Help - how important is fuel economy for low mileage user?

[macadee]

I'm trying to work out what car I should buy - basically whether to spend extra on a more economic diesel, or not. Can anyone offer any advice on how important a car with good fuel economy is for someone who averages maybe 5000 miles a year?

Am I right in my following rough calculations?

5000 miles @ 42mpg = 119 gallons/541 litres @ 86p per litre = £465
5000 miles @ 56mpg = 90 gallons/410 litres @ 98p per litre = £401
5000 miles @ 62mpg = 81 gallons = 369 litres @ 98p per litre = £362

 

[creature]

Youve answered it yourself. If you like your money they go for the higher mpg one. Im not sure how true it is but youll get stung on the tax for the lower MPG cars, i presume theyd produce more co2 per mile. Add in the tax bands and see what figures you come up with then.

Youll find a higher mpg car will give you more money to play with in the long run.

welcome to torquecars

 

[HDi fun]

Firstly, treat manufacturers MPG figures with a pinch of salt. They're a good way to compare within a range of cars but it's a bit like ladies clothes sizes. They're just indices really and aren't consistent from shop to shop.

If you driving consists of mostly short runs then follow the Urban figure only.

If you do a 400 mile round trip once a month then look at the extra urban. The combined figure really doesn't represent much at all.

If you're a low mileage driver you're biggest hit will be depreciation. Fuel isn't the deciding factor at all.

Why not but a 3 year old car for, say £8000 - a Mondeo TDCi could be haggled in this economic climate. Stick a 3 yr warranty on it (Ford's used warranties are amongst the industry's best) and drive around losing only pennies a week only in depreciation?

 

[prevtec]

i always maintain if you worry about your fuel consumtion, you shouldnt drive
if it dosent burn petrol, its no good
if i go to the pub, id spend 100 euros easily in 1 night, that would get me a week of driving, and not a - b, but to get to c and d too

people should worry about the tyre pressure more importantly than fuel, if the tyres are the wrong psi, it will drink fuel

 

[pgarner]

its been mentioned about road tax - diesels are normally low producing in co2 which is near enough harmless but pump out lots of other crud,
insurance - again diesels are normally cheaper
and servicing - this is where diesels are normally dearer.

 

[HDi fun]

its been mentioned about road tax - diesels are normally low producing in co2 which is near enough harmless but pump out lots of other crud,
insurance - again diesels are normally cheaper
and servicing - this is where diesels are normally dearer.

Diesels are likely to a £15 or so increase in road tax over a petrol with similar Co2 figures. Even so, the performance on offer (bhp/gCo2/km) is well worth it.

With particle filters diesels are virtually sootless. Even with a remap mine is clean even full throttle (which I rarely need, to be honest)

I think that McAdee is more interested in economics though. For low mileage use a petrol engine might suit better, despite me citing a TDCi example.

The biggest factor with a new car is depreciation. Unless, of course, you're going to keep it 10-12 years

 

[macadee]

Thanks for the quick replies.

I'm looking specifically at buying a used VW Golf, so the figures I included are just based on different engine variations (petrol, diesel & bluemotion). I'm just trying to figure out if it's really worth spending extra money (between £1000-3000) on the more economic car, or as a fairly low mileage driver, is it false economy?

I've taken into account the different road tax for each, and am comparing like for like mpg (ie all manufacturers figures & have now used the urban figures instead of combined), but haven't taken into account cheaper insurance & higher servicing between petrol/diesel (as I hadn't thought of that).

Anyway, maths isn't my strong point so just wanted to be sure my calculations weren't completely off! And I think the replies have helped me confirm what I first though, that yes, it probably is false economy. So I guess I'm better just trying to decide which of the 1.6 petrol or 1.9 diesel would be better/more enjoyable to drive!

 

[pgarner]

1.9 diesel in 130 form, tax and insurance are both the same groups from what i can remember as this is the engine i was looking for but couldnt justifly the nearly £3k more it was over the 1.8t with 50k less on the clock.

the wife has the golf 1.6 and it is pretty gutless and on normal a road youll get around 41mpg but its low geared and thirsty on the motorways. i get arount 37mpg on the motorway at 80mph yet i get the same in my bora.

 

[HDi fun]

You arithmetic is spot on. I'd go for the 1.9 TDi but get the 130 model (with red T & D on the bootlid). The 1.6 FSi is OK but it's nowhere near as flexible or accelerative as the diesel. The FSi petrol engines were designed to be used optimally in turbocharged from, these are badged TFSi. Without a turbo they feel a bit spineless and torque shy.

Servicing will cost more on a diesel, but VW has closed the gap significantly compared to some other makers, to the point that it's robably not worth worrying about. If you're only doing 5000 miles/annum then get a model with the variable service indicator. You mignt only need to service it every 30,000 miles! Clearly, it's down to you to keep an eye on other non engine things such as brake pads/discs etc.

Historically they (diesel models) attracted higher used prices but in today's economic climate, with diesel deing 10-12p/litre more expensive than petrol it's likely you'll get very good deal indeed.

 

[obi_waynne]

The purchase cost will not be recouped for years in better MPG. I'd say don't worry about MPG too much if you only do 5000 miles.

Instead look at the future TAX brackets, The wrong car can cost you a lot of money in the long run.

 

[macadee]

Isn't the 1.9 diesel in 130 format only available in the older style Golf (up to 2004, as that's all I can find online), the newer style just seems to be all 105? I'm hoping for something about 3 years old, so I think that really just leaves a straight choice between the 1.6 petrol and 1.9 TDi (I won't be looking at the GT models).

I'd be tempted to stay with the petrol, but perhaps there's not really too much difference between the two in terms of performance? Besides, I had forgotten all about the future road tax changes, but that does edge me towards the diesel as in 2 years time there will be a difference of £70 between the two.

 

[pgarner]

dont remind me mine is goning up by £90 this year.

 

[HDi fun]

Isn't the 1.9 diesel in 130 format only available in the older style Golf (up to 2004, as that's all I can find online), the newer style just seems to be all 105? I'm hoping for something about 3 years old, so I think that really just leaves a straight choice between the 1.6 petrol and 1.9 TDi (I won't be looking at the GT models).

I'd be tempted to stay with the petrol, but perhaps there's not really too much difference between the two in terms of performance? Besides, I had forgotten all about the future road tax changes, but that does edge me towards the diesel as in 2 years time there will be a difference of £70 between the two.

The TDi 130 will flatten a 1.6 petrol in performance terms. The PD 100/105 is a bit less sparkly but still a strong contender.

THe later 2.0 TDi (which is TOTALLY different to the PD engines) has good figures. I've not driven a Golf with that engine but it does a good job of moving the Audi A4 around. I have no idea of the fuel economy figures or even the projected real world fuel economy.

 

[pgarner]

the 2.0 unit is very nice to drive however normal VW diesel noise at idle.
real life drive i got averaged 52mpg with one mainly motorway driving

 

[HDi fun]

Thanks, PG, 52mpg is worthy of note. VW's 4 cylinder diesels do have that rumbly idle, I agree. Four cylinders is not really enough for any engine really, let alone a diesel. Some are better than others but a well designed straight 6 has to be the definitive device for smoothness.

You only have to go and drive a well maintained 20 year old BMW 320i to realise this. Simple engines, but perfectly balanced with no need for additional rotating mass in the form of balance shafts to correct what is essentially a shortcoming of any four cylinder engine.