but more accurate than on a test bed where they usually come up with their figures

[kee616]

Not half bad

[RetroPug]

That is very impressive.

Yes, it is test conditions, but you can attempt to replicate the conditions under which they got this record in your everyday driving and it will make a massive difference.
I've averaged over 69mpg in the fiesta with a much older 1.6 HDI by backing off so I come to a stop less and simply just slow down a bit when a car has stopped ahead, coasting down if I do have to stop and reducing speed on the motorway to a more efficient one.

[Dum-Dum]

That is very impressive.

Yes, it is test conditions, but you can attempt to replicate the conditions under which they got this record in your everyday driving and it will make a massive difference.
I've averaged over 69mpg in the fiesta with a much older 1.6 HDI by backing off so I come to a stop less and simply just slow down a bit when a car has stopped ahead, coasting down if I do have to stop and reducing speed on the motorway to a more efficient one.

^^^ Yeah my 106 with it's TUD5 designed in the 80s does over 60mpg average and apparently they'll do over 80mpg with someone sensible at the wheel.

[bashbarnard]

I cant say I saw 80mpg out of mine but on a run down south at 60 I averaged 77. Highest I've ever gotm

[procta]

toms306 will blow his load!

[Piggy]

yeah the wife got 78mpg in her 106nad one week

[r3k1355]

I think the best record set by the 208 was the record at Pikes Peak they set.

https://youtu.be/Y20CLumT2Sg

[Dum-Dum]

^^^ What he said.

That car is massive trouser explosions.

[Toms306]

Seems like a pointless test tbh, I bet it doesn't top 70mpg tank average in real world driving.

[RetroPug]

Seems like a pointless test tbh, I bet it doesn't top 70mpg tank average in real world driving.

I bet it is capable of that given that I'm pushing closer and closer to an all-time average of 70mpg in a much older version of the engine.

[Niall]

Seems like a pointless test tbh, I bet it doesn't top 70mpg tank average in real world driving.

I bet it does. You look at how most manufacturers claim 70-80mpg these days out of their eco busses and thats in circumstances like this. This has done well over 100 so even under normal conditions i reckon it would do 70. Even if it doesn't, its still VERY impressive and shows we are well in the right direction!

[Dum-Dum]

Yeah it is amazing, the more people who buy economical dailys the more fuel there is left for us to burn in fast cars.

[Toms306]

You mean old inefficient cars Dum....there are plenty of modern fast cars that are also reasonably economical.

We'll see when people buy them 208s I guess, I will be very surprised if they get much above 70mpg in the real world...

[toseland]

You mean old inefficient cars Dum....there are plenty of modern fast cars that are also reasonably economical.

We'll see when people buy them 208s I guess, I will be very surprised if they get much above 70mpg in the real world...

Still not economical enough for you toms! 

[RetroPug]

Seems like a pointless test tbh, I bet it doesn't top 70mpg tank average in real world driving.

Another point actually, name another possible test that would actually make it possible to make objective comparisons? As in, a test that a manufacturer could carry out to see how their powertrain is performing. Simply getting a large number of people to "just drive the car" doesn't give you correlated nor consistent results.

[Toms306]

You mean old inefficient cars Dum....there are plenty of modern fast cars that are also reasonably economical.

We'll see when people buy them 208s I guess, I will be very surprised if they get much above 70mpg in the real world...

Still not economical enough for you toms! 

Nothing ever will be.

Seems like a pointless test tbh, I bet it doesn't top 70mpg tank average in real world driving.

Another point actually, name another possible test that would actually make it possible to make objective comparisons? As in, a test that a manufacturer could carry out to see how their powertrain is performing. Simply getting a large number of people to "just drive the car" doesn't give you correlated nor consistent results.

Why not? Given a large enough group and several tanks of fuel it would work well. I bet if we did a poll on here of daily driver HDi's like that most would be 50-55mpg. Maybe ~10% with a lead foot and town driving would be below, maybe ~10% would be above. That's a much more useful test imo, even if it is a slightly less accurate.

MPG doesn't vary as much as people say, I haven't got above 50mph so far on this tank, used about half in over a month and am no better off than when I was doing loads of miles at 80mph because it's still well mixed... The only thing that I can see making a difference is people that do a massive commute say once a month and then solely town the rest of the time. My mixed has been the same over the tank give or take 1mpg for 6 months now...

[RetroPug]

You mean old inefficient cars Dum....there are plenty of modern fast cars that are also reasonably economical.

We'll see when people buy them 208s I guess, I will be very surprised if they get much above 70mpg in the real world...

Still not economical enough for you toms! 

Nothing ever will be.

Seems like a pointless test tbh, I bet it doesn't top 70mpg tank average in real world driving.

Another point actually, name another possible test that would actually make it possible to make objective comparisons? As in, a test that a manufacturer could carry out to see how their powertrain is performing. Simply getting a large number of people to "just drive the car" doesn't give you correlated nor consistent results.

Why not?  Given a large enough group and several tanks of fuel it would work well.  I bet if we did a poll on here of daily driver HDi's like that most would be 50-55mpg.  Maybe ~10% with a lead foot and town driving would be below, maybe ~10% would be above.  That's a much more useful test imo, even if it is a slightly less accurate.

MPG doesn't vary as much as people say, I haven't got above 50mph so far on this tank, used about half in over a month and am no better off than when I was doing loads of miles at 80mph because it's still well mixed...  The only thing that I can see making a difference is people that do a massive commute say once a month and then solely town the rest of the time.  My mixed has been the same over the tank give or take 1mpg for 6 months now...

Because if you did the same test in Sheffield, the same test in London and the same test in cornwall you'd get vastly different results due to different mixes of driving, different hills, etc. etc. You'd get different results depending on the season.

If you did that test, then changed something on the ECU or something else and then tested again, you wouldn't know whether the variance in MPG was due to your change on the vehicle or the fact that the test was 3 weeks later and the weather was different and you used a different group of drivers and it was a different batch of fuel from the refinery (all of which do make a difference).

Using professional drivers giving the exact same inputs to the car using the same batch of fuel under the same environmental conditions is pretty much the only way to get useful results (useful for the manufacturer), and even then it is still very difficult to get good, comparable results. As a marketing tool it is better to quote higher figures as well.

I'm not disagreeing with you entirely, if I bought a new car I'd love to have overall statistics from a large sample size of 'normal' drivers. It would be great information for the consumer. I'm just saying that the results of such tests, which would be very expensive to carry out, are not useful to a manufacturer in my opinion, which is why they don't really do them as far as I know. I work in vehicle testing.

[Toms306]

But as I've proved, weather, season etc doesn't really make a difference to an overall tank average. Yes if you drive in torrential rain/floods/wind for 10 miles and check the mpg it'll be less than if you did the same 10 miles on a clear day, but over a 600 mile tank of mixed weather and roads and traffic it evens out. The small differences really aren't noticeable on that large scale. Fuel also doesn't make a difference. Or tyre pressures which I must admit surprised me. Or even chucking a toolbox and various stuff in the boot. I've always checked MPG but never recorded it before like I have with the Focus, and been amazed how it's so nearly the same regardless of any external factors! There will be exceptions as a I said, someone that does solely town driving for example, but their result is still useful...for others that do solely town driving.

I get the same MPG on the Focus in the 'flat counties' as a guy in Scotland...and as most other people on that forum.

I see your point that there are too many variables for it to be a really accurate test...but who cares? It's more pointless doing a test where no-one can replicate it.

[Dum-Dum]

You mean old inefficient cars Dum....there are plenty of modern fast cars that are also reasonably economical.

They might be more economical to run but they aren't more economical to buy.

[bashbarnard]

You mean old inefficient cars Dum....there are plenty of modern fast cars that are also reasonably economical.

They might be more economical to run but they aren't more economical to buy.

Im with dum on this. Cheap as chips motoring old pugs are. Even if you take into account the big tax its still far out weighs buying a modern car. Also its more eco friendly to run an old car. Fact!

[kee616]

i run used veg from work, so basically zero fuel costs bar a few liters of petrol a tank!
cant do that with a modern engine!

[RetroPug]

But as I've proved, weather, season etc doesn't really make a difference to an overall tank average.  Yes if you drive in torrential rain/floods/wind for 10 miles and check the mpg it'll be less than if you did the same 10 miles on a clear day, but over a 600 mile tank of mixed weather and roads and traffic it evens out.  The small differences really aren't noticeable on that large scale.  Fuel also doesn't make a difference.  Or tyre pressures which I must admit surprised me.  Or even chucking a toolbox and various stuff in the boot.  I've always checked MPG but never recorded it before like I have with the Focus, and been amazed how it's so nearly the same regardless of any external factors!  There will be exceptions as a I said, someone that does solely town driving for example, but their result is still useful...for others that do solely town driving.

I get the same MPG on the Focus in the 'flat counties' as a guy in Scotland...and as most other people on that forum.

I see your point that there are too many variables for it to be a really accurate test...but who cares?  It's more pointless doing a test where no-one can replicate it.

That's indicated MPG which isn't necessarily accurate.
 
None of those seem to make a difference when you drive a whole tank, but if the MPG did vary and there were several variables you wouldn't know which had caused it.

I'm not trying to say real-world MPG is a bad or useless measure, I'm saying it isn't very useful for a manufacturer when developing a vehicle, and for marketing purposes I think they'd also rather have a very high number.

[Toms306]

It's not indicated mpg at all, some of us actually work it out!! The indicated MPG is up to + or - 2, it's very rarely bang on in the Focus I find. Was more accurate in the Golf, less accurate in the Vectra, interestingly.

Marketting purposes may like high numbers...but it's pointless when people KNOW the numbers will be wrong now... No-one believes their stated MPG figures any more. I don't even bother looking at them now, much more accurate to ask on a forum and get a rough average...

[RetroPug]

It's not indicated mpg at all, some of us actually work it out!! The indicated MPG is up to + or - 2, it's very rarely bang on in the Focus I find.  Was more accurate in the Golf, less accurate in the Vectra, interestingly.

Marketting purposes may like high numbers...but it's pointless when people KNOW the numbers will be wrong now...  No-one believes their stated MPG figures any more.  I don't even bother looking at them now, much more accurate to ask on a forum and get a rough average...

Yes but if everyone assumes the numbers are way too high and are wrong and you put that it does 70mpg because it genuinely does that real-world everyone will assume it does 55.

The websites that average all the owners' mpg are very helpful as well.

[Toms306]

Yes but if everyone assumes the numbers are way too high and are wrong and you put that it does 70mpg because it genuinely does that real-world everyone will assume it does 55.

That is a very good point tbh, it really shouldn't be like that though, truth/honesty should prevail.

[RetroPug]

Yes but if everyone assumes the numbers are way too high and are wrong and you put that it does 70mpg because it genuinely does that real-world everyone will assume it does 55.

That is a very good point tbh, it really shouldn't be like that though, truth/honesty should prevail.

Honesty and selling things are rarely encountered together unfortunately!