Just curious, why is there so much hate on big car fuel economy?

[Thomas11]

My brother grabbed a liberty the other week, i'm not sure of the year but it was late 2000's. Probably a 2006. 2.5L motor and has the auto.

Its a nice looking car, nice interior too, but its absolutely gutless and its not exactly what you'd call frugal.

We took it down to the NSW central cost from QLD over the week and we averaged roughly 9L/100km down the whole way. And I could not believe just how slow it is.

It really struggles in power.

I find this with alot of smaller cars, people say larger cars like a modern direct injection commodore or a 6 speed 4L falcon use heaps more fuel, but I have to wonder if its to do with perception and nothing to do with actual real world results.

Because a Falcon can easily use 9L/100km if you drive it nicely, any car with a decent sized 4 pot is going to use close to that, ie a lancer, subaru etc. While they usually have no power to go with it.

I just don't get the hate on big car fuel economy?

[xisled]

It's funny, I use my BA GT as a daily and find 6 cylinders and 4 cylinders have similar power. I can notice the difference but not much.

[EA30TH]

Originally Posted by xisled

It's funny, I use my BA GT as a daily and find 6 cylinders and 4 cylinders have similar power. I can notice the difference but not much.

???Really??? If that's the case I would suggest you do a compression check on the engine. The BA had problems with the valve seats and compression suffers. My BA had three cylinders down badly and Ford rebuilt the heads. Massive difference when I got it back.

[pmacc]

On the highway with the tall 5th and 6th gears and the nice low down torque, the larger cars are naturally gonna be better on fuel but the real world doesnt understand stuff like tall gearing and lazy low down torque. people see kw and engine size as a way to determine fuel usage. in the city however the small car makes more sence with its shorter gearing and smaller (maybe perky) engine

[xisled]

Originally Posted by EA30TH

???Really??? If that's the case I would suggest you do a compression check on the engine. The BA had problems with the valve seats and compression suffers. My BA had three cylinders down badly and Ford rebuilt the heads. Massive difference when I got it back.

Ah stupid Iphone. I see what I wrote looks funny.

What I should have said is. Driving a 4 and 6 cylinder is similar power these days. Was going to say something about me drivign the BA GT gets around 15l/100.

[buickman]

We have a 2010 FGxr6 and a 2011 Mazda 3 auto and around the city the 3 stays around 8.4L/100km to 8.8L/100km and on the h/way I've not seen the display on the car get below 7.9L/100km on the FG around 10-12L/100km in city but can get into the low 7'sL/100km on the H/way.

The perception with size gives a impression that a car uses alot more fuel is one issue but so is cost as the Mazda3 was $23,000 with auto drive away and the Ford $38,000 .

[Gabbs]

The thing I've noticed with a car like a falcon is if you do some nice long drives they won't use much fuel. Start throwing in some peak hour traffic or short trips and it goes up. Currently the wife manages mid 11s with the falcon which is pretty damn good for a car of that size but she doesn't get stuck in traffic.

[Lefkad]

Ye its a strange one, My falcon uses around 15.0/100km around melbourne and around 7/100km on the freeway. In comparison, my mums saab 95 which drives a similar city route uses 15.4l/100km but i think thats partly because her driving style aint great.

Im suprised you found the 2.5l gutless, would have imagined off the line it would be sweet with awd. A mate of mine has a 2.0l 2000 impreza and I know thats lighter then the liberty but he would probably beat my ba ghia I6 to 50/60km/h

[jpd80]

The mid sized vehicle segment share really hasn't changed much over the years, staying around 8%
while large cars have gone from 25% down to 6% and that lost market share has shifted over to
small cars (down sizers) or SUVs/ Dual Cab pick ups ( more utility). the one thing you will notice
with those vehicles is the significant advantage they have in fuel economy over large cars.
And forget LPG because most private buyers are not interested, fleets barely are these days.

[Mickxr8]

Boredom cars, ever tried doing a skid in one (esp an auto lol) , If it makes you all warm and fuzzy thinking your helping the planet etc good on ya .

My point ( or should I say goal ) is make the best of the ol V8 guzzlers while we can , The right foot is the judge end of the day

[flooded one]

because people winge about the price of fuel and for some reason people think large sedans a fuel guzzlers. its funny. take my AU sedan out on the highway with people that think it would chew heaps of fuel and there like. gee. its acutally good on fuel!! even city driving it isnt bad for a big car. i find its how you drive it. i find it even more funny the day i had some one tell me that falcons and commodores are fuel guzzlers yet drives a landcruiser in brisbane that never goes off road with it. brought it because he feels "safe" in it. makes alot of sense that arguement.

[xisled]

Originally Posted by Mickxr8

Boredom cars, ever tried doing a skid in one (esp an auto lol) , If it makes you all warm and fuzzy thinking your helping the planet etc good on ya .

My point ( or should I say goal ) is make the best of the ol V8 guzzlers while we can , The right foot is the judge end of the day

LOL my make brang over his Daewoo Cielo to another mates farm. He said I bet no one can make this car spin it's wheels. I was the only one to be able to, after a bit of a limit bash in park. LOL

[2002au]

My manual xr6 used 10.4 per 100 last fill up. That's excellent considering I did a lot of mixed driving (highway, city and spirited occasionally)

On the highway the best I've gotten is 8.0 per 100kms. Happy with that

[wrongwaynorris]

" Just curious, why is there so much hate on big car fuel economy? "

Because most people ( so called motoring experts and journalists included ) are stupid and ignorant .

[Streets]

This thread has been an eye-opener. I get about 17L/100km in my old car so even if I upgrade to a modern-day "gas-guzzler" it'll still be an improvement

[XB GS 351 Coupe]

Originally Posted by Thomas11

I just don't get the hate on big car fuel economy?

Because people have no idea, my modded and tuned to 400hp GT uses less fuel than my mothers Honda 4 cylinder, and our H3 uses about the same as my old XR8 even when towing a car trailer, and when driven by itself (not towing) it uses about the same as our 4 cylinder Daihatsu 4x4 and less than my mates 2 liter Hilux which I often used to drive on hunting trips, but it has at least 3x the power and 10 times the comfort

[Coyote mk3]

I find because generally smaller cars have smaller fuel tanks.
Therefore from empty to full might only cost $60,
Where as we go and put almost 70L in and it is over $100.
They just don't quite realise that most of the time they aren't going as far.

This seems to be the case with some of my friends that own smaller cars.

[mac_man_luke]

Sure there is not something wrong with it?

My mum has an 09 liberty 2.5 auto which id imagine would be very similar.
Plenty quick, gear box is a little rough but not too bad. Not that much slower than a falcon 6.

[FGII-XR6]

it's easy, tree huggers are stupid, the belive big automatically means thirsty , in reality with modern advances large cars and be good on fuel. just take a look at the EB in the falcon

[Rodge]

I agree there can be a tendancy to lump all big cars together into a single, (its big and must chew fuel), smaller is now cooler.

A modern narurally aspirated inline six Falcon is a fairly efficient vehicle for its size and is capable of getting into the 7's on the open road but OTOH can easily climb into the 13's in the city, (forced induction is obviously worse).

In a world still being ravaged by the effects of the now five year old Global Financial crisis its only natural people will look for less expensive motoring solutions. Cars like a Mondeo diesel with its 5.6 L/100 km's combined cycle (really is a large car by any objective analysis), offer a compelling alternative to traditional large cars. I'm surprised they don't sell in higher numbers.

I suspect it comes down to the perception that "small is cool" hence the reason why Mazda 3 and similar other cars sales are so strong.

[RG]

Are you guys serious? Comparing oranges with apples will always yield skewed results.

My inlaws BA (03) uses 12 odd litres around town. My Pug (also 03) uses 8, and I certainly drive a lot more spirited than them. It's still comparing apples with oranges though isn't it? The simple fact is a heavier car with a larger engine will generally use more than a lighter car with smaller engine. There are exceptions to this rule however.

As a matter of note, I'm not suprised the OP found the 2.5 lib to be slow. NA those subi boxer engines aren't much good and are thirsty compared to a "normal" configuration engine. Boost helps them a lot though.

[flooded one]

well i dont think people buy mazda 3s for fuel ecconomy. they seem too use more fuel then alot of other cars in that segment. same as the hilux

[EA30TH]

The fuel issue is relatively simple. It is a visibility thing. The biggest cost in owning any car is typically depreciation. It seldom gets spoken about because the dollars don't come up on a register or in a statement weekly. Out of sight, out of mind. But putting fuel into the car is visible every single time and people see/fell the cash going out. SoO that's what they try to address.

Human nature....

[Brazen]

*waits paitently for diesel Falcon

[Ben73]

I drove my big V8 300c from Newcastle - Sydney CBD - Newcastle on the weekend and average just over 9L/100
I also recently drove it from the Mid North Coast - Newcastle and averaged 9l/100km
I also have previously done calculations while filling up and my trip computer shows a worse consumption then I actually get. So if it was showing low 9s I was probably getting high 8s
So I am getting similar consumption to a 4 pot Subaru? I know which I would prefer to drive.

People buy small fuel efficient cars which are too small for their needs so they can save $10 a week on fuel. They then use that $10 to buy two $5 cups of coffee from a coffee shop, while they could make a coffee themselves for probably 20 cents.

[LeadFoot81]

Originally Posted by Ben73

I drove my big V8 300c from Newcastle - Sydney CBD - Newcastle on the weekend and average just over 9L/100
I also recently drove it from the Mid North Coast - Newcastle and averaged 9l/100km
I also have previously done calculations while filling up and my trip computer shows a worse consumption then I actually get. So if it was showing low 9s I was probably getting high 8s
So I am getting similar consumption to a 4 pot Subaru? I know which I would prefer to drive.

People buy small fuel efficient cars which are too small for their needs so they can save $10 a week on fuel. They then use that $10 to buy two $5 cups of coffee from a coffee shop, while they could make a coffee themselves for probably 20 cents.

Mate I love a big V8 sedan as much as the next guy, but the whole "I'm a sick c*** cos I drive a big car, and people who drive small cars are losers" bit I keep reading on these forums (from multiple members) is getting old.

Assuming your 300C could run at 9L/100km on the same route I take to work every day, my Fiesta would still be ahead by 3L/100km, in a week (600kms of travel) thats 18L of juice. At $1.55 (for premium) that's $27.90 a week, $111.60 a month, $1339.20 a year. I highly doubt you could manage 9L on the route I take however.

I bought a small fuel efficient car which is the perfect size for my needs (inside and out) and I'm saving a lot more than $10 on fuel per week. I also pay less for insurance. It does everything I need it to do AND I love driving it.

With more congestion on the roads, smaller parking spots, expensive petrol and insurance (and general cost of living) who wouldn't buy a well priced, well equipped, well designed small car that isn't that big on the outside but fairly spacious on the inside and is inexpensive to own?

I'm sure there are many who make the mistake of downgrading to the wrong car for their needs just to save money on fuel, but the vast majority of small car owners are buying cars that are more than up to the task at hand: getting one person to work and back safely, comfortably, and cheaply. If they have a well sorted chassis and are fun to drive, that's just a bonus.

And what they do with the money they save is up to them.

[buickman]

[QUOTE=
I bought a small fuel efficient car which is the perfect size for my needs (inside and out) and I'm saving a lot more than $10 on fuel per week. I also pay less for insurance. It does everything I need it to do AND I love driving it.[/QUOTE]

The saving on insurance costs bit has me beat as the 2011 Mazda3 Neo costs nearly $200 extra to insure than the 2010 FG 50th XR6 connected to the same policy with the same nominated drivers on rating 1. I somtimes wonder why a car that is smaller and more basic can cost extra to insure.

[RG]

Originally Posted by buickman

The saving on insurance costs bit has me beat as the 2011 Mazda3 Neo costs nearly $200 extra to insure than the 2010 FG 50th XR6 connected to the same policy with the same nominated drivers on rating 1. I somtimes wonder why a car that is smaller and more basic can cost extra to insure.

This is an easy one.

There are many 3's that have been pranged and had insurance claims due to the average driver (lowest common denominator, the car is from a-b so I don't care) therefore insurance premiums are high.

[2011G6E]

I think...in Queensland at least...the decision to own a V8 is not really a fuel economy thing for many people. I mean, a friend of mine owns a 2005 Monaro with the older 5.7 V8 and six speed manual. On the highway at 100kph the engine is dribbling along at something like 1400 rpm. When he bought it, we owned a 2001 VX Lumina, and he was equalling the fuel economy we were getting on the highway, and not that much more around town unless his right foot got a bit heavy. A workmate out here last year bought a new SS with the six liter and six speed manual, and it too does some ludicrously small amount of revs on the highway, and gets the same fuel economy as our G6E with the four liter six.

The choice in Queensland is the difference in rego...it costs us about $802 a year for our G6E, $647 for our four cylinder (and $416 for my motorbike, for farks sake!!! ), but a V8 costs well over a grand a year to register, and insurance costs are more as well as you move up the cylinder count. That's what people do their sums over, and I don't know about other states, but here in Queensland, it's usually the first thing on a buyers mind..."A V8 huh...that will hammer you with the rego..."

[Ben73]

Originally Posted by LeadFoot81

Mate I love a big V8 sedan as much as the next guy, but the whole "I'm a sick c*** cos I drive a big car, and people who drive small cars are losers" bit I keep reading on these forums (from multiple members) is getting old.

Assuming your 300C could run at 9L/100km on the same route I take to work every day, my Fiesta would still be ahead by 3L/100km, in a week (600kms of travel) thats 18L of juice. At $1.55 (for premium) that's $27.90 a week, $111.60 a month, $1339.20 a year. I highly doubt you could manage 9L on the route I take however.

I bought a small fuel efficient car which is the perfect size for my needs (inside and out) and I'm saving a lot more than $10 on fuel per week. I also pay less for insurance. It does everything I need it to do AND I love driving it.

With more congestion on the roads, smaller parking spots, expensive petrol and insurance (and general cost of living) who wouldn't buy a well priced, well equipped, well designed small car that isn't that big on the outside but fairly spacious on the inside and is inexpensive to own?

I'm sure there are many who make the mistake of downgrading to the wrong car for their needs just to save money on fuel, but the vast majority of small car owners are buying cars that are more than up to the task at hand: getting one person to work and back safely, comfortably, and cheaply. If they have a well sorted chassis and are fun to drive, that's just a bonus.

And what they do with the money they save is up to them.

Sorry but I missed the part where I said "Im a sick **** for owning a large car, small car owners are losers"
I do prefer a bigger car, that is just my preference, I never hate on people who own small cars. Many people in my family own small cars including the missus. I drive her car occasionally and I do not enjoy it at all.
If you own a small car and it's right for you, then I'm happy for you.
The reason for my previous post was because I found it interesting that my large sedan with a V8 had similar consumption to a smaller car with an engine less then half it's size. I don't know if that is a common problem for said model or if that particular one was having problems.
A mate at work has a 3 year old 4 cylinder Forester and he is definitely not impressed with his consumption. He said he drove from Newcastle to Melbourne and averaged about 10L/100km while his mate who drove with him in his diesel BMW X3 and averaged about 5L/100km. He knows diesels are more efficient, but he still wasn't impressed he couldn't get under 10L doing mostly highway driving.

I didn't buy my car to be fuel efficient, although I am happy when I get good consumption.
The 4 cylinder I had previously was cheaper to run, except that insurance was much more.