Fuel consumption?

[gnhuk]

Filled up yesterday and as usual did the calculations = 30.5 mpg! The only difference is that it's been warmer, because I haven't done any long journeys, so either the thermostat or a temperature sensor must be faulty. There seem to be many possibilities in the sensor department though. No warning lights showing and there doesn't seem to be a Lambda light if the handbook is to be believed..... I don't possess a fault code reader - is the serial port in the drivers side of the centre console were these plug in?

Hopefully this will be sorted out on Wednesday without too much expense.

G

[gnhuk]

Dealer unable to find any fault and unwilling to start replacing parts without a very good reason (Pardon? I thought to increase the bill was reason enough :D ) and have advised me to monitor fuel consumption closely. If I find any cause bring it back but they'll need it for a while (= expensive job) because no fault codes found. While slightly disappointing this displays a sensible attitude unlike the previous bunch I tried - who, in the light of the rear brakes being completely shot(pads & discs, expected life 200-500 miles), are unlikely to have done all that I was charged for.

They gave me a couple of "advisories" that things will require attention before the next service but at least I know about these (I'll probably try an independant).

Crap dealer = Pillings, Milton Keynes

Good dealer = Cecil & Larter, Bury St. Edmunds

G

P.S. I *might*, if the fuel consumption gets silly again, replace the thermostat myself.

[followtheox]

Initially I thought my magnet device - 'Pilot Green' on the fuel inlet pipe was not having any effect. After 5 tank refills and driving exactly the same the consumption has increased now to 34.7 mpg (actual) and the computer is saying 37.9 .This has been for the last two tank fulls. For a few quid it is not a bad bit of kit to have after all.

[bigandquick]

I've followed this thread with interest. I've always considered the 1.8 (actually much closer to 1.7) S40 underpowered, and the gearbox ratio is certainly a lot lower than in my T5.
I used my wife's on Friday for a 100 mile round trip. All A roads and dual carriageway, with the cruise control set at 75mph where possible. The computer read an average of 30mpg. From experience I know this is 1.5 - 2 mpg high. I don't believe we've ever returned more than 32mpg on a run.
Seems it's just not an economical engine/gearbox combination.

[gnhuk]

A further update - last three tanks worked out at 26.12, 30.56 and most recently 33.01 (!) though the last included trips of 160 miles (Linslade - Hinckley - Bury St. Edmunds), service and 80 miles (Bury St Edmunds - Linslade) so can't be viewed as typical.

According to book values it has about the same power and weight as a 1.8 Mondeo (my previous car) but the gearing is much lower. The Mondeo had more torque (or so it felt)and would do approx 60mph @ 2500rpm. Since the service the "hole" in the powerband, which caused problems at T junctions(especially when cold), seems to have vanished and the car now feels better. The dealers just did a normal 66000 service plus rear discs/pads and "no codes shown" so what happened I've no idea, I'll have to keep an eye on it....

Now, just to ruin my day, my brother (who asked if I had got I pipe & slippers when I bought it) has bought an S60 D5 SE auto - talk about seamless acceleration............

Gavin

Sorry to gloat Gavin but I have just worked out my fuel consumption on my 2002 S40 D S. Just filled up and using the old fashioned accurate method (no info centre) I am doing 47.8mpg. I drive about 20 miles round trip to work which is both urban and dual carriageway, plus some local running around as the family taxi service.
I know it's not the most refined diesel available but who cares with that sort of return.
Sorry!

Stuart

[gnhuk]

Hi Stuart,

I found out about diesel fuel consumption when I was lent a Passat TDi for a week last year - thrashed it unmercifully and got 44mpg!
My next car will be a diesel, especially as my brother has just invested in an S60 D5 SE auto - that really does move! (Actually when I bought the S40 he took the mickey, how times change! :D )

[steveT4]

Hi

Agree with Pilling MK being crap.

Bells of Northampton are much better.

Steve

Wish I could get a diesel...

I currently pay 110 euros 4 times a year for car tax.

That would almost double if I switched to a diesel V40, and possibly quad with a diesel V70...

Stu

[Carlos]

I have an S40 with the same engine, and similar fuel 'economy'...

I've found that although gutless at low revs, there's a huge burst of power above 4,500rpm(ish). Driving it in a lower gear makes for much improved throttle response and performance, and a better driving experience generally. Doesn't seem to have any significant effect on fuel economy either, nor does the style of driving, light or heavy footed.

Changed the front discs and pads recently as they were squeaking and twittering away to themselves and found that one of the discs was badly grooved and the pad had worn into it - as a result the brakes had been dragging. Performance was noticeably better afterwards. Haven't used it enough to assess whether fuel economy has improved though.