[FredBasset]

Hello,
I'm seriously considering an UP as my next car. I haven't tried one yet, but will be doing so very soon. However, as a long time user of diesel cars, I do a daily commute of around 85 miles, on A roads and motorway, I would like to know what real life mpg you guys and girls are getting.

My current commute car is a Smart Fortwo diesel, which does on average 70 mpg. Sometimes it drops to 65 and sometimes I can get 75 mpg. I know a petrol engine isn't likely to get near this, but I'd very interested in real world mpg of the UP.

If I do go for one, it would most likely be the 75 hp model, so any feedback from those who have one, would be most appreciated. I look forward to reading the experiences, you are having with your new UP's.

Many thanks.

 

[Craig200588]

I feel I would be awesome answering this as I too have owned a Smart car in the past (2004 Fortwo Pulse) and am a proud owner of a 75bhp High Up!!

I have only driven mine only 200 miles (if that) and I'm already getting an average 55 mpg, and thats with not even trying! on under half a tank of petrol I got nearly 200 miles out of it. I found this extremely impressive as its a brand new car and I know the more you drive it the better the MPG will become! It differs on how you drive, it went up to 59 mpg the other night and that was just driving through country roads! When I owned my lovely wee smart car I was getting roughly the same MPG, 45 - 55, it wasn't a diesel but it was still good!

I feel that if you purchased an Up and drove it a while you may be looking at the same MPG as your smarty!!

 

[Tomodo]

You'll get the best MPG figures from a Move Up Bluemotion - mine averages 55-75mpg. (around 450-500 miles per 35 litre tank)

 

[FredBasset]

Thank you both for your replies.

Unfortunately, VW in their wisdom, don't bring the 75ps Bluemotion to the UK and its a 75ps that I would want. I like either the UP White or the UP Black.

Please do keep your comments comming on your mpg, I'm sure lots of prospective owners will be interested.

CheersEdited by: FredBasset

 

[nEiL!]

Done my first 100 miles and averaging 65mpg, mixture of urban driving and motorway but I'd say only 20 motorway miles so well impressed

 

[Lovejimbo]

I'd say I drive pretty hard, travel around 40 miles a day which includes half national speed limit and half inner city driving - and I've been doing my share of flooring it due to a fair amount of roundabouts and traffic lights on the dual caridgeways giving me plenty of 70mph speed limits from a standing start...

My average is being shown as 57mpg with 700 miles on the clock. At weekends on more leisurely drives I can often see the computer reporting 70mpg+ averages over relaxing 2hr journeys...

That is being reflected in my fuel buying too, with half a tank getting me around 300 miles!

 

[Stainless]

The 75hp version will return great mpg and perform fabulously too. I have a 3 days old base model 'Take up!' 60hp version and am really, really impressed at just what the car achieves in all driving conditions.

I did a road test report on my first 350 miles in the first 2 days...

Read it on the forum and add your view here...

http://www.upownersclub.co.uk/forum/take-up-day2-extended-135-mile-drive_topic388_page1.html

The 75hp model has the same gear ratios etc so the review will give you a more overall impression of owning an up! ... other than just the, very important, mpg figures. The car is spacious and very comfortable and I reckon a far better, and more practical commute than a Smart,.. at least IMO

Best wishes

Dave

 

[smileythf]

I've noticed that the Skoda Citigo has the Bluemotion Technologies available for their 75PS... Just not sure if I'll like it as much as the Up!

 

[Craig200588]

I got 56 MPG yesterday driving up and back to Aberdeen! this will only improve after a few more hundred miles

 

[PaulT]

I am getting 68-70 mpg average consumption but I stick to 60 mph on duel carriageways and use the gear shift advice. However, I do use neutral a lot (5-10%)in urban driving trying to beat my last consumption reading for fun. It's surprising how many miles you can cover in neutral coasting to junctions and down hills, even uphill to junctions instead of breaking, without holding any traffic up!
It's not that I'm tight

I just like making a game of it. My best to work is 71 mpg over 4 miles with two T-junctions a roundabout and one set of traffic lights. Over 40 mile + journeys using mainly dual carriageways I'm getting 68mpg+ as well.Travelling at 70mph will obviouslyincrease consumption significantly.

 

[bazves]

I am getting 68-70 mpg average consumption but I stick to 60 mph on duel carriageways and use the gear shift advice. However, I do use neutral a lot (5-10%)in urban driving trying to beat my last consumption reading for fun. It's surprising how many miles you can cover in neutral coasting to junctions and down hills, even uphill to junctions instead of breaking, without holding any traffic up!
It's not that I'm tight

I just like making a game of it. My best to work is 71 mpg over 4 miles with two T-junctions a roundabout and one set of traffic lights. Over 40 mile + journeys using mainly dual carriageways I'm getting 68mpg+ as well.Travelling at 70mph will obviouslyincrease consumption significantly.

I could be wrong but I thought in modern cars coasting in neutral actually uses more fuel than travelling in gear with zero throttle?

EDIT, added link from first google hit http:////www.popularmechanics.com/cars/alternative-fuel/news/coasting-in-neutral-fuel-economy

Edited by: bazves

 

[luckyjimmy]

The current consensus is that youDO use more fuel coasting in neutral vs travelling with zero throttle opening.
Coasting in neutral has the engine running at its idle speed (800rpm say), using fuel. Whereas travelling with zero throttle, the injectors can be shut off by the engine management system while the movement of the car keeps the engine turning- zero fuel used. Engine braking comes in to play eventually of course.



Incidentally, I've had 95mpg on the Maps & More instantaneous fuel consumption readout - I've even seen it going, briefly, to 120 mpg when in gear, approaching a junction with zero throttle.

 

[move up!]

You're both right... if the gradient is steep enough, and you can keep your speed by rolling in gear with zero throttle without slowing down, then that is the best, as it shuts off the fuel completely, and the car's momentum (with the help of gravity) keeps it going. If the gradient is very shallow, and you find the engine braking overcomes gravity (you are losing speed), you will need to either give a small amount of throttle, or coast in neutral. I believe the latter is slightly more frugal in that case. There have been discussions about the safety of coasting, so it's worth being aware of that too. Overall, I'd say it's best to avoid coasting. I certainly didn't coast when taking my IAMS advanced driving test. That would have been an instant fail

Edited by: move up!

 

[Leif]

The loan Polo I had showed 200mpg when the accelerators pedal was not pressed.

There have been discussions about the safety of coasting, so it's worth being aware of that too. Overall, I'd say it's best to avoid coasting. I certainly didn't coast when taking my IAMS advanced driving test. That would have been an instant fail

All of the information I have read says that coasting out of gear is dangerous as you do not have control of the car. That said, the IAM taught me that it is fine to coast a short while when for example approaching a junction. You might be in 5'th, you brake, then about 100m from the junction, you go into neutral, and brake, slowing to a speed suitable for the junction, then engage 2'nd near the junction, ready to either stop, or enter the junction in an appropriate gear. I presume you were taught something similar.

Oddly enough the IAM chap who taught me encouraged me to brake more, and accelerate more, I think he thought I was too relaxed a driver. He thought that making rapid progress took precedence over fuel economy. Not sure what the general IAM official line is.

 

[Rednaxela]

The current consensus is that you DO use more fuel coasting in neutral vs travelling with zero throttle opening.
Coasting in neutral has the engine running at its idle speed (800rpm say), using fuel. Whereas travelling with zero throttle, the injectors can be shut off by the engine management system while the movement of the car keeps the engine turning - zero fuel used. Engine braking comes in to play eventually of course.

 

Incidentally, I've had 95mpg on the Maps & More instantaneous fuel consumption readout - I've even seen it going, briefly, to 120 mpg when in gear, approaching a junction with zero throttle.

That's interesting, I have noticed my mpg value going to "---" sometimes when I'm driving down hill and take my foot off the gas. I guess this is telling me that no fuel is being used?

 

[luckyjimmy]

Rednaxela: I've seen that too and just presumed the Maps & More can't quite cope with some of the values fed from the car's management systems. To be more precise, the calculations based on the various sensor readings result in an infinitely large mpg figure (where the denominator in the calculation is at or very near zero). Just a guess though...

 

[PaulT]

Thanks, I've learnt something here. I have tried my work journey without coasting in neutral and am getting the same 68-70mpg. It may be that coasting in neutral actually gives a false mpg anyway. I am in the process of doing a physical check of my mpg (full tank to full tank) and will post my result.

 

[johnleigh]

It is now possible to get the 75 hp engine with blue motion technology. I have one on order.