Our new 1.2 Chevy only does 36mpg :-(

[Split_Pin]

I know new is not what this place is about but I'm not asking Honest Jehovah or whoever.

 

We got our new Chevy Aveo 1.2 last month, brand new.

 

It has what East Scotland folk call 'shan' fuel consumption.

 

I thought it would improve as the engine ran in or something, but its now at 1600 miles and still drinking the fuel at 36mpg.

 

This was achieved on a round trip of about 800miles to the NEC in Birmingham and back, where we used 105 quids worth if fuel.

 

My boss said her 3 litre BMW does 34 mpg!

 

Is this normal for a new car to do this for the first few k or is the map maybe duff or something? It's costing my poor wife a fortune.

[Junkman]

It should be in the neighborhood of 40 mpg.

Heck, I got 36 from a 3.8 litre Oldsmobile on a trip like this.

 

Here is your mpg <-> l/100km converter: http://www.eforecourt.com/l_100km_mpg_convert.htm

Here is what others report for the Aveo: http://www.spritmonitor.de/de/uebersich ... owerunit=2

[cms206]

The Senator did that coming back from Liverpool and I am not light of foot... hell I nearly get that on a run with the 740.

 

Seems poor.

[Mash]

I'd have thought a car like that should get nearer 50mpg on average - hell, even my Starlet regularly returns that sort of figure (1999, 1.3-litre) and I got 37mpg from my Datsun Violet on the last long run I did.

 

My dad was comlplaining about the consumption on his 1.6 Astra and has now got a 1.2-litre 61 plate Hyundai i20 and it's much nearer these kinds of mpg. I'd definitely call it into question.

[Guest]

That's really depressing. I got 37 from my 460 Turbo, and I'm a fake Manc posho mong who drives like a passive aggressive hippo after drinking too much orange Fanta.

 

'Aye, thes Chevve ah jes go' tha nowh, et drenks fuewl, aye, loadey pesh!'

[michael1703]

http://www.honestjohn.co.uk/realmpg/why ... -true-mpg/

 

all bullshit nowadays

 

I noticed this a few years ago, always run old stuff getting up to 30mpg from a 1958 rover p4 even and then borrowed a modern eco box and it was barely any better on fuel over the same journey and driving conditions

[Mike D]

That's shocking! especially if that's 'on a run' figures, I get that out my 330ci on the motorway no worries!

[cort16]

I've found small engined cars at their most hopeless when doing motorway journeys it's not really what they're about. They have to work hard to keep up the motorway pace and the lack of torque means you find your foot buried just to get up hills. I bet your mpg improves on general A-road 56mph work.

[Luxobarges_Are_Us]

How much does it weigh (double-entendre)?

[Micrashed]

Thats shite. My wifes 2.2 tonne 2L C8 gets 39MPG.

Bugger me I'd be crying if that was my new car.

[Shep Shepherd]

Fifteen-year-old, 181,000-mile, 2.5-litre TV2 does 34mpg in mixed driving, and I have a heavy right foot. It sounds like there's something not quite right with your Chevy.

[Luxobarges_Are_Us]

My Granada can exceed 40mpg on the motorway if I am a bit patient speed-wise. It drops to 32mpg at 78 miles per hour.

 

I'd be rather pissed off at a figure of 36mpg!

[406V6]

That's a poor fuel figure. My 3 litre auto 406 will get that on a motorway run. Obvious thing to check is that the tyres are properly inflated and the tracking correctly set. Cold starts really hammer the fuel figures but should be insignificant in the overall scheme if you're making a long run.

[trigger]

I get better then that out of my Horsely Horseless.

[Guest]

I wouldn't worry yet. 1600 miles is nothing, it'll be tight still.

New cars in the fleet I manage were so shite on MPG that it was ringing alarm bells how bad the spend per month was til they bedded in a bit.

When I saw the title and then saw 1600 miles I was Oh.

[gtd2000]

The Chevy/Daewoo Aveos have always been terrible for fuel consumption.

 

I looked at an accident damaged one (for repairs) a few years back and was shocked at the official MPG figures.

 

Years back, while in the USA '01 or '02) I was at a GM dealership looking at the new cars - a Daewoo Lanos (2.0L 4) was parked next to a Pontiac Firebird (5.7L V8)...there was 1 MPG between the two cars on both the offical urban and highway MPG

[Luxobarges_Are_Us]

I get better then that out of my Horsely Horseless.

 

Is that a competitor to the original Horsey Horseless?

[Split_Pin]

Ok cheers guys, something does seem amiss with the car compared to all your mpg figures of much larger engined cars. I'm going to get the hand book to quote to the dealer when I call them tomorrow about the mpg.

[garethj]

I wouldn't worry yet. 1600 miles is nothing, it'll be tight still.

What he said.

 

However the joy of a new car is you can phone up the dealer to check things like wheel alignment and diagnostics. You can check tyre pressures yourself. I wouldn't be surprised if you need 10,000 miles to start getting representative fuel economy.

 

As for everyone else's fuel economy, don't forget the internet law of 25% when making claims. For example, if someone's getting a genuine 30mpg that's an Internet Claimed Fuel Economy of 37.5mpg

[Micrashed]

don't forget the internet law of 25% when making claims. For example, if someone's getting a genuine 30mpg that's an Internet Claimed Fuel Economy of 37.5mpg

 

Cough * Cough *

[Split_Pin]

Ok just looked at the handbook and it's all US measurements so thanks Junkman for your converter

 

It should be getting 51mpg. Car weighs approx 1200kilos. Quite a heavy bugger for a 'small' car eh!

 

Went out and checked the average MPG readout on the dash and it still said 37.9 mpg after a further 2 weeks of my wifes short A-road daily commute.

 

The warranty is all very well but I'm not paying £75 or whatever to have the dealership plug it into its computer just yet, as that's all they'll probs do and then some gobshite will say 'oh they all do that sir'..

 

I'll leave it until after Christmas and if it creeps towards 45mpg I'll settle at that.

 

To rub salt into the wound, I am using the car my wife used to drive around it and OK, its a 3 pot Corsa but my total weekly commute of 40 miles costs me £5, a bit less if I fart into the tank as well as the unleaded.

 

'Tanks' for all your help so far chaps

[Morgan84]

My Alfa Romeo Mito 1.3 JTDM is supposed to achieve up to 72 MPG ..... Try 41 MPG avergage ! Crap fuel economy;my Lupo 1.4 TDi is faster,yet does over 50 MPG easy

[Split_Pin]

I take it your Mito is quite new also?

[Morgan84]

2009 with 8000 miles on the clock,but is run in,and does a mixture of local runs driven sensibly,and dual carriageway 80 mile round trips doing 70 mph in 6th gear at about 1800 RPM. The fuel consumption on my mothers 2010 Freelander 2.2 TD4 is better !

[Spiny Norman]

A lot of modern stuff is engineered to do really good figures on test but never comes close to it in real life driving. By contrast I usually find I can beat the official figures for the older stuff by quite a bit. I can get 36mpg from my old Saab quite easily just by staying out of town in it, and that's on an engine that converts quite a lot of the energy from the fuel into noise....

I'd suggest that 1600 miles is nowhere near run in for a modern engine, needs at least 5000 miles on it before it frees up.

[garbaldy]

/\/\/\/\/\ what he said, our new car is booked at 67 mpg but does 51 if driven gentle,

no new car does what it says on the tin the figures are fiddled to get co2 figures down as thats all that seems to mater to the general buying public nowadays,

 

An old guy i know had one of these chevy aveo thingys and even after 20k miles it still was sh1t with a capital S, he said 40mpg was about best it managed, he now has a vauxhall astra dizzler and loves it,

[rml2345]

The 1.3 Yaris I had was quite run in (168k or so) but driven sensibly would average about 43mpg. Driven like a raving mental who's just set fire to their trousers and it would average about 43mpg.

The Volvo does about 28 according to Fuelly but will get 36-40 on a long run, driven sensibly.

[wuvvum]

I've also heard a lot of people saying that these modern small diesels are nowhere near as good on fuel as they're supposed to be - presumably because a tiddly engine that relies almost solely on boost to make its power is going to be working a lot harder a lot more of the time than a bigger engine. My Rover 420 diesel averages between 50 and 55 mpg depending on how many tractors and Tesco lorries I have to overtake - it's a lot bigger and less sophisticated than something like a Mito or a Polo (although probably not much heavier), but the engine is far less stressed (it's quite possible to make adequate progress without ever going over 2,000rpm) and I think that's what makes it so economical.

[michael1703]

Depends how its run in too, I thrash rebuilt engines and change the oil frequently as they break in and never had a problem, 4 wheels or 2.

 

This is dated now but was hot poop in about 2002 http://www.mototuneusa.com/break_in_secrets.htm but he is correct

 

I've rebuilt quite a few engines in the 9 seasons Ive raced motorbikes and either run them in on a dyno or just gave them a lap to bed in and the rings have seated nicely with good bhp figures

 

At what mileage is/was the first service?

 

Maybe a track day will break it in?

[wuvvum]

A track day in a 1.2 Aveo? That could be interesting.