-
First refuelling 465 miles, 30.65 litres so 69.3 mpg (car claimed 73 mpg).
Second refuelling 515 miles, 32.90 litres so 71.2 mpg (car claimed 75.1 mpg).
The "fibometer" appears to be about 5% optimistic - nothing new there!
-
You can have my crown. Great mpg.
-
You can have my crown. Great mpg.
Your 60-ish mpg from a Mk. 1 Jazz is a greater achievement. I suspect that I won't keep the crown for very long as someone will find that their normal driving hits the sweet spot in the system efficiency. The sweet spot on the Mk 3 Jazz is at about 40 mph https://www.theaa.com/about-us/newsroom/fuel-economy-record-attempt . The Mk 4's optimum speed is probably slightly higher - just above the threshold at which direct drive is enabled, which my initial data logging suggested is at around 42 mph.
-
Another 546 miles of mainly A road cruising and 33.76 litres was needed to top up the tank which I calculate to be 73.5 mpg. The car reckoned I could have continued for another 77 miles although the mpg suggests this should be 100 miles - most likely Honda's algorithm at work to encourage the driver to refill. Here's the car's version of the mpg to date. My average to date for the computer's optimism bias is 4.6%. I'm expecting the mpg to drop as the weather gets colder.
-
I’ve been averaging 52 mpg in my Mk3 over 4 years of “defensive” driving (40,000 miles) so based on your figures I should be able to average 72 mpg in a Mk4. This would save me about £300 a year, but against that I would lose my current £30 p.a. road tax. I think I’ll keep the Mk3 for 2 or 3 more years, but I’ll soon need to replace the original front tyres!
-
Back from a trip, clocked 430 miles, car said 60.4 mpg, actual worked out at 60.1. Not as good as some but quite happy with that.
-
I’ve been averaging 52 mpg in my Mk3 over 4 years of “defensive” driving (40,000 miles) so based on your figures I should be able to average 72 mpg in a Mk4. This would save me about £300 a year, but against that I would lose my current £30 p.a. road tax.
I agree that the current tax regime doesn't provide much incentive to move to a more efficient vehicle. The government should recalculate the tax on older vehicles using data from the current WLTP test given that this was introduced to reduce the ease for vehicle manufacturers to game the system.
A less-well publicised benefit of the new Jazz is that it can provide substantial power without any hesitation which makes the vehicle feel much more nimble so you feel you've got a more powerful vehicle without the associated fuel cost penalty.
Back from a trip, clocked 430 miles, car said 60.4 mpg, actual worked out at 60.1. Not as good as some but quite happy with that.
Did your trip include a significant proportion of motorway cruising at the legal limit? That would drop the mpg by a substantial amount due to the aerodynamic drag losses while the hybrid system provides little benefit.
PS: Do you need to change the vehicle in your forum profile? It says "2012 ES".
-
Yes, mostly motorway driving with average speed between 60-70
Changed vehicle profile, thanks.
-
Interesting figures. thanks. Those are slightly better than my 1.8 Toyota Corolla Excel. What size tyres does that Jazz have? Supposedly the tyres on my Excel cost about 10% in fuel consumption.
Also - what's the Jazz like for road height? One criticism of the Corolla is that it sits fairly low to the ground which can make getting in and out a bit awkward for those who are no longer 'in the first flush of youth' :)
If the hybrid Jazz has as much interior space and is as easy to get in and out of as previous versions then maybe Honda have managed to beat Toyota at their own game. I had my doubts when I saw the predicted figures two years ago which is part of why I switched to Toyota.
The other reason was the poor build quality and customer service I experienced with my Mk3.
-
Tyres are 15 or 16" depending on vehicle version - see https://www.honda.co.uk/cars/new/jazz-hybrid/specification.html. The ride height for the basic Jazz is where you'd expect it for a Jazz while the Crosstar (185 / 55 R16 tyres) is about 1" higher and the fuel economy suffers a bit (the roof rails can't help). You can get a lot of insight into fuel economy issues by looking at the WLTP fuel consumption data for the different test cycles - eg the fuel consumption increases substantially over 60 mph (the relatively high and boxy shape of the Jazz doesn't help the aerodynamics but I recall looking at the Corolla WLTP numbers and seeing that they showed a similar trend).
I understand that the Crosstar is selling better than Honda anticipated - perhaps a lot of their customers value the extra height which is what I primarily bought it for. Internal space for the passengers is very generous but the boot is a bit small due, I think, to Honda setting the rear seats such that they could be folded forward without removing the headrests (and the magic seats hare still there). There's no home for a spare wheel as the battery is under the front part of the boot floor but there is a cubby hole for bits and pieces under the rear part of the boot floor.
The build quality feels much better than the Mk 3 Jazz and the eHEV system has transformed the performance while the engine is almost inaudible unless it is asked to work hard (eg steep hill or heavy acceleration). It's worth giving the new Jazz a test drive although customer experience is a lottery depending on the dealer. However, the connectivity feature is work in progress and Honda are being slow to respond to user problems. Fortunately, this is a bit of garnish and not critical.
-
Sounds hopeful then but I don't like your comments on the connectivity. Sounds like Honda are no better than they were when I last dealt with them :(
I normally travel at 60 mph on motorways but coming back from my Dad's funeral in Wales (190 miles) a couple of weeks ago I pegged it at 80/90 and it certainly does impact on mpg. Going up I managed 65 mpg but coming down it was 52 mpg. Still a pretty good figure considering I suppose.
But my next car will be full EV. Oh and if I can arrange it will have a colour LCD screen like my Corolla does (the main part at least). I prefer a digital speedometer and there's something very cool in being greeted by animated graphics on your dashboard when you switch on :)
-
Another 546 miles of mainly A road cruising and 33.76 litres was needed to top up the tank which I calculate to be 73.5 mpg. The car reckoned I could have continued for another 77 miles although the mpg suggests this should be 100 miles - most likely Honda's algorithm at work to encourage the driver to refill. Here's the car's version of the mpg to date. My average to date for the computer's optimism bias is 4.6%. I'm expecting the mpg to drop as the weather gets colder.
That's a great amount of miles that can be achieved on a tank of fuel - almost diesel figures. And it'll probably do more as the engine wears in over time.
It's these sorts of figures which have given me an interest in the new Jazz as I want a car that needs filling up as little as possible on long journeys. But I know hybrids, especially the older ones, don't do quite as well on fuel at motorway speeds as standard petrols so I hadn't been interested in them until this new lot of engines have come along which I understand are better on motorways than they once were.
I'm still unsure if it's worth me paying the higher price for a hybrid when I also travel on the motorway a fair bit, but it seems they're improving all the time.
-
It's these sorts of figures which have given me an interest in the new Jazz as I want a car that needs filling up as little as possible on long journeys. But I know hybrids, especially the older ones, don't do quite as well on fuel at motorway speeds as standard petrols so I hadn't been interested in them until this new lot of engines have come along which I understand are better on motorways than they once were.
I'm still unsure if it's worth me paying the higher price for a hybrid when I also travel on the motorway a fair bit, but it seems they're improving all the time.
The hybrid system is effectively redundant when cruising at motorway speed although it's possible that Honda's single direct drive gear is mechanically slightly more efficient than a conventional (or CVT) gearbox. However, if you encounter stop-start traffic on a motorway then the hybrid system comes into play and it's possible, as I discovered on mine of my first trips, to spend 5 minutes or more of crawling without the engine coming on. And, when the engine does wake up because the battery is getting low, it revs to an efficient 2000 rpm to both move the car but primarily put more charge into the battery so it can go to sleep again.
A relatively short and high vehicle such as the Jazz will never be the most efficient motorway cruiser as the drag coefficient will be higher than on a longer, lower vehicle, but interior space and a higher seating position are often factors which attract Jazz purchasers. If you want to figure out which vehicles are the best motorway cruisers then dig into the test data and look at the WLTP "extra-high" results which involve a lot of driving at up to 80 mph https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Worldwide_Harmonised_Light_Vehicles_Test_Procedure. I'm happier at 60 mph in which case the WLTP "high" results are more applicable. The WLTP data also highlight how much the road transport carbon footprint can be reduced if people drove more slowly, but that's another matter.
Another benefit of a hybrid system over a plain petrol engine is the low-end torque provided by the electric motor which translates to a much more pleasant driving experience.
-
As it got colder we see around 52 mpg, 15-20 mpg less than in summer.
A big hit was a hurry highway drive with 70 mph, resulting in 40 mpg once. :o
So, mpg correlates strongly with speed and climate, a little bit more than expected.
-
As it got colder we see around 52 mpg, 15-20 mpg less than in summer.
Great summer mpg, but that's a large seasonal variation.
-
I would expect a hybrid - where the engine switches on and off regularly - to gave a cooler running engine. In winter with colder air through the radiator - the engine may run a lot cooler and hence be significantly less efficient when running than an ICE car.
-
I would expect a hybrid - where the engine switches on and off regularly - to gave a cooler running engine. In winter with colder air through the radiator - the engine may run a lot cooler and hence be significantly less efficient when running than an ICE car.
I was surprised that Honda didn't provide thermostatically-controlled blinds for the radiator to restrict cold air entry to the engine compartment to address this problem which is entirely foreseeable. I think they did this on the new CR-V. The cold engine problem is exacerbated by the cabin heating sucking whatever heat there is out of the engine coolant due to Honda not designing the electrically-operated aircon to run in reverse as a heat pump plus, on the Crosstar, the absence of the undertray will also help keep the engine compartment cold.
While the WLTP testing is an improvement on what came before, it should have included a cold weather stop-start traffic test to help focus vehicle designers' minds on this aspect. Longer journeys with the engine running continuously under moderate load won't have the cold engine problem but I reckoned it took at least 5 miles to get my HR-V running efficiently on a cold day.
-
I would expect a hybrid - where the engine switches on and off regularly - to gave a cooler running engine. In winter with colder air through the radiator - the engine may run a lot cooler and hence be significantly less efficient when running than an ICE car.
I think they took care of this. In the old Honda Insight the base coolant temp was about 10 deg C lower than on other Hondas. But even then some owners have fitted cardboards in front of the radiator to extract more heat for more efficiency and more heating in the cabin. But the effect was in the single digit range, not 10 or 20%.
I was surprised that Honda didn't provide thermostatically-controlled blinds for the radiator to restrict cold air entry to the engine compartment to address this problem which is entirely foreseeable.
+1. Not sure if it was cost cutting, max reliability or no big impact.
Two things would be interesting to know: engine revs and coolant temp, both seem to be not available for the driver.
One more observation: the engine revs higher than in summer. More noise, not disturbing, but noticable.
EDIT: found a solution for WT and RPM: if you pull the steering wheel back there's is enough space for a scangauge.
-
I've some more observations with my ScanGauge.
As John Ratsey pointed out somewhere in this forum a cold engine starts with 1600 rpm until the coolant temp is 40 deg C and charges the hybrid battery, I guess to warm it up too.
After that EV is available unless you start the heating. In all my cars I've let the engine warm up before using cabin heating. When I switched the heating ON to 22 deg C the coolant temp lost 10-20 deg C, BUT not so in the new Jazz.
When I active the heating in the Jazz the engine management seems to let the engine more often to supply heat for the cabin. The coolant temp range is between 60 and 80 deg C.
-
In all my cars I've let the engine warm up before using cabin heating. When I switched the heating ON to 22 deg C the coolant temp lost 10-20 deg C, BUT not so in the new Jazz. When I active the heating in the Jazz the engine management seems to let the engine more often to supply heat for the cabin. The coolant temp range is between 60 and 80 deg C.
I also keep the cabin heating off until the engine has had opportunity to warm up. Using the heated seats will help to keep the front seat occupants warm and also uses some of the electricity. However, this doesn't help with demisting the windscreen.
-
I also keep the cabin heating off until the engine has had opportunity to warm up. Using the heated seats will help to keep the front seat occupants warm and also uses some of the electricity. However, this doesn't help with demisting the windscreen.
The engine heats up pretty quickly without doing much driving.
I'm using heated seats, heated steering wheel (almost always in winter), set aircon to recirculate and switch the fan OFF. A/C also OFF. No problem with misting so far when I've let the A/C to loose the moisture by switching it OFF miles before I let it sit overnight. When the engine is warm enough (60 deg C) I switch the fan ON and set the temp to 22-24 deg C and use fresh air but still with A/C OFF.
A/C ON is a culprit in winter. Sure it helps to demist the windows but it stores so much moisture that you can't switch it OFF the next time you start a cold engine/interior. You're forced to leave the A/C ON to demist the windows.
I know I'm using A/C not much (or just on a monthly base) but never had any problems with it in several cars but I also do an A/C service every 2-3 years which contains demoisturing, new oil, filled freon up to the top.
-
Why would you switch A/C off? Surely leaving it on with recirc will dry out the air and so reduce condensation more be quickly. That's the advice in my Skoda Yeti's manual - also has heated windscreen which quickly eliminates any condensation anyway.
Pity Jazz doesn't offer heated windscreen even as an option, I believe heated windscreen is a real safety item and more important than some of the more esoteric items that are included as safety items.
-
Why would you switch A/C off?
Worse fuel economy and even drier air than outside.
-
In the countries where a non hybrid Jazz is available, the digital instrument cluster includes a bar display rev counter at the top of the display and the battery charge gauge is replaced by a water coolant gauge.
I guess on the hybrid model, with the ICE only operating part time, a rev counter is deemed less useful, particularly during the times when the ICE is acting as a generator and the revs may be more constant. Possibly, as the engine temperature is less likely to remain at a consistent regular running level due to part time ICE operation, the coolant temp gauge is replaced with a two stage warning light indicator, to alert if coolant temp is too high.
On the non hybrid models, the blanked out switch near the gear selector is fitted with a start/stop system deactivation switch.
In some markets there is also a heated screen switch in the panel which includes the parking sensor switch. I think this may just heat the windscreen in the wiper park position area, as is the case on some Kia vehicles.
I wondered why the dash lighting illumination switch was over large, then saw that, in some countries, the lower half of the circular switch features a ‘TRIP’ button. Assuming this resets the trip counter or accesses the trip counter mode, rather than accessing the trip counter using the menu system. Perhaps these models have a less compressive range of trip counter features, so a simple reset button is all that’s required, same as the trip reset buttons that feature on many analogue instrument clusters.
Would be nice to have the rear seat centre armrest that some countries receive, particularly as the rear accommodation is generous for a small car. Some of the UK specs show this as a standard feature but I haven’t seen any UK models with it.
Strangely, the cars that have rear centre armrest often seem to have a tray between the front seats, rather than a front centre armrest/cubby box, which I’d have thought was more useful.
-
To John Ratesy.
Great figures there John. Do you make a conscious effort to drive economically or is that mainly motorway mileage.
Just curious.
-
Great figures there John. Do you make a conscious effort to drive economically or is that mainly motorway mileage.
Just curious.
A valid question. I'm happiest pottering along on a rural A road at 50mph and do my best to avoid motorways. However, when on a motorway I tend to use the lorry lane at 60mph with the occasional burst of extra speed to get past a lorry.
The Crosstar isn't a very aerodynamic shape which means that the drag losses mount up at higher speeds. I don't like driving in towns either but have noticed that the hybrid system is happy under those conditions as it also is during stop-start traffic on a motorway.
-
Just out of curiosity, I have compared the actual measured average fuel consumption of 3 competing small hybrids on "Spritmonitor" (www.spritmonitor.de/en/) : De Honda Jazz e:HEV, the Toyota Yaris Hybrid and the Renault Clio E-tech.
Of course this is not really representative yet: few cars, little miles.
The (preliminary) conclusion, however, is a bit surprising. The Jazz (62 mpg) and the Yaris (63 mpg) virtually no difference, the Clio however, at 52 mpg, is quite disappointing.
It looks like "Japan rules" :D
-
Just out of curiosity, I have compared the actual measured average fuel consumption of 3 competing small hybrids on "Spritmonitor" (www.spritmonitor.de/en/) : De Honda Jazz e:HEV, the Toyota Yaris Hybrid and the Renault Clio E-tech.
Of course this is not really representative yet: few cars, little miles.
The (preliminary) conclusion, however, is a bit surprising. The Jazz (62 mpg) and the Yaris (63 mpg) virtually no difference, the Clio however, at 52 mpg, is quite disappointing.
It looks like "Japan rules" :D
Indeed!
What I find even more interesting, is that the Jazz is bigger, a lot heavier and more powerful than the Yaris, but fuel efficiency is similar. So for me, Honda rules ;)
-
Just had my first refuelling.
799.7 km (about 497 miles) - 32.59 litres (about 7.2 gallons) - 4.08 l/100 km (about 69.24 mpg)
The car indicated 3.9 l/100 km, so it's about 5% off
Mostly commuting with speed limits of 50-70 kph in "D" with ECON mode on and use of ACC where possible. I go to work before 6 am, which means a lot of cold starts. The car sits in the garage overnight. I only use aircon when I need it, for demisting or when the car is too hot (not often so far). Heating is on, but usually not higher than 20 degrees. There were only a few short stretches of motorway, where I try to stay between 110-115 kph.
I'm quite pleased with this fuel economy. The car is less than a month old, and apart from last week, the weather hasn't been warm yet. So I expect to get even better mileage in the future!
-
69.24 mpg
That is excellent. That is the BEST I have ever achieved with my Mk 1. Come the summer, you should easily exceed that.
-
[/quote]That is excellent. That is the BEST I have ever achieved with my Mk 1. Come the summer, you should easily exceed that.
[/quote]
That’s really impressive. I had a 2006 Fiat Panda 1.2 for four years (bought in 2015). The best I achieved with that car in summer was about 55.4 mpg... Haha. Fun car to drive though.
-
I was initially sceptical about the claimed efficiency benefits of hybrid technology, as all the energy still comes from petrol. However, the real world figures reported here show that the combination of engine efficiency and regenerative braking make improvements of around 35% very realistic.
-
I was initially sceptical about the claimed efficiency benefits of hybrid technology, as all the energy still comes from petrol. However, the real world figures reported here show that the combination of engine efficiency and regenerative braking make improvements of around 35% very realistic.
The hybrid scores in several ways, one being that kinetic energy is converted to electricity and recuperated (stored) in the battery while braking or decelerating, and the stored electricity can be converted back to kinetic energy to propel the car. A non-hybrid simply wastes kinetic energy to heat in the brake pads and discs . Other differences are adoption of the Atkinson cycle for the engine, which trades off torque for economy of fuel consumption, Atkinson cycle engines are better when assisted by a hybrid electric motor to plug the gap for reduced engine torque
-
The hybrid scores in several ways, one being that kinetic energy is converted to electricity and recuperated (stored) in the battery while braking or decelerating, and the stored electricity can be converted back to kinetic energy to propel the car. A non-hybrid simply wastes kinetic energy to heat in the brake pads and discs . Other differences are adoption of the Atkinson cycle for the engine, which trades off torque for economy of fuel consumption, Atkinson cycle engines are better when assisted by a hybrid electric motor to plug the gap for reduced engine torque
Also the hybrid system means that the engine (when running) spends more time in its most efficient range. Something I noticed when I first got my Crosstar and used Torque + a Bluetooth OBDII reader to monitor the engine behaviour was that the engine was never run at below 1600 rpm. My presumption is that excess power goes to the battery which then takes over and lets the engine go to sleep. This behaviour is very noticeable in crawling traffic. The hybrid system, however, provides minimal benefit during motorway cruising.
-
Today, for the first time since purchasing the car in March, my Jazz started in EV mode with 5 bars of ‘juice’ in the box, after standing still outside for 7 hours! We’re having a hot spell here in Belgium (25°C and up), and it’s clearly having a positive effect on the battery.
While driving home from work, EV mode also came on more often than I was used to until now. Average consumption was 3.8 l/100km at departure, and after a 20 min. drive had dropped to 3.6 (about 78 mpg) with A/C on. I have ECON on in B mode.
This is making me very optimistic about summertime fuel consumption :D
-
I've just done my second petrol fill. Same pump as first one. Same number of "clicks" from the pump.
I found that the car's own "trip counter" mpg figure is very close to the measured one: only about 2mpg more optimistic.
448 miles of mixed driving and 32 litres of fuel: 63.6mpg.
For the same sort of (ab)use in the Mk2 I'd be looking at about 45mpg at best.
-
Once again I'm getting Jazz envy.
My impression is that another advantage of hybrids is that the efficiency of petrol engines is much better at constant speed. I notice with my OBD reader that any acceleration, however gentle, causes the consumption to drop dramatically. Presumably the Jazz Mk2 hybrid doesn't have an Atkinson cycle engine but would have this benefit. If I'm right, that is, I might be talking out of my hat ;D.
-
I've just done my second petrol fill. Same pump as first one. Same number of "clicks" from the pump.
I found that the car's own "trip counter" mpg figure is very close to the measured one: only about 2mpg more optimistic.
448 miles of mixed driving and 32 litres of fuel: 63.6mpg.
For the same sort of (ab)use in the Mk2 I'd be looking at about 45mpg at best.
Pretty much the same, been away for a week approx 400miles done and 63.3 mpg, quite happy with that.
-
Summer Time!
Even with extensive use of A/C and a bit of motorway, I was able to achieve 3.9L/100km, which translates to 72,4 mpg UK
Second tank which such a great result, the engine and the battery likes Italian heat.
-
hi folks, im averaging just a smidge over 60mpg in mixed driving over the first 2 weeks of ownership. mostly motorway though. think thats more than ok for a brand new engine. single trip high score so far is 76mpg over about 20 miles, country roads, aircon on, eco mode ;D
-
The mighty Jazz keeps surprising me.
During the last full tank of fuel, the trip computer showed 3.6 l/100 km for almost the whole time. My own calculation after filling up was 3.61 l/100 km (78.25 mpg). I mostly did commuting (50 & 70 kph) and only two short stints of motorway at 110. Always in B mode with econ on.
The surprising thing (to me) is, today the fuel consumption on the trip computer dropped to 3.5 two times, finally settling on 3.6 again, while the weather is slightly less warm and Econ is now switched off for the first time (which is noticeable when accelerating from standstill and lower speeds).
The previous tank gave me 966 kilometers of driving. With these economy figures, I’m tempted to go beyond 1000 km 8)
-
The mighty Jazz keeps surprising me.
During the last full tank of fuel, the trip computer showed 3.6 l/100 km for almost the whole time. My own calculation after filling up was 3.61 l/100 km (78.25 mpg). I mostly did commuting (50 & 70 kph) and only two short stints of motorway at 110. Always in B mode with econ on.
The surprising thing (to me) is, today the fuel consumption on the trip computer dropped to 3.5 two times, finally settling on 3.6 again, while the weather is slightly less warm and Econ is now switched off for the first time (which is noticeable when accelerating from standstill and lower speeds).
The previous tank gave me 966 kilometers of driving. With these economy figures, I’m tempted to go beyond 1000 km 8)
Somebody please tell me what 3.6 l/100 km means, as I don't live in Belgium.
-
Somebody please tell me what 3.6 l/100 km means, as I don't live in Belgium.
3.6 Litres per hundred kilometres or 78.25 mpg as Pirre says in his post.
-
Somebody please tell me what 3.6 l/100 km means, as I don't live in Belgium.
Does the job: https://www.thecalculatorsite.com/conversions/fuelconsumption.php
-
Just a comment on mpg as against litres per 100 km.
I am pretty old but I genuinely can't my head round the litres per 100 km thing. I'm OK with a lot of metric stuff (I've moved on from pounds and ounces ;)).
I think the stumbling block for me is that it is "the other way round" - ie how much fuel to do a certain distance as opposed to mpg where it is the distance you get out of each unit of fuel. This means I can't perceive whether, say, 5 litres/100 km is economical or not.
Mental block.
-
You're right, I was always used to km/l, the silly thing is that on Jazz it is not possible to switch from l/100km to km/l on the board computer, so I'm getting used to l/100km.
Fun fact EVs tend to use Wh/km or kWh/100km and not km/kWh.
Inviato dal mio LG-H815 utilizzando Tapatalk
-
If an hybrid consumes 4.4 and a non hybrid consumes 1 l more it makes me wonder if hybrids are really worth it. And even in an non hybrid you can save fuel by changing the way you drive
This reminds me of a pub debate from a couple of years ago. My pal who has a 24 kwh Nissan Leaf, said he "didn't like hybrids" on environmental grounds. His argument was they were the worst of all worlds involving all the dodgy mining processes to produce lithium ion batteries whist still emitting harmful CO2. There was also the issue of plug in hybrids which he said were even worse if used as long distance company cars because most of the time they would be powered by petrol but fuel consumption would be hit by having to lug a heavy battery around.
I don't necessarily agree. I think hybrids are, generally, more efficient and, given they take off from a standing start in EV mode they must be better for air quality.
I wonder what the truth actually is.
-
If an hybrid consumes 4.4 and a non hybrid consumes 1 l more...
A non hybrid 1 (one?) liter more...?
Just a simple example. Our previous car was a Honda Jazz Comfort Plus CVT. Search on Spritmonitor the actual measured average fuel consumption over at least 10,000 km. of that model. That's 6.11 l/100 km.
https://www.spritmonitor.de/de/uebersicht/18-Honda/169-Jazz.html?fueltype=2&vehicletype=1&constyear_s=2011&constyear_e=2015&power_s=69&power_e=79&minkm=10000&page=5
Not bad...
And now the Jazz e:HEV, same measurement: 4,43 l/100 km.
https://www.spritmonitor.de/de/uebersicht/18-Honda/1293-Jazz_Hybrid.html?fueltype=10&vehicletype=1&constyear_s=2020&minkm=7500&gearing=3
Difference a little more than 1 liter, right? To be precise: The e:HEV consumes an average of every 100 km. 1.68 liters of liquid gold less than the non-hybrid.
One more example: Our Jazz Comfort Plus CVT 2013 (non-hybrid) had an average consumption of 6.66 l/100 km measured over 4 years.
Its successor, our Toyota Yaris Hybrid 2017 (I know... a different car...) used exactly the same way, also measured over 4 years, has an average consumption of 4.89 l/100 km.
The difference: 1,77 l/100 km.
-
From what I can see Mercedes made diesel and petrol hybrid versions of the C and E class, plug in and non from 2015. They seem to make up about 20% of those for sale on AutoTrader. Also Peugeot and Citroen made diesel hybrids though they don't seem popular.
-
The problem with Diesels is still the emissions - which were laid bare by the 'cheat ' software scandal. Long ago the Japanese said that as far as emissions were concerned Diesel was a 'dead end' technology. The complicated and expensive equipment needed to reduce particulates and Nox emissions was becoming a lot of expense ( and regular servicing required £££'s ) for rapidly diminishing returns, + extra weight of diesel engines. Neither VW or Audi feature in list of hybrids, and BMW only rarely... The Germans had firmly settled on Diesel, and when diesels were 'outed' a few years ago decided to go straight to BEV and skip the hybrid bit..
-
From what I can see Mercedes made diesel and petrol hybrid versions of the C and E class, plug in and non from 2015. They seem to make up about 20% of those for sale on AutoTrader. Also Peugeot and Citroen made diesel hybrids though they don't seem popular.
the first hybrids were sold in 1999/2000, the Prius as we know it, became mainstream in 2005/6, Mercedes entered the market 10 years adrift of the Prius.
Mercedes self-reported secret collusion with other German car makers, collusion between makers to suppress or not introduce technology that would reduce exhaust pollution from vehicles, the Courts have imposed fines on the car makers for the illegal collusion, Mercedes were exempt from the fine for having self - reported the collusion
-
First refuelling 465 miles, 30.65 litres so 69.3 mpg (car claimed 73 mpg).
Second refuelling 515 miles, 32.90 litres so 71.2 mpg (car claimed 75.1 mpg).
The "fibometer" appears to be about 5% optimistic - nothing new there!
71 mpg? That is phenomenal.
I couldn’t even dream of such a figure. I have a smile at 45mpg.
-
First refuelling 465 miles, 30.65 litres so 69.3 mpg (car claimed 73 mpg).
Second refuelling 515 miles, 32.90 litres so 71.2 mpg (car claimed 75.1 mpg).
The "fibometer" appears to be about 5% optimistic - nothing new there!
71 mpg? That is phenomenal.
I couldn’t even dream of such a figure. I have a smile at 45mpg.
If i not using climate control(only fan for ventilation using outside air) i can get around 90-100 MPG in town .
Climate control set to cooling greatly affects fuel economy in hot summer.
-
Because of my driving style, time of day, routes, I've always achieved more than the official figures.
In my current 1.8 torque converter auto Civic I'm averaging about 52mpg. The brochure combined is 44.8mpg
Same in my Lexus IS200, the official figure was 28 but I was averaging 32mpg.
-
Because of my driving style, time of day, routes, I've always achieved more than the official figures.
In my current 1.8 torque converter auto Civic I'm averaging about 52mpg. The brochure combined is 44.8mpg
Same in my Lexus IS200, the official figure was 28 but I was averaging 32mpg.
Impressive - does Jocko have a challenger for his crown ;)
-
Having looked again at the way the Jazz hybrid works I doubt I will be in the top 10.
Under about 10mph it can be electric, then 10 to 30 it's a mix and match but over 30 it's primarily engine.
99% of my weekly journey is motorway and fast A roads.
-
As a new member, hello. The Jazz Hybrid we recently purchased belongs to my wife, who is the main driver. This is her 8th new Honda, all pretty faultless. However, I will probably drive more miles than her in it.
We part exchanged her Jazz Mk 3 Sport cvt, with 9k on the clock, really on my advice, because second hand car prices are very high, and we lost very little in depreciation. She actually loved her Sport, but after driving this latest, I think she loves it more.
I have already driven it more, and I have to say I think it is an astonishing little vehicle.
To give some background, I drive a 2019 Mercedes S Class S400d, itself a brilliant car, and have just returned from driving 1372 miles to the Orkney Islands, so I do understand comfort and economy.
The day after we returned I took the Jazz to London and back in a day, some 485 miles, to collect an item, quite heavy, in order to give the Jazz some miles.
I filled up before and immediately after, and returned 63 mpg, with full aircon, motorway hold ups (many), A roads, and driving on acc at 70 mph. This is also a brand new car, 40 miles on the clock, and knowing Honda’s as I do, still very tight, so mpg will improve.
I am 6ft tall and I found the Jazz extremely comfortable to drive, with my only criticism being road noise on motorway at speed.
After watching the dash showing how it all works, which is pretty smart, I switched it off.
I have viewed many of the Video reviews, from motoring journalists and disagree with most, why do they love to put the Jazz down?.
In summary the Jazz ain’t cheap, and we invariably buy the EX , but we are both very happy, particularly the versatility, which will be put to good use on a family holiday where the space loading beats the Merc .
Clearly in this day and age, an electric car would have been more ideal, but lack of charging ability, plus cost put us off. I also would not have risked a London return, but taking everything into account, and the whole Jazz Hybrid package, for our needs, 5 year warranty, 5 year servicing…… just brilliant.
-
Having looked again at the way the Jazz hybrid works I doubt I will be in the top 10.
Your doubt is based on the way the Honda hybrid works? Whether the Jazz, with regard to fuel consumption, will be in the top 10, we will see in a while. But to give a first indication, which is based on too few cars to be reliable, here's a comparison between the "champion fuel-efficient hybrid", the new Toyota Yaris and the Jazz. This indication is based on data from "Spritmonitor" https://www.spritmonitor.de/en/ , measured over a minimum of 10,000 km. (just over 6200 miles).
The champion, the Yaris then has an average fuel consumption of 4.27 L/100 km (= 66.15 mpg) and the Jazz 4.44 L/100 km. (= 63.62 mpg).
Indeed, the Yaris shows (marginally) more economical, but as said: this is a first (unreliable) indication. In a year (or 2 years) we will get a more reliable picture.
Honda Jazz: https://www.spritmonitor.de/en/overview/18-Honda/1293-Jazz_Hybrid.html?fueltype=10&vehicletype=1&constyear_s=2020&minkm=10000&gearing=3
Toyota Yaris: https://www.spritmonitor.de/en/overview/49-Toyota/1287-Yaris_Hybrid.html?fueltype=10&vehicletype=1&constyear_s=2020&power_s=80&minkm=10000&gearing=3
-
Having looked again at the way the Jazz hybrid works I doubt I will be in the top 10.
Under about 10mph it can be electric, then 10 to 30 it's a mix and match but over 30 it's primarily engine.
99% of my weekly journey is motorway and fast A roads.
As a new member, hello. The Jazz Hybrid we recently purchased belongs to my wife, who is the main driver. This is her 8th new Honda, all pretty faultless. However, I will probably drive more miles than her in it.
We part exchanged her Jazz Mk 3 Sport cvt, with 9k on the clock, really on my advice, because second hand car prices are very high, and we lost very little in depreciation. She actually loved her Sport, but after driving this latest, I think she loves it more.
I have already driven it more, and I have to say I think it is an astonishing little vehicle.
To give some background, I drive a 2019 Mercedes S Class S400d, itself a brilliant car, and have just returned from driving 1372 miles to the Orkney Islands, so I do understand comfort and economy.
The day after we returned I took the Jazz to London and back in a day, some 485 miles, to collect an item, quite heavy, in order to give the Jazz some miles.
I filled up before and immediately after, and returned 63 mpg, with full aircon, motorway hold ups (many), A roads, and driving on acc at 70 mph. This is also a brand new car, 40 miles on the clock, and knowing Honda’s as I do, still very tight, so mpg will improve.
I am 6ft tall and I found the Jazz extremely comfortable to drive, with my only criticism being road noise on motorway at speed.
After watching the dash showing how it all works, which is pretty smart, I switched it off.
I have viewed many of the Video reviews, from motoring journalists and disagree with most, why do they love to put the Jazz down?.
In summary the Jazz ain’t cheap, and we invariably buy the EX , but we are both very happy, particularly the versatility, which will be put to good use on a family holiday where the space loading beats the Merc .
Clearly in this day and age, an electric car would have been more ideal, but lack of charging ability, plus cost put us off. I also would not have risked a London return, but taking everything into account, and the whole Jazz Hybrid package, for our needs, 5 year warranty, 5 year servicing…… just brilliant.
The warranty is 3 years. You have to pay to extend the warranty to 5 years.
-
The warranty is 3 years. You have to pay to extend the warranty to 5 years.
All new Honda models have 5 year Honda Care, Servicing & Roadside Assistance at the moment - no extra payment.
https://www.honda.co.uk/cars/campaigns/five.html
-
Having looked again at the way the Jazz hybrid works I doubt I will be in the top 10.
Under about 10mph it can be electric, then 10 to 30 it's a mix and match but over 30 it's primarily engine.
99% of my weekly journey is motorway and fast A roads.
As a new member, hello. The Jazz Hybrid we recently purchased belongs to my wife, who is the main driver. This is her 8th new Honda, all pretty faultless. However, I will probably drive more miles than her in it.
We part exchanged her Jazz Mk 3 Sport cvt, with 9k on the clock, really on my advice, because second hand car prices are very high, and we lost very little in depreciation. She actually loved her Sport, but after driving this latest, I think she loves it more.
I have already driven it more, and I have to say I think it is an astonishing little vehicle.
To give some background, I drive a 2019 Mercedes S Class S400d, itself a brilliant car, and have just returned from driving 1372 miles to the Orkney Islands, so I do understand comfort and economy.
The day after we returned I took the Jazz to London and back in a day, some 485 miles, to collect an item, quite heavy, in order to give the Jazz some miles.
I filled up before and immediately after, and returned 63 mpg, with full aircon, motorway hold ups (many), A roads, and driving on acc at 70 mph. This is also a brand new car, 40 miles on the clock, and knowing Honda’s as I do, still very tight, so mpg will improve.
I am 6ft tall and I found the Jazz extremely comfortable to drive, with my only criticism being road noise on motorway at speed.
After watching the dash showing how it all works, which is pretty smart, I switched it off.
I have viewed many of the Video reviews, from motoring journalists and disagree with most, why do they love to put the Jazz down?.
In summary the Jazz ain’t cheap, and we invariably buy the EX , but we are both very happy, particularly the versatility, which will be put to good use on a family holiday where the space loading beats the Merc .
Clearly in this day and age, an electric car would have been more ideal, but lack of charging ability, plus cost put us off. I also would not have risked a London return, but taking everything into account, and the whole Jazz Hybrid package, for our needs, 5 year warranty, 5 year servicing…… just brilliant.
The warranty is 3 years. You have to pay to extend the warranty to 5 years.
It depends on the market and the MY.
In Italy the first year (2020) was with 8 years warranty included in the price, now they just give 3 years, 5 or 8 years are optional and you have to pay for it.
-
I think the inclusive 5 year warranty/servicing roadside assistance plan is dependent upon taking out Honda finance.
-
Honda do change their offers. The extra 2 year warranty was negotiated in the package. The servicing plan was free if you took out a Honda finance plan, but we can pay off without penalty, other that a small interest charge after 6 months.
I think the offer now has changed again
-
Yes,I took the Honda Finance package, in order to obtain the 5 years free service and will paying it off in full after 6 months.
Actual cost is peanuts, compared with the full cost of 5 years service.
-
Here in Poland the standard Honda warranty for cars is 3 years.
If the car insurance is taken out at Helvetia through Honda (competitive price), the warranty is extended to 5 years or a maximum of 300.000 km!!! (186,000 miles!!!).
It seems they (the importers) do it differently everywhere...
-
The warranty is 3 years. You have to pay to extend the warranty to 5 years.
All new Honda models have 5 year Honda Care, Servicing & Roadside Assistance at the moment - no extra payment.
https://www.honda.co.uk/cars/campaigns/five.html
When I was purchasing my car, I got the 5 years free servicing & road side assistance. When enquiring about the warranty I was told the car would come with three years warranty & you would have the option to extend it to 5 years at any time for an additional payment. see link below:
https://www.honda.co.uk/cars/owners/extended-guarantee-old.html
-
Yesterday I drove from Lichfield to Stratford upon Avon with air-con all the time, with mostly motorway driving I averaged 64.1 mpg.
-
Despite my best hypermiling techniques I cannot manage that on a regular basis. Need to get a Mk 4.
-
Yesterday I drove from Lichfield to Stratford upon Avon with air-con all the time, with mostly motorway driving I averaged 64.1 mpg.
This kind of "averages" is very nice, but means nothing at all. The only way to determine an average consumption is to measure (not read the bc!) over a long(er) period, a year or more and under all weather and traffic conditions.
After a long(er) time you will see a realistic average fuel consumption. I recommend to use for example https://www.spritmonitor.de/en/
-
Having looked again at the way the Jazz hybrid works I doubt I will be in the top 10.
Under about 10mph it can be electric, then 10 to 30 it's a mix and match but over 30 it's primarily engine.
99% of my weekly journey is motorway and fast A roads.
Don't be fooled by Honda giving an easy to understand explanation using speed. It depends on load. I have had it run in EV mode at 65 mph; downhill on the motorway. The best results come from a light right foot when accelerating.
-
Despite my best hypermiling techniques I cannot manage that on a regular basis. Need to get a Mk 4.
Out of interest, do you try to get the highest MPG possible to mostly save money, or is it like game/compeition to you to try and do as best you can?
Personally, I haven't got the patience for it so I just drive as normal and then just fill up when the fuel light comes on + about 40 miles.
-
Out of interest, do you try to get the highest MPG possible to mostly save money, or is it like game/compeition to you to try and do as best you can?
It is all a game. I am retired, I am seldom in a hurry to get anywhere and it adds interest to my driving. My wife goes on about "Bonnie Scotland? All I ever see is the back of one truck or another.".
-
I have noticed that driving with the ECO button on I get around 10% extra mpg and the performance is still good. I was getting around 65mpg (according to the dash figure) when I first had the car but with the ECO on I'm getting 70+
-
Some days I can get Hybrid mpg with my Mk 1. This was for a run from Cowdenbeath via Mossmorran, Auchtertool to Kirkcaldy. All country roads. No AC (don't have any) but I did have the windows wide open.
(https://i.imgur.com/0uh5KLl.jpg)
Think I need to dust my dash and instruments!
-
I have now 1350 Km.
MPG BC 3.2 L real 3.44 L around 82.12 mpg (Sprit Monitor)
Autonomy more than 1150 Km
-
I too use Sprit Monitor. That is where the number beside my avatar is derived.
-
I to can get close to this mileage of 3.2l but now too hot (34°C and 70% humidity) .
My last tank refill average 3.89l (using a/c) (904km from ful to empty tank light come up with 45km to empty on screen. (According to user manual should be around 5l in tank) refilled 36l, i think our gas stations cheating.....
Morning trips without a/c ~ 10km with speed up to ~40km/h i getting readings from BC 3.1l/100km.
4 months ago i have issues with braking system
the brake pads wedged sometimes, a couple of times in traffic jams I heard a rumble from behind, I thought that the truck was slowing down nearby, until I heard the same rumble when I was turning around in an empty parking lot, I went to the service center, they told me that they hadn't found anything, but after that the fuel consumption became decrease.
On trips that not shorter then 7 km with speed up to 40km/h on flat road it's possible.
Japanese Fit e:HEV in specs have WLTP test and JC08 test results, using JC08 test pattern (if someone interested this can be found in the net) car can show consumption 2.8l/100k in town.
-
So if I drive carefully at 70mph I can get 45.2 mpg average which isn't bad for a 17 year old car with several problems. Note that this was at night in the rain (added resistance from the water) main beams on and I had the demisters on due to steaming up so there was some electrical load on the car, not to mention the stereo that I have on fairly loud.
For those interested, at 110mph with the same electrical load the mpg drops down to 19.5mpg.
-
For those interested, at 110mph with the same electrical load the mpg drops down to 19.5mpg.
I'll pretend we didn't hear that. ;D
-
For those interested, at 110mph with the same electrical load the mpg drops down to 19.5mpg.
Interested and impressed that the old jalopy can get to 110mph. 8)
-
For those interested, at 110mph with the same electrical load the mpg drops down to 19.5mpg.
Interested and impressed that the old jalopy can get to 110mph. 8)
Foot flat to the floor, sitting at around 6000rpm and shaking like a dog, but other than that it cruises comfortably. If you anchor on quickly though for a junction you can hear and feel the brake fading.
-
A round trip today of a bit over 30 miles each way mainly on an A road where about 2/3rd of the distance has a 50 mph limit. The fibometer claimed 83.1 mpg on the outgoing leg and 79.3 mpg on the return. The latter included aircon use and a very small headwind. That's an average of 81.2 mpg but I find the fibometer to be nearly 5% optimistic which reduces the average to 77.1 mpg.
-
I can get more mpg without using the eco mode, I am getting at least 67mpg with which I am more than happy.
-
Had my Mk4 for 1 week now and first run on open B roads gave a reading of 79.9 mpg
-
Already 2000 Km and the consumption still 3.2L average. Photo attached during the trip.
-
Already 2000 Km and the consumption still 3.2L average. Photo attached during the trip.
Wow! 88mpg.
-
Already 2000 Km and the consumption still 3.2L average. Photo attached during the trip.
Wow! 88mpg.
73.5 mpg. Still very impressive. :)
Edit my mistake the conversion gave US gallons.
88 mpg right enough.
-
I was challenge to do 1000 Km with one tank.
Challende accepted.
Done already 1003 Km with this tank, still 225 Km autonomy ( 3 bars fuel left) and BC indicate 3.0 L average.
Long term average in 3325 Km 3.2L
Does anibody say plug-in or electric several thousand EURO more expensive
-
That's impressive!
My most recent fill (35.0 litres) was after 446 miles (717km). Two bars were showing on the fuel gauge and about 50 miles range left.
Long term average is 60.3 MPG. (4.683 L/100km)
I live in a hilly area.
-
So this week (Midnight on Sunday 05/09/21 to 12/09/21) I will do over 500 miles (mostly motorway) in my Jazz which will be interesting. 500 miles is usually 1.5 fill ups depending on how I drive.
It will be 500 miles minimum as long my planned week goes as planned and could be more depending on a few things. Due to my recent relationship situaiton change (ie. new parter lives futher away) it's likely that 400mi a week could become the norm, which is a fair week for an 18 year old 137,000mi Jazz. I have faith though, it's done this before so it can do it again.
-
I was challenge to do 1000 Km with one tank.
Challende accepted.
Done already 1003 Km with this tank, still 225 Km autonomy ( 3 bars fuel left) and BC indicate 3.0 L average.
Long term average in 3325 Km 3.2L
Does anibody say plug-in or electric several thousand EURO more expensive
Impressive, i did two time 989km but with 0 bars left, so I didn't felt comfortable risking 1000km, my best tank was 26km/l with AC use when needed.
-
Over nearly 2,000 miles I’m averaging around 54-58mpg.
Not bad as most of my driving is 70mph motorway on long trips. It compares to a diesel hatchback where my long term mpg was 44-47mpg on the same journeys. So about 10mpg more using cheaper fuel.
As soon as I drop below the usual 70mph cruising speed the mpg shoots up.
I did a 30 mile motorway trip recently, about half at up to 70mph and half fixed at a set 40/50mph due to roadworks. Mpg for the whole trip was 70! That was just driving normally with the rush hour traffic.
-
Impressive, i did two time 989km but with 0 bars left, so I didn't felt comfortable risking 1000km, my best tank was 26km/l with AC use when needed.
[/quote]
Not understand is last bar on meter also disappears ? :o
On my Jazz low fuel warning starts when ~5l left with 50km left to 0
When 0 km remaining appears on meter I can refuel 36l
So remaining fuel is 4l
-
Last bar disappears also, I've filled up 38L after that.
I thought that the estimated range left was a little conservative as on Toyotas, so I've tried to run after that l.
I did 20-30km with 0 range, and after that went to 0 bars left on that tank, so i think it's keeping just 50-60km of margin after 0 range left.
-
I was challenge to do 1000 Km with one tank.
Challende accepted.
Done already 1003 Km with this tank, still 225 Km autonomy ( 3 bars fuel left) and BC indicate 3.0 L average.
Long term average in 3325 Km 3.2L
Does anibody say plug-in or electric several thousand EURO more expensive
Awesome!!!
I can’t get 3.2l average- to many tailgaters and aggressive drivers on our roads, my best last trip 120km - 3.1l/100km with AC set to 22 C (but the sun was already low, so the air conditioner did not waste a lot of energy, outside it was 31 degrees Celsius ) with speed 70-90km/h
-
For those interested, it's possible to do 72 miles at 43.5mpg before it runs out of puff and you have to class the AA as I delicately tested the other day.
-
I known it's not average consumption
(https://i.ibb.co/YD8VFb3/20210908-194519-HDR.jpg)
And i cheating :), when i startet this trip battery have 60% of charge and all road descents slightly, previus trip other way same road and speed limit.
No AC usage only ventilation that takes air from outside.
(https://i.ibb.co/HghJZHh/20210908-194537-HDR.jpg)
That average mpg from last trip A reset on full tank refill.
-
I happened to be rereading the Auto Express review of the normal Jazz… somehow they managed to average 42mpg! Less than the 50+ they got in a later review of the Crossstar.
I don’t know what they did but maybe it’s a misprint - no one else seems to have got mileage that low.
-
That possible if on review they drive aggressively or very short trips, short trips especially when ICE is cold may give low MPG easily.
-
I have been forced to the conclusion that test drivers for auto magazines etc. do not once consider the reality of the vehicle they are testing. All are rated against their misguided belief in how a Porsche should be driven and perform. I understand they are there to expose weaknesses and areas of concern but to not appreciate the advantages of each car or try and understand what it was designed to accomplish is a real failing on their part. We are all interested in basics like 0-60, top speed, cornering etc. but only as basic parameters; mpg driven as intended and ride comfort and refinement are at least as important. Why, for instance, don’t they report on ride height - a major factor in those looking at Crossover SUV’s ?
-
I have been forced to the conclusion that test drivers for auto magazines etc. do not once consider the reality of the vehicle they are testing. All are rated against their misguided belief in how a Porsche should be driven and perform. I understand they are there to expose weaknesses and areas of concern but to not appreciate the advantages of each car or try and understand what it was designed to accomplish is a real failing on their part. We are all interested in basics like 0-60, top speed, cornering etc. but only as basic parameters; mpg driven as intended and ride comfort and refinement are at least as important. Why, for instance, don’t they report on ride height - a major factor in those looking at Crossover SUV’s ?
I disagree, MPG and comfort wouldn't be anywear near the top of my list when looking at a car for myself. My current (also first car) was bought cheap for insurnace purposes and for practice.
The second car (in a few weeks) is likely to be on of the V8 Supercharged Jaguar XF's and let me tell, the comfort or MPG wasn't on my list when choosing it. 0-60, noise and how quickly I can make rubber become smoke were my top 3.
-
You are just the person many car testers are writing for!
I would suggest however that you are in the minority and the ability to make smoke is far, far down the list for most drivers in 2021.
-
Well someone looking for 0-60, smok and noise should not look on hybrid cars, purpose to have hybrid car is to get maximum fuel economy, have comfortable ride, and save planet from excessive co2 build up.
So car tester should be able to test ability of hybrid car to give MPG and show how efficient this car can be, 0-60 and breaking disrance from 60 also intresting that sometimes can save life.
-
I disagree, MPG and comfort wouldn't be anywear near the top of my list when looking at a car for myself. My current (also first car) was bought cheap for insurnace purposes and for practice.
The second car (in a few weeks) is likely to be on of the V8 Supercharged Jaguar XF's and let me tell, the comfort or MPG wasn't on my list when choosing it. 0-60, noise and how quickly I can make rubber become smoke were my top 3.
(https://images.partydelights.co.uk/CUTO/33/8/front/v1/pop/2.jpg)
-
The mk4 Jazz hybrid has the same 0-60 as the mark 1 VW Golf GTI or the Mazda MX5 Miata.
It’s also the same 0-60 as the current VW Up GTI, so not a slow car at all.
My last car was a tuned 180hp/400Nm hatchback… the Jazz is just as fast at real world speeds and actually faster at the lower end.
-
But for noise and how quickly it can make rubber become smoke it for sure loses with the types of car 150234 would go for.
Maybe a TROLLeybus :P would be something for 150234... https://www.tbus.org.uk/home.htm
-
First refuelling 465 miles, 30.65 litres so 69.3 mpg (car claimed 73 mpg).
Second refuelling 515 miles, 32.90 litres so 71.2 mpg (car claimed 75.1 mpg).
The "fibometer" appears to be about 5% optimistic - nothing new there!
Just checked on my Honda+App, one 24 mile journey showing 79.9 mpg (Kendal in Cumbria to Morecambe). Any idea on the accuracy of this figure on this app?
-
Seems pretty accurate- on long motorway trips I’m getting maybe 55mpg but as soon as the speed drops the mpg goes up.
I did a trip on the M25/M4 in rush hour, 25 miles at maybe an average 50mph & got 70mpg.
Coming back later with no traffic and a steady 70mph average the mpg was normal around 55mpg.
Trips off the motorway at up to 60mph and getting around 60mpg.
So for me, very roughly long distance average speed gives:
70mph - 50+mpg
60mph - 60mpg
50mph - 70mpg
-
Just checked on my Honda+App, one 24 mile journey showing 79.9 mpg (Kendal in Cumbria to Morecambe). Any idea on the accuracy of this figure on this app?
The My Honda+ app shows exactly the same mpg numbers as the Trip Computer function on the big screen. I assume that these numbers have the same optimistic bias as the miles per refill otherwise the overall numbers wouldn't add up. I'm currently on 4.77% optimism bias.
The claimed 79.9 mpg Kendal to Morecambe is plausible as I've found that the hybrid system is very sensitive to any height difference between start and end points. Kendal is about 200ft above sea level and any downhill journey increases the proportion of the time when the car can be running on battery. Was it a dry day? I've found that wet roads cause a surprising reduction in the mpg.
-
First refuelling 465 miles, 30.65 litres so 69.3 mpg (car claimed 73 mpg).
Second refuelling 515 miles, 32.90 litres so 71.2 mpg (car claimed 75.1 mpg).
The "fibometer" appears to be about 5% optimistic - nothing new there!
Just checked on my Honda+App, one 24 mile journey showing 79.9 mpg (Kendal in Cumbria to Morecambe). Any idea on the accuracy of this figure on this app?
On my first trip on fairly clear and level B roads I also got a reading of 79.9 mpg.
-
Just checked on my Honda+App, one 24 mile journey showing 79.9 mpg (Kendal in Cumbria to Morecambe). Any idea on the accuracy of this figure on this app?
The My Honda+ app shows exactly the same mpg numbers as the Trip Computer function on the big screen. I assume that these numbers have the same optimistic bias as the miles per refill otherwise the overall numbers wouldn't add up. I'm currently on 4.77% optimism bias.
The claimed 79.9 mpg Kendal to Morecambe is plausible as I've found that the hybrid system is very sensitive to any height difference between start and end points. Kendal is about 200ft above sea level and any downhill journey increases the proportion of the time when the car can be running on battery. Was it a dry day? I've found that wet roads cause a surprising reduction in the mpg.
Yes it was a dry day, I did notice EV mode was on on some points driving at 67 mph as well. The downhill drive as you mention is more likely to give a better mpg.
-
Hybrid economy :D
-
:) Now that is economy!
-
A longer journey, mostly on motorway:
-
But for noise and how quickly it can make rubber become smoke it for sure loses with the types of car 150234 would go for.
Maybe a TROLLeybus :P would be something for 150234... https://www.tbus.org.uk/home.htm
I mean, I would expect the Jaguar XF 3.0 V6 280hp and 600nm of torque to beat a Golf, and definitely a Jazz.
Did I mention RWD for them mini roundabouts.
-
I mean, I would expect the Jaguar XF 3.0 V6 280hp and 600nm of torque to beat a Golf, and definitely a Jazz.
Did I mention RWD for them mini roundabouts.
Assuming a perfect Jaguar launch every stop (left foot braking to build up the revs and turbo, and a bit of wheel spin,which will wear the transmission/etc), it’s actually only 0.8 seconds faster to 37mph than a crosstar:
Duel: Honda Jazz IV Crosstar e:HEV vs Jaguar XF 3.0 D S (https://zeperfs.com/en/duel8682-2909.htm)
Whereas all the Jazz driver has to do is calmly press the accelerator to launch. The Jaguar driver has to dial up the revs and find traction every time perfectly to get that launch performance. Just pressing the accelerator with no revs build up first in many diesels adds 1 second to the 0-60mph time.
With lots of mini roundabouts, the Jazz driver actually has a real chance of winning against a 280hp diesel XF!
In a drag race to 30mph, from idle, the 110hp Jazz should beat the 280hp XF. It has over 500kg less weight, and 250Nm available from zero revs.
You even get a nice noise with fake gear shifts in the Mk4 under full acceleration:
(For all points - Professional Driver/Closed Course obviously)
-
I mean, I would expect the Jaguar XF 3.0 V6 280hp and 600nm of torque to beat a Golf, and definitely a Jazz.
Did I mention RWD for them mini roundabouts.
Assuming a perfect Jaguar launch every stop (left foot braking to build up the revs and turbo, and a bit of wheel spin,which will wear the transmission/etc), it’s actually only 0.8 seconds faster to 37mph than a crosstar:
Duel: Honda Jazz IV Crosstar e:HEV vs Jaguar XF 3.0 D S (https://zeperfs.com/en/duel8682-2909.htm)
Whereas all the Jazz driver has to do is calmly press the accelerator to launch. The Jaguar driver has to dial up the revs and find traction every time perfectly to get that launch performance. Just pressing the accelerator with no revs build up first in many diesels adds 1 second to the 0-60mph time.
With lots of mini roundabouts, the Jazz driver actually has a real chance of winning against a 280hp diesel XF!
In a drag race to 30mph, from idle, the 110hp Jazz should beat the 280hp XF. It has over 500kg less weight, and 250Nm available from zero revs.
You even get a nice noise with fake gear shifts in the Mk4 under full acceleration
But will the rear end slide out in the mk4? I think not.
5.9 seconds to 60mph will thoroughly slap the mk4 about the place, any day of the week. As for 0-37mph, I don't remember seeing that test on Top Gear. Who races from idle? Like who?
How exactly would a Jazz beat an XF around mini roundabouts? I just have to boot the throttle and around she goes, I'm going back where I came from in less than a second.
As for torque, well 600nm at 2000rpm will be lovely.
The mk4 just doesn't compare, in anyway.
-
.
.
(https://www.cheesebuerger.de/smiliegenerator/vorschau/43432.png)
.
.
-
I've completed 2 of my regular weekly journeys along the M4 and fast A roads and my average mpg is just under 70mpg. I can't see that getting any higher.
Probably lower when the M4 returns to 70mph
-
75+mpg the other day :) just driving normally on 40/50/60mph roads.
Even on fairly short trips I’m getting 50+. My Toyota hybrid was over 10mpg less on the same roads.
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210918/f1e734516641fd40bbc6b89e7311e5c6.jpg)
-
I’m finding cruising speed to have the biggest effect on mpg.
Today I had a 25 mile trip, from cold and having to demist the car I still got over 64mpg on country roads mostly 30/40/50!
For comparison the Auris hybrid I used to have would have struggled to hit even 44mpg on that trip.
For me, a steady 50mph cruise either through roadworks or open country roads with that limit consistently gets me over 70mpg.
Whereas at 70mph I’m consistently getting lower/mid fifties. Compared to my Auris hybrid that did mid forties on the same roads.
It’s a very impressive engine/motor setup in the Jazz.
-
A leisurely trip from Manchester to NW Wales (about 150 miles) with cruise control set to 60mph. A mixture of motorway, dual carriageway, A roads and B roads.
I let ACC tag me along behind lorries on max follow distance, etc. The intent was to have the drive to be low stress, leaving me to wind down whilst listening to some podcasts and a bit of radio.
In my Mk2 I'd be needing to refuel about half way to allow me to make the return trip without stopping. I started with a nearly full tank. The range remaining is 396 miles.
-
I've found something odd ......
When I turned off yesterday my trip B was showing 68.7 mpg. I went out this morning, powered up, and trip B was showing 67.4 mpg.
When I powered up, the engine didn't fire up so no petrol being used.
I did the same again, powered off and on again and trip B was now down to 66.7 mpg.
I wonder what it's doing ?
-
I've noticed something similar when I've been sitting in the car not going anywhere setting things up - but in my case the petrol engine was cycling on/off as needed a few times to keep the battery charged.
It might be that it is assuming that it will shortly be running the engine warm up cycle whenever it's turned on, so taking that into account?
-
I've recently completed a 60 mile round trip so the batteries are OK.
As you say, I expected the MPG drop during stationary setup as the engine did periodically kick in, as expected, during my couple of hours setup.
This morning I did turn off the heating/AirCon as that will fire up the engine.
I powered up, the engine did not fire up but the MPG dropped anyway. It's doing or trying to do something clever because the power is on.
-
Maybe now car computer countin idling electricity consumption in EV mode - that something like 300w
In Jazz 2021 that consumption not counted so MPG not decreasing when i idling in EV mode.
-
I'll find out how accurate it is when I next brim it then do the maths, litres in v miles covered.
When that happens my Spritmonitor will change from -- to something realistic.
Not for a while though at 60 miles per week.
-
Sorry for off topic
Today changed several times l/100km to MPG and back without mooving car and found that our MY21 infotainment have glitch ;)
Each time i changed measured units infotainment duplicated trip A from last trip A .....
Can someone check if this happens not only with my infotainment ?
-
Can anway tell me why in a mk1 Jazz at 70mph in top gear I can only manage 41mph when trying to be as gently as possible? That seems a bit poor to me, I should probably check tyre pressures as I haven't done in a while, what's everyone running?
One thing I will say though, my particular Jazz isn't very efficient as it has the worst tyre QwikFit had with an E rating for fuel economy, it's heavily loaded as it has quite a lot of stuff in it for work which add to the total weight and it's also got quite draggy gearbox which does have a few issues.
Also, the car is about to get to 140,000 miles in the next month or so and considering I bought it with two owners at 112,122 who had both babyied the car around the city with a few mile per year over the previous 17 years, I reckon that the engine has a fair few hours on it also so is likely suffering from wear.
-
Can anway tell me why in a mk1 Jazz at 70mph in top gear I can only manage 41mph when trying to be as gently as possible?
This is the Mk 4 Jazz forum so we Mk 4 Jazz owners hope to get better mpg than your Mk 4 Jazz. In addition to the factors you have mentioned, I expect that the engine is running outside of its most efficient zone (particularly if it's 1.2 L). What's the engine rpm at 70 mph?
Getting back to the Mk 4, I got a claimed 123.9 mpg on a 6 mile trip today. However, the car was assisted by gravity - the start was about 100m higher than the end. I forgot to note the mpg for the trip in the opposite direction but it would have been somewhat lower but it highlights the effect of height difference on individual trips.
-
Can anway tell me why in a mk1 Jazz at 70mph in top gear I can only manage 41mph when trying to be as gently as possible?
This is the Mk 4 Jazz forum so we Mk 4 Jazz owners hope to get better mpg than your Mk 4 Jazz. In addition to the factors you have mentioned, I expect that the engine is running outside of its most efficient zone (particularly if it's 1.2 L). What's the engine rpm at 70 mph?
Getting back to the Mk 4, I got a claimed 123.9 mpg on a 6 mile trip today. However, the car was assisted by gravity - the start was about 100m higher than the end. I forgot to note the mpg for the trip in the opposite direction but it would have been somewhat lower but it highlights the effect of height difference on individual trips.
Maximum MPG that claimed on Honda Japan site for e:HEV FIT is 108 MPG or 2.63l/100km or 38.5km/l in JC08 testing cycle/ but WLTC only 3.57l/100km or 79 MPG
(https://i.ibb.co/NLNb1hf/FIT-spec.jpg)
right side of screenshot for Japanese 1.3l petrol FIT with variator
The following are selected parameters of the JC08 driving schedule:
Duration: 1204 s
Total distance: 8.171 km
Average speed: 24.4 km/h (34.8 km/h excluding idle)
Maximum speed: 81.6 km/h
Load ratio: 29.7%
(https://i.ibb.co/yBx21F7/JC08.png)
Today seen 2.8l/100km without gravity help but i added air pressue in tires - now is 38 psi front and 36 psi back this pressure recomended if driver frequently driving with speed that higer then 160km/h ? to reduse tire heating.
-
No matter how I'm driving I've only ever seen 2 readouts on the 'instant mpg' bar.
It either reads somewhere around 35mpg (midway between zero and the centre marked 70mpg) or 140mpg when presumably the engine is off.
Seems sort of pointless if that's the norm.
-
Yes, I’ve stopped looking at the instant mpg bar as it doesn’t seem to be much use.
A eco/power bar like other hybrid cars have showing percent of power used would be more useful as you could vary the accelerator to get more mpg.
Mine also seems a bit slow to react, so not really instant mpg.
-
An interesting trip last week of about an hour stopping once without turning off the engine. Split nearly 1/3 motorway, 1/3 urban and 1/3 country roads.
Averaging 64mpg. Without the motorway section then I’m sure mpg would be over 70.
-
On my last Heathrow area to Reading return journey I hit Eco and took it easy but I still can't quite crack 70mpg. Very close at 68 though.
Looking at previous journeys Eco did almost nothing. Unlike the Civic I didn't notice any change to throttle response or climate control performance.
-
Hi Kremmen
About ECON it hass effect on climate controll - in hot day if you using climate control without ECON the climate control can blow air with high speed, but when you press ECON button theclimate control air blower speed reduces and cabin temperature not keeping always same temperature that you choise but can rise if you cooling cabing and recirculation for air choisen (the speed near knob may remain same but you can hear that speed of blower reduced)
About acceleration with ECON pressed - if i gentle on accelerator pedal and i pushing ECON i can feel little reduction in power (lets say it`s like if you drive an old car with 1.0l naturaly aspirated engine uphill and when acelerating hitting air con on)
About regen braking without ECON - its more powerfull from my observation, when i removing my foot from accelerator and when pressing braking pedal .
This make sense because bigger economy is not when regen braking used but when car glades (no aceleration and no braking used) that reason to use ECON and B mode in town, when you gentle on accelerator you can catch its position where regen is almost not applied, you can check this when you driving downhill but becarefull when you in B mode and releasing accelerator fully you speed redusing fast like you pressing brak pedal but stop light not activated !!!
But if you doing small trips without A/C (lets say 6-8km) in town with speed up to 40km/h and gentle with accelerator, allowing to car reduce speed slowly without hard regen braking if you need to stop you can get same fuel economy as with ECON pressed.
About fuel economy when my Jazz new it suffered firs 2 month from brak pads dragg. The pads was new and i almost not used them, several times i heared noise from rear of car when started to move (noise like from heavy car that braking hard but there was no car near me) I let to honda service check car -they told me that they not found something wrong with braking system but after this check that wooping noise from rear of car not came back and fuel economy started to rise .
-
Play with obd2 car scanner
(https://i.ibb.co/tYNPhLY/20210925-171100-HDR.jpg)
I not unedstand Honda
They included power meter on new HR-V e:HEV
But Jazz/FIT not get this meter...
That power flow that we have not much informative
-
Can anway tell me why in a mk1 Jazz at 70mph in top gear I can only manage 41mph when trying to be as gently as possible?
This is the Mk 4 Jazz forum so we Mk 4 Jazz owners hope to get better mpg than your Mk 4 Jazz. In addition to the factors you have mentioned, I expect that the engine is running outside of its most efficient zone (particularly if it's 1.2 L). What's the engine rpm at 70 mph?
Getting back to the Mk 4, I got a claimed 123.9 mpg on a 6 mile trip today. However, the car was assisted by gravity - the start was about 100m higher than the end. I forgot to note the mpg for the trip in the opposite direction but it would have been somewhat lower but it highlights the effect of height difference on individual trips.
It's a 2003 mk1 with the 1.4 litre petrol. Runs at bang on 3,500 RPM at 70mph.
-
It's a 2003 mk1 with the 1.4 litre petrol. Runs at bang on 3,500 RPM at 70mph.
I think that's the answer to your question. 3,500 rpm is well outside the zone of optimum engine efficiency. I think later Jazzes (certainly the CVT versions) are no more than 2,500 rpm at 70mph.
-
This, in my opinion, is why cars shouldn't be allowed 5 gears as it just isn't enough. If the Jazz had a 6th it would be far more efficient.
-
An interesting journey - I have a regular 50 mile, 70mph journey in a fairly hilly area.
Normally I get around 52mpg if it’s clear and I’m mostly sitting with the ACC on.
Today I tried going at around 60mph or a bit less in ECON mode and with only very gentle acceleration.
I managed to get 61mpg, so an improvement of 9mpg.
It does show how efficient the car is to start with though, without having to drive differently at all. The heating wasn’t as effective in ECON mode too.
I see the HRV gets an eco/power gauge but it’s not needed in the Jazz.
-
I should mention that I am currently running 10W-40 DIESEL oil in my petrol Jazz. It's thicker and is of course meant for diesel engines which also won't help fuel economy. I only realised after putting it in.
-
An interesting journey - I have a regular 50 mile, 70mph journey in a fairly hilly area.
Normally I get around 52mpg if it’s clear and I’m mostly sitting with the ACC on.
Today I tried going at around 60mph or a bit less in ECON mode and with only very gentle acceleration.
I managed to get 61mpg, so an improvement of 9mpg.
It does show how efficient the car is to start with though, without having to drive differently at all. The heating wasn’t as effective in ECON mode too.
I see the HRV gets an eco/power gauge but it’s not needed in the Jazz.
Power gauge actually can help to drive more economical - you can see how much energy you use.
And using this power meter you can glide on flat road or on slope .
See technique pulse and glide, this technique works excellent on Toyota hybrids.
On Honda Jazz also work but need to sense car because we not have this power meter.
Can by added as I did but that not good to put tablet on dashboard.
-
Today a touristic trip of 257 km. (160 miles). Partly B roads (max 90 kmh / 56 mph) partly typical "touristic" roads with the same speed limit, but you hardly ever reach 70 kmh / 45 mph.
Beautiful weather, temperature visible in the pictures.
Picture 1 more or less halfway: 3.4 l/100 km. = 83.1 mpg
Picture 2 back home, more B roads: 3.6 l/100 km. = 78.5 mpg
Oh... by the way. All the trip was in B (didn't need ACC) and Econ.
-
Honda has now fixed the trip readings on the Honda+ app with todays update on apple - you get the correct mpg heading instead of mph.
-
I just updated the Android version. Fuel consumption is now MPG, not MPH. I don't know if that's the only change.
-
Honda has now fixed the trip readings on the Honda+ app with todays update on apple - you get the correct mpg heading instead of mph.
Yes, Android is the same. However, the fuel consumed is still labelled as being in L when it's obviously in gallons.
-
It would also be useful to have the miles travelled in the journey log.
-
It would also be useful to have the miles travelled in the journey log.
That might be useful.
-
However, the fuel consumed is still labelled as being in L when it's obviously in gallons.
Patience... Suzuka wasn't built in one week either... ;D
-
Just done my first topup.
Trip Computer = 64.7mpg
Actual = 63.8mpg
Near enough.
This low MPG is due to the engine kicking in and out during my first setup. My most recent trip has clocked ~73mpg
-
Even so - impressive figures. I'd settle for those. My interest is how the Mk4 responds to my short trip, urban type motoring.
Getting it tomorrow.
-
95% of my trips are motorway and fast dual carriageway A roads and I can pick my time of day.
In the 50mph roadworks section I'm averaging about 75 but the 60mph average speed section drops to about 65. Urban with a full battery is where it really scores but I haven't done any short urban journeys.
-
After resetting my trip, this is what is shown as mpg. If only !!!!!
-
I've seen that before on the Civic forum where someone has filled up at the top of a hill and been able to coast downhill for far enough to trigger the displays maximum reading :)
-
After resetting my trip, this is what is shown as mpg. If only !!!!!
I had 199.9mpg last night on a short trip from one side of a motorway service area to another, where it had only used battery power.
-
I actually had my Mk3 showing 199.9 mpg a couple of months ago. That must be as high as it goes.
I'd started from a car park at approx 500' up and, after initial acceleration, trundled down to a crossroads 1.4miles away at 150'. There was a car in front, so I couldn't have gone much faster if I'd tried.
As I approached the bottom, I saw 172.8, 187.2 and finally 199.9 mpg.
-
On my recent trip of 290 miles, mainly dual carriageway & motorway, with 3 people and luggage on board the trip computer recorded 70mpg. The range indicator a total of out at 322 miles left in tank giving 612 miles range. Current overall mpg on trip B 64.9mpg for over 2500 miles.
I wonder how long will it be before a practical electric car will be available with a range of over 600 miles.
-
On my recent trip of 290 miles, mainly dual carriageway & motorway, with 3 people and luggage on board the trip computer recorded 70mpg.
What was the average speed during this 290 mile trip according to the BC?
-
Intresting
Just leave gas station after refill of 11l of RON 98 gasoline.
Trip meter 335km ODO 14721km
After leaving gas station looked on BC
This can't be true.....
Only 11l of 98 octane to 30l of 95
(https://i.ibb.co/6n8dK15/20211015-103810.jpg)
(https://i.ibb.co/gvDBMTC/20211015-103801.jpg)
Something wrong.....
-
I filled up last weekend and my tank range is currently showing 639 miles which is 1,028km so 999 may be the limit.
-
No Kremmen :D
This is i km not miles - when i leave gas station there was 1030 km
Look little bit lower
Average consumption by computer only 2.7l/100km or 141MPG it’s only 18km after refill but this newer happened before, my lowest average that I seen before is 3.3l in same driving conditions.
I newer filled 98 RON before.
-
What was the battery charge status when you refilled and was the gas station higher than wherever you travelled to? Either of these will temporarily result in an unrepresentative estimate of the fuel consumption which is then extrapolated to the estimated miles remaining which assumes that the journey so far is representative of the total.
The attached mpg was the result of a 6 mile trip including a 90m (300ft) drop although, IIRC, the battery has near minimum at both the start and end of the trip.
-
I've seen lots of similar posts elsewhere after filling up at a high elevation fuel station.
As we run into Winter I'm not expecting the sort of figures some are achieving. I'm expecting no more than ~ 60mpg once the heater is needed. My regular weekly journey is 30 miles, mainly motorway and fast dual carriage A road with only about 1 mile urban at each end.
-
When I entered gas station battery has 3 bars but this can be 31-39 %, the gas station on same height that my destination.
What’s different from my usual journey’s that engine was warmed up. Nothing more.
Now is 90 km after refill average staying on 3.1l/100km with average speed 24km/h (have short distance between runabouts and traffic lights) when possible speed kept 40km/h, something I noted is that momentarily consumption now always less than 20l/100km when engine run, actually more times kept across 12l/100km, and before mixing fuel grades game when engine run momentarily consumption rarely kept across 12l/100km, 70% of time close to 20l/100km, and when I starting to drive average consumption on trip meter B that resets every journey behaves differently- before mixing fuel always started count from 50l/100km (flat surface on parking lot) now starting counting from 25l/100km.
Maybe I see changes because our “95 RON” not 95 but from 95 to 92, sometimes I hearing pinging from engine (using 95 all the time).
Honda wants minimum 95 RON for our engine.
Whe have many gas station that fails on fuel quality check of diesel and gasoline sometimes quality so bad that octane rating can’t be checked .
Friend of mine refilled cheap priced 95 RON gasoline 6 months ago, when he get to home engine refused to start normal , he visited several repair shops and spend good amount of $ but nothing helped, problem gone only when all that cheap gasoline burned in engine.
-
Two jorneys about 14km one direction uphil(with cold engine at start) other downhill same road (hot engine)
fuel ≥95 RON tyre pressure 2 PSI more then recommended for speed over 160 km/h (38PSI + 2 PSI front 36 PSI +2 PSI rear) it`s not advice to do that but i can say no difference on harsh road either 35 PSI or 38 PSI or 40 PSI and visualy protector of tyre still have contact with road as with 38 PSI for front or 36 PSI for rear, but have effect on rolling resistance.
Uphill average for trip 3.0l/100km
downhill average for trip 2.7l/100km
Average for 180km after refill 3.1l/100km
-
Two jorneys about 14km one direction uphil(with cold engine at start) other downhill same road (hot engine)
fuel ≥95 RON tyre pressure 2 PSI more then recommended for speed over 160 km/h (38PSI + 2 PSI front 36 PSI +2 PSI rear) it`s not advice to do that but i can say no difference on harsh road either 35 PSI or 38 PSI or 40 PSI and visualy protector of tyre still have contact with road as with 38 PSI for front or 36 PSI for rear, but have effect on rolling resistance.
Uphill average for trip 3.0l/100km
downhill average for trip 2.7l/100km
Average for 180km after refill 3.1l/100km
I've not seen that instrument display before, how do you get to it?
-
You'll likely get the display by plugging a dongle into the OBD port and using an app on a phone or tablet. I've seen similar displays from Prius owners.
- Can someone please confirm where the OBD port is on the Mk 4 Jazz? I know they're usually somewhere under the bottom of the dash.
-
I'm sure I spotted mine when I did the dashcam install.
From memory it's the long white port.
-
OBD port located on left side under steering well slightly lower then fuse box and option power connector.
App that used on Toyota hybrid, Hyundai ioniq, Ford hybrid and Kia Niro is Hybrid Assistant- excellent app but to my sadness not supporting Honda hybrids
When I asked author of this app if he plans to add support of Honda hybrids he answered that if Honda will be interested in this he will add support of Honda hybrids…..
Program that I used is Car Scanner Pro, this is diagnostic app but you can configure dashboard.
-
Having driven a few trips of 50 miles at motorway speeds in cold weather, I’m seeing a drop of 4mpg so far.
To be expected, hybrids tend to get maybe 5mpg less in winter.
I was surprised it was so much at high speed though, must be due to the efficiency of the system and it’s use of EV mode at speed in warm weather.
-
It's been pretty cold and wet near us and I've been doing my usual stop/start short distance stuff. The fibometer was showing a tad over 60 mpg but it seems to have dropped back and settled at around 57 mpg. I reckon this might translate to 53 mpg actual which is fine by me and a 25% improvement on my Mk3.
As it happens I've just done a short trip (about 5 miles round trip but parked up for 2 hours) and I have noticed that the battery is showing full but the car is reluctant to kick into EV mode - it's clear that it won't do that whilst the climate control is on until the correct ambient temperature is reached in the cabin.
I've done about 165 miles. I have a strong urge to do a fill up to check my "real" mpg but I am trying to resist that so I can get a truer picture over a longer distance.
-
I was getting an average of 62 mpg but now averaging 56mpg in the "cooler" climate.
-
First fill - early for convenience @ 382 miles gave 53.2mpg (dashboard - 52.9). Range max would be 468.
Countryside running. Mainly D last third with eco.
Looking for better as run-in completes.
-
I cracked!
Curiosity got the better of me so I topped up the tank today. 53.7 mpg and I'm pleased with that given the type of driving I've been doing. I reckon the Mk3 would have been 42 mpg at best.
Early days but the fibometer was just under 4 mpg (57.5mpg) optimistic so no change there then.
-
Having been forced to drive a VW T-Cross hire car with a laggy at low speed DSG for a week, I’m finding my MPG has increased in the Jazz!
A regular country road 25 mile trip achieved 73+ mpg today - my best country mpg.
-
Mine is now hovering around the 64mpg mark. Mostly 50 and 60mph restricted motorways with the heater on.
I must say, the heater does come on fairly quick. My ICE Civic used to not push out noticeable heat till end of the local bypass, 2 miles, but the Jazz is kicking out heat half way down.
-
Mine is now hovering around the 64mpg mark. Mostly 50 and 60mph restricted motorways with the heater on.
I must say, the heater does come on fairly quick. My ICE Civic used to not push out noticeable heat till end of the local bypass, 2 miles, but the Jazz is kicking out heat half way down.
Had my first bit of proper motorway driving this Wednesday. About 40 miles - 30 motorway and 10 on A Road. Roadworks on the motorway so I rarely got anywhere near 70. At the end of this trip the Fibometer was reading just over 64 mpg and that figure includes some other short stuff with the engine on heating the cabin so pretty much in line with your experience.
I was looking at the "Which" figures for this car. They got an astonishing 91 mpg on some urban stuff but only 40 mpg on the motorway. I think these figures might be outliers - the 91 mpg seems incredible but I am sure you'd get more than 40 mpg at motorway speeds even allowing for the fact that high speed motorway work is not a hybrid's strong suit.
-
I think these figures might be outliers - the 91 mpg seems incredible but I am sure you'd get more than 40 mpg at motorway speeds even allowing for the fact that high speed motorway work is not a hybrid's strong suit.
The worst I have had was about 49mpg on the A74(M) from Carlisle climbing to Beattock summit (IIRC they had to fit an extra railway locomotive for this climb in the 'old days'. ) Thats with only about 500 miles from new and the ACC set for 65 mph (where those around me may have had 70 mph showing on their speedometers.)
Maybe If I had set it for 80 mph it may have dropped to 40 mpg, but otherwise I dont know how these journalists manage get the figures they do. Perhaps they just look at the constant fuel consumption bar which with the engine running can drop below 35 mpg at times, but balanced up by the times you are not using any fuel at all. Or they measure it over a very short distance pedal to the metal.
I'd say at 65 mph on level motorway I got about 65 mpg ,sometimes dropping to low 60's. This may depend on tail wind or headwind. I got roughly 1 mpg less for every 1 mph over this speed and 1 mpg more for every mph under. But 80 mph + would come at a fuel cost.
But these are very rough estimates made over a short period. This is about the same as my Diesel yaris under similar conditions. A few small conventional petrol cars may equal, or slightly better it on the motorway. Its in town, and driven sensibly on rural roads where its fuel consumption is really impressive.
-
Yes - I know that climb to Beattock summit. I think your figure of 49 mpg is more realistic than the "Which" figures.
-
First fill - early for convenience @ 382 miles gave 53.2mpg (dashboard - 52.9). Range max would be 468.
Countryside running. Mainly D last third with eco.
Looking for better as run-in completes.
2nd fill - early for convenience @ 760 miles gave 51.9mpg (dashboard - 53.9). Range max would be 456.
Day previous 130 miles round trip mainly dual carriageway +/- 70mph.
-
I wonder why you're getting ~10mpg less than me ?
Can't be traffic as the engine stops.
-
I wonder why you're getting ~10mpg less than me ?
Can't be traffic as the engine stops.
I believe it has something to do with the weight of the right foot ::)
-
I find there's a sweet spot with the right foot, even on the motorway. Keep just within it you can maintain speed, and still get quite sprightly acceleration when required . Exceed it ,even by a little, and fuel consumption can rise significantly without much extra performance. Floor it and you become a gas guzzler.
ACC can have a heavy right foot. If the vehicle in front slows you to say 50 mph and you then move into a clear lane the ACC will accelerate quite hard to regain speed ,guzzling fuel . Better to accelerate manually, and more gently, only letting the ACC resume control after you reach the desired speed.
Those who generally drive at 60 mph on motorways have a double mpg advantage. Slower speed plus they are often protected from wind resistance by a truck in front.
I have found mpg , and how often the car goes into EV mode, can vary even at the same speed , same light traffic and the same apparent gradient. I suspect it depends on whether you have a head wind or tail wind.
Adjusting your speed by even a mph or two can keep you in the mpg sweet spot . Unfortunately I dont find the constant mpg bar display very helpful here. Its only shows 0 ,70 and 140 mpg. You have to estimate the actual figure.
It also seems the wrong way round for mpg where a high figure is good. Better for litres/km where low is good.
-
ACC can have a heavy right foot. If the vehicle in front slows you to say 50 mph and you then move into a clear lane the ACC will accelerate quite hard to regain speed ,guzzling fuel .
True
-
That's why I like the LIM instead on speed controlled motorways. I control the rate of acceleration.
-
Last tank i filled was 98 RON gasoline and computer was sure i can do 1150km to empty tank (when i use car in city) , but then i do trip to Dead Sea (-389m below sea level ) with speed ~90km/h from big Tel Aviv +47m above Sea level to 477m elevation in higest point above sea level and climate control set to+23 Celsius, with with 3 passengers - 326km total round trip, then 216 km with one passenger on highway with speed 90km/h, and rest 432km with one passenger in city with speed 40-50 km/h, when low fuel light up i done 955 km, car calculated consumption 3.6l/100, then consumption dropped to 3.5l/100 after another trip of 19km (in fact it should display 3.59l/100km but when car dashboard set to metric system it's less accurate then when displays UK MPG) , entered fuel station with 38km left to empty tank i gues there left 4.7l and i done 974km from full tank (on average with our 95 RON i can get 850km to low fuel message), this time filled 10l of 95 RON (engine knocks again when engine cold).
Price of gasoline in Israel - 1 UK gallon of 95 RON was 6,768 GBP and 98 RON 7,4 GBP
-
I’ve had the new jazz for a month now and slightly disappointed with averaging 53mpg. Thought I’d get a bit more. Think the issue is very short distances driven 3 times a day and the batteries haven’t had time to warm up therefore EV mode not kicking in. Also notice I get much better mpg when I drive over my wife with her big led foot.
-
Short distances in winter do drop the mpg quite a bit.
I got 40mpg for a trip recently, but on the way back it was over 50mpg.
With the engine running, if I turn off the heating it stops instantly and restarts when I switch it back on. In the summer it often doesn’t need to start up if the outside temperature is warm.
-
I’ve had the new jazz for a month now and slightly disappointed with averaging 53mpg. Thought I’d get a bit more. Think the issue is very short distances driven 3 times a day and the batteries haven’t had time to warm up therefore EV mode not kicking in. Also notice I get much better mpg when I drive over my wife with her big led foot.
You beat my worst record....
When i have my car for 3 month i did mostly short trips 0.6-1.8 miles twice day and lightly used heater
managed to get 67 MPG but our winter is not so cold and minimal temperature last year were i live +6 Celsius.
I found that best MPG in town is when trip is not shorter then 4-5 miles and speed up to 25mph (with this speed on level road Jazz can stay in EV mode up to 80% of time)
Check tyres pressure when they cold (low tyre pressure lowers MPG)
Usage of heater with short trips will give you worst MPG, if possible use seat heater.(now when outside temperature around +16 engine get to normal working temperature of 80 Celsius in town after traveling ~2.5 miles)
When you lightly press accelerator you can found pedal position where no acceleration or regenerative breaking occurs so when you get to you speed say 25 mph and you on level road or descending you can drive without wasting gas or electricity some distance.
-
[quote author=Mike Quinn link=topic=12364.msg112170#msg112170 date=
Usage of heater with short trips will give you worst MPG, if possible use seat heater.(now when outside temperature around +16 engine get to normal working temperature of 80 Celsius in town after traveling ~2.5 miles)
Found this interesting. Went short to this morning, usually get 28 to 30mpg. It’s cold this morning 3c so didn’t expect much. Turned off the heater totally and ev came in very quickly. Got 54mpg. Is this The answer I wonder. Certainly worth trying a few times to see.
However not sure Is it the heater the issue or the ac?
-
[quote author=Mike Quinn link=topic=12364.msg112170#msg112170 date=
Usage of heater with short trips will give you worst MPG, if possible use seat heater.(now when outside temperature around +16 engine get to normal working temperature of 80 Celsius in town after traveling ~2.5 miles)
Found this interesting. Went short to this morning, usually get 28 to 30mpg. It’s cold this morning 3c so didn’t expect much. Turned off the heater totally and ev came in very quickly. Got 54mpg. Is this The answer I wonder. Certainly worth trying a few times to see.
However not sure Is it the heater the issue or the ac?
Heater turns on when you choose on climate control temperature higher then outside/in vehicle temperature, more difference between outside or in vehicle temperature and temperature you set more energy will be consumed.
Heater also starts in summer if temperature that set becomes higher then outside or in vehicle.
-
However not sure Is it the heater the issue or the ac?
[/quote]
Heater turns on when you choose on climate control temperature higher then outside/in vehicle temperature, more difference between outside or in vehicle temperature and temperature you set more energy will be consumed.
Heater also starts in summer if temperature that set becomes higher then outside or in vehicle.
[/quote]
Yes but is the issue the heater or the air con. As You can turn the heater on but have the aircon off
-
Yes but is the issue the heater or the air con. As You can turn the heater on but have the aircon off
If you have climate control set to Auto the heater will be used if it needs to raise cabin temperature to the set temperature ,air con used if it needs to reduce it. . The right hand knob increases or reduces heater fan speed which may indirectly affect the amount of heat extracted from the engine and fuel used to maintain engine temperature and battery power for the fan.
If the need is to raise cabin temperature the air con is usually off.
If you press the button for rapid windscreen clearance BOTH heating and air con are used. (air con dehumidifies)
If you just want air con without automatically maintaining a set temperature the aircon button will switch this on and auto climate control off.
A 'normal 'car has an engine driven air conditioning compressor ,,a direct loading that increases fuel consumption.
But I think the Mk4 uses an electrically driven compressor (so it can still run in ev mode) .The engine may need to run more often to provide it with battery power but the effect on fuel consumption is reduced.
A heavy right foot can have a big affect on fuel consumption. You dont have to drive like a lunatic to fall foul of this.
The secret is to keep within the sweet spot. Its possible to accelerate quite rapidly without any conscious use of the throttle. A bit like following slight curves without consciously steering . It needs very delicate and subtle use of the throttle. If a driver has difficulty with this it may help to use Econ mode which suppresses throttle response. (and climate control) . You can always give it some extra 'welly' when required.
-
I think the advice about throttle control is very important. The old adage that you should imagine an egg between your foot and the throttle has a lot of merit. I like to gently squeeze rather than push hard if that makes sense.
An additional benefit, if you have the conventional CVT box in Mk2 and Mk3 models is it makes the "rubber band" effect far less pronounced.
-
Throttle control may be more effective if we can see how much power we taking from battery, I not understand Honda, they include power meter on insight, clarity, new CR-V e:HEV, HR-V e:HEV, but Jazz e:HEV not, there plenty space on screen, they can put it as simple linear meter above real time ICE consumption or replace it with power meter, this can help to get better mileage.
Of course I can use OBD tool with car scanner to add this function but not everyone can do that and this is not good, as this requires to have another smartphone or tablet and need to be mounted on dashboard.
When I used this app with elm327 adapter I have set on screen power meter and I clearly see how much energy used, and also simple to found accelerator pedal position when I want to glide after I get to speed I wanted, need to play with accelerator pedal to get power consumption close to 0 (possible to do that also without car scanner but much difficult)
In this case when consumption at 0 on meter car gradually loses speed if we on level road like with manual transmission in neutral , or accelerate when we on slope but this more efficient then accelerating and then braking by using electric braking as we loses some energy.
-
:D
Looked now spritmonitor
And compared fuel consumption on my page and on pages of other owners of new Honda Jazz with similar average consumption.
Interesting ….
Consumption starting to decrease after 5-6 months of driving……
Is this time needed to understand how to drive more efficiently or something else ?
-
My old 1.8 auto Civic used to fluctuate between 45mpg/50mpg winter/summer, virtually no town driving.
My Jazz is doing around 64mpg/70mpg winter/summer, same conditions.
I'm happy and I certainly wouldn't be driving round with the heating off and wearing a big fluffy coat and gloves just to get a few more mpg
-
My old 1.8 auto Civic used to fluctuate between 45mpg/50mpg winter/summer, virtually no town driving.
My Jazz is doing around 64mpg/70mpg winter/summer, same conditions.
I'm happy and I certainly wouldn't be driving round with the heating off and wearing a big fluffy coat jhat and gloves ust to get a few more mpg
I agree to a certain extent. If my mpg was in the same ballpark as others I wouldn’t be too bothered about it but when I see there is a clear difference between my 53mpg and your 64 in all conditions it’ll drive me nuts until I found out why.
So of course the obvious, why put the heater on at all when driving from cold as it’s only going to blow cold air. Unless you need to de-mist. So 2c this morning and left heater Off and again went into ev pretty much straight away. So as I do a few short journeys a day this could be what’s dragging the mpg down. I’ll persevere with this theory and see how our goes.
-
All cars have a significantly increased fuel consumption with short journeys from a cold start. Some just dont display mpg figures as obviously as the Mk4 if at all.
I know it doesnt help to mention a function you dont have but I'm wondering how much not having heated seats and steering wheel affects your figures .
So far ,with temperatures down to about 3c I have found the heated seats and wheel heat up quickly and give sufficient heat for the early part of the journey. After a few miles the engine is warm enough to take over heating duty without too much affect on economy. This coincides with the seats getting a little too toasty and needing turning down or off.
But admittedly I have not yet needed to use the screen demist/defrost function.
I still think heated seats (and wheel) are luxuries I could do without if necessary , but its nice to have them.
-
All cars have a significantly increased fuel consumption with short journeys from a cold start. Some just dont display mpg figures as obviously as the Mk4 if at all.
I know it doesnt help to mention a function you dont have but I'm wondering how much not having heated seats and steering wheel affects your figures .
So far ,with temperatures down to about 3c I have found the heated seats and wheel heat up quickly and give sufficient heat for the early part of the journey. After a few miles the engine is warm enough to take over heating duty without too much affect on economy. This coincides with the seats getting a little too toasty and needing turning down or off.
But admittedly I have not yet needed to use the screen demist/defrost function.
I still think heated seats (and wheel) are luxuries I could do without if necessary , but its nice to have them.
IIRC Jocko stopped using the heater after startup and watched his scangauge for engine temperature to rise before turning heater on ( or maybe watched the blue light ).
-
All cars have a significantly increased fuel consumption with short journeys from a cold start. Some just dont display mpg figures as obviously as the Mk4 if at all.
I know it doesnt help to mention a function you dont have but I'm wondering how much not having heated seats and steering wheel affects your figures .
So far ,with temperatures down to about 3c I have found the heated seats and wheel heat up quickly and give sufficient heat for the early part of the journey. After a few miles the engine is warm enough to take over heating duty without too much affect on economy. This coincides with the seats getting a little too toasty and needing turning down or off.
But admittedly I have not yet needed to use the screen demist/defrost function.
I still think heated seats (and wheel) are luxuries I could do without if necessary , but its nice to have them.
I know EV drivers who have heated seats see them as a major ally in increasing range in really cold weather in that they don't draw as much power as the car's main heating system (usually a heat pump).
I tend to have the Climate Control set at 21 degrees and on auto so, in my case, use of heated seats would be another additional drain on the battery. I guess I could reduce the thermostat by a few degrees, use the heated seats and get extra efficiency that way.
But I can't be bothered. I am delighted with the fuel consumption. If the car can get north of 50 mpg with my diet of short stop/start journeys in towns I am well pleased.
-
As I've posted before, I'm very pleased with the heater.
My old Civic used to take about 2 miles down my local 50mph by-pass before it started puffing any warmth. The Jazz starts blowing warm air in half that distance.
I've got climate set to auto 21.5C
-
Comfort or better MPG
Choose of everyone, we living in different climates, don’t forget that, in my country rarely temperature reach lower then +5 ( if I not in Ramon crater)
And of course I use heater when I need it, but only when my journey relatively long but again we not have temperature such as -15, with true cold winter nothing to do with MPG heater should be used, but 21 degrees C in freezing winter wil eat too much gasoline, I may heat salon up to 16 degrees C (just because this temperature comfortably fo me) and first 2-3 minutes of drive if defrost not needed only heated seat.
-
I wonder if it does ?
Initially, to get the water hot, yes, but once it's hot, would the normal engine run to charge the HV battery be alm9st enough to keep the water hot.
At the moment it's -2c out there in London so the heater, if only to keep the inside windows clear is probably needed.
**** the MPG hit :D
-
Out of interest my last car was a Merc B200 automatic ( DSG type of gear box). At just below 60,000 miles it had averaged 49.8 mpg from new and this did include some caravan towing. I often had 62 or 63 mpg on a run and my wife, she drives it softer than me, had achieved over 70 mpg
These are actual figures based on fuel purchased, not what the car said. I am not a hard driver and as it was a second car it was mainly run on longer journeys with very little town work. all my cars are garaged and I do think this helps in winter. The car had climate control and I had it set at 20C and I cannot ever remember switching it off,including the AC I just never touched it winter or summer.
I just hope the Crosstar I have on order will be better for the atmosphere
I do think the jazz would be a lot better in town work than the Merc but on run not much difference
-
Excellent mpg figures Derek - was the Merc a diesel? I'm finding the Mk4 Jazz is the first car to equal the mpg I got from my 2005 Mk5 VW Golf 1.9TDI.
-
Out of interest my last car was a Merc B200 automatic ( DSG type of gear box). At just below 60,000 miles it had averaged 49.8 mpg from new and this did include some caravan towing.
If you still intend towing a caravan, or any trailer, bear in mind this is illegal with a Jazz Mk4 and Crosstar. They have no maximum tow weight type approval recorded on their registration document.
-
The first trip of the day with a cold soaked car has quite an difference on the mpg for that trip.
It was minus 4 last night, minus 1 when I started the car and defrosted - I got my lowest mpg so far of 45.4 today for a 70mph trip with the heater required as outside it was mostly freezing.
It’s still quite good mpg though.
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20211222/ab975a3482247330e33bfe2111158dcb.jpg)
-
Quite a drop in winter over summer mpg figs, which is to be expected of course. I was getting 64mpg average, now thats down to about 56mpg average. tied into that are more shorter trips, so perhaps its exaggerated a little. still , I think thats still super economical. 8) 8)
-
Similar, I'm down from ~66 to 60 on average.
As posted, the need for heating, warming the engine from freezing and lights is to blame I guess.
-
I seem to be stuck on about 52 mpg at present - allowing for the optimism of the on board computer I guess I'm on around 47/48 mpg. Just looking back at my previous car - a Mk3 - I'd be in mid to late 30s at this time of year. My first tank indicated 54 mpg (actual) and this was October/November.
I think, as a ball park figure, over a year, my average might pan out at about 52 mpg - almost exactly 10 mpg better than my Mk3. My stop/start short stuff, predominantly in urban areas would challenge the fuel economy of any ICE car.
In reality I use very little fuel anyway given my annual mileage of less than 3,000 so the cost savings whilst nice are not a big deal.
-
I keep wondering whether a tank full of E5 would make any difference
-
I've wondered about using E5 - my small mileage would make the cost difference insignificant. My unscientific brain wonders whether, given the engine is used mostly as a generator so, presumably not even close to be being under significant load, it would improve anything?
-
Low mileage here as well.
Picked mine up 3rd Sep and I'm nearly on 800 miles.
When I think back to the 70's when I was doing 30k a year as a part time minicab in West London..
-
I've wondered about using E5 - my small mileage would make the cost difference insignificant. My unscientific brain wonders whether, given the engine is used mostly as a generator so, presumably not even close to be being under significant load, it would improve anything?
It will be a bit cleaner inside as E5 usually contains a higher concentration of cleaner additives.
When the generator is called on for full power, E10 might be a few percent lower than the power with E5. I believe the performance figures are taken using the best pump fuel available.
At high speed cruise the engine is actually connected to the wheels via a fixed clutch , so the small normal engineimprovements from E5 should be seen then.
-
(https://www.cheesebuerger.de/images/midi/konfus/c050.gif)
It will be a bit cleaner inside as E5 usually contains a higher concentration of cleaner additives.
Who told you that fairy tale...?
-
(https://www.cheesebuerger.de/images/midi/konfus/c050.gif)
It will be a bit cleaner inside as E5 usually contains a higher concentration of cleaner additives.
Who told you that fairy tale...?
https://www.shell.co.uk/motorist/v-power-fuels.html
If it wasn’t true likely the advertising standards agency would stop them.
-
https://www.shell.co.uk/motorist/v-power-fuels.html
........................................................................................(https://www.cheesebuerger.de/images/midi/froehlich/a048.gif)
If it wasn’t true likely the advertising standards agency would stop them.
(https://www.cheesebuerger.de/images/midi/froehlich/a055.gif)
-
https://www.shell.co.uk/motorist/v-power-fuels.html
........................................................................................(https://www.cheesebuerger.de/images/midi/froehlich/a048.gif)
If it wasn’t true likely the advertising standards agency would stop them.
(https://www.cheesebuerger.de/images/midi/froehlich/a055.gif)
On every car I've owned, I can tell the difference in torque/HP between standard fuels and super - it will be increased further now with E5 and E10.
On the Toyota Auris and Yaris hybrids I used to own, running on the super unleaded also made a big difference to vibration both when the ICE was starting up and also at max power on slip roads.
MPG increase on super pays for some of the difference in cost - I'm very happy to pay the remaining difference for the increased performance and smoother running.
I only intend to run the Jazz up to a maximum of 90k miles to stay in warranty, so very long term engine health increases on super (150/200k miles) won't benefit me.
To anyone who hasn't tried Shell V-Power/etc - try a tank and see if your full tank mpg/etc is improved.
On older cars I've bought, around 50/60k miles, the first tank of premium has made the car run worse as it has been cleaning out the engine.
-
(https://www.cheesebuerger.de/images/midi/verschiedene/k026.gif)
Made a trip of 106 km (65 mi) today in typical winter conditions. The car was started at 11:30 am in the garage, where the thermometer showed +2°C. It was -7°C outside at that time. The destination was 53 kilometers. We arrived at 12.25 pm. It was about 12 km. (8 mi) city traffic and 41 km. (25 mi) local roads with a speed limit of 90 kmh (56 mph).
We were at our destination for more than 2½ hours, the car parked at -6°C.
Returned the same way after a (very) cold start, arriving home around 4 pm, temperature -7°C.
Sun all day and little wind. Heating the entire trip at 21.5°C, econ and in "B". Fuel: Euro 95, here in Poland (still) E5.
According to the BC average speed 45 kmh (28 mph), fuel consumption 4.3 l/100 km. (65.7mpg).
Let that BC "lie" just 0.2 liters, then it is a real consumption of 4.5 l/100 km. (62.8mph)!
I think this is "ice cold" an excellent consumption!
-
On every car I've owned, I can tell the difference in torque/HP between standard fuels and super - it will be increased further now with E5 and E10.
On the Toyota Auris and Yaris hybrids I used to own, running on the super unleaded also made a big difference to vibration both when the ICE was starting up and also at max power on slip roads.
Our previous car was a Toyota Yaris Hybrid. Here in Poland we always used E95 E5. But (pre-covid) we drove thousands and thousands of miles in Germany, the Netherlands, Belgium and France. Always on E10....
I have never seen, heard or felt any difference. No vibrations when starting the ICE and maximum power on slip roads was fine. As it was on E5.
Maybe there could be a difference in mpg, but there was also (much) difference in conditions.
Conclusion: I am an insensitive person or others are hypersensitive.
Theoretically, a car engine would have a few percent higher consumption on E10 than on E5. But do you know that a difference in headwind or tailwind of 1 or 2 Beaufort makes a much bigger difference? And do you drive with an anemometer on your roof?
-
On every car I've owned, I can tell the difference in torque/HP between standard fuels and super - it will be increased further now with E5 and E10.
On the Toyota Auris and Yaris hybrids I used to own, running on the super unleaded also made a big difference to vibration both when the ICE was starting up and also at max power on slip roads.
Our previous car was a Toyota Yaris Hybrid. Here in Poland we always used E95 E5. But (pre-covid) we drove thousands and thousands of miles in Germany, the Netherlands, Belgium and France. Always on E10....
I have never seen, heard or felt any difference. No vibrations when starting the ICE and maximum power on slip roads was fine. As it was on E5.
Maybe there could be a difference in mpg, but there was also (much) difference in conditions.
Conclusion: I am an insensitive person or others are hypersensitive.
Theoretically, a car engine would have a few percent higher consumption on E10 than on E5. But do you know that a difference in headwind or tailwind of 1 or 2 Beaufort makes a much bigger difference? And do you drive with an anemometer on your roof?
Perhaps I’m sensitive to performance- I used to turn off the air conditioning on my civic on slip roads as it made a difference to acceleration.
My Yaris hybrid had a slight shudder when the ICE started up and a slight rattle under full power with ordinary 95 unleaded.
My long term average mpg on the Yaris hybrid was 57mpg on the gauge, which was a real tank average of 55mpg. But the Yaris was much slower than the Jazz at higher speeds.
Auris hybrid mpg was quite a bit lower, in winter I might see 42mpg average.
Jazz is doing well, faster than Auris and gets still over 50mpg mostly - only dropping to 45mpg when very cold.
-
Perhaps I’m sensitive to performance- I used to turn off the air conditioning on my civic on slip roads as it made a difference to acceleration.
Normally the aircon clutch gets disconnected by ECU when a sudden press of accelerator is detected. The clutch also gets disengaged when starting the engine...
-
My Yaris hybrid had a slight shudder when the ICE started up and a slight rattle under full power with ordinary 95 unleaded.
My long term average mpg on the Yaris hybrid was 57mpg on the gauge, which was a real tank average of 55mpg. But the Yaris was much slower than the Jazz at higher speeds.
Jazz is doing well, faster than Auris and gets still over 50mpg mostly - only dropping to 45mpg when very cold.
Our Yaris didn't have a shudder nor a rattle with ordinary 95 E5 or 95 E10.
The long term average mpg on the Yaris hybrid, measured over 4 years https://www.spritmonitor.de/en/detail/842930.html was 57,89 mpg (4,88 l/100 km).
Our Jazz is (till now) doing slightly better: from August till now 63,48 mpg (4,45 l/100 km).
-
On every car I've owned, I can tell the difference in torque/HP between standard fuels and super - it will be increased further now with E5 and E10.
That might not hold true for the Mk4 Jazz due to its running the petrol engine in its power band.
-
On every car I've owned, I can tell the difference in torque/HP between standard fuels and super - it will be increased further now with E5 and E10.
That might not hold true for the Mk4 Jazz due to its running the petrol engine in its power band.
It should have an effect, but likely less than on a Toyota hybrid.
When cruising at high speed the petrol engine in the Jazz will be directly connected to the wheels, so any improvements in engine performance for torque/HP should be direct to the wheels.
When working solely as a generator, on super fuel, it will be giving maximum HP in generating.
Someone ran tests on a dyno with different fuels on a family car and found 3-4 HP increase with super fuel.
-
A fuel is a mixture of different hydrocarbons (including octane and heptane) that are present in different dosages. The ratio expressed in % between the content of octane and heptane is called the octane number.
According to the European directive, gasoline SP98 has an octane number of 98 and is composed of 98% octane and 2% heptane; gasoline SP95 has an octane number of 95 and is composed of 95% octane and 5% heptane.
And as for the engine?
The ratio of octane to heptane has an impact on the engine's auto-ignition mechanism. In practice, SP98 ignites at a higher temperature and pressure than SP95. This distinction is a result of how the different hydrocarbons respond to pressure. For example, octane will ignite less quickly than heptane. The lower the octane number, the greater the risk of spontaneous combustion at the time of compression in the engine cylinders.
Which petrol for which car?
Initially, it is recommended to use the fuel recommended by your car manufacturer. Anyone who thinks that a higher octane number leads to better performance is wrong.
If your engine is equipped to run on SP95 gasoline, like most regular cars, there's no point in filling up SP98. Certainly not in our Jazz with an ICE that runs with Atkinson cycle... You will pay more without getting more in return.
The proper functioning of your car depends on the compression level of your engine. This has an impact when the contact of the petrol with the air produces a spark. This explosion takes place at the right time with the right fuel, sensor checked.
And now that "damned" E10.
What is E10 petrol and bioethanol?
E10 fuel consists of a minimum of 90% petrol and a maximum of 10% bioethanol (so it can also be 94.5% petrol and 5.5% ethanol...). If the percentage of ethanol is below 5%, the gasoline is sold under the name E5. Ethanol, another word for alcohol, is often added to gasoline to reduce reliance on fossil fuels. Because the production and composition of E10 petrol is less bad for the environment, it is referred to as a sustainable petrol.
In principle, with a full tank of E10 fuel you will get a little less far than with a tank of regular E5 petrol. This is because E10 has a slightly lower energy density. A petrol engine consumes a maximum of about two percent more when E10 is refueled.
Two percent... Here in Poland we don't have E10 (yet), so we use E5. Our Jazz has so far a measured average consumption of 4.55 l/100 km = 63.5 mpg. So theoretically, consumption on E10 would have been 63.5 - 2% = 62.2 mpg.
Overtaking two, three, maybe four times quickly, a hundred miles more highway, more often headwind, less tailwind, etcetera etcetera probably gives more difference in consumption...
Oh... and maybe the air will also stay about 2% cleaner with E10...(https://www.cheesebuerger.de/images/midi/froehlich/a048.gif)
-
IIRC manufacturers all use the highest octane fuel available for their official fuel economy and performance figures - any tiny improvement is worth it to beat competitors.
I think they also tape up wing mirrors/etc just to get a tiny improvement. Another reason why we don't have spare wheels anymore, anything they can do to get a tiny increase in MPG/reduction in emissions.
-
Some manufacturers played with the software to detect when it was being tested to falsify emissions and possibly MPG figures.
They'll try anything.
Vertical windscreen wipers to reduce drag.
-
When cruising at high speed the petrol engine in the Jazz will be directly connected to the wheels, so any improvements in engine performance for torque/HP should be direct to the wheels.
Actually, it's only directly linked when it's in overdrive. If you floor it, the little gear will disappear from the display.
-
With the recent spell of milder weather I am noticing EV mode kicking in much more largely because less power is needed to heat up the car. Heating the cabin will be my main drag on decent fuel consumption during winter months.
-
When we run our car in town actualy no difference or small difference in MPG when 98 RON used (said effects only more advanced timing with 98 RON in summer)
1 month ago I did trip with elevation from sea level to +477m fully loaded when used 98 RON and seen with car scanner that when motor generator have enough load car computer retarded ignition down to+7 degree (on flat road timing somewere on +35 degree) on that tank i did 974km from 35l of 98 RON gasoline - 2 trips 163km with speed 90km/h fully loaded with A/C set to 22 C with elevation to +477m then down -420m to Dead Sea and back same route , rest is trips with 1 passenger - 2 trips 110km each with speed 90km/h and rest 448km short trips 10-15km each in town (in town computer showed consumption 3.0l/100km average for 448 km ).
Now i switched back to 95 RON - in winter 98 RON not shows better MPG.
When outside temperature is low the 95 RON less prone to detonation.
But yes right fuel does better MPG
Should i get bad 95 RON gasoline that in reality in best case 89-90 RON i will get bad fuel economy, but if that real 95 RON it will be OK because our car should use 95 RON minimum.
Take look https://www.spritmonitor.de/en/detail/1195531.html (https://www.spritmonitor.de/en/detail/1195531.html) this driver from Switherland uses 95 RON and getting excellent MPG.
-
After running my Jazz exclusively on Shell V Power 99RON for 7,000 miles I decided to try ordinary Shell 95RON E10 and switched over several fills ago…
On the motorway the drop in mpg has only been around 1mpg, whereas the cost is 10% more for the V Power.
There is a difference in performance though, not so much in total power but in the way it is delivered- V Power seems to have more pull at motorway speeds. It’s only the initial pull, actual performance seems similar.
Whereas ordinary 95 has more pull at lower speeds so is much better around town - there is less of an initial delay when pulling away/accelerating.
Ordinary 95 seems to actually be a better fuel for the Jazz, it appears to rev lower when under light/medium acceleration.
If I was driving around town a lot, I’d predict that 95 would actually get better mpg than 99!
-
I was considering topping up with Tesco 'premium' next time but based on your test I'll stick with the 95RON E10 jollop.
-
Thinking along similar lines. I need to refuel so rarely that the extra cost per litre is not a deal breaker but if there is literally no point I'll probably stick with E10.
-
Thinking along similar lines. I need to refuel so rarely that the extra cost per litre is not a deal breaker but if there is literally no point I'll probably stick with E10.
It surprised me, in other cars I've owned there were benefits of using the super fuel - with the Jazz just being a generator engine usually it doesn't seem to make any real difference.
If anything, I'd say the Jazz runs slightly smoother on 95 instead of super. In my previous Yaris hybrid it was the other way round, but that had a gearbox and the petrol engine was driving the wheels through it in combination with the electric motors.
-
I wonder in the longer term if the extra cleaning agents in Shell super petrol would benefit the engine? Also won't filling with E10 with 10% hydroscopic ethanol increase the rate of water absorption into the fuel and is that likely to have long term corrosion risks for fuel lines etc?
-
I did a similar exercise in my first 8G Civic. I used Tesco Standard, BP Ultimate and Shell V Power. At that time I was doing a tank full a fortnight so I ran each for a month to reduce any hybrid mixes.
The results were almost identical with an average of only 1mpg difference and no noticeable performance gain.
-
I wonder in the longer term if the extra cleaning agents in Shell super petrol would benefit the engine? Also won't filling with E10 with 10% hydroscopic ethanol increase the rate of water absorption into the fuel and is that likely to have long term corrosion risks for fuel lines etc?
Most fuels have cleaning agents added, it’s just that the super fuels have more.
The standard agents should be fine, as for E10 as it’s marked on a sticker in my fuel flap as approved I’m not worried - I tend to get through a tank or so every week so water absorption shouldn’t be an issue.
If the car was being left for a few months it might make a difference, but you could fill up with super fuel before leaving the car. V power is marked as ‘up to’ E5 but may actually be E0.
-
Just filled up. 299 miles and 3 bars left on the fuel gauge. 48.8 mpg for the last tank.
It doesn't look great but it's about 10 mpg better than my MK3 would have been in similar conditions. Average speed 15 mph which tells you all you need to know about what sort of driving I've been doing.
The effect on mpg of cold weather is quite stark. At least 5 mpg spent on keeping the heater on I reckon as a ball park figure.
-
Just on mpg and referring to the latest "Which" review which had the Jazz as the best car in the small car category, it seems the Jazz averages better than the small car average which is 48.7 mpg. "Which" got 55.4 mpg average and this is from all driving scenarios.
Only the Yaris did better.
Keeping warm in the winter is the biggie but, even in this colder period and allowing for my short trip driving profile, I achieved just under 49 mpg.
Can't wait for the warmer weather!
-
So that's Which? and Whatcar that have the Jazz top of the small car sector.
:D
-
Only the Yaris did better.
Keeping warm in the winter is the biggie but, even in this colder period and allowing for my short trip driving profile, I achieved just under 49 mpg.
Can't wait for the warmer weather!
Yes keeping warm ….
I remember from time I leaving in Ukraine in winter most drivers put in front of radiator cardboard or special designed “mask” for radiator grill
Interesting do Yaris have active grille shutters ?
I can’t understand, some Honda models do have them, but Jazz that can be super fuel efficient Honda decided not use them.
Some time ago I get excellent fuel economy (2.6-2,8l/100km) but I think that time is 98 RON fuel, but that something else
When I topped up fuel I did 16km trip before that, and engine was warmed to it’s working temperature.
I suspect that when car’s tested for fuel consumption engine already at it’s working temperature.
That how in Japanese national test for fuel efficiency they get 2,8l/100l, when engine warmed up I can easily get 3l/100km in town, in current weather (+12) on road with speed restriction 80km/h I getting 3,2l/100km on long 100km trips.
-
The front of the MK4 has a lot less open grill which is probably why it warms up quicker.
-
I tend to use the heated seats initially and only switch on the climate system once the engine has had a chance to warm up. I've been getting around 60mpg in winter and I was getting 70mpg in summer but I don't do much motorway driving, I have the ECO button on all the time.
-
The front of the MK4 has a lot less open grill which is probably why it warms up quicker.
But still loses coolant temperature in town, if you driving at speeds 40-50km/h with temperature outside that far from winter temperature in UK. Seen temperature loses when outside +10, and because of that to get best fuel economy displayed need to drive twice more distance then in summer
-
I've no idea about coolant temp as it hasn't got a gauge.
One would have been useful.
-
Today 7000 Km.
According to BC average 3.3 L, real 3.56 L
Not bad for the best Hybrid on the market.
-
Great average consumption! (https://www.cheesebuerger.de/images/smilie/froehlich/a020.gif)
On Spritmonitor https://www.spritmonitor.de/de/detailansicht/1259542.html I see that you travel 33% on motorways, 33% on country roads and 33% in the city.
My questions:
- Where and under what climate conditions do you live?
- At what speed do you drive on the motorway?
-
Double post... :-[
-
I've no idea about coolant temp as it hasn't got a gauge.
One would have been useful.
I using car scanner app with elm327 adapter.
-
Jazzik I live in Lisbon and my average speed on motorway is maximum 100 Km / h
-
Ah... that explains it! Average max. daytime temperature around 14, 15°C instead of maximum around or just above 0°C (and regularly significantly lower) here in Toruń makes a difference!
Our average speed on the motorway (where the maximum allowed speed is 140 km/h) is normally around 120 km/h and sometimes a bit faster...
-
The hybrid scores in several ways, one being that kinetic energy is converted to electricity and recuperated (stored) in the battery while braking or decelerating, and the stored electricity can be converted back to kinetic energy to propel the car. A non-hybrid simply wastes kinetic energy to heat in the brake pads and discs . Other differences are adoption of the Atkinson cycle for the engine, which trades off torque for economy of fuel consumption, Atkinson cycle engines are better when assisted by a hybrid electric motor to plug the gap for reduced engine torque
Also the hybrid system means that the engine (when running) spends more time in its most efficient range. Something I noticed when I first got my Crosstar and used Torque + a Bluetooth OBDII reader to monitor the engine behaviour was that the engine was never run at below 1600 rpm. My presumption is that excess power goes to the battery which then takes over and lets the engine go to sleep. This behaviour is very noticeable in crawling traffic. The hybrid system, however, provides minimal benefit during motorway cruising.
Really useful information, John, thanks. I'm considering upgrading my beloved Mk2 ahead of retiring next year -- it's a fabulous car, but the manual 5 speed box is a bit of a pain on my arthritic feet, and it's a wee bit noisy on the motorway. I'm also fascinated by the hybrid technology.
Thanks again.
-
I found another culprits for poor fuel economy - rain and wet asphalt - on roads with speed limit 55 mph at speed 55 mph when asphalt wet and in rain i can only get 70 MPG, when there is no rain and asphalt is dry i can squize 80-85 MPG (on long trip of course)
I not remember that with gasoline car i had so big difference in fuel consumption in similar conditions.
But also 70MPG for me big difference - with my previus cars in town i can`t ahive more then 28MPG (Yaris 4 gear automatic 2001), 47MPG (Baleno 2018 5 manual gear ) 22 MPG (Vitara 2019 1.0l turbo 6 gear auto )
-
I've found the MPG gauge in my EX to be almost spot on. Perhaps the 16" wheels help the calculations
The gauge was showing 50.3 mpg for a whole tank vs 50.5 calculated from the miles and litres added.
-
Mine has been a couple of MPG out as has all my Civics.
There must be a driving style or road condition/traffic congestion that gets it right whilst others are more difficult to compute.
-
My driving must be 90+ % motorway, so it's likely easier for it to work out on long trips.
The Honda app records the mpg ok, but the fuel used figure varies a lot.
-
Mine has been a couple of MPG out as has all my Civics.
There must be a driving style or road condition/traffic congestion that gets it right whilst others are more difficult to compute.
I think that must be right. With most cars I have owned the car's computer has been reliably about 4 mpg optimistic. I try to drive in as smooth a way as possible but there is no getting away from the fact that I am braking, stopping, accelerating almost constantly with the type of trip I do.
-
First refuelling 465 miles, 30.65 litres so 69.3 mpg (car claimed 73 mpg).
Second refuelling 515 miles, 32.90 litres so 71.2 mpg (car claimed 75.1 mpg).
The "fibometer" appears to be about 5% optimistic - nothing new there!
I would try a different Garage. Our local garage was overcharging by 10% on their metering and were finally caught by Trading Standards.
-
Mine has been a couple of MPG out as has all my Civics.
There must be a driving style or road condition/traffic congestion that gets it right whilst others are more difficult to compute.
I think that must be right. With most cars I have owned the car's computer has been reliably about 4 mpg optimistic. I try to drive in as smooth a way as possible but there is no getting away from the fact that I am braking, stopping, accelerating almost constantly with the type of trip I do.
Give more space between you and car ahead to allow more time for braking or stop on traffic lights if that possible (not too much cars on road) start gentle deceleration if you see ahead red traffic light, try to coast when that possible - use energy flow animation to understand when car starting regenerative braking, when you see green energy flow to battery slightly press gas pedal and monitor your speed - if you speed decreasing slowly on level road you coasting and almost not using energy, if you on downhill you will see fast acceleration but again you will not use energy
Jazz become super efficient when engine coolant warmed up to 70-80 Degrees C
In summer enough to drive maybe 5km to get engine warmed up, in winter this taking more time - in my case with +12 degrees C I need to drive 11km or more to get engine warmed up.
https://listers.co.uk/news/2014/07/10-ways-to-increase-your-hybrids-fuel
-
My current driving style is to try to minimise use of the brake. Seeing a stop light ahead I take my foot off the pedal and try to reach the light as it changes. If I'm not using ACC I set the gear-lever to B.
-
Same here, my 1980's IAM tutor taught me a lot. Plus, my double deck PSV training included smoothness and planning ahead. You don't want to hit the brakes with standing passengers.
-
My current driving style is to try to minimise use of the brake. Seeing a stop light ahead I take my foot off the pedal and try to reach the light as it changes. If I'm not using ACC I set the gear-lever to B.
Yes - I try to do that. I'm also in Econ and B most of the time. I reckon I'm on about 49 mpg with this current tank. To be fair I'd be on late 30s in my Mk3 at this time of year with an overall mpg of just over 42 mpg. A huge chunk of my mpg must be the engine being on to keep me warm and the fact that I rarely reach optimum operating temperature.
I'm quite happy with this - I reckon the Mk4 will end up about 25% more efficient than my Mk3.
-
Hi All,
Greetings to you All!
First post so please be gentle.
I have 2021 Jazz and something is off the the MPG and real consumption. According to the on board computer my car is doing around 57-59 MPG but at the same time I am only getting max 380 miles from the full tank. How is this possible? with that MPG i should be getting over 500miles from the tank. Did only 5 full tanks from new but 380 miles from full tank is consistent. Is something wrong or I am missing something? What are you guys getting from full tank?
Btw, this is my 4th Honda and second Jazz and I am very happy with the car just mildly concerned.
-
Have you calculated actual fuel put in v actual mileage covered to double check?
-
380 miles per tank is all I get, but my average is around 50mpg.
There is some fuel left when the range reads zero, maybe up to a gallon but I always refill before 100 miles range is left as the last 100 miles drops quicker than it should do.
-
HI,
yes i did, 37 liters in vs 380 miles that is less than 43 MPG. confusing...
-
HI,
yes i did, 37 liters in vs 380 miles that is less than 43 MPG. confusing...
What conversion factor are you using? 37 litres is 8.13 gallons, which over 380 miles is 46.7 mpg.
-
That still doesn't compute v the onboard calculator.
Last time I heard of such a discrepancy was a son siphoning a few gallons out when dad wasn't looking.
-
I am (more than) a little surprised when I read above that cee drives 380 miles on a full tank. ⛽
Is that the same Honda Jazz e:HEV as mine?
I see significant differences in fuel consumption. Some here seem to have a significantly higher consumption than I do, others rather comparable.
So far I have an average (measured) consumption of 62.9 MPG.
I drive normally, not like a nearsighted grandpa but also not like Max V., always in Econ and B mode (except on the highway with ACC). Heating and air conditioning are used as needed.
I've never refueled after less than 386 mi (that was 5.72 Imp.gal), but I normally do between about 420 and 490 miles on a tank of fuel.
The last fill-up was in mid-January (Winter in Poland!) after 435 miles traveled, a fill-up of 7.15 gallons (60.8 MPG).
In the fall, I filled up 6.90 gallons on Oct. 8, after 487.8 miles: 70,7 MPG (80% local roads with a max speed of 90 km/h = 56 mph and 20% city traffic).
Why do I see here such (rather significant) differences?
-
6.25l/100km is too much, how that can be done ?
Maybe short trips with climate control set to 25 degrees C ?
Or even worse case short trips with climate control set to 25 degrees C on highway with fast acceleration and hard braking afterwards.
-
Cruising at 70mph/110kph I’ve found I get 50mpg, it doesn’t matter if I accelerate slowly or don’t brake/use B/ use eco mode - I still get almost the same 50mpg.
However as soon as I drop below 50mph I’m getting nearer 70mpg. Either roadworks on the motorway or country roads.
There’s not much the hybrid system can do to save mpg for hours of 70mph constant cruising unfortunately.
It’s the same with pure EV cars - as soon as you add high speed cruising into a journey your range drops massively.
Some good information on real world EV motorway ranges in this review - it’s the same for the Jazz and other hybrids.
-
Yes - I've said this before but if you look at Mk4s on spritmonitor there is a huge range of mpg figures. The way I see it is that it is possible to achieve superb mpg figures but this almost certainly requires a particular driving profile. On a warm day, doing a decent mileage on a mixture of town roads with some country roads in the mix it will be possible to top 60 mpg - maybe even better.
This can lead to disappointment so the more relevant metric for me is what my previous (non hybrid) car did. I am disappointed that I can't join the 60 mpg club but I'm bumping along at just over 50 mpg at a time of year where my Mk3 would have been doing late 30s/early 40s at best.
-
Hi Guys, i do understand differences in MPG we are all getting but what baffles me is the discrepancy between MPG on the trip computer vs miles per tank. Can you let us know how many miles are getting from the full tank please?
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
-
what baffles me is the discrepancy between MPG on the trip computer vs miles per tank.
I keep track of my consumption on Spritmonitor https://www.spritmonitor.de/en/ , where you note the actual amount of litres/gallons fueled and the number of kilometers/miles driven.
In addition, you can also fill in what the on-board computer indicated as consumption (plus additional information that you want to add yourself).
I have kept track of that and the conclusion is that my actual consumption so far is about 4.5% higher than what my on-board computer indicated.
-
Those figures are so adrift I'd be getting the dealer to check for any fuel leaks.
-
Hi Guys, i do understand differences in MPG we are all getting but what baffles me is the discrepancy between MPG on the trip computer vs miles per tank. Can you let us know how many miles are getting from the full tank please?
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
It’s a 40 litre tank I believe, at 50mpg if you ran it completely empty theoretically it would give a 440 mile range vs the 380 miles the range meter says.
Most cars have a reserve of fuel when the range says zero, so that works out at around a gallon or so.
-
Hi Guys, i do understand differences in MPG we are all getting but what baffles me is the discrepancy between MPG on the trip computer vs miles per tank. Can you let us know how many miles are getting from the full tank please?
Sorry, I missed your main concern. I think you accept its possible to get less than 50 mpg in unfavourable conditions such as high motorway speeds,short journeys etc . ( My car has averaged about 65 mpg over 2000 miles, but even so there are times when the constant fuel consumption bar is in the low 30's.mpg. Get this too often average consumption plummets )
But the discrepancy in on board computer figures does seem excessive. Maybe the calibration is wrong. I'd think a physical fuel leak, or mechanical problem increasing fuel consumption is less likely. Wouldnt you smell fuel or notice poor running?
Not sure exactly how it works, but I'd have thought part of the system would measure actual fuel flow to the engine. If this increases,for whatever reason,it should still register as fewer mpg.
But I may be wrong. The system may only estimate fuel consumption based on engine running time, throttle settings, load ,temperature etc.
Either way its probably a good idea to have it checked by a dealer.
-
Not sure exactly how it works, but I'd have thought part of the system would measure actual fuel flow to the engine. If this increases,for whatever reason,it should still register as fewer mpg.
But I may be wrong. The system may only estimate fuel consumption based on engine running time, throttle settings, load ,temperature etc.
Either way its probably a good idea to have it checked by a dealer.
Normally the ECU keeps track of the injector 'on time' - which is the amount of fuel squirted into engine, if the fuel pressure is constant then the amount of time the injector valve is open can give the volume of fuel used.
-
When I picked up my car from new with only 8 miles on it and it’s first full tank of fuel, the fuel range remaining was over 600 miles!
I’ve never seen anything like that again, not sure how the computer managed to get a figure so high with so few miles.
-
Mine still shows just north of 600 each fill up.
-
When I picked up my car from new with only 8 miles on it and it’s first full tank of fuel, the fuel range remaining was over 600 miles!
I’ve never seen anything like that again, not sure how the computer managed to get a figure so high with so few miles.
The engine was already warm when the car returned from getting the tank filled and it might have been a slightly downhill journey as well.
I keep a record of the car's claimed mpg as well as what I calculate from fuel into the tank. The car is averaging about 4.5% high.
As already noted, cold weather and short trips are an mpg killer. I always have trip mpg showing on the big screen and this highlights how the mpg improves from a low start. I keep the heating off until the engine is warmed up which means several miles (that's probably why Honda gave us heated seats).
-
My actual, miles covered v squirt put in is calculated via Spritmonitor, under my avatar.
Currently 61.3 but I reckon that will increase at it warms up, depending on AC power.
-
I once filled up at Sainsburies then drove a few hundred metres to park. IIRC it showed 117 mpg !
-
I recently drove a 30 mile trip - 60% urban, 20% at 50mph and 20% at 70mph - total average was 68mpg.
It’s high steady speed that really drops the mpg in the Jazz. (But 50mpg is still very good - my old Accord 2.0 petrol would be doing maybe mid thirties mpg)
-
Just a little comment on mpg. I think my car is doing around 48 to 49 miles per gallon as things stand. I've been doing some digging in spritmonitor and there is a decent sized cohort who are getting well under 50 mpg over longish periods. I saw one owner who even had the odd tank under 40 mpg. The lowest mpg, for a tank, was 36 mpg.
We are still in the winter but I can't see me ever getting close to 60 mpg, even on a run.
What am I doing wrong? I drive like a granny on sedatives. Don't get me wrong, the mpg is significantly better than the Mk3 but 60 mpg? How?
-
Just a little comment on mpg. I think my car is doing around 48 to 49 miles per gallon as things stand. I've been doing some digging in spritmonitor and there is a decent sized cohort who are getting well under 50 mpg over longish periods. I saw one owner who even had the odd tank under 40 mpg. The lowest mpg, for a tank, was 36 mpg.
We are still in the winter but I can't see me ever getting close to 60 mpg, even on a run.
What am I doing wrong? I drive like a granny on sedatives. Don't get me wrong, the mpg is significantly better than the Mk3 but 60 mpg? How?
It seems to be a combination of time,speed and temperature.
If I stay under 50mph on journeys I can easily get 60+mpg.
Journeys need to be sufficient distance/time - say 20+ miles.
The first start of the day after being parked outside is always lower in the cold/freezing weather. The second trip gets better mpg as the engine/cabin are already warm.
I don’t baby the accelerator- something I learned from Prius. Car engines are most efficient under 80% load, so accelerating briskly up to the speed limit and then maintaining the speed maybe the car will use EV mode quite a bit once cruising.
FYI hybrid cars work backwards to ordinary ones - they get worse mpg on a run, and better mpg when stuck in slow moving traffic.
-
I got 60mpg yesterday, 8C outside, on a mainly motorway run from Heathrow to Reading :)
-
I got 60mpg yesterday, 8C outside, on a mainly motorway run from Heathrow to Reading :)
Was that all at 70mph? There’s nothing I can do to get above 50mpg at 70mph on 50+ mile trips in the Jazz :(
It’s 10% lower mpg than my mark 1 Yaris hybrid got on long motorway trips.
As soon as the speed drops, the mpg goes up though.
-
Not 70 as I tend to max out around 60, I find it more relaxing. Plus M4 junctions 3 to 8/9 are still 50mph in the roadworks.
-
There he get 58 MPG
Cold weather lots of highways and hills, and he not baby gas pedal to.
-
Just a little comment on mpg. I think my car is doing around 48 to 49 miles per gallon as things stand. I've been doing some digging in spritmonitor and there is a decent sized cohort who are getting well under 50 mpg over longish periods. I saw one owner who even had the odd tank under 40 mpg. The lowest mpg, for a tank, was 36 mpg.
We are still in the winter but I can't see me ever getting close to 60 mpg, even on a run.
What am I doing wrong? I drive like a granny on sedatives. Don't get me wrong, the mpg is significantly better than the Mk3 but 60 mpg? How?
Do you have ECO switched on, I find it does make a difference of up to 10%?
-
Just for info my Eco is off.
-
It seems to be long distance high speed where the mpg drops - set the cruise control for a real 70mph (72mph indicated on 16” wheels) and you only get 50mpg :(
The hybrid system can’t really help in those situations as it’s limited in what it can do.
The petrol engine is directly connected to the wheels during high speed cruising.
-
The petrol engine is directly connected to the wheels during high speed cruising.
Because at this speeds using ICE directly connected to transmission more eficient.
-
The petrol engine is directly connected to the wheels during high speed cruising.
Because at this speeds using ICE directly connected to transpission more eficient.
50mpg seems to be as efficient as it gets for the 1.5 petrol engine at 70mph.
Its still maybe 20% better than the mark 2 Jazz loan cars I used to have.
-
Thanks to Roman for posting the You Tube video from the Irish car dealer. I'd settle for 58 mpg given the type of driving on that trip - it's excellent and he doesn't hold back, you can hear the petrol engine being pushed hard at times.
I have ECON on and use B mode nearly all the time.
I've decided to do a 50 mile or so "mixed" run when I next fill up. I see 60 mpg as a target - I just want to see it :)
-
The best I’ve had was through long 50mph sections of motorway- just set the cruise control and I was getting 75mpg.
It shows how wind resistance plays a big difference in fuel economy:
75 mpg at 50mph
50mpg at 70mph
Many of the so called real ranges on pure EV cars are based on speeds around 50mph - in the real world if you are on the motorway long distance at 70mph it will be considerably less. Combined with cold weather and it’s even worse.
-
ACC only after you get to desired speed !!!
If ACC will be used in stop and go trafic it can increase fuel consumption !
-
ACC only after you get to desired speed !!!
If ACC will be used in stop and go trafic it can increase fuel consumption !
I never use ACC if there is traffic anywhere near, too many scares from the system getting confused. I used it only once in stop and go traffic and it tried to kill me! It brakes too late, and then accelerates too hard. In traffic that is speeding up and slowing down the system can't cope at all.
It's only used on an empty road with no cars in range - if I'm approaching another vehicle I'll switch it off before the car can see it.
-
Yes - I will use it very sparingly. Emptyish stretch of Motorway or Dual Carriageway on a long trip just to give the right leg a bit of a rest.
-
Current total mileage today, since April 21 = 7336 miles, Fuel consumption over that distance = 65.9MPG
Driving style: Mostly 'B' mode except where ACC is required, (which is not often). ECO = Off
I have to confess that only about 12-15% of those miles are motorway miles and then generally circa 65Mph.
Most motoring is urban/country roads where speed limits are 50mph or less.
These figures are from the dashboard readouts, not really concerned about any errors in quoted/real results, since all my previous Jazz cars have used the same basis for consumption comparison.
Typically, they were usually in the mid 50s Mpg, so more than happy with the MK4 improvements.
-
My mileage now 7615 with mpg of 60.7 measured by "tank full" method and an excel spreadsheet. A mixture of long and short journeys, mostly on A roads - B mode in towns and Eco mode for 80% of the time.
Very happy with the Jazz, comfortable, quiet and economical!
-
I have averaged about 65 mpg in mixed use over 2000 miles.
On motorways I tend to set the ACC to 65mph. This gives mpg of upper 50's to low 60's (Although i havnt done enough miles to fully analyse it as slight hills up or down, wind direction etc are factors. )
And the speedo is quite accurate so it really is 65 mph. At this speed many cars speedos will be reading 70 mph so I am actually keeping pace with a lot of the other cars and with a slight edge over trucks.
Of course I have my moments over 70 mph,(I thought it was a work trip officer, not social. Oh you have photos) and consumption does suffer .
-
I got 60mpg yesterday, 8C outside, on a mainly motorway run from Heathrow to Reading :)
..... and 73.6MPG coming back this morning :
(https://i.imgur.com/83GyPmJ.jpg)
-
I've noticed that the seat heaters seem to be programmed to tie in with engine heating.
The engine was off and the seat heaters on, when I switched the heaters off the engine started straightaway to give heat.
I then switched the seat heaters back on and the engine switched off instantly.
Probably only makes a tiny difference to mpg in cold weather but an interesting quirk.
-
I've never used the seat or steering wheel heaters.
At least we get warm cloth instead of cold leather.
In summer we get cool cloth instead of hot leather.
-
I have had the Jazz EX Style for 3 weeks and so far am disappointed that despite deliberately driving very frugally to try an achieve best fuel consumption, I have achieved an average of 54mpg over 500 miles. I have followed all available guidance including switching off AC and switching on Economy mode. I have driven a couple of journeys of 200 miles on an A road at speeds of 50 to 60 and the rest in town at speeds on average of 30. I have been extremely light on the accelerator and have found so far that I achieve best fuel consumption at low speed, in town. I really am so very disappointed that the car has achieved nothing like the 62 mpg claimed to be normal and nowhere in the region of the 70mpg that all reviewers claim is fairly achievable. My Mk 11 Jazz regularly achieved 50mpg and sometimes even 60. I am hopeful that the disappointing mpg is down to the cold weather but any advice would be appreciated. My gripe apart, the car is amazing to drive and beautifully finished
-
I'm regularly getting average 60 to 70 mpg. My journeys are mostly 50mph restricted motorways with urban roads at each end.
One thing to watch, if you can, is the 'instant mpg' readout on one of the display options. What I'm noticing is that on the motorway at a steady speed the instant mpg will change from max 140mpg to around 35/40 mpg as the engine cuts in and out to keep the battery charged.
What I have noticed is that where the mororway is slightly uphill the engine will kick in but once at the crest and you start the downhill slope, albeit a very slight gradient, it's reading the max 140 almost all the downhill section.
When I leave the motorway and drive on fairly clear 30 to 50 urban roads my average mpg does start to drop.
-
In normal weather hybrids tend to get 5-10mpg more.
In the winter the car has to burn petrol to provide heat for the cabin, as well as keeping the emissions system up to temperature.
Over 10,000+ miles my long term average is around 50mpg. I only see maybe 2mpg more in the summer as most of my driving is motorway at 70mph.
I’ve stopped paying much attention to mpg now, with my driving I get 50mpg which is fine for the combination of performance and refinement.
It’s 10% less than my Yaris hybrid did, but much better motorway performance.
The difference in fuel costs with higher mpg isn’t that much above 50mpg.
-
10,000 miles...... I've only just gone over 1,000
I used to get 50mpg average in my auto Civic so I'm looking forward to warmer weather. Then we'll be moaning about aircon MPG :)
-
On transcontinental journeys you sometimes follow key routes for hours. I often see the same distinctive cars that hack past me at a high rate of knots, pass me again 2 hours later. And after a very brief stop for fuel or the loo I pass the same lumbering truck i passed 2 hours earlier.
A life in the fast lane buys you surprisingly little extra time in the course of a day. Enough time to fit an expensive coffee into your frantic schedule maybe.
Fewer fuel stops = more time. Although sometimes I need a comfort stop without refueling. What a waste.
Driving fast can be fun. But these days I am happy to drop a few mph to save a few quid and a few polar bears.
-
I remember travelling at the legal 50mph along the various roads from Oxford to Worcester. I had an impatient *** behind who couldn't get past on the twisty roads.
Just before Evesham is a short section of dual carriageway. Past he shot.
He turned left and shot down the Evesham bypass whilst I went through Evesham itself (knowing the road and it was early and quiet).
A few miles down the road there he was again in my mirrors and he knew it was me again :D
The bypass may be faster but it's quite a bit longer.
-
On my long motorway journeys I often see people shoot past me and disappear into the distance, only to catch them up many miles later in congestion.
Certainly in the south it’s pointless having a high performance car.
If you are in Germany with their no speed limit roads it makes a difference, however Teslas/etc doing 150mph only get 100 miles of range I believe, so in a race across Germany a jazz may actually beat them?
To a normal driver the difference between 50mpg and 60mpg might only be 30p a day according to one online calculator I used - not much on a £23k car.
-
10,000 miles...... I've only just gone over 1,000
I used to get 50mpg average in my auto Civic so I'm looking forward to warmer weather. Then we'll be moaning about aircon MPG :)
I’m on track to complete maybe 11-12k miles in under 6 months!
A bit more than my usual 15k pa miles but I’ve been on a few UK holidays.
-
I have had the Jazz EX Style for 3 weeks and so far am disappointed that despite deliberately driving very frugally to try an achieve best fuel consumption, I have achieved an average of 54mpg over 500 miles. I have followed all available guidance including switching off AC and switching on Economy mode. I have driven a couple of journeys of 200 miles on an A road at speeds of 50 to 60 and the rest in town at speeds on average of 30. I have been extremely light on the accelerator and have found so far that I achieve best fuel consumption at low speed, in town. I really am so very disappointed that the car has achieved nothing like the 62 mpg claimed to be normal and nowhere in the region of the 70mpg that all reviewers claim is fairly achievable. My Mk 11 Jazz regularly achieved 50mpg and sometimes even 60. I am hopeful that the disappointing mpg is down to the cold weather but any advice would be appreciated. My gripe apart, the car is amazing to drive and beautifully finished
I havnt driven much on long A road journeys since the winter,Its currently mostly half hour runs in the the suburbs. My average over 2000miles since october is about 63 mpg, without being super frugal. I never use Eco mode . But I am surprised you are not getting 60mpg + on long A road runs . even in winter.
I dont mean any offence but maybe your idea of extremely light on the throttle has still not yet quite hit the sweet spot of throttle control that gives best results in a mk4. It really is ' foot on an eggshell' stuff. You almost get the car to go faster by mind control, not by consciously pressing on the pedal as you might in a mk 11. Hit the sweet spot and the car performs very respectably under 'mind control ' -more than enough for normal driving . Exceed it by even a little (which will be necessary sometimes when hill climbing and brisk overtakes ) and fuel consumption suffers. Eco mode helps by suppressing throttle response, but its still possible to over do it. If you can master throttle control without using ECO mode the car feels much more perky and responsive.
I can only suggest persevering with gentle throttle control. It falls in nicely with the instant torque response in EV mode. And again ,sorry if you already have. Also, it can make a significant difference if you are travelling uphill ,or downhill on average during the journey. Even if its not enough that you would normally notice. Maybe you were just unlucky with the terrain on your trips so far.
-
I have had the Jazz EX Style for 3 weeks and so far am disappointed that despite deliberately driving very frugally to try an achieve best fuel consumption, I have achieved an average of 54mpg over 500 miles. I have followed all available guidance including switching off AC and switching on Economy mode. I have driven a couple of journeys of 200 miles on an A road at speeds of 50 to 60 and the rest in town at speeds on average of 30. I have been extremely light on the accelerator and have found so far that I achieve best fuel consumption at low speed, in town. I really am so very disappointed that the car has achieved nothing like the 62 mpg claimed to be normal and nowhere in the region of the 70mpg that all reviewers claim is fairly achievable. My Mk 11 Jazz regularly achieved 50mpg and sometimes even 60. I am hopeful that the disappointing mpg is down to the cold weather but any advice would be appreciated. My gripe apart, the car is amazing to drive and beautifully finished
I can see where you are coming from. I'm just starting to get slightly annoyed at the fuel consumption. I got my car in mid October and I'm showing a genuine 50.8 mpg over, admittedly, a relatively short total mileage of 650 (ish) miles. On the car's computer I'm showing 52 mpg at the moment which, from past experience, is probably 4 mpg out so 48 mpg on this current tank.
This is better than my Mk3 in similar conditions but probably about 8 mpg at best better. I drive in B mode with the ECON button on most of the time.
It's a matter of psychology. You, like me, are seeing road tests showing mid 50s or better, other owners getting over 60 mpg.
One thing I did do to see if my (relatively) poor mpg was exceptional was to check similar cars on the fuel consumption website - spritmonitor.de. On that site there are plenty of drivers grubbing along at 50 mpg and significantly lower in some cases. Digging deeper I've seen a driver who has covered a lot of miles in an EX and he is averaging a tad over 50 and, on some tanks, he was down in the mid to late 30s.
I do a lot of short stuff, allegedly the car's forte in terms of mpg, but not in my case. I put it down to the fact that, in this cold weather, the engine is on a lot of the time both charging the battery AND keeping the cabin warm.
I think, though, we need to wait for the better weather. If I'm still grubbing along at 48 to 50 mpg I will be very disappointed.
Poor fuel economy, or perhaps more accurately, disappointing fuel economy aside - I do love the car.
-
If you do a lot of short journeys from cold then that'll do it.
Almost all my journeys are ~30 miles so lots of warm miles, engine, tyres, etc. From what I've read, anything under 16 miles and the cars not fully warm.
-
I think the Which test - as opposed to WLTP - arrived at a figure of 56 mpg overall. Just looking again at Sandysally's post above, she is on about 54 mpg having had the car 3 weeks - 3 very cold weeks. I think she might be pushing 60 mpg when the weather improves.
I'd definitely settle for 56 mpg overall. Warmer weather and a few longer trips should help. I guess, given the hybrid, I see 50 mpg as the minimum - a psychological thing.
-
I've done some rereading of the Jazz brochure - I'd missed that under normal WLTP the official MPG is 62 average but if you look further at the motorway only figure (WLTP high) it's only 48mpg.
Which is near what I'm getting, so quite accurate.
The Jazz Mk4 does do 0-60 in around 9 seconds, compared to competitors such as new Yaris that are doing it in 11 seconds, so the lower performance is probably why they are getting maybe 10% better fuel economy.
Compared to the Mk3 Jazz auto, the Mk4 is quicker to 60mph and also accelerating in gear. The fact it gets better mpg while being significantly faster is quite good.
Duel: Honda Jazz III 1.3i-VTEC CVT vs Honda Jazz IV Crosstar e:HEV (https://zeperfs.com/en/duel7616-8682.htm)
-
For those who use the Jazz (or any car for that matter) a lot for short trips, try following this fuel-saving tip: Combine as many of those short trips as possible. So don't go for example to the dentist in the morning (1st cold start), shopping after lunch (next cold start) and than, at the end of the afternoon also quickly to the bank (3rd cold start) and so on...
If you combine these three in this example, the first ride gives quite a high consumption, but after half an hour at the dentist the engine has not really cooled down and the second ride the consumption already looks better and the engine gets really warm. After 20 to 30 minutes in the supermarket you start with a reasonably warm engine and you have an even better consumption.
I know: a rather obvious tip, but you have to put in some effort...
-
Yes - I have been trying to collate trips into one. It's the weather I think. In October I filled the car after around 170 miles just to get an inkling of what the mpg was like and the first tank showed over 54 mpg (it showed 58 on the car's computer). The second tank, over 300 miles, was down at 48.8 and I think I am in late 40s on this current tank. When I do fill up my overall mpg will almost certainly dip below 50.
To be fair, it's the most economical car since my VW Golf Diesel and the most economical petrol car by some distance. I must stop being so competitive about mpg figures :)
-
I've said more than once that IMHO Honda should have designed the electrically powered aircon to be reversible so it could be used as a heatpump. This would have reduced the adverse effects on mpg caused by the engine running under sub-optimal conditions* to provide heat (enabling Eco mode reduces this problem by allowing a bigger difference between target and actual cabin temperatures so it lets the engine stop more often). I've been using the seat heating for the first few miles of any journey or in urban driving with cabin heating only used on longer runs or to clear the windows. I would have also liked to have blocked off most of the front grille but found that to be a challenge. If the standard fuel efficiency tests included a proper cold weather component then vehicle manufacturers would have more incentive to address the cold weather problem.
My Crosstar claimed 61 mpg on a 6 mile trip across town on Monday (temperature about 9C) and 79 mpg on the return home about an hour later. The mpg on short trips can be strongly influenced by the difference in battery charge between start and end but starting the return journey with a warm engine would have helped.
*See for an excellent explanation of the design philosophy.
-
Interesting John. I do know, that amongst EV early adopters, pre-heating and/or using the heated seats were seen as ways of reducing the effect of cold weather on range. My pal still has his 2014 Nissan Leaf and he does the preheating thing via an app on his phone on cold days. He uses AC to clear the windows if misted up.
-
Feeling a bit better about mpg this morning. I've found a similar car to mine on spritmonitor who has an overall mpg over just over 50 but, since October, this car has travelled around 1500 miles and hasn't once registered a tank of 50 mpg or more - mostly mid to late 40s.
What was instructive about this car's figures was a bell shaped curve from early 2021 to early 2022. Poor mpg at both ends but much better mpg from, say, April through to October.
So I'm now thinking 48 mpg isn't that bad and I may get to late 50's in the warmer weather. If I record a 60 mpg tank at any stage I will be buying champagne!
-
When I had a new Fiesta I noticed an improvement in MPG when I passed 2000 miles. I had the same from my Corolla when I passed 4000 miles. Given that the engine in the Corolla only runs 50% of the time then that would be similar to the Fiesta. With electrical assistance hybrid engines are less stressed than normal ICEs. There is a guy on the Toyota forum who has an Auris that has done in excess of 150000 miles and he says his fuel consumption is still as good as it ever was.
I think the Honda and Toyota hybrid systems are the best around. Most other manufacturers have mated their hybrids to a DGS gearbox, a potential source of problems in the years ahead as most drivers treat them like conventional automatics.
-
Had my ex for 4 weeks now just completed 500 miles
Today went from Nottingham to Bakewell, approx 50% on motorway and the rest on minor roads, a steady 55 - 60 mph on motorway, achieved 58.2mpg.
On way back same route similar speed and driving conditions, this time 82.5 MPG.
Can only assume was to do with wind and gradient.
Lovely drive and used ACC just on motorway no problems at all.
-
Just filled up only because I had a Nectar card offer that was about to expire. 48.5 mpg just a tad down on the last fuel up but my 50 plus mpg status overall is just preserved. Hoping for better mpg going forward as the weather warms up. I wonder how much per litre my next fill up will be? £2 per litre perhaps?
-
I wonder how much per litre my next fill up will be? £2 per litre perhaps?
And that's when spending money on a car with better mpg starts to show up in the household finances. :)
-
Current total mileage today, since April 21 = 7336 miles, Fuel consumption over that distance = 65.9MPG
Driving style: Mostly 'B' mode except where ACC is required, (which is not often). ECO = Off
I have to confess that only about 12-15% of those miles are motorway miles and then generally circa 65Mph.
Most motoring is urban/country roads where speed limits are 50mph or less.
These figures are from the dashboard readouts, not really concerned about any errors in quoted/real results, since all my previous Jazz cars have used the same basis for consumption comparison.
Typically, they were usually in the mid 50s Mpg, so more than happy with the MK4 improvements.
Have now turned the 8000mile mark, which I guess now covers most of the Winter period, consumption over that mileage is still returning 66.0mpg, so still very pleased with results.
-
With the warmer weather, I managed 77.1mpg today over 17 miles of mixed 30/40/50/60 country and urban roads.
Car was already warm from previous trips today, I've noticed the engine doesn't always start up recently as it's not needed for heating with the warmer temperatures.
-
With the warmer weather, I managed 77.1mpg today over 17 miles of mixed 30/40/50/60 country and urban roads.
But of course you do realize that that consumption over such a distance means nothing, literally nothing at all?
Example: We drove an almost identical trip of 22.5 kilometers (almost 14 mi) this morning. Start with COLD engine, air temperature + 7 °C, almost no wind.
Consumption according to BC: 3.4 l/100 km. = 83.1mpg.
Knowing that BC is a bit of a liar, I assume that the actual consumption was about 3.6 l/100 km. (78.5mpg)...
Unfortunately now the real world: the actual measured consumption of our Jazz over almost half a year is
4.49 l/100 km. = 62.9mpg. Almost 20 mpg less...
-
My long time average over 12,000 miles is almost exactly 50mpg.
Due to most driving being steady 70mph trips.
Good compared to other petrol cars with similar performance.
-
Spring seems to be arriving. For a trip across town (about 6 miles each way) my Crosstar reported 68.8 mpg on the outgoing journey and 93.4 mpg for the homeward leg about 1 1/4 hours later. There was no need for heating and the battery gauge was 4 bars when I started and finished (I didn't check it at the other end of the trip but the charge wmay have been higher). The homeward journey was slower due to more traffic. The average according to the computer is 81.1 mpg which means upper 70's mpg after allowing for the optimism.
-
My range display always shows around 400 - the only time I have seen more was when I first bought the car and also after a recent full power reset... where it shows 600 miles!
Looks like the computer is programmed to assume a high mpg when fully reset, I expect it to drop back down to the long term 400 miles range after a few tanks of fuel.
-
Here's my 199.9 :
(https://i.imgur.com/QfeDgTH.jpg)
Beat that
-
Here's my 199.9 :
Beat that
I had that in my Mk3 once after driving out of a car park and trundling 1.5 miles downhill.
-
Here's my 199.9 :
(https://i.imgur.com/QfeDgTH.jpg)
Beat that
Beat that ;)
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20220409/6de9e2983324f36b3b020cba471f76be.jpg)
-
I’m getting about 70mpg on country roads between Edinburgh and Kelso, which is 43 miles in length :)
-
A 50 mile round trip on the motorway today - fully loaded on the way out with 5 adults and suitcases, and just me on the return.
Up some hills on the motorway too, just under 53mpg was quite good for the whole trip from a cold start.
Acceleration a bit slower, but not much mooing if you use the trick of only pressing 1/3 of the way and holding. Braking a bit longer with all the weight, but not too bad.
-
Just done a run, from cold start. approx 10 miles in town, about half was fairly gentle, but some stop start traffic and I had to stop at about 8 sets of traffic lights. Then about 5 miles suburban 40 mph limit. Then 3 miles on country A road , 50 -60 mph, and about 10 miles on narrow country lanes , mostly under 30 mph, often having to slow or stop for oncoming cars. ( I even got the occasional RDMS twitch ;D)
I wasnt trying to be specially frugal. Just went with the traffic flow. 76 mpg on the fibometer. !! :-*
-
Lots of regen braking?
-
In the next couple of months the M4 roadworks 50mph limit will be removed and I'll be closer to 60mph 65mph so I'll be out of the mpg race.
-
Lots of regen braking?
No long hills. All in D mode. Eco off. I do try to anticipate the need to slow or stop, so maybe I'm slowing more on regen engine braking, and lighter on brakes than some.
I think climate control was off, which will also have helped.
-
...I have Econ on (apart from for traffic light grand prix and roundabouts :D), B mode (apart from ACC) and pootle at normal speeds 30, 40, 50 etc. and from 60 to 70ish ;) on the dual carriageway. 20 min, 17 mile journey each way to work every day, various journeys at the weekend although no great distance.
Climate control is on 99% of the time.
Car reckons I'm getting 66.9mpg at the moment. Seems to plateau occasionally but mainly slowly drops as the tank empties.
Warmer weather making a noticeable difference. Week or so ago was only 57ish.
Will see what I end up on by the end of this tank.
-
I'm getting about 71mpg on a mixed roads between Edinburgh and the Scottish Borders, not exceeding 55mph.
-
We in Israel have now nice temperature outside - 19-21 degrees Celsius, ECO switched off used D mode in urban drive 30-50km/h ~10km trips, constantly getting from fibometer 3,1l/100km every trip, now driven 342km from full tank with average 3,2l/100km
But that 3,1l/100km can be in reality something between 3,1-3,19l/100km
Sad that I can’t switch to km/l reading….
-
Some good mpg figures around at the moment with lots of EV running as the engine isn’t needed for heat. It’s shutting off very quickly after start.
I did a 25 mile trip today, country/urban roads 30-60 mph. 77 mpg is pretty good, not driving for economy just normal with the traffic.
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20220416/13b77cac139ac6aa21527ac94ae0a05a.jpg)
-
Hi Sportse,
what did you do to get trip fuel consumption displayed on the Trip Meter?
Thanks
-
Hi Sportse,
what did you do to get trip fuel consumption displayed on the Trip Meter?
Thanks
It’s from the Honda app through telematics.
It’s gallons used, Honda still hasn’t updated the units and thinks it’s litres. The fuel used figure isn’t always right but mpg is.
App mpg agrees to the dash and on my car is almost spot on when compared to a full tank manual calculation.
-
After having my car for 1 week, here's what I got. I'm not really technical and really do not know what "Fuel Efficiency" looks like, but here's what showing on my car.
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/52012055250_fd6c063bb1_4k.jpg) (https://www.flickr.com/gp/danskiedijamcojr/KGFv9Z)
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/52010513077_fc6812b368_4k.jpg) (https://www.flickr.com/gp/danskiedijamcojr/KGFv9Z) (https://www.flickr.com/gp/danskiedijamcojr/27MJL4)
-
After having my car for 1 week, here's what I got. I'm not really technical and really do not know what efficiency looks like, but here's what showing on my car.
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/52012055250_fd6c063bb1_4k.jpg) (https://www.flickr.com/gp/danskiedijamcojr/KGFv9Z)
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/52010513077_fc6812b368_4k.jpg) (https://www.flickr.com/gp/danskiedijamcojr/KGFv9Z)
(https://www.flickr.com/gp/danskiedijamcojr/27MJL4)
If you're used to mpg figures, the upper image for trip B works out at 76mpg. Your ''current drive'' works out at a higher 78mpg figure. km/pl equivalents 27 and 28 respectively. Healthy figures, I'd say. Though, of course, that's economy rather than efficiency.
-
I find it unusual that the change from winter to summer causes so much mpg change.
I do roughly the same journey every weekend and winter has been giving me an average 60mpg whereas spring is giving me an average 70mpg.
On one particularly warm day a few weeks ago, outside temp 18C, I got almost 80mpg.
My Civics seasonal change was only about 5mpg.
-
I’m surprised the manufacturers of hybrids haven’t come up with a more efficient way to heat the cabin in winter than running the petrol engine.
My mpg has seen a big jump just recently with the warmer weather, and the car is driving much more in EV mode - very noticeable at lower speeds.
-
I'm finding the increase in mpg is quite noticeable as well. I often start off in EV mode (when the car has been used and then parked whilst going to the supermarket say). In the colder weather this never happened.
I've mentioned this before but I have found a driver on spritmonitor whose mpg is an almost perfect "bell" curve on a graph and I think I am following this example. This driver almost never got 50 mpg after November or until the following spring but peaked at over 60 mpg in the summer. He had an overall average of just over 50 mpg. I think he looks like a high mileage driver so that will be a factor if cruising at 70 mph.
I'm showing 59 mpg on my current tank. I think this will be about 55 to 56 actual.
-
I’m surprised the manufacturers of hybrids haven’t come up with a more efficient way to heat the cabin in winter than running the petrol engine.
My mpg has seen a big jump just recently with the warmer weather, and the car is driving much more in EV mode - very noticeable at lower speeds.
One hybrid that uses heating elements I know but that car not selling in Europe
It’s Nissan e-Note with 1,2l petrol engine that always working as generator.
-
I've had an EX since December 2020 and driven around 10,000 miles in it. The mpg for last 3,000 or so miles is just over 66mpg but that figure is steadily rising - warmer weather plus slight modifications in my driving style. I seem to have settled into driving in B (figuring that the regenerative braking will reduce brake wear as well as save a little fuel) and with the econ button on. I will often sit behind a lorry at circa 58mph for extended periods until I get bored looking at the rear of the same container, when I'll overtake. Then I'll usually settle behind another truck for a while and repeat the process. This makes for low-stress, reasonably economical driving for me. Currently I'm averaging just over 70mpg.
-
Rural driving with occasional motorway to airport.
Tried tank fills with all D mode, all B mode both with econ.
Recently switched to start in B and when road allows constant speed go to D and set cruise (53mpg as this allows constant round most bends on routes used and hill sections minimises mooing) then return to B for urban times. Motorway cruise on 70mph.
This has resulted in an increase in overall mpg from new so far by about 1mpg but last fill gave highest for one fill so far of 57.31mpg.
Looks like I will settled on these methods.
-
57.5 mpg from latest tank. I am pretty sure this is the highest mpg I have ever recorded on any car albeit only by 1 mpg or so. Most of my driving has been in "B" mode with ECON mode selected. Did some motorway driving yesterday and I prefer "D" with Econ off for this type of driving.
PS
The old "4 mpg" optimistic thing was evident again. The fibometer said 61.5 mpg. To be honest I don't really need to record my mpg at all given how constant the 4 mpg thing is.
-
Today a short, about 40 km. (25 miles) trip with Mrs. Jazzik. Beautiful weather, 18°C and hardly any wind. Half way through we stopped for a half hour walk in the woods. We did not drive faster than 80 km/h (50 mph).
Back home, the BC showed a fuel economy of 3.3 l/100 km (85.6 mpg). I always correct the (usually over-optimistic) BC and assume a real consumption of 3.5 l/100 km = 80.7 mpg.
Not bad... the fuel tank is now about half empty and just a shame ;) that I see a consumption of 4.5 l/100 km (62.8 mpg) this far from the last fill up on the BC....
-
It does seem that up to 50mph you can get some impressive mpg, especially in warmer weather. Once over 50mph and closer to 70mph mpg drops dramatically.
Looking back to that Honda video about the h:ev efficiency, widely linked to here, the cutoff point on that was 49mph when converted from the kph used in the video.
The posted results here, and what I'm getting, have been :
50mph = 70mpg
60mph = 60mpg
70mph = 50mpg
-
It does seem that up to 50mph you can get some impressive mpg, especially in warmer weather. Once over 50mph and closer to 70mph mpg drops dramatically.
I suspect that above 50mph the power output from the engine is outside the zone of optimum efficiency plus the drag losses start to shoot up (approx double at 70mph compared to 50mph). I reckon the roof rails on my Crosstar don't help and cause significnat excess drag if there's a crosswind. The Jazz is evidently optimised for urban and extra-urban conditions. If it was given a bigger engine with the optimum efficiency at higher power then I expect that the mpg under low power conditions would suffer. It will be interesting to see the real life numbers for the new Civic and I wonder if Honda will make it more tolerant of cold conditions.
-
I was always dubious about the Which? test claim that they got 91mpg out of their test car.
Yesterday I did a rare local urban trip. This involved 30mph and Ealing councils blanket 20mph limit and the result of this 9 mile 20 & 30mph trip was 130mpg !
(https://i.imgur.com/5Ep6b7q.jpg)
-
Hi Kremmen
Do you remember car presentation ?
They told during the presentation that car running in EV mode 80% of time with speed 40km/h
An if we check Japanese Honda site they have in addition to WLTP Test result also JC08 test result
In JC08 test they get maximum 100MPG (2,8l/100km)
And if we look on JC08 test pattern we will see that most of test time car run on such low speeds and only small part of this 15 minutes test car run with speed of 80km/h (50mph)
-
Morning
All I know is what I said above. I never got above 30mph and a lot of it was at 20mph. I suspect if I'd driven longer that would have dropped as the battery needed more topping up.
-
Aaa, maybe you get fuel economy 130 MPG because battery on start has -50% charge and maybe engine already hot enough.
I also get readings like this (around 2,5l/100km) sometimes when I starting new trip when engine already at it’s working temperature and battery has more then 30% charge (sorry 3 bars on battery meter) but same 3 bars can be from 25% to 42% charge.
My every day trips is same route with same speed around 40 km/h with maximum speed up to 50km/h, with glide we’re it’s possible after ice engine stopping work to charge battery, I constantly getting readings 3.0l/100km - 3.3l/100km with average on tank for more then 300 km 3,2l/100km, but there is catch - such fuel economy possible when trip not shorter then 8 km in summer or 15-20 km in winter (+10 degrees C) if I starting that trip with cold engine.
First year of car owning i not known that and for several months did relatively short trips ~ 2-3km and my average fuel consumption was 3,8- 4,3l/100km.
-
My Crosstar is liking the warmer weather. Yesterday afternoon I did a trip totalling 91 miles using mainly rural A roads, rarely reaching 60mph, with some much slower sections and an average speed of around 35 mph. The trip was in two parts, 26 miles where the car claimed 92.7 mph and a second part of 65 miles with a claimed 79.8 mpg. The journey was assisted by a light tail breeze, the first part included a slight height drop but was fairly level overall while the second part was through more undulating terrain with an overall height gain. The engine had been off for two hours before the start and the ambient temperature was such that neither heating nor aircon was needed.
-
A couple of days ago a took a photo of my BC total average consumption as I am arriving 10.000 Km and don´t know if the BC resets the values.
On close to 9500 Km BC indicates 3.3L average and real SM 3.53L
It is like a 125 cc Scooter... ;D ;D
-
Speed makes a huge difference- this shows two trips on country roads likely averaging 40mph and two trips on the motorway at 70mph:
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20220514/fa6dbb15b76d9572ced2151ec86d2ee5.jpg)
I’ve tried various things but when you are at 70mph there is hardly any difference to the mpg you get. Likely because most of the time the petrol engine is in direct drive mode and running.
-
Yep, our model of Jazz doesn't give optimal over 49.71mph (80kph)
-
I’ve tried various things but when you are at 70mph there is hardly any difference to the mpg you get. Likely because most of the time the petrol engine is in direct drive mode and running.
I suspect it's a combination of a body shape which isn't very aerodynamic and the engine running well outside the zone of maximum efficiency in order to deliver the required power. I wouldn't be surprised if the new Civic with its 2 litre engine will give better mpg than the Jazz at 70mph (but worse at lower speeds).
-
I’ve tried various things but when you are at 70mph there is hardly any difference to the mpg you get. Likely because most of the time the petrol engine is in direct drive mode and running.
I suspect it's a combination of a body shape which isn't very aerodynamic and the engine running well outside the zone of maximum efficiency in order to deliver the required power. I wouldn't be surprised if the new Civic with its 2 litre engine will give better mpg than the Jazz at 70mph (but worse at lower speeds).
Plus the fact that when in direct drive the battery and electric motors are just dead weight. The Mk3 actually gives better mpg at motorway speeds ... but worse around town.
-
Plus the fact that when in direct drive the battery and electric motors are just dead weight. The Mk3 actually gives better mpg at motorway speeds ... but worse around town.
Although there's the weight saving of having no conventional gearbox.
As for the mpg, I've looked up the official data for the WLTP tests (conducted at 23C - an untypical temperature for UK). The numbers below are the mpgs for the low / medium / high / extra high cycles = the combined result.
2019 Jazz SE manual transmission: 40.9 / 53.3 / 56.5 / 44.8 = 48.7
2019 Jazz SE CVT transmission: 37.2 / 53.3 / 56.5 / 47.5 = 47.9
2020 Jazz SE eCVT transmission: 80.7 /74.3 / 72.4 / 48.7 = 62.8
Which show that the Mk 4 gives slightly better mpg than the Mk 3 at motorway speeds but the numbers also highlight the massive drop-off in the Mk 4's mpg between the high and extra high cycles. The corresponding reduction for the Mk 3 is much less. The WLTP procedure is described at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Worldwide_Harmonised_Light_Vehicles_Test_Procedure .
-
Maybe I wrong, but I think that low mpg on high speed came from single speed gearbox, there Toyota wins with planetary gearbox ….
-
I’ve had a couple of Toyota hybrids - an Auris and a Yaris.
Motorway mpg was similar to the Jazz slightly less in the Auris, maybe 2mpg less ,and 5 mpg more in the Yaris.
The Yaris was underpowered above 50mph though, despite having similar horsepower as the Jazz.
Although the Jazz only officially has 108hp, the performance is similar to other 130-150hp cars on the motorway.
The equation they use to calculate equivalent horsepower in a hybrid doesn’t match the actual performance you get from one in the ones I’ve had.
-
Maybe I wrong, but I think that low mpg on high speed came from single speed gearbox, there Toyota wins with planetary gearbox ….
The car will only use direct drive if it's the most efficient option. If more power is needed than can be efficiently delivered by direct drive then the system will switch back to generator - motor mode. This can be seen by watching the power flow display. I suspect that Honda engineers focussed too much on tuning the system to suit their expected usage (predominantly urban driving). There might be a system tweak when the mid-life refresh arrives (next year?). The money problem with the combined emissions total is explained here https://clubjazz.org/forum/index.php?topic=14648.0 .
-
Yes, the computer in the jazz seems programmed for low speed efficiency.
You can get good, mostly quiet performance on the motorway but have to drive around the programming.
I’ve found pressing the accelerator 1/3 of the way and holding it there gets you good acceleration at high speed after only a short delay.
Whereas pressing the pedal a long way gets you nothing for what seems like ages before the computer decides to accelerate.
A mode switch with sport/normal/eco like the HRV would be useful.
-
First refilled to full tank since acquiring my MkIV.
Car system reported 61.2 MPG, actual physical calculation 59.5 MPG. Did 470 miles before refilling, one bar left on the fuel gauge.
About 15% of mileage short local trips, rest on A or Motorway (averaging about 62 mph).
Best ever tank filled average in my previous MkII was 54.7 MPG which was mainly a long run down a quiet A9 with cruise control set at 60 in Summer.
-
Current total mileage today, since April 21 = 7336 miles, Fuel consumption over that distance = 65.9MPG
Driving style: Mostly 'B' mode except where ACC is required, (which is not often). ECO = Off
I have to confess that only about 12-15% of those miles are motorway miles and then generally circa 65Mph.
Most motoring is urban/country roads where speed limits are 50mph or less.
These figures are from the dashboard readouts, not really concerned about any errors in quoted/real results, since all my previous Jazz cars have used the same basis for consumption comparison.
Typically, they were usually in the mid 50s Mpg, so more than happy with the MK4 improvements.
Have now turned the 8000mile mark, which I guess now covers most of the Winter period, consumption over that mileage is still returning 66.0mpg, so still very pleased with results.
Just turned over the 10020 miles mark today and still showing circa 67.0mpg, ( see the trip B result)
It seems that the trip B figure on the dashboard only reads to 4 digits, hence it is reading 20.3 miles instead of 10020 miles.
I've also included a photo of the trip A results for the last 3 refuels, which I think show fairly consistent results.
Still well pleased with the vehicle. ;D
-
Speed makes a huge difference- this shows two trips on country roads likely averaging 40mph and two trips on the motorway at 70mph:
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20220514/fa6dbb15b76d9572ced2151ec86d2ee5.jpg)
I’ve tried various things but when you are at 70mph there is hardly any difference to the mpg you get. Likely because most of the time the petrol engine is in direct drive mode and running.
An interesting post
Could you please tell me how you got the trip computer on the main screen?
-
Sorry incomplete post
Trip computer as a short cut
I cannot see it as any of my tabs
-
For Trip Computer on main screen:- Go to - Home - Cursor right - Trip computer.
In my case Trip A is set, to reset at Refuelling, so it give the current situation plus the last 3 refuels.
Trip B is set to Manual reset and has not been touched since the car was new, hence it gives total mileage with consumption to match.
-
Excellent!
Thanks for the prompt advice
Sometimes you look but don’t just see!
Really v pleased with the Crosstar which I’ve had for 2 months now
The real ( brim to brim ) fuel consumption has been more than 60mpg under all driving circumstances which, given rising fuel costs, has been one of many benefits of getting the car.
The only readjustment I have had to make is realising the compact external dimensions given the spaciousness inside
-
I currently have a crosstar loan car - I'm finding maybe 5 mpg more on the motorway.
Perhaps the tyres on the crosstar have lower resistance than the standard EX tyres?
I found the standard EX tyres to be better in the wet, but in the dry the crosstar tyres are more comfortable.
-
But that's more down to the make and type of tyre, not the car. As a generalisation All Season tyres are said to give a softer ride, however, only Fallen make an All Season tyre for the Crosstar - it's a rare size - so replacement is limited.
-
Here are trip computer figures for my Jazz EX on its current continental road trip. Summer tyres, aircon on.
One shows it in mpg ,the other the same figures in litres per 100 km '
Prev 3' is A roads, no motorway , includes crossing the Brenner pass from Austria into Italy. For much of this trip the average was 88 mpg.
Prev 2' is A roadsc, crossing a mountain pass and approx 25% on motorway
Prev 1' is in A roads and about 70 % of it on motorway
Current is A roads. No motorway
Motorways were fairly leisurely - maybe 60 -65mph, but faster at times .
I am very pleased with these results. Average from new (5263 miles )is 67.9 mpg
-
I currently have a crosstar loan car - I'm finding maybe 5 mpg more on the motorway.
Perhaps the tyres on the crosstar have lower resistance than the standard EX tyres?
I found the standard EX tyres to be better in the wet, but in the dry the crosstar tyres are more comfortable.
-
It seems that speed makes a massive difference to MPG - at 70mph it's around 50-55mpg no matter what you do.
But if you don't use the motorways then it's easy to get 70+ mpg.
Considering the performance, it's a great achievement for performance/mpg.
-
Best speed for mpg is 50-57 mph.
Once you over this speed you waste energy because of air drag.
How can we reduce air drag ?
-
I'm finding, as per the Honda Hybrid explanation video frequently linked to, that over 49mph / 80kph is the point where mpg starts to reduce.
My local motorway has had a 50mph limit for a long time and at 50mph I'm getting ~70mpg but where the motorway restriction ends and I speed up to 60mph the mpg instantly decreases.
-
Best speed for mpg is 50-57 mph.
Once you over this speed you waste energy because of air drag.
How can we reduce air drag ?
We already have the ‘speed nose’ on the EX instead of the crosstar’s ordinary grille , so are probably at the limit already for the body shape and ride height.
-
I'm finding, as per the Honda Hybrid explanation video frequently linked to, that over 49mph / 80kph is the point where mpg starts to reduce.
My local motorway has had a 50mph limit for a long time and at 50mph I'm getting ~70mpg but where the motorway restriction ends and I speed up to 60mph the mpg instantly decreases.
Yes, 50mph motorway sections are great for mpg.
I’ve achieved 74mpg on a trip that was mainly steady 50mph motorway.
-
(https://i.ibb.co/YcWd2VG/D5-FCBC68-770-C-4-B0-A-9547-7214-DD347-A37.jpg) (https://ibb.co/y6Rk0xJ)trip A
(https://i.ibb.co/56wt25T/FF5904-C1-DD59-441-B-AC31-A96-B08-AF83-AD.jpg) (https://ibb.co/7XL8bGv)trip B
MPG on photo trip A total average after topping tank to full, there lower average MPG because first 4 trips needed to use climate control with temp set to 25 degree C (outside temp 29 degree C) and this trips shorter than 10 mile.
MPG on photo trip B in town with max speed 25 MPH without A/C.
Key to fuel economy - right speed (in town if there every 500m runabout or trafic light it`s 25 mph) and avoid short trips, best result on trips 10 miles or more, coast (glide) as much as possible, if acceptable drive up the hill at a slightly lower speed, so we will use less energy from the battery and the generator will turn on much later, smart usage of A/C or climate control and when acceptable use only fan with choice of air from outside.
if you want call me captain snail, I understand that almost no one will drive a car like that, but nevertheless here it is the result - consumption of only 104.4 miles per gallon on fairly even road, all trips were started with the battery charged to 3-4 bars (specially I didn’t charge the battery because it worsens the average consumption per tank) when charging while standing still, about 2 kilowatts out of 5 that the internal combustion engine consumes are lost to heat.
-
I'll be doing my regular 30 mile motorway trip tomorrow morning. Be interesting to see how the temps affect it.
-
Modifying driving settings to find best mpg has resulted in use of B mode + ECCO as standard with D mode on motorway for cruise settings etc.
Overall mpg from new is currently 53.01. - 4680 miles with 416.30 litres used
See attached excel graph for mpg for each fill.
dips with m/way speed. shift to B mode giving increase evident from increase
-
I agree that driving in "B" mode and Econ saves fuel. However, I miss a timeline on your excel graph. Temperature also has a significant influence on consumption. In winter, consumption will therefore always be higher than in summer.
-
I'm on 52.4 mpg (actual not computer) at present. My lowest mpg has been 48.5 and that was in the winter months when, effectively, you are using the ICE to keep you warm.
On my current tank I am on just over 66 mpg according to the computer - I think this will pan out at 62 mpg actual. I do a very small mileage - I've had the car 8 months and have done a tad under 1300 miles. I reckon I'm on track for an overall mpg over a year of 55 ish. I'll take that. My MK3 was on about 42 mpg overall after 2 years.
-
I did my usual 30 mile trip yesterday and got just over 72mpg
What surprised me was the aircon. Unlike the Civics it did maintain a good fan speed to keep the interior cool.
Outside was 27C and I had it set to 20C
Pleasantly surprised :)
-
I agree that driving in "B" mode and Econ saves fuel. However, I miss a timeline on your excel graph. Temperature also has a significant influence on consumption. In winter, consumption will therefore always be higher than in summer.
Sorry about cropping too much, attached graph with dates.
Also attached my Jazz Sport mpg graph which shows in the winter months decreasing mpg, all the other dips are due to m/way trips to go to airport on holidays.
-
(https://emojipedia-us.s3.dualstack.us-west-1.amazonaws.com/thumbs/120/emojidex/112/thumbs-up-sign_1f44d.png)
-
In the first 1650 miles in a mk4, I have averaged 76.1 according to the trip computer. This is over a mixture of roads. I don't often drive above 50mph and rarely above 60mph, always trying to avoid engine drive. The trick is to charge the battery as much as you can when slowing down or going to down hill and then using that electric reserve for fuel consumptive ascents and accelerations.
-
I still can't work out the logic.
On a quiet flat fixed speed 50mph motorway under LIM, so speed is constant, I can see the engine kick in and out regardless whether the battery bars are 3 or 7.
I would have expected 3 bars = engine, then once up to 7 bars the engine cuts out until back down to 3 bars......and so on
-
I still can't work out the logic.
On a quiet flat fixed speed 50mph motorway under LIM, so speed is constant, I can see the engine kick in and out regardless whether the battery bars are 3 or 7.
I would have expected 3 bars = engine, then once up to 7 bars the engine cuts out until back down to 3 bars......and so on
Pretty much mirrors my experience.
-
Seems to a lot of angst about mpg, indicated on dash and engine/motor power distribution.
In the end overall the real mpg comes down miles covered and fuel put in. I always fill to full and make notes on anything like type of journey covered - high speed m/way seems to be biggest effect.
The "magic" of how the power unit manages this just has to be accepted surely and enjoy the driving experience
-
I still can't work out the logic.
On a quiet flat fixed speed 50mph motorway under LIM, so speed is constant, I can see the engine kick in and out regardless whether the battery bars are 3 or 7.
I would have expected 3 bars = engine, then once up to 7 bars the engine cuts out until back down to 3 bars......and so on
At 50mph in direct drive on flat ground the optimum engine efficiency for the rpm dictated by being in direct drive means that there's a little spare power which trickles into the battery. Once the battery is up to 7 bars the engine has a short snooze.
-
I've said it before, but I'll say it again, it doesn't really matter how the optimum fuel consumption is arrived at. nor does it matter if certain journeys are down to the 40-50mpg range. or even up to the 80-90mpg range.
I just leave it to the Honda boffins to determine the most efficient mode, although like most members I assume that the most miles in EV mode will equal the best consumption.
To that end, I mostly drive in 'B' mode to promote maximum regeneration where possible and for me 'Econ' mode takes the edge off the performance. so I leave it Off.
No, what matters is the overall mileage covered, against fuel used, which for me as the attached photo shows is today 10727 miles at 67.6mpg ( the 'B' trip only reads to 3 decimal places, hence it only shows 727.8 miles), however I can assure everyone that it was set when the car was new and has not been reset at any time.
I guess I should say, that most of my motoring is journeys in the 10-15 mile range, urban and semi urban, with little motorway use
And so, having had 5 Jazz cars, all automatic (1 I-shift & 3 CVT) this MK 4 EX is the best car yet, particularly with fuel costs as they are at the moment.
-
I've finally crashed through the 60 mpg barrier. Just filled up and 66.6 showing on the computer which turned out to be an actual 61.6. Mostly town driving with some country roads and motorway.
Computer 5 mpg optimistic.
First fill up since 22nd April. Could have gone quite a bit further but filled up largely for convenience. I should get at least 2 more decent tanks before the winter plunges me back under 50 mpg. I think I'm on target for an overall 55 mpg in a full year.
-
So I'm a little in shock at the moment.... Figured with petrol prices as they are the time was right to see what I could get out of my EX Jazz and the results were, umm, surprising. 403 miles of mostly motorway driving over a couple of weeks with the odd trip around Milton Keynes thrown in. 23 litres of petrol. Which by my rough reckoning is near as damn it 80mpg! Nothing fancy, just driving everywhere in D with Econ mode on, a very very light foot, sensible speeds usually between 50 to 60, Apple CarPlay always on and no a/c (though I did succumb to thirty degree cabin temps a couple of times and put the fan on). Absolutely ridiculous economy and it was still creeping up when I refuelled at half a tank.
-
speeds usually between 50 to 60
That's the key - mpg varies massively with speed/wind resistance.
I get 50mpg at 70mph and 70mpg at 50mph, so a big difference.
Many EV drivers sit at 55-60mph for the same reason. For them, going faster won't get them anywhere quicker as they would have to spend more time charging than they would save from the higher speed.
-
That's me :)
Where the M4 opens up from 50mph to NSL at J8/9 westbound I only up it to 60 because anything faster kills the average MPG figure. The 7 miles I do between J 8/9 and 10 sees a small drop-off but not as drastic.
-
speeds usually between 50 to 60
That's the key - mpg varies massively with speed/wind resistance.
I get 50mpg at 70mph and 70mpg at 50mph, so a big difference.
Many EV drivers sit at 55-60mph for the same reason. For them, going faster won't get them anywhere quicker as they would have to spend more time charging than they would save from the higher speed.
Yes - I think a lot of people, in all sorts of cars, are disappointed at mpg or range at 70 mph. People think about a long run being good for mpg - well yes but not at 70 mph.
-
Having collected my car on Thursday, with 20 miles recorded, on Friday I drove about 210 miles to my weekend destination. Setting the A meter on zero, the trip there recorded 69.0mpg on arrival. Running around over the weekend with a mixture of town and open road driving, the A meter didn't drop below 67mpg.
On leaving to return home, I left the A meter as it was from Friday morning and zeroed the B meter before setting off, the return trip of around 210 miles recorded 74.3mpg. Overall for the weekend, the A meter gave me 527 miles at 69.9mpg.
Compared to my 2012 Jazz that has made many similar journeys, my fuel consumption has just about halved. My driving style for the weekend was relaxed and I was happy to cruise at 55-65 mph with the Econ button selected all the time. I used the cruise control often on the M11 and A1.
Very happy with the performance of the new model.
-
...On 62.5mpg at the moment. It has gone up since switching off Econ and with the warm weather, using climate control on a higher setting???
It's as though my results are back to front :D
-
There were many reports on Civinfo about getting better mpg with Eco off.
Eco dulls the throttle so maybe a heavier foot to compensate decreases mpg ?
-
I've also wondered about the ECO button thing (I have it on most of the time). There are times when you want a bit more acceleration and you might be tempted to put more throttle input whereas, without ECO, a small throttle input can result in quite a pleasing response.
I am a big fan of B mode though. Much more regen braking and, with my mainly urban driving pattern, I can take advantage of that.
-
I am a big fan of B mode though. Much more regen braking and, with my mainly urban driving pattern, I can take advantage of that.
As part of my minimum braking style I use B when I can but ACC has to have the car in D.
-
Lightly pressing the brake pedal seems to do the same thing as B mode.
I tried it out this week on the approach to a roundabout from 70mph down to 0mph.
If you put the car in B mode and lift off to slow down it charges the battery, but you get the same thing if you lightly press the brake instead.
It’s quite quick charging from 70mph - you can easily go from a half charge to fully charged when approaching a roundabout.
-
Interesting
So what gives more recharge, B mode or brakes ?
I routinely use B mode but if light braking gives more recharge I'd happily switch to D
-
It might be the same - I braked for the roundabout with both at about the same level of slowing down, and got about the same half charge for the battery from both of them.
On many hybrids, light braking doesn't use the actual brakes - just the electric motor.
We don't have a meter on the Jazz dashboard to see how much braking force is being used unfortunately.
On Toyota hybrids I could choose how hard to 'brake' to get maximum regeneration without wasting energy with the brake pads by using the regen meter on the dash.
There is also this useful explanation for Prius, although our hybrid systems are different:
https://prius.ecrostech.com/QandA/Brake.htm
-
I might be wrong, but I think there is a general misunderstanding, re regeneration on the Mk4 Jazz.
In my view regen occurs the moment you lift your foot off the accelerator, the car is then driving the electric motor, which becomes a generator to generate power to charge the battery.
Two degrees of regen are provided, ie 'B' & 'D' mode, with a much less degree in 'D' mode.
Use of the brake pedal provides NO additional regen braking, in fact in overall terms there is less braking energy available for regen, because that energy is then being dissipated by the friction brakes.
So, in normal driving conditions, maximum regen is provided, by lifting off the accelerator early and rolling to stop in 'B' mode, so that the footbrake is only used for the last few yards.
It's surprising how easy it is to learn this technique, which results maximum Mpg and far less brake pad wear.
My only concern is the fact that when slowing down using regen, the brakes lights are not working, which maybe of concern to a following motorist, particularly one who is already only 6ft from my rearend!!
-
... So, in normal driving conditions, maximum regen is provided, by lifting off the accelerator early and rolling to stop in 'B' mode, so that the footbrake is only used for the last few yards.
It's surprising how easy it is to learn this technique, which results maximum Mpg and far less brake pad wear.
This is my preferred style of driving.
My only concern is the fact that when slowing down using regen, the brakes lights are not working, which maybe of concern to a following motorist, particularly one who is already only 6ft from my rearend!!
But isn't that the same as a conventional car deaccelerating by using the engine. A gradual slowdown shouldn't cause a rear end shunt.
If someone is too close I dab the brake pedal a few times.
-
I've found with 'thoughtful driving' approaching roundabouts and junctions in B mode, tailgaters back off because they think you have no brake lights ;D
-
Two degrees of regen are provided, ie 'B' & 'D' mode, with a much less degree in 'D' mode.
Use of the brake pedal provides NO additional regen braking, in fact in overall terms there is less braking energy available for regen, because that energy is then being dissipated by the friction brakes.
In D I get limited recharging of the battery, whereas with light braking I was getting the same regen as with B while still in D.
I believe HRV may have a regen display on the dash, so you can judge how much braking to apply for maximum regen.
What we need is someone to plug into the OBD port, that way they can give us actual figures for the amount of regen each method produces and create a graph like this:
https://www.speakev.com/threads/regen-efficiency-displayed-using-the-torque-app.142183/post-2694350
Using an app, you could create your own regen gauge on a phone to ensure maximum regen.
-
There is unfortunately a lack of information available on the Honda hybrid system - for Prius we have loads of information on the various modes/etc.
A few comments on here may be useful - FYI regen still wastes energy as it won't be a 100% conversion of energy into the battery and there will be losses in conversion:
https://www.quora.com/How-far-can-the-brake-pedal-of-a-Toyota-Prius-be-depressed-in-order-to-engage-the-regenerative-braking-only-and-not-the-friction-brakes
-
Two degrees of regen are provided, ie 'B' & 'D' mode, with a much less degree in 'D' mode.
Use of the brake pedal provides NO additional regen braking, in fact in overall terms there is less braking energy available for regen, because that energy is then being dissipated by the friction brakes.
In D I get limited recharging of the battery, whereas with light braking I was getting the same regen as with B while still in D.
I believe HRV may have a regen display on the dash, so you can judge how much braking to apply for maximum regen.
What we need is someone to plug into the OBD port, that way they can give us actual figures for the amount of regen each method produces and create a graph like this:
https://www.speakev.com/threads/regen-efficiency-displayed-using-the-torque-app.142183/post-2694350
Using an app, you could create your own regen gauge on a phone to ensure maximum regen.
I did that gauge, using car scanner pro app, and Bluetooth adapter for obd
When brake pedal applied regen gives more power, when accelerator pedal released regen power depends on the speed of the car, when I drive with speed 40km/h in D mode and leave accelerator pedal I get ~ 5kw regen, when on same speed I choice B mode I get ~ 8kw regen if I remember correctly, maximum regen that I seen with brake pedal pressed is 29-30kw both in D mode and B mode.
Regen alone will not give maximum MPG, coasting when that possible gives, more gentle braking for extended time will waste less energy on conversion and more safe for battery, battery not heating up too much.
There another technique to save more gas, I seen one YouTuber Chanel I think from Taiwan, he tailgating lorries, using ACC on FIT e:HEV
-
There another technique to save more gas, I seen one YouTuber Chanel I think from Taiwan, he tailgating lorries, using ACC on FIT e:HEV
Is he still alive?
-
Than one of poor hypermiling tricks, when you stay behind large car on motorway you benefit from lower air drag, this will give you better MPG, but there risk to total car.
He doing that using ACC with minimum distance in settings, this may not work in Israel- our drivers hot and unpredictable :), I tried ACC with such settings once, car lowering speed without problems but several times ACC switched off by CMBS I think.
-
Than one of poor hypermiling tricks, when you stay behind large car on motorway you benefit from lower air drag, this will give you better MPG, but there risk to total car.
He doing that using ACC with minimum distance in settings, this may not work in Israel- our drivers hot and unpredictable :), I tried ACC with such settings once, car lowering speed without problems but several times ACC switched off by CMBS I think.
So both dangerous and reckless, then?
-
In my experience following lorries too closely is a major stone chip hazard due to their high height so stones can thrown higher.
Many years ago I had a very near miss when a half brick was wedged between 2 lorry twin tyres and when he sped up it was thrown back and missed my drivers side A pillar by inches.
-
Also, various ACC systems don't like lorries and can lose them from view.
I had a Toyota Corolla hire car with ACC, approaching a slow lorry on a hill it initially saw the lorry and braked from maybe 120 to 100... then lost it and decided to accelerate flat out to try and get back to 120! (kph in Spain)
Sending me right into the back of the lorry if I didn't disengage it.
I think some Teslas have had the same issue.
-
Many years ago I had a very near miss when a half brick was wedged between 2 lorry twin tyres and when he sped up it was thrown back and missed my drivers side A pillar by inches.
Yikes! :o
-
Interesting, if someone actually looked the Fit traveler videos, model that produced for Asia has ability to measure fuel consumption in km/l, why european model not have ability to show consumption like that ?
When I set meter to UK MPG I get more accurate consumption then in l/100km
And yes lorries are should be avoided at any cost !!!
That MPG not interesting me if this will cost me car body and window repairs.
-
Here’s the results from my test from a 58 mile mostly 70mph journey I do regularly:
Normal driving at 70mph using acceleration - 1 hour , 50mpg £10.10 cost
Maximum speed 55-60mph and only gentle acceleration - 1 hour 10 minutes, 62mpg £8.10 cost
So, an extra 12mpg and a saving of £2.
However, as I drive in the busy times I won’t be doing it again as £2 is worth it for safety.
Apart from lorries you are the slowest thing. Even though vans should only be doing 60 they actually do 80 and you are swarmed.
I even had someone in a Yaris hybrid flash me for doing 61 in a 70 limit before they zoomed off into the distance at 80!
Although I did see one suv only doing 45-50mph.
-
I'm happy at 60 ish, inside lane. Never been flashed.
I do take in the circumstances though. If I'm almost in a lorry convoy I will speed up or slow down to match their speed rather than be an obstruction.
-
I'm happy at 60 ish, inside lane. Never been flashed.
I do take in the circumstances though. If I'm almost in a lorry convoy I will speed up or slow down to match their speed rather than be an obstruction.
Yes - I do this as well. I overtake slower moving trucks as well. Having said that, most of my motorway work (such as it is) is on very busy motorways so 70 mph simply isn't an option.
Last Saturday I gave my daughter a lift to the evening do of her friend's wedding. I hit the M6 for about 6 miles on the way back - traffic sparse so I did 70 mph for the whole of this stretch. I could see the mpg edging down as I did it.
I find it a bit uncomfortable to sit in the inside lane of an empty motorway doing 60 mph. As per usual I was overtaken by 50% of the cars on that stretch.
My daughter does 80 to 85 on the M6 if it's clear (she's never been done for speeding - yet!). She's got a Toyota CHR Hybrid on order from the lease company. I think she might be disappointed in the mpg!
-
60 isn't something new to my Jazz, I've been comfy at 60 for about a decade now.
-
I'm happy at 60 ish, inside lane. Never been flashed.
I do take in the circumstances though. If I'm almost in a lorry convoy I will speed up or slow down to match their speed rather than be an obstruction.
80 to 85 on the M6 if it's clear (she's never been done for speeding - yet!). She's got a Toyota CHR Hybrid on order from the lease company. I think she might be disappointed in the mpg!
According to the Jazz video I’ve seen, 85mph gets you 38mpg!
Will probably be a shock as the CHR should be even less.
-
Yes - I think she's in for a shock. She's expecting much better mpg than the 32 mile per gallon she gets out of her Qashqai.
-
I don't understand the 80, 85mph + drivers.
At that speed thinking time is less, plus they are presumably constantly on the lookout, all angles, for Police, speed cameras and other vehicles travelling slower.
It doesn't sound like a very relaxing drive to me.
Before I took, and passed, the IAM test back in 83, I had a few lessons from a qualified IAM instructor. The one bit of advice that stuck in my mind was 'you should arrive at your destination as refreshed as you set off. If not you need to change your driving style'
-
I don't understand the 80, 85mph + drivers.
At that speed thinking time is less, plus they are presumably constantly on the lookout, all angles, for Police, speed cameras and other vehicles travelling slower.
It doesn't sound like a very relaxing drive to me.
If, like me, you lived in a country where the speed limit on the motorway is 140 km/h = 87 mph, I suspect you would get used to 80 or 85 mph very quickly.
I normally try to hold back a bit and arrange the ACC somewhere between 73 and 77 mph. but that's no guarantee that it won't go a little faster every now and then.
And I don't have to think much, at that speed I just go with the flow and I don't have to be on the lookout for police and speed cameras.
If it's not very busy on the road it really is a relaxing drive. ACC and LKAS on and here we go!
-
I drove my civic 1600+ miles in two days going from London to Prague and back, all averaging around 80/85 which was the speed limit then.
I just sat at 80/85 for most of each day, it took maybe 10 hours each way.
Apart from Germany where it was 120+ on the derestricted sections. But not for long, as the civic was gearing limited - 120mph was around 6k revs and close to redline!
Even at 120mph there were plenty of German cars passing me doing 160+.
If everyone is doing the higher speeds and expecting it, then there isn’t an issue.
-
I forgot to qualify I was purely referencing UK roads.
Of course other countries with higher limits you're not having to constantly look over your shoulder.
-
Hit my highest ever mpg in any car today.
A mix of 30/40/50 mph roads with a bit of traffic.
12 mile journey, driven normally at the limits with climate control blowing a fair bit due to the temperature…
107.9 mpg!
-
Keep trying ;D
https://clubjazz.org/forum/index.php?topic=12364.msg119882#msg119882
-
I also managed a 80 mpg 10 mile journey today too - a big difference from my 16,000 mile average of 50mpg.
As well as what the trip computer recorded as a 44mpg 12 mile return trip… but that did include over an hour of idling so can be ignored.
Urban use is definitely what the Jazz looks to be designed for, rather than efficient motorway travel.
-
Today 150 miles, mostly 90 km/h (56 mph) roads, also some 70 km/h (43.5 mph) roads and very little urban:
3,6 l/100 km = 78.5 mpg.
-
Two extremes today on a short trip - 199.9 mpg on the way out and 35mpg on the way back.
Highest I’ve seen and lowest too - it shows how the battery charge has a big influence.
Trip out was with a charged battery, trip back it was empty.
Steady high speed is where the mpg drops away for me with the 16” tyres.
Above 50mph, mpg drops rapidly.
On the motorway, the best mpg I could get long distance over 50 miles cruising was 60mpg at a steady 60mph (real mph - 62 indicated.)
My old 2013 Yaris hybrid got better mpg than the Jazz at 70mph on 100+ mile trips - 55mpg Yaris vs 50mpg Jazz.
-
Today 150 miles, mostly 90 km/h (56 mph) roads, also some 70 km/h (43.5 mph) roads and very little urban:
3,6 l/100 km = 78.5 mpg.
I just don't understand how those figures are possible. As soon as I get above 50mph I can watch the average mpg figure drop by 0.1mpg every few minutes which is backed up by the engine cutting in far more frequently.
My mpg mirrors what sportse gets :
70mph = ~50mpg
60mph = ~60mpg
50mph = ~70mpg
and if you do an urban journey all under 40mph you can get closer to 90 or 100mpg+
-
Today 150 miles, mostly 90 km/h (56 mph) roads, also some 70 km/h (43.5 mph) roads and very little urban:
3,6 l/100 km = 78.5 mpg.
I set my ACC to 60 mph actual (62 indicated) and kept it there for 50 miles.
Fuel economy was 60mpg.
If you go any faster it drops, slow down it increases.
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20220707/a19de16d8783ccbb78a1f486870f12e1.jpg)
-
A week ago I returned from a 1600 mile round trip from southern England to north Scotland. Overall mpg based on fuel used was 74.3. I had expected the rural Scottish roads with max 50 mph to favour very good mpg but this didn't prove to be the case for, I think, the following reasons: (i) Uphill sections which pushed the engine out of its zone of optimum efficiency; (ii) long downhills which exceeded the battery's ability to store regenerated energy; (iii) single track roads with sharp braking and limited potential for regeneration and (iv) wind drag in open areas (I feel that the Crosstar is vulnerable to crosswinds (roofbars?). The best mpg was on motorway sections where I joined the queue of lorries (but at least 50m behind whatever I was following). At one stage the fibometer was claiming 84.5mpg over 170 miles. After allowing 6% optimism that's 79mpg.
-
When brake pedal applied regen gives more power, when accelerator pedal released regen power depends on the speed of the car, when I drive with speed 40km/h in D mode and leave accelerator pedal I get ~ 5kw regen, when on same speed I choice B mode I get ~ 8kw regen if I remember correctly, maximum regen that I seen with brake pedal pressed is 29-30kw both in D mode and B mode.
This is useful information as it highlights the need for gentle braking to maximise regeneration. Heavy braking must temporarily generate at least 100kW of energy, much of which doesn't go into the battery.
-
A week ago I returned from a 1600 mile round trip from southern England to north Scotland. Overall mpg based on fuel used was 74.3.
That's as good as generally the car will do on roads up to 50mph - I can regularly repeat that on similar roads myself.
My 100+ mpg trip and the same trip the next day at 96mpg were a result of:
1) A fully warmed up engine, and setting off a few minutes after stopping
2) Warm outside temperatures
3) A fully chilled interior, so the a/c just had to maintain it rather than cool it down.
-
When brake pedal applied regen gives more power, when accelerator pedal released regen power depends on the speed of the car, when I drive with speed 40km/h in D mode and leave accelerator pedal I get ~ 5kw regen, when on same speed I choice B mode I get ~ 8kw regen if I remember correctly, maximum regen that I seen with brake pedal pressed is 29-30kw both in D mode and B mode.
This is useful information as it highlights the need for gentle braking to maximise regeneration. Heavy braking must temporarily generate at least 100kW of energy, much of which doesn't go into the battery.
Don’t forget to coast when this possible (if you watch power flow it’s when blue lines from battery becomes green to battery when you gently press and release accelerator pedal, at that moment motor taking minimal power from battery or 0 or has little regen), this gives more mpg than regen alone, don’t brake hard , that giving huge regen power but if that brisk hard braking most of energy will go to heat in inverter and battery, the longer you braking gently the more energy will be stored, but again braking only if we need to stop car and we not have distance / time to reduce speed by coasting, there another trick try not stop car, even if you speed very low and you approach traffic light that may change to green any second try not stop car completely (to move standing car motor work harder and taking more current from battery).
-
That's as good as generally the car will do on roads up to 50mph - I can regularly repeat that on similar roads myself.
My 100+ mpg trip and the same trip the next day at 96mpg were a result of:
1) A fully warmed up engine, and setting off a few minutes after stopping
2) Warm outside temperatures
3) A fully chilled interior, so the a/c just had to maintain it rather than cool it down.
I reckon you were helped by either a tailwind or a height difference between the two ends. If they were part of round trips then what were the mpgs on the other halves?
Don’t forget to coast when this possible (if you watch power flow it’s when blue lines from battery becomes green to battery when you gently press and release accelerator pedal, at that moment motor taking minimal power from battery or 0 or has little regen), this gives more mpg than regen alone, don’t brake hard , that giving huge regen power but if that brisk hard braking most of energy will go to heat in inverter and battery, the longer you braking gently the more energy will be stored, but again braking only if we need to stop car and we not have distance / time to reduce speed by coasting, there another trick try not stop car, even if you speed very low and you approach traffic light that may change to green any second try not stop car completely (to move standing car motor work harder and taking more current from battery).
What you describe is my normal technique but it doesn't work on some of the Scottish roads (even A roads) which are single track with passing places and it's a matter of using passing places. Sometimes I had to brake suddenly when I was about to pass a passing place and saw an oncoming vehicle while at other times I felt I couldn't decelerate at my normal speed because an oncoming vehicle was waiting for me.
I wonder if pure EVs have a much better burst regeneration capability.
-
Pure EV another story they have big battery at last 24kwh, so brisk braking that pushing 30kw of power nothing for them they charging at 50kw DC and I think that slowest DC charging today, but there maybe another brick on road, when battery hot it’s BMS reduces power that can be pushed in battery or power taken by traction motor, so if you push brake pedal hard enough you will use braking pads.
Today I did trip 14 km from shop to home with staring position slightly higher then end point and warmed engine, no one on roads, coasted as much as I can , I get 117 MPG this time, no A/C used as I fell comfortable when outside 27-28 degrees C, only fan blowing, most of time 30mph.
-
maintain it rather than cool it down.
I reckon you were helped by either a tailwind or a height difference between the two ends. If they were part of round trips then what were the mpgs on the other
It’s a flat urban trip, straight roads and mostly 40mph limits with some 30 and some 50 too.
I’ve just done the same trip today, this time with 2 passengers and got 86mpg. It’s 28 degrees, air con working hard.
Return trips can’t be compared, as I parked up and ran the engine before the return trip without powering down.
Mpg for the return was 44 one day and 47 the next - including 60-90 minutes of stationary engine running with the air con set for 21.
-
I've decided to remove my Spritmonitor link.
The M4 is due to partially open up by July 16th from 50mph to 60mph so my MPG is going to drop. Plus I'm deliberately not going above 60mph in the unrestricted zone just to keep my stats here higher.
Plus, if next weekend does get to 36C+ then I will open both garage doors and run the Jazz AC for a short while to cool down and that will kill the MPG.
-
I've decided to remove my Spritmonitor link.
................../................
so my MPG is going to drop.
May I say that I find that a very strange reason to remove the link...? (https://www.cheesebuerger.de/images/midi/konfus/a058.gif)
-
I see it as a MPG competition and I've decided to retire rather than drive to boost my figures. I'm getting well above my old Civic average 45mpg.
I'll still enter my details into SM but just not display them here.
-
Just on air con and its effect on mpg. Interesting trip yesterday to Dunham Massey Park with 3 and a half up. Car is parked in full sun. Opened doors to help get a bit of heat out then set off. The fibometer was showing 62 mpg.
It's a 16 mile round trip. Traffic quite light. Max speed 50 mph but mostly on country lanes where doing around 35 ish. Ordinarily I would expect the mpg to creep up but, at the end of this trip, the fibometer had dropped to 59.6.
Outside it was about 28 degrees. I managed to park in the shade but the Air Con was blasting out for the whole trip back (8 miles). Recirculation on the same time as well.
Wish now I'd set one of the trips. Another variable was an extra adult and child but I now have no doubt at all that, when on full blast, the Climate Control will cut mpg by a good 10%.
This must be where the 10% figure comes from. Over time the effect on mpg of Aircon/Climate Control will even itself out and probably not have that much effect overall but I can now give the 10% more credence than I did. Air Con can drink fuel.
-
I see it as a MPG competition...
:o
I didn't realize at all that this forum and the information it discloses could be considered a "competition".
I thought it was more about exchanging information...
-
It can be. I must admit I get "sore loser" syndrome when I see these guys with mpg over 60 mpg ;D ;D
-
In normal cars the air con runs from the engine by a belt, so runs anyway when the engine is on. There will be a hit to mpg as there will be more load on the engine.
With Jazz, it's a fully electric system so requires power to work.
In hot weather, I wonder what the difference in economy is between an ordinary car a/c and a Jazz a/c - maybe not a huge difference if both systems are under high load?
The Jazz system is probably more efficient in lighter load situations, plus works from the HV battery when the engine is off too.
-
I guess the answer in a situation like yesterday would be aircon off and all windows open for a mile or two (low speeds so no significant drag factor) and then go back to auto.
-
It can be. I must admit I get "sore loser" syndrome when I see these guys with mpg over 60 mpg ;D ;D
Good that you added two ;D ;D. Otherwise I would have taken your comment almost as serious. ;)
-
I've just travelled 1,800 Kms (1118 miles) from Somerset to Vienna Austria. Almost all motorway doing 130-140Kph (80-86 Mph) pretty well all the way and averaged 53 Mpg (UK Gallon). A remarkable Mpg by any standard. I've only owned my 2021 Jazz EX for a week. I am seriously impressed.
Moreover at 6'5" it was comfortable as well. A rare thing for me in small car :D
-
In normal cars the air con runs from the engine by a belt, so runs anyway when the engine is on. There will be a hit to mpg as there will be more load on the engine.
My Panda had an electrical clutch in the AC pulley; you could hear it click when the AC was turned on.
-
It can be. I must admit I get "sore loser" syndrome when I see these guys with mpg over 60 mpg ;D ;D
Sorry, I not wanted that this looked like that, I will remove my MPG , but my MPG so high only because I drive mostly in town with speed limit 30mph…
-
In normal cars the air con runs from the engine by a belt, so runs anyway when the engine is on. There will be a hit to mpg as there will be more load on the engine.
My Panda had an electrical clutch in the AC pulley; you could hear it click when the AC was turned on.
Most conventional cars have an electric pulley clutch to disconnect the air compressor from the engine when not in use EV's and, I believe hybrids, usually have a compressor driven by its own electric motor ,.EV's have no I.C.E.anyway , and Hybrids still need air con when in EV mode.(not just for driver comfort but to help cool the HV battery) It uses battery power ,which in an EV can significantly reduce its range and in a hybrid requires extra fuel to replace, but when it its switched off its off.
-
I've just travelled 1,800 Kms (1118 miles) from Somerset to Vienna Austria. Almost all motorway doing 130-140Kph (80-86 Mph) pretty well all the way and averaged 53 Mpg (UK Gallon). A remarkable Mpg by any standard. I've only owned my 2021 Jazz EX for a week. I am seriously impressed.
You'd be even more impressed if you keep the speed down to about 110kph. Mathematically this might appear to add a couple of hours to the 1300 Km Calais to Vienna. In practice the extra time taken is much less . I spend the time noticing the same gas guzzlers that hurtle past at 200 kph, that do so again 2 hours later having stopped for the extra fuel ,or a caffeine fix. . I also find that setting a more leisurely pace encourages me to come off the motorway for fuel, which can save 30-40 cents a litre. I often found that any time I had saved was only spent killing extra time at the hotel waiting for dinner time. . Fuel savings could have paid for the drinks. ;)
-
A/c must draw quite a lot of energy on the Jazz.
I’ve been driving on urban roads recently in 32/33 degree temperatures with the a/c set to 21 - the petrol engine has been revving a lot more than usual.
Mpg is also down, I’d say much more than winter for urban trips.
I’d expect 70 on medium urban trips in the winter but yesterday was 60.
-
It can be. I must admit I get "sore loser" syndrome when I see these guys with mpg over 60 mpg ;D ;D
Sorry, I not wanted that this looked like that, I will remove my MPG , but my MPG so high only because I drive mostly in town with speed limit 30mph…
Don't remove your mpg on my account. I was only joking (well a bit anyway ;)).
-
A/c must draw quite a lot of energy on the Jazz.
I’ve been driving on urban roads recently in 32/33 degree temperatures with the a/c set to 21 - the petrol engine has been revving a lot more than usual.
Mpg is also down, I’d say much more than winter for urban trips.
I’d expect 70 on medium urban trips in the winter but yesterday was 60.
The conclusion I draw is that the 10% figure can be accurate if the circumstances are right. I was staggered to see my mpg going down on a trip where it would normally go up. The petrol engine was cutting in a lot more as well as you found on your trips. I guess, eventually, the car would have got down to 21 degrees and, on a longer trip it would even itself out.
In short I now believe the 10% figure as a maximum effect of AC being on. Over the course of a year it is much less than that but it would be fair to say that aircon can reduce mpg by UP TO 10%.
-
I have arrived at speed, drive settings and adapted to give what I feel is the optimum driving method to suit me.
General driving locally is up to 53mpg when conditions allow in B mode and ecco, climate control always auto varying temp, and use of any fitted auxiliary like heated seats as required.
When motorway use for distance driving, same auxiliary use but D mode ACC and ecco speed set to 70mph on dual carriageway sections where permitted.
Attached graph shows mpg after each fill and the Accumulative mpg since new.
The dips in fill mpg in all cases attributed to after motorway or distance runs when max permitted speed used where permitted.
I report on here my accumulative mpg in site settings since that is the real indicator over all conditions, and since settling on settings it and fill mpg naturally increasing towards a settled figure at some point.
Stopped thinking of the multiple variations that may occur as generally I cannot influence ambient conditions, but do monitor tyre pressure.
-
A/c must draw quite a lot of energy on the Jazz.
I’ve been driving on urban roads recently in 32/33 degree temperatures with the a/c set to 21 - the petrol engine has been revving a lot more than usual.
Mpg is also down, I’d say much more than winter for urban trips.
I’d expect 70 on medium urban trips in the winter but yesterday was 60.
Actualy alot of energy because you set 21 degree C - try set 25-26 degree C but disable ECON if you use it
I seen throught Car Scanner that A/C when compressor works adds ~1 kW but i not abuse Air Con with unnided low temp settings, frend of mine also with Jazz 2021 had always huge fuel consumtion never less then 4.5-5l/100km because he setting 15.5 degree or LO on Air Con in summer and ECON on, recently when he in car (outside temp that time 33 degree C) he call me and started complain about fuel consumption, i asked wat's A/C setting he set and then i say him please set temp to 26 degree and disable ECON, an half hour later he called to me to say thanks - same time he managed to cool down air in car he first time seen fuel consumption 3.0L/100km on long trip with speed ~90km/h with 3 passengers.
-
As Roman suggests it had crossed my mind to crank up the temperature to, say 25%, to get the air con to switch off a bit earlier.
-
...I'm obviously not understanding the reason to run the climate control at 21° in heat of 32°? :o
I don't want it to 'switch off' unless I press the button!
I've got mine set on LO, econ off, B mode, fan on 2 or 3 and either blowing straight out or to feet too.
Mpg is around 60-62 indicated. If that's too chilly then I drop the fan speed...
-
I guess the thinking is that, on very hot days, the Climate Control will take a long time, at least 10 miles, before it gets even close to 21 degrees. Mine was blasting out with the fan on nearly max after an 8 mile drive in an ambient temperature of 28 degrees.
I could cope with a temperature of 25 degrees in the summer if it meant I could drive in relative silence. I find the fan quite intrusive (not just on the Jazz but in most cars with AC and/or CC).
It's a minor problem in the UK to be fair.
-
True
If you want intrusive noise get a portable air conditioner for indoors :-\
-
On today’s trip 14 km with outside 35 degrees C i set temp to 28,5 auto and econ off and still getting cool air from a/c
Air con when climate control set to cool air constantly switch on and off when it reach desired temp, but when inside car temp is almost 40 and climate control set to auto and 21 degrees or lower compressor not stopping to work and constantly taking power from HV battery, another option to conserve energy is to take control of fan (speed 1-4)while temp set to 22 - 28,5 degrees (depending on outside temperature). This allows more economic usage of energy.
Now there catch when a/c cools salon too much it will fall in heat mode, when climate control set to auto this can be detected by 2 ways- air direction when heating sets automatically to blown down / straight, when cools it’s set to straight only, or when watching energy flow ICE apears without charging battery or giving energy to motor.
When this happens I simply lower a/c temp by 1-2 degrees.
-
...And the MPG when all this is going on?
-
...And the MPG when all this is going on?
At least not dropping down dramatically. But of course will be lower then without a/c, but without a/c either driver or battery will suffer from heat in cabin ;)
-
...What do you actually get though?
-
...What do you actually get though?
Comfortable air (low humidity at least) in cabin and good mpg same time.
-
...What MPG are you getting?
-
...What MPG are you getting?
With A/C 3,3- 3,6l/100km depends on distance (shorter trips less fuel efficient) and how hot outside is.(I starting use A/C if outside temperature is 29 or higher)
Without A/C 2,7-3,1l/100km.
-
...I'm obviously not understanding the reason to run the climate control at 21° in heat of 32°? :o
I don't want it to 'switch off' unless I press the button!
I've got mine set on LO, econ off, B mode, fan on 2 or 3 and either blowing straight out or to feet too.
Mpg is around 60-62 indicated. If that's too chilly then I drop the fan speed...
I leave the climate control set to 21 all year round… because I want the inside to be 21 ;)
It’s supposed to keep the car at that temperature and does ok in the winter but is working hard in the summer.
I have tinted windows in the EX but there is still a lot of untinted glass at the front.
-
...I'm obviously not understanding the reason to run the climate control at 21° in heat of 32°? :o
I don't want it to 'switch off' unless I press the button!
I've got mine set on LO, econ off, B mode, fan on 2 or 3 and either blowing straight out or to feet too.
Mpg is around 60-62 indicated. If that's too chilly then I drop the fan speed...
I leave the climate control set to 21 all year round… because I want the inside to be 21 ;)
It’s supposed to keep the car at that temperature and does ok in the winter but is working hard in the summer.
I have tinted windows in the EX but there is still a lot of untinted glass at the front.
21 degree under bright sun in summer inside car that should be fuel efficient but have big windows....
It`s nonsens, that temperature your car will reach only after sunset ;) It`s car - large metal box with closed windows (when sun reys getting in car the car temperature becomes higher then outside by 5-7 degree)
25-26 degree can be reached easy but also this will take some time if car parked not under shade (with sun shade for windows that closing all windows will be litle bit cooler but this window shades taking too much space (at least thos i found on Aliexpress) this for older Jazz but almost all parts fits (litle front windows not covered)
https://www.aliexpress.com/item/1005002911623846.html?spm=a2g0o.store_pc_groupList.0.0.2d6ec79cds4zwV&pdp_ext_f=%7B%22sku_id%22:%2212000022741162816%22,%22ship_from%22:%22CN%22%7D&gps-id=pcStoreJustForYou&scm=1007.23125.137358.0&scm_id=1007.23125.137358.0&scm-url=1007.23125.137358.0&pvid=e1bc7888-2ef7-4f95-9be3-a02f0529f98e (https://www.aliexpress.com/item/1005002911623846.html?spm=a2g0o.store_pc_groupList.0.0.2d6ec79cds4zwV&pdp_ext_f=%7B%22sku_id%22:%2212000022741162816%22,%22ship_from%22:%22CN%22%7D&gps-id=pcStoreJustForYou&scm=1007.23125.137358.0&scm_id=1007.23125.137358.0&scm-url=1007.23125.137358.0&pvid=e1bc7888-2ef7-4f95-9be3-a02f0529f98e)
-
Every other car I’ve had has reached 21 degrees without a problem in the midday sun- even my Volvo that had a panoramic sunroof with the shade open. Usually only 20 minutes or so before the fan speed drops.
The jazz air conditioner appears to use a lot of power but not be powerful enough for the car unfortunately.
I’ve been driving for one to two hours in the jazz and the fan is still at high speed.
On holiday I’ve had rental cars in 35-40 degree summers that also don’t take long to get to 21 degrees, so it’s not an unusual thing to be able to achieve.
-
My 3 Civics AC was also pathetic when compared to my previous 2 Xantias and IS200.
The Jazz does seem to be colder as the fan doesn't give up quite so early. On my Civics, if I dialled in 21C the fan would almost stop blowing around 25C
-
I’ve driven a previous generation Yaris hybrid in Spain, that coped ok with cooling from 30+ to 21.
Some Toyotas go even further than just eco mode / normal for air conditioning- my Auris hybrid had ‘sport mode’ for the air conditioning!
Turning it on gave you a higher fan speed and more airflow than standard.
I’m surprised at Honda having poor air conditioning, they sell loads of cars in the US so people will be using them in high summer temperatures.
-
...What MPG are you getting?
With A/C 3,3- 3,6l/100km depends on distance (shorter trips less fuel efficient) and how hot outside is.(I starting use A/C if outside temperature is 29 or higher)
Without A/C 2,7-3,1l/100km.
91 - 104? I'm not sure I believe that at all. I don't think I could drive that slow just to achieve those mpg figures.
-
I must admit, there have been some unbelievable mpg figures posted.
I find it incredible that some can do 80mph+ for hundreds of miles and still return 70 to 80mpg.
On mine, as soon as I go above 50mph the mpg drops off to below 60mpg. At the quoted 80mph I'd be showing less than 50mpg.
-
I have always found these "My MPG's better than your MPG" discussions pretty pointless. There are so many variables (speed, driving style, traffic, hills, wind, temperature, etc) that comparisons can only be vague. Especially so when figures are quoted for single, relatively short, trips. That's the whole reason for the WLTP process: whilst the results can be criticised as not representative of the real world, they endeavour to standardise all the variables so you can compare between cars.
For me, the only useful application of the figures displayed by the car's computer is to help the driver achieve the best MPG he/she can in whatever conditions prevail at the time. Someone else driving a different (but same model) car in different circumstances will get different fuel economy.
-
Very good point Colin. The variables are immense between different users, different conditions, different driving styles. I guess one issue is, when you buy a hybrid, you want to see a measurable improvement in mpg and if that improvement is not as big as you'd hoped then you might start to stress about it.
If you go on spritmonitor and look at identical cars there is a vast gap between the best average mpg figures and the worst. Last time I looked it ranged from over 70 mpg down to about 45 for the hybrid Jazz. My figures, over an admittedly small number of refills range from 48.3 right up to 61.6.
I think I'm going to settle in the mid 50s. It's roughly what Which found on their test - 56 overall if memory serves.
-
...There's driving carefully and getting 5-10mpg more and there's driving in some unknown weird way to get over 40mpg more!
-
I drive (in my opinion, of course ;)) perfectly 'normal', and so far I have a 'normal' consumption of 4.55 l/100 km = 62.1 mpg (according to Spritmonitor).
-
On the Prius group I used to be a member of, some people were inflating their tyres to very high levels to get better mpg - 40/45psi instead of 30psi IIRC.
Some car manufacturers quote an eco tyre pressure, but extreme people were going beyond this.
I’m sure they would find their tyres probably wear out quicker and the costs offset any mpg savings.
Plus the road holding will be reduced.
-
Oh...I forgot to mention. Yes, I also drive with slightly higher tire pressure. Although we never drive 160+ km/h, I do stick to the recommended tire pressure for that speed. So front wheels 2.7 bar (39 PSI), rear 2.6 bar (37 PSI).
The Vredestein Quatracs do not (yet) show any strange wear pattern, road holding is fine, it is perhaps a little less comfortable on bad road surfaces. Fuel economy as it is...
-
As most of my miles are on the motorway at 70mph it's easy for me to record my one figure long term average mpg.
Unusual trips for me are country roads where I may average 70mpg if I stay below 50mph. Also some urban ones averaging only 21mph where you get 80-100mpg.
Over 17k miles my long term average is 50mpg.
Compared to some other cars I've owned/driven for some time on the same roads it's a good mpg figure, even though the Jazz Mk4 figure might appear quite low:
Accord 2.0 manual - 30mpg
Civic 1.8 auto - 36mpg
Jazz 1.4 auto - 40mpg
Volvo V40 diesel auto - 48mpg
The only car I've owned that got better mpg was a mark 1 Yaris hybrid - 55mpg. But that had hardly any performance above 50mph.
-
I was just looking at the manual records I kept on my 2005 Golf TDI (1.9) Diesel. This, given what people say about high speed cruising in the Jazz, beats most hybrids hands down. I did a couple of trips down to Cornwall cruising at 75 to 80 mph where I could and I would often get 55 to 56 mpg.
It's why, if mpg is the sole criterion, a diesel will beat a hybrid for high speed cruising. The advice "Which" used to give before the Nitrous Oxide thing came to the fore was go diesel for high speed cruising. They still sound a cautionary note to the effect that hybrids may disappoint if used solely for motorway use. I do know that PHEVS can be particularly thirsty once you run out of battery.
But who wants a dirty noisy oil burner these days? 50 mpg is pretty good, all things considered, for cruising at 70 mph and if that's the lowest you get then happy days.
When I got rid of the Golf, I noticed my average mpg was 48.98. I'd retired by then and hadn't done a motorway run of any consequence for over a year.
-
Well I tried to inflate 38 psi front and 36 psi rear(allowed pressure for our car if speed over 160km/h expected), I tried also 40 psi front and 38 rear, and not seen any improvement in MPG, only driving weird as someone said giving good mpg, if I will abuse climate control and will be first on next red light I will get normal mpg, but I choice hybrid car not to be first waiting on next red light, I prefer not stop on red light at all, maybe I will drive slower then someone else but I will get mpg that I wanted to see from hybrid car.
And please check page 13 from owner manual about e:HEV, aggressive driving and heavy usage of climate control affecting drastically fuel efficiency - that is from owner manual page 13 if driver expected fuel efficiency better then measured during WLTP test calm driving is must.
We in Israel not have roads with speed limit more then 120km/h and I always skip this fast road because I will waste more fuel this is not flat road - most of it on hills, and will pay for using that road, in addition this road never as close at end points of my trips as some slow free of charge roads, so no benefits from using that road at all.
Best economy I seen not only in my jazz but also on YouTube channel from someone in Taiwan also with Honda Fit e:HEV, he getting 36km/l but he not speeding over 80km/h to get this fuel consumption and I think always drives behind lorries . And I believe that with a/c because I seen that outside temperature in the video is 31 degrees or more and probably with high humidity.
-
Another thing to watch for is the air conditioning is required to cool the battery in summer.
If you reduce the use, the battery won’t be kept as cool - which will affect mpg/performance a bit depending on temperature.
I know people that have Prius in the desert can get reduced performance after being parked for a while until the ac has cooled the cabin and battery.
-
Battery starts to cool down actively when reaches temperature of 35-40 degrees (near battery air outlet in the lower luggage box 15l always after driving 35-36 degrees C , in last summer when I had long trips with a/c set to 25 degrees (outside temperature in my country can reach 40 easily) I never get warning from hybrid systems about overheating.
-
I have always found these "My MPG's better than your MPG" discussions pretty pointless. There are so many variables (speed, driving style, traffic, hills, wind, temperature, etc) that comparisons can only be vague. Especially so when figures are quoted for single, relatively short, trips. That's the whole reason for the WLTP process: whilst the results can be criticised as not representative of the real world, they endeavour to standardise all the variables so you can compare between cars.
For me, the only useful application of the figures displayed by the car's computer is to help the driver achieve the best MPG he/she can in whatever conditions prevail at the time. Someone else driving a different (but same model) car in different circumstances will get different fuel economy.
Like author of this I think this item is getting a bit too detailed in trying to massage mpg data with too many variables which do not or cannot be applied by other drivers.
The only constant is the power unit.
-
I have always found these "My MPG's better than your MPG" discussions pretty pointless. There are so many variables (speed, driving style, traffic, hills, wind, temperature, etc) that comparisons can only be vague. Especially so when figures are quoted for single, relatively short, trips. That's the whole reason for the WLTP process: whilst the results can be criticised as not representative of the real world, they endeavour to standardise all the variables so you can compare between cars.
For me, the only useful application of the figures displayed by the car's computer is to help the driver achieve the best MPG he/she can in whatever conditions prevail at the time. Someone else driving a different (but same model) car in different circumstances will get different fuel economy.
Like author of this I think this item is getting a bit too detailed in trying to massage mpg data with too many variables which do not or cannot be applied by other drivers.
The only constant is the power unit.
I agree with all that.
I wish there no holy war because of MPG , should I travel to UK and lease Jazz or crosstar I believe I will get same mpg as most of local drivers get.
About weird mpg of someone - believe or not in Japanese JC08 test they get 2,8l/100km but test patterns contain mostly roads with speed limit 30-50km/h and little bit of road with speed 80km/h.
https://dieselnet.com/standards/cycles/jp_jc08.php (https://dieselnet.com/standards/cycles/jp_jc08.php)
Sometimes fuel consumption can be lower than obtained in test but most of time it will be hard to be close to this numbers, my overall fuel consumption after almost 2 years of owning a car is 3,51l/100km over 27000km and dropping because after first half year I started driving more “hybrid way” almost as an hypermiler.
Should I drive as before with brisk acceleration and hard braking afterwards I will be close to 5l/100km on every tank (that is fun and our car have plenty of torque and power to drive like that but my wallet not allows to do that)
-
Just as an aside I was trying to remember when I became obsessed with mpg. I remember a time when I would fill up with the cheapest unleaded I could find and not care a jot. I might have done the occasional check once or twice a year to check that nothing was amiss but I certainly didn't write it down.
I looked at my "book" in which I record all sorts of stuff from holidays to utility bills. I've had it for years. The mpg obsession started in 2001 - I was still working then so not a "too much time on my hands" issue. Something must have triggered it. I have a mate who is a real penny pincher but even he doesn't track mpg.
-
I have never been too concerned about MPG figures with any car. I keep them correctly maintained, check tyre pressures regularly and drive using a light right foot and apply acceleration and deceleration sense in accordance with principles laid down by the IAM and RoSPA ADA.
I do keep a 100% record of my mileage and fuel figures though, but its thanks to Thames Valley Police (TVP) who put a marker on my car for fuel theft in the Reading area a couple of years ago. I live 200 miles from Reading and have never driven there but was stopped by my local force one day and had a job to convince them of my innocence. They had TVP send a photo of the offending car to their patrol car and it turned out that TVP had incorrectly input my registration number, which was one digit different to that of the thief.
I figure that fuel & mileage recording might help to show how far I could have travelled if it happened again. With 700 miles on it, my journeys in the new EX have not been below 65mpg.
-
In early 2009 I started tracking my fuel consumption on Spritmonitor. Simply out of curiosity.
I don't know why those other nearly 700,000 people are doing the same thing as me and I really don't care.
Spritmonitor.de
Database statistics:
.1.017.186 vehicles
.697.826 users
.40.257.954 fuel ups
.20.499.816.165 km
.1.528.059.663 l of gas
-
Well I tried to inflate 38 psi front and 36 psi rear(allowed pressure for our car if speed over 160km/h expected), I tried also 40 psi front and 38 rear, and not seen any improvement in MPG
Interesting
After cleaning brake disks from rust I found that car coasting bigger distance without dropping speed, and accelerating with ECON ON better then before , I should try to inflate tyres to 38 psi front and 36 psi rear now ;D but also now I starting to get weird MPG - on same road that I use all that time, with rusted disks I managed to get 85 MPG, now 100,8 (without A/C) and my average for 354km dropped rapidly from 85 MPG to 91 MPG.
-
I think the weight of the rust causes the difference in consumption. I suppose you have braked away several kilos of rust... :P
-
I think the weight of the rust causes the difference in consumption. I suppose you have braked away several kilos of rust... :P
I think someone not understand anything in mechanics…..
-
I think someone does not understand anything of humor... :D
-
Well I tried to inflate 38 psi front and 36 psi rear(allowed pressure for our car if speed over 160km/h expected), I tried also 40 psi front and 38 rear, and not seen any improvement in MPG
Interesting
After cleaning brake disks from rust I found that car coasting bigger distance without dropping speed, and accelerating with ECON ON better then before , I should try to inflate tyres to 38 psi front and 36 psi rear now ;D but also now I starting to get weird MPG - on same road that I use all that time, with rusted disks I managed to get 85 MPG, now 100,8 (without A/C) and my average for 354km dropped rapidly from 85 MPG to 91 MPG.
...Hmmm Hmmm.
-
I sometimes overinflate by 0.5 psi in Winter but not in summer.
The fuel saving with ~3 psi would likely be wiped out with premature centre tyre wear ?
Not sure how it affects road holding, especially in heavy rain ?
-
I sometimes overinflate by 0.5 psi in Winter but not in summer.
The fuel saving with ~3 psi would likely be wiped out with premature centre tyre wear ?
Not sure how it affects road holding, especially in heavy rain ?
This pressure Honda recommend for speed over 160km/h to reduce tyre overheating so 38 psi front and 36 psi rear not something that not allowed, and should not introduce wear in centre of tyre.
If Honda write it on b pillar it’s OKAY, on mine this pressure set exits.
-
Tried that pressure set for 160km/h or higher (38psi front and 36 psi rear), can say almost nothing happened to MPG, on trip with speed 80KM/H 120km length i get 3.0L/100KM, in town with speed up to 50KM/H trips 16km (but already warmed engine) infotainment calculated 2,6L/100KM, so maybe i get 0,1L/100KM difference…
So wo prefer more comfortable ride can’t recommend to inflate to this pressure’s unless speed may reach 160km/h or more.
-
Yes, my B pillar has the ~160kph (100mph)
As I won't be travelling anywhere near that speed, plus, as posted above, the ride will surely be approaching boneshaker territory ?
Given the published max speed is 108mph (173kph) is that speed wise ?
-
Yes, my B pillar has the ~160kph (100mph)
As I won't be travelling anywhere near that speed, plus, as posted above, the ride will surely be approaching boneshaker territory ?
Given the published max speed is 108mph (173kph) is that speed wise ?
This set of pressure for driving 99 (100) mph or faster to reduce tyre heating
Almost no changes to comfort, but if you go further to 41psi front then yes will be boneshaking ride, I owned before the Jazz new Suzuki Baleno that with weight 820kg only had pressure set ECO with 41 psi front and 36 psi back and has comfortable ride….
-
I have arrived at speed, drive settings and adapted to give what I feel is the optimum driving method to suit me.
General driving locally is up to 53mpg when conditions allow in B mode and ecco, climate control always auto varying temp, and use of any fitted auxiliary like heated seats as required.
When motorway use for distance driving, same auxiliary use but D mode ACC and ecco speed set to 70mph on dual carriageway sections where permitted.
Attached graph shows mpg after each fill and the Accumulative mpg since new.
The dips in fill mpg in all cases attributed to after motorway or distance runs when max permitted speed used where permitted.
I report on here my accumulative mpg in site settings since that is the real indicator over all conditions, and since settling on settings it and fill mpg naturally increasing towards a settled figure at some point.
Stopped thinking of the multiple variations that may occur as generally I cannot influence ambient conditions, but do monitor tyre pressure.
Latest fill update attached
-
A week's holiday on the Baltic Sea Coast. Total distance covered 1125 km (700 mi) with a pretty packed Jazz. Mostly roads with a speed limit of 90 or 100 kmh (56 - 62 mph). Small part max. speed 120 kmh (75 mph). Many villages along the way, 50 km/h (31 mph).
Not driven faster than 110 km/h (68 mph).
Consumption (https://emojipedia-us.s3.dualstack.us-west-1.amazonaws.com/thumbs/120/sony/336/fuel-pump_26fd.png) over the entire distance according to BC: 3.9 l/100 km (72.4 mpg) In reality 4.11 l/100 km (68.7 mpg). (https://emojipedia-us.s3.dualstack.us-west-1.amazonaws.com/thumbs/120/sony/336/thumbs-up_medium-skin-tone_1f44d-1f3fd_1f3fd.png)
-
Good stats Jazzik.
I'm going to Scotland in September for an extended weekend. 177 miles from home and I might do 200 (ish) whilst there so a total of 550 (ish) miles. Some of it motorway - say 200 and the rest on roads that will not really allow much over 50 mph. I'll be delighted if I get late 60s mpg.
-
I have arrived at speed, drive settings and adapted to give what I feel is the optimum driving method to suit me.
General driving locally is up to 53mpg when conditions allow in B mode and ecco, climate control always auto varying temp, and use of any fitted auxiliary like heated seats as required.
When motorway use for distance driving, same auxiliary use but D mode ACC and ecco speed set to 70mph on dual carriageway sections where permitted.
Attached graph shows mpg after each fill and the Accumulative mpg since new.
The dips in fill mpg in all cases attributed to after motorway or distance runs when max permitted speed used where permitted.
I report on here my accumulative mpg in site settings since that is the real indicator over all conditions, and since settling on settings it and fill mpg naturally increasing towards a settled figure at some point.
Stopped thinking of the multiple variations that may occur as generally I cannot influence ambient conditions, but do monitor tyre pressure.
Latest fill update attached
This is calculated simply from fuel fill to top each time/miles covered.
-
Latest fill update - some m/way driving again.
Overall mpg up from 54.31 to 54.51 this time
-
Just had my best tank - 63.6 mpg (68.1 on the fibometer). I was interested in this tank in that it contained the first really long motorway stretch (about 100 miles out of 178) to get from Warrington to Kirkcudbright in Dumfries and Galloway.
70 mph cruising is not great for mpg but I was only able to do 70 mph in short bursts due to roadworks and congestion. Having got there, a fair amount of 50 to 60 mph driving.
My last 3 refills have been over 60 mpg so well pleased. In the winter I expect a drop down to mid to high 40s as you use the ICE to warm you up!
The car will be a year old on 12th October. I'll refill before then and that will give me an mpg figure for the year.
-
Mine is 1 year old on 6 october . Same fibometer trip from new, over 7250 miles = 68.8 mpg.
That is fibometer. I dont measure it in real terms when refuelling. I dont see the point. It is what it is. Even if the fibometer is inaccurate its probably consistently so, which is enough to show how economically I'm driving ,or if there is a mechanical problem affecting consumption.
-
Ours was 1 year young on 1 september. We measure in real terms https://www.spritmonitor.de/de/detailansicht/1280885.html when refueling. The fibo (A) is zeroed every fill up (to check how much it is lying average 0,2 l/100 km) and B is occasionally used for certain trips.
Actual first year fuel economy over 10040 km (6240 mi) was, to be fairly precise :P 4,467 l/100 km = 63,237 mpg. Not too bad... :D
-
Mine is 1 year old on 6 october . Same fibometer trip from new, over 7250 miles = 68.8 mpg.
That is fibometer. I dont measure it in real terms when refuelling. I dont see the point. It is what it is. Even if the fibometer is inaccurate its probably consistently so, which is enough to show how economically I'm driving ,or if there is a mechanical problem affecting consumption.
That makes sense once you know, give or take, how much the fibometer is out. With me it's about 4 mpg. I just like the pie charts and graphs on the various fuel economy sites :)
-
I know in reality its probably only going to be 64 mpg. Still happy with that.
My Diesel Yaris managed about 64 mpg on its fibometer but in reality may have been 60 mpg. Still quite impressive, albeit dirty diesel. So back in the day when diesel was cheaper than petrol in most EU countries
there wouldnt have been much difference in fuel cost alone.
I wonder if the readers for whom English is not their first language, realise 'fibometer' is not a real word. Its made up. ;D
Fib means " a lie , typically an unimportant one "
We should have called it a porkiesmeter then every one would understand. :P (Porkies = Pork pie, cockney rhyming slang for 'lie'. )
-
Yesterday after refueling our Jazz a somewhat strange experience.
The car stated an estimated range on this full tank of 1,048 kilometers (over 651 miles). That
estimated range is supposed to be based on current fuel economy.
With a stated tank capacity of 40 liters (8.8 Imp gal), our Jazz predicts an estimated consumption of 3.82 l/100 km (74 mpg).
That would set a new record: the lowest measured consumption till now was 4.0 l/100 km (70.6 mpg) on a single tank.
Very nice that our Jazzik thinks that it will be more economical than ever in the coming autumn with falling temperatures (and leaves), but...
-
But will recalculate remaining km after 150-180km ;)
-
Best I have had was 63mph, it’s averaged out though at just over 60. I’m happy with that..
-
first day out after getting the car was 3.3l/100km (85,6 mpg)
current average is 3.7l/100km over 1100km (76,35 mpg)
-
I've just driven my usual 30 mile journey but very early morning.
Headlights and heater on. Normally I've been getting 60mpg since they raised the M4 speed limit but only 53mpg this morning.
-
I have parted company with my 2020 Crosstar with 9,587 miles at a claimed 74.9 mpg. However, actual mpg based on fuel into tank was 70.55 mpg so the car was 6% optimistic. mpgs on individual fill-ups ranged between 63.7 (January 2022) and 79.1 (July 2022) although these would have some error depending on how full I filled the tank.
-
I have parted company with my 2020 Crosstar with 9,587 miles at a claimed 74.9 mpg. However, actual mpg based on fuel into tank was 70.55 mpg so the car was 6% optimistic. mpgs on individual fill-ups ranged between 63.7 (January 2022) and 79.1 (July 2022) although these would have some error depending on how full I filled the tank.
How would you compare driving and refinement characteristics between the Crosstar and HR-V?
-
Latest fill up mpg's, one early to ensure completion of visitors presence without need to visit petrol station again befor their departure. Collecting visitors from airport chauffeuring around bending hills tracks of low/highlands so a good mix of motorway, urban and very country.
Not unexpectedly big dip but overall mpg from new @ 54.44
-
How would you compare driving and refinement characteristics between the Crosstar and HR-V?
I'll post some observations in 2021 HR-V sub-forum https://clubjazz.org/forum/index.php?board=163.0 once I've collected my thoughts.
-
I'll post some observations in 2021 HR-V sub-forum https://clubjazz.org/forum/index.php?board=163.0 once I've collected my thoughts.
Here https://clubjazz.org/forum/index.php?topic=15171.0
-
So my fourth consecutive calculated mpg figure of over 60 mpg - this time 61.9 (66.7 on the car's computer) and this gives me an mpg figure for the year of 57.7. Pretty pleased with that figure to be fair.
It will start to dip again as the weather gets cold and I burn petrol to keep me warm. Quite a range over the year from a low of just over 45 mpg to a high of 63.6.
-
Latest fill up - a bit early for logistical reasons, overall mpg still increasing - 54.58 now
-
Just filled up, which reset my trip, then drove off up a fairly steep hill. 12 litres per 100km. ( 23.5 mpg ! ) :o
(I am in foreign parts at the moment. The constant fuel consumption 'bar' makes much more sense in metric)
Of course it soon settled to something much more pleasing. ;D
-
Latest fill update - overall mpg still edging up - now 54.66, increase 'held' back by required motorway running
-
Picked up my new Jazz EX Style on Tuesday and today was my first proper drive. Mostly dual carriageway and motorway, around 80 miles round trip with speeds mostly in the 60-65mph range topping out at 70mph. My average was 56mpg, I was hoping for 60+, so maybe it will improve a bit when the engine gets a few miles on it.
For reference my 2022 Volvo XC90 B5D usually averages around 45-46mpg on the same journey.
Overall, it drove well, was quiet and comfortable, stereo sucks compared to the stereo in the Honda e I had before and none of the range anxiety of the e.
-
Latest fill - overall MPG still creeping up - now 54.83, not much motorway this time.
-
Picked up my new Jazz EX Style on Tuesday and today was my first proper drive. Mostly dual carriageway and motorway, around 80 miles round trip with speeds mostly in the 60-65mph range topping out at 70mph. My average was 56mpg, I was hoping for 60+, so maybe it will improve a bit when the engine gets a few miles on it.
Its fuel advantage over other cars at motorways speeds is welcome but not as impressive as it can be in town and slower speeds. You really notice the fuel penalty for even a small increase in speed. (and saving for a small reduction in speed and a gentle right foot) But even at 70 mph you may improve on 56 mpg . Colder weather (a feature for the next few months >:() ) does increase fuel consumption. It does with normal cars, but maybe not as noticeable due to the consumption displays., Fuel consumption in warmer weather is what really brings a smile to your face. :D
It can also vary quite significantly depending on whether there is a head wind or tail wind or the route is predominantly up hill or downhill. You may have been unlucky with the overall average on that particular journey I sometimes wonder why the car seems to be guzzling fuel for a while when the motorway or other road seems flat to me yet with no obvious change to topography, speed or battery level it might use no fuel at all. Best to give it more time to average out.
Some find adapting their driving slightly to the cars strengths can help. Easing back slightly, rather than going for every last bit of available power can reduce fuel consumption (and noise) significantly without noticeable loss of performance.
-
My daughter and family live in Cornwall. I live near Coventry. That's 275 miles each way. I am able to use ACC almost all of the journey. Out of holiday season I can do the trip in 4 hours. I am not willing to drive slower than the maximum allowed speeds, (plus 2 to compensate for inaccurate speedo) ; getting there in the shortest possible time trumps economy.
-
Picked up my new Jazz EX Style on Tuesday and today was my first proper drive. Mostly dual carriageway and motorway, around 80 miles round trip with speeds mostly in the 60-65mph range topping out at 70mph. My average was 56mpg, I was hoping for 60+, so maybe it will improve a bit when the engine gets a few miles on it.
Its fuel advantage over other cars at motorways speeds is welcome but not as impressive as it can be in town and slower speeds. You really notice the fuel penalty for even a small increase in speed. (and saving for a small reduction in speed and a gentle right foot) But even at 70 mph you may improve on 56 mpg . Colder weather (a feature for the next few months >:() ) does increase fuel consumption. It does with normal cars, but maybe not as noticeable due to the consumption displays., Fuel consumption in warmer weather is what really brings a smile to your face. :D
It can also vary quite significantly depending on whether there is a head wind or tail wind or the route is predominantly up hill or downhill. You may have been unlucky with the overall average on that particular journey I sometimes wonder why the car seems to be guzzling fuel for a while when the motorway or other road seems flat to me yet with no obvious change to topography, speed or battery level it might use no fuel at all. Best to give it more time to average out.
Some find adapting their driving slightly to the cars strengths can help. Easing back slightly, rather than going for every last bit of available power can reduce fuel consumption (and noise) significantly without noticeable loss of performance.
It was a windy day with some significant changes in elevation.
I just did a quick 2-3 mile each way, in and out of town trip from a cold start and achieved 56mpg, so that's pretty good, a journey that was always so inefficient in the Honda E, so clearly the Jazz is happier at town rather than motorway speeds.
I feel I am almost an expert of squeezing efficiency out of my vehicles, my previous BMW's 540i touring and X3 M40i, both up to 43mpg on runs, regularly in the 38/39mpg range and 50mpg on my current Volvo XC90.
The Jazz now sits nicely as our second car for short trips around town, whilst the longer journeys are catered for by the effortless comfort of the XC90(provided the end parking spot is big enough)
The Jazz is a much better overlap to the XC90 than the E having both a range and space advantage.
-
I started out at 56mpg from new with just shortish trips, but as I did a longer trip or two it got past 60mpg and still around 59 now going up on longer trips. But the colder weather and warm air con will knock a few mpg off, the engine seems to be on more the last couple of days.
-
Just over 3000 miles now in my May 22 EX, which I usually drive in B mode, for the one pedal driving.
I have steadily seen the MPG figure, go up in tenths of a mile, to a figure of 74 and a half ish, but I have now been thwarted by the cold weather ‘til the Spring! Over the last 400 miles, I have reduced it to 72 and a bit.
Note to self: Need to buy some wire wool, to shine up the rusty brake discs!
-
Latest fill with a bit of motorway, fall due to winter with decreasing temperature coming in?
Overall now 54.58mpg, was 54.83 last fill.
-
One thing I am noticing in this very cold snap is that EV mode rarely kicks in (admittedly I have only done short stuff lately). I am driving round with a permanently full battery. I am using petrol to keep the car warm.
-
I am using petrol to keep the car warm.
Definitely, the engine is on much more in freezing weather.
-
Just done a long trip heading west across europe ,mostly motorway. . At plus 9C I was struggling to achieve 5.5 liters per 100 km (51 mpg) . Didnt often go into EV mode But later, when the temperature had dropped to minus 3C I managed 4.9 litres 57 mpg ,and a bit more often in EV .More like what I was expecting for the speeds in winter.
Cold battery is less efficient ,and cold air is more dense aerodynamically. So why was it better at minus 3 than it was at plus 9 ? No real difference in speed or terrain.
I noticed that when MPG was poor the windfarm windmills were going at a good speed and I could tell from their orientation that, for hundreds of miles, I was predominantly battling against a headwind. This was not noticeable as buffeting when driving, or strong enough to sway leafless trees.
Yet later when mpg improved to 57 mpg the windmills were largely dormant , so little wind, and what there was appeared to be a tail wind for me. I think had I been travelling in the opposite direction my mpg would have improved overall and typically averages out over time.
I cant claim it was all due to wind direction as the poor mpg section did include some heavy rain which may have also increased tyre rolling resistance.
-
A headwind makes a big difference to the mpg as the drag loss increases in proportion to the square of the effective speed (vehicle speed + headwind speed) so a 10mph headwind at 60mph results in the drag loss for 70mph - an increase of 36% while a 20mph headwind at 60mph increases the drag loss by 78%.
-
Just recorded my lowest ever mpg today - didn't really need to fill up but this will see me through into the new year. 47.9 mpg after 4 successive readings above 60 mpg.
Apparently we are in the coldest snap since February 2021 so not too bad. I don't stint myself in the cold weather either - heated seats and steering wheel on along with rear screen and mirror clearing. I also haven't done any significant trips so a lot of my driving has been when the car is below operating temperature. EV mode rarely kicks in these days. I have had a full house of battery bars for over a month.
A bit of perspective - this lowest reading so far is significantly above the average for my MK3 so I'm not complaining.
-
Just over 19,000 miles and a global average of 65.4 according to the fibometer! That’s a real mix of rural urban A roads motorways city centres and mountain passes! Lots of frozen cold starts but most journeys in excess of 30 mins of driving!
-
If your Jazz shows the same deviation as ours, that equates to 62.5 MPG in real life. (https://emojipedia-us.s3.dualstack.us-west-1.amazonaws.com/thumbs/120/sony/336/thumbs-up_medium-skin-tone_1f44d-1f3fd_1f3fd.png)
-
My latest graphs attached plus new graph for cost at £/mile qnd Accumulative.
Did this in view of RAC published numbers giveing petrol car cost of £0.17/mile with an economy of 40mpg. (Diesel £0.20/mile.
The electric car equivelent using rapid chargers is - £0.20/mile.
My cost is accumulatively - £0.133/mile.
Happy with Crosstar economy. - Added info - the fill consumption this time was down to 44.87mpg - the winter effect, less than last Jan figure, first annual figure from new was 54.83mpg
-
This one is our first number.
Full Istanbul heavy traffic. 1450km 4.3lt/100km
(https://i.ibb.co/gmyrFks/Whats-App-Image-2023-01-25-at-10-45-11-1.jpg)
This one is also full heavy traffic in Istanbul. But weather little warm that time + I was using too 140km 3.8lt/100km
(https://i.ibb.co/CmM5LTW/Whats-App-Image-2023-01-25-at-10-45-11.jpg)
-
Latest fill/overall figures - the winter effect very pronounced.
-
(https://media.autoweek.nl/m/nioy466bm4x6.jpg)
My image (mind: in l/100km, so higher = worse) shows that winter driving can be very economical as well. It shows my summer holiday (1,000 km NL - D - CH and back) in a negative way: higher speeds and more weight (2 people and luggage). Average is 4.13 l/100 km or 68.4 MPG UK.
When I remove those 2,000 kilometers out of the average, I get 4.04 l/100km or 70.0 MPG UK.
-
(https://www.cheesebuerger.de/images/midi/froehlich/a040.gif)
(http://images.spritmonitor.de/1302972_5.png)
(http://images.spritmonitor.de/1302972_45.png)
It also shows that it makes a clear difference where you drive. In Poland: motorway max. speed 140 kmh (we usually do not drive faster than 120-125 kmh), B-roads 90 kmh.
In the Netherlands: motorway max. speed 100 kmh, B-roads 80 kmh.
Funny: 2 weeks on vacation in the Netherlands and our consumption immediately dropped to around or just under 4.0 l 100 / km, or about half a liter less than at home in Poland.
-
Yes, I'm afraid the Jazz loses a bit of its magic on fuel economy when driving on motorways beyond 100 kmh. I noticed the drag coefficient of 0.32 is worse than my Lancia Delta HPE which I had more than 25 years ago, It had a CW of 0.31. This is peculiar because both cars have a length of around 4 meters. But then of course the Jazz is more spacious leading to a larger front. FYI: I managed an average of 8l/100km with this 1,6l ICE, which is almost double of my currrent Jazz EX!
-
Reading this had me check my Fabia 2 and it is 0.33. The current Fabia 3 is 0.28.
-
Just been from near Heathrow to Reading and back 2 days on the trot.
Been breezy down here due to Otto but, driving westbound to Reading, both days, mpg 55. Return journey, eastbound, mpg 75.
Thoughts to those around Aberdeen who seem to have been pummelled judging by the SSEN powercut map.
-
Thoughts to those around Aberdeen who seem to have been pummelled judging by the SSEN powercut map.
80+ mph gusts plus the supply lines there are all overhead (Not the big pylons but "telephone" poles). It just takes a nearby tree blowing vigorously.
-
I have a cunning plan. Jazz sand yacht
-
Reading this had me check my Fabia 2 and it is 0.33. The current Fabia 3 is 0.28.
Sorry to read about the demise of your Mk1 Jocko, I had one and loved it - even more than my current Mk2.
-
Latest fill data.
Lower mpg due to low ambient and very speedy motorway trip required. Accumulatie mpg dipped below 54.
Attached mpg graphs
-
I haven't filled up since 16th December! That said I think I am on course for my lowest ever mpg in the MK 4. The fibometer is showing 50.4 mpg which, in real terms, will turn out to be 46 (ish).
The weather, coupled with my driving profile this winter, is almost uniquely bad for mpg. Yes hybrids are good round town but not if it's freezing outside and you are burning petrol to keep the car warm. Couple that with a typical journey of no more than 3 or 4 miles, often less and you are never going to get anywhere near 60 mpg.
But a bit of perspective, 46 mpg is 3 mpg better than my overall average in the MK3 so I have to be pleased with that.
-
I think I really like our over 60 mpg piggy bank on wheels... :D
(https://thumbs.dreamstime.com/b/d-roze-spaarvarken-op-wielen-43756609.jpg)
-
So today was a record for me.
A 16 minute journey, 3 adults, max speed 42.7mph, average speed 22.3mph
Consumption 104.8mpg from a cold start
-
Latest fill data.
No recovery yet from colder weather - 2nd day managed to sit in sun, so getting better, hope mpg follows
-
Yesterday a short (25 miles) trip, some urban, mainly country roads. Nice weather, sunny, 17, 18℃ Hardly any wind. Average consumption 91.1 mpg. It looks like summer is on its way! :D
I regularly get 65-70 mpg, sometimes quite a bit less (short trips in winter!), sometimes quite a bit more (like yesterday).
However, average consumption, actually measured (Spritmonitor) during almost 20 months is different.
Than you get what you see under my avatar...
-
Today 110 mile round trip, filled up after 349 miles with 22.7L E10 fuel that equates to 69.83 mpg and the guessometer shows 69.4 mpg, ambient temperature 12C, 90% of mileage on motorways and dual carriageways at 60 to 70mph and a bit more when overtaking, and I’m not really trying to drive super economically so looking forward to higher summer temperatures, OMG I love this car ;D ;D
-
Isn't it odd how some cars behave differently.
Regular as clockwork I get 50mpg at 70mph, 60mpg at 60mph and 70mpg at 50mph. Under 50mph I can get up to 100mpg depending on whether I'm averaging 30 or 40 mph or lower.
-
Isn't it odd how some cars behave differently.
Regular as clockwork I get 50mpg at 70mph, 60mpg at 60mph and 70mpg at 50mph. Under 50mph I can get up to 100mpg depending on whether I'm averaging 30 or 40 mph or lower.
So many variables. I've mentioned this before but a big factor for me is short journeys coupled with cold weather. The ICE is a de facto heater in these circumstances. I'm down at mid 40s at best in these scenarios. Now the temp is beginning to climb I'm showing 58.2 on the fibometer so around 54 in real money. Last year I did manage 4 successive tanks at over 60 mpg - this was the sweet spot of warm ambient temperatures and a few longer drives.
It is, though, the most economical car I've ever owned even beating my Golf Diesel.
-
I agree. The only time my 1.8 auto Civics ever got average 50mpg was following trucks, inside lane, doing about 60mph on the motorway.
-
So, after 8500 miles from new, general A/B roads (55/60), town and the occasional short motorway were I touched the 70 mark.. heating on around the 3 bar mark and 18 degrees.. I am seeing an average of 64.3 mpg. Far better than my previous cars, and one I am more than happy with.
-
It can get a bit like the old Joke "Why are you unhappy? Last week you won £65 million on the lottery" "Because this week I only won £52 million. >:( "
I can remember when only a few small and underpowered cars could manage even 40 mpg on a good day. The mk4 is roomy and quite nippy and many of us average 65 mpg or better. Rejoice. :-*
-
My 12 Reg Mk 2 averaged 46 mpg over 10 years and my 22 reg Mk 4 has averaged 62 mpg over 13 months.
-
My Lexus IS200 had a manufacturer's average mpg of 28mpg but I regularly got 32mpg
-
Consumer New Zealand (the equivalent of Which in the UK) just did a hands-on practical trial of the MPG for the top of the range Toyota Yaris Hybrid.
Their real-life MPG assessment was 45 mpg (5.2 l/100km) across both city and country driving during the NZ winter in the hilly city of Wellington (no real snow nor frosts).
The trial info is here if you are interested (note that it is by an ordinary person, not a professional car reviewer):
https://www.consumer.org.nz/articles/toyota-yaris-zr-hybrid-car-review
-
Latest fill data - effect of improving weather very evident.
Overall figure tending back up even.
-
Consumer New Zealand (the equivalent of Which in the UK) just did a hands-on practical trial of the MPG for the top of the range Toyota Yaris Hybrid.
Their real-life MPG assessment was 45 mpg (5.2 l/100km) across both city and country driving during the NZ winter in the hilly city of Wellington (no real snow nor frosts).
The trial info is here if you are interested (note that it is by an ordinary person, not a professional car reviewer):
https://www.consumer.org.nz/articles/toyota-yaris-zr-hybrid-car-review
To start with: 5.2 l/100 km is 45 miles per US gallon, in UK gallon it is 54 mpg. So that can cause some confusion here.
https://www.thecalculatorsite.com/conversions/fuelconsumption.php
In addition, 5.2 l/100 km is a full liter more than the average consumption of 83 Yaris Hybrid owners who measured their consumption on Spritmonitor over at least 15,000 km (nearly 9,500 mi):
https://www.spritmonitor.de/en/overview/49-Toyota/1287-Yaris_Hybrid.html?fueltype=10&vehicletype=1&constyear_s=2020&power_s=75&power_e=85&minkm=15000&gearing=3
Note that the Yaris with the lowest fuel consumption averages 3.43 l/100 km over 20,000 km, while the least fuel efficient averages 5.21 l/100 km over 21,000 km.
The latter is a Polish Yaris driver who almost exclusively drives on motorways, where the maximum speed is 140 kmh (87 mph)...
Let's just conclude that driving around for a week (and 270 km at the most) cannot possibly give a correct impression of the actual consumption of a car.
-
I agree with Jazzik that you need consumption figures over a decent period of time to get a true picture of what your car coupled with you driving pattern and style will achieve. It's all to do with outliers. My record consumption of around 65 mpg over a tank is an outlier as is my lowest figure in the mid to low 40s mpg.
A year is a decent amount of time - you'll drive through all conditions and do a typical mix of trips. Mine is hovering at 55 mpg (actual) so that's what I tell people when they ask about my mpg.
-
First long trip today. Well more than my usual in and out of town trips.
A2, M2, M20, M26, M25, M23
Outbound: 64 miles, average speed 53mph, max speed 72.5mph, average fuel consumption 58mpg
Return: 67 miles, average speed 55.7mph, max speed 73.9mph, average fuel consumption 55mpg
Outbound I was aiming for around 60-65mph and for the return I was aiming to be as close to 70mph as possible.
I was a little disappointed, as I was hoping to achieve 60+mpg on the outbound journey considering I was keeping the speed more towards 60mph most of the time and driving as gently as possible. For my short town trips, I often achieve 60-70+mpg.
The thing is, if I do the same trip in my Volvo XC90, I usually average 47-48mpg, sometimes 50mpg and in a lot more comfort.
For me, motorway cruising is not the Jazz's forte, its town driving ability remains strong and I am glad I have the 2 options.
-
For me, motorway cruising is not the Jazz's forte, its town driving ability remains strong and I am glad I have the 2 options.
I think the same applies with most, if not all, hybrids because at motorway speeds the engine has to continually provide the power and the battery provides little benefit (but adds weight). This effect is evident in the detailed WLTP test results for the "extra high" cycle. The Jazz's shape doesn't help - a long and low car has a better drag factor. You will, however, get excellent mpg from the Jazz on a journey using rural A roads where 60mph is the maximum speed and 50mph more typical.
I would also note that even a light wind can have a significant effect on mpg. People don't appreciate this effect until they start comparing mpgs for different trips. I also found out a few days ago how much heavy rain and very wet roads reduces the mpg due to the tyres having to continually push water out of the way.
-
For me, motorway cruising is not the Jazz's forte, its town driving ability remains strong and I am glad I have the 2 options.
I think the same applies with most, if not all, hybrids because at motorway speeds the engine has to continually provide the power and the battery provides little benefit (but adds weight). This effect is evident in the detailed WLTP test results for the "extra high" cycle. The Jazz's shape doesn't help - a long and low car has a better drag factor. You will, however, get excellent mpg from the Jazz on a journey using rural A roads where 60mph is the maximum speed and 50mph more typical.
I would also note that even a light wind can have a significant effect on mpg. People don't appreciate this effect until they start comparing mpgs for different trips. I also found out a few days ago how much heavy rain and very wet roads reduces the mpg due to the tyres having to continually push water out of the way.
Completely agree with the effect of rain and a head wind, I just thought that the Jazz might be a bit more slippery through the air as its advantage over my XC90(diesel/mild hybrid) brick on the motorway is not significant, only the ease of parking at Gatwick's stupidly tight short stay car parks gave me the reason to use it today.
To put its town ability into perspective, I just popped into town to the garage to fill up.
3 miles each way, with a cold start. Max speed 50 mph and 67.4mpg going out and 56.4mpg coming back.
-
2023 Crosstar
1st refuelling after 2 weeks and 560 miles of mixed motoring; motorways, fast A roads but mostly urban and suburban roads with a bit of stop-start jams.
Generally gentle driving 30-60 mph, but with a few hard acceleration and more urgent, urban runs. Quite impressed by the acceleration with both battery & ICE power!
Honda's metered @ 66.4 mpg.
Self calculated @ 65.7 mpg
Only 1% difference between manually calculated & meter display average. Pretty good.
-
I'm averaging 62MPG according to the car, I haven't checked it by other methods.
-
Last week we made 877KM in Istanbul with one tank and car shows it can go 40km
I set automatic reset to B after every refill
This one from gas station to home
(https://i.ibb.co/VYZrVXV/14139af0-8f2e-4303-a9d3-8327fefe2e87.jpg)
It's just pure joy :D
-
My genuine fuel consumption, based on recording usage every time I fill up, is 58mpg. This has been calculated after driving 13100 over the past 20 months. Worst record was 52mpg and best 64mpg refilling on average every 312 miles.
-
Let's talk about summer! (https://em-content.zobj.net/thumbs/120/sony/336/sun-behind-small-cloud_1f324-fe0f.png)
Today we made a trip of just over 67 km. (41 miles).
About 15 km. (9.3 mi) here through the city (half of which in rush hour, hectic, traffic jams) the rest B- and local roads. Along the way some villages with of course speed limits. Nowhere driven faster than 80 km/h. (50 mph).
Beautiful weather, sunny, 24 ° C, quite a bit of wind. Car "loaded" with 3 people (yes... with mother-in-law in the back.. :-* ).
Aircon at 21°C and ECON.
At the start, the B trip counter was set to 0. Back home it showed we made 67.2 kilometers (41.7 miles), consumption 2.9 l/100 km. = 97.4 mpg.
Now that BC is lying a bit. I have calculated that it is about 4 to 5% too optimistic, so in reality it will have been about 93.5 mpg.
I love summer! (https://em-content.zobj.net/thumbs/120/sony/336/sun_2600-fe0f.png) And not just because our car is so economical then...(https://em-content.zobj.net/thumbs/120/sony/336/umbrella-on-ground_26f1-fe0f.png)
-
I agree with Jazzik that you need consumption figures over a decent period of time to get a true picture of what your car coupled with you driving pattern and style will achieve. It's all to do with outliers. My record consumption of around 65 mpg over a tank is an outlier as is my lowest figure in the mid to low 40s mpg.
A year is a decent amount of time - you'll drive through all conditions and do a typical mix of trips. Mine is hovering at 55 mpg (actual) so that's what I tell people when they ask about my mpg.
Agree with this, all other angst about wind, type of road, load etc. is about the variables of each users style and pattern or none of use. Hence I have always recorded fuel used vs miles covered and displayed each fill and overal mpg on graphs presented, I note aany significant event - usually m/way use for airport journey for holiday and the seasonal temperature effect is clearly evident.
-
Bought my Jazz last September (22), and just approaching the 10k mile mark. Had a few reasonably long motorway jaunts, but mostly its been nice A or B roads, at a nice relaxed average 55mph. Generally driving in D, but when in the Wolds/Peaks I will drop to B mode. I don't hang about at lights, and quite enjoy the swift acceleration. Occasionally use the air con, but more often than not its not turned on.. just set the temp to Lo. I haven't reset the B trip since purchase, and today I looked and it's giving a very creditable 66 mpg.
I am more than happy with this.
-
66 mpg seems to be typical for many with mixed driving,averaged out over a long period ,making no particular efforts to drive economically. I try not to worry about higher consumption at motorway speeds, in winter etc. Much as I'd like to have the best of both worlds the very good times more than make up for the less good times . IMO. It depends on your typical driving pattern I suppose.
For some reason Mk4 fuel consumption reminds me of the Poem by Longfellow / nursery rhyme.
There was a little girl,
Who had a little curl,
Right in the middle of her forehead.
When she was good,
She was very, very good,
But when she was bad, she was horrid.
Except the Mk4 is never Horrid , not really. Even at its worst mpg its still better than many cars deliver at their best.
On a recent long motorway trip, 28C, fairly flat, no significant wind ,I set the Cruise control to 120 kph (75 mph) Fibometer read 4.5 litres per 100 km (62 mpg) .Sometimes traffic slowed the car to 100 kph, other times the engine was working hard to regain speed. I cant absolutely guarantee this figure,which was a bit better than expected. I didn't scrupulously reset the trip, so it may have included a small amount of 'very good' consumption.
Later, in Germany I forgot to set the Cruise control and went with the traffic flow. I found I was exceeding 150 kph (93 mph) The car did this comfortably with ,little noise .I didnt dare check mpg :-[ ) So measured as 'Horses for courses' the mk 4 still makes a comfortable motorway cruiser, even if it eats a bit more hay than it normally does.
-
Latest figures at 10996 miles.
Overall possibly settling around 54mpg
-
Latest figures at 10996 miles.
Overall possibly settling around 54mpg
What is the "MPG Acc" red plot of?
-
Maybe something like "Accumulating"? ;)
-
Yes it is accumulative, total miles/total fuel used since new - evens out all the assorted different journeys and weather factors and will reflect overall realistic fuel economy.
-
Mine has gone up to 64.1 so I'm very pleased about that. But I've noticed it's switching to EV more frequently.
-
But I've noticed it's switching to EV more frequently.
That may be due to your choice of cabin vs outside temperature.
Please keep in mind that the heating in the Jazz stems solely from the ICE.
So, if you set the AC to 22 degrees all the year you will be "punished" during the coldest and the hottest seasons as the ICE has either to provide for heat or has an increased load for AC.
In my experience it is most economical to set AC to about +/- 3 to 5 degrees of the outside temperature.
-
In my experience it is most economical to set AC to about +/- 3 to 5 degrees of the outside temperature.
I don't think my wife would agree if it's -12℃ here in winter. (https://em-content.zobj.net/thumbs/120/sony/336/cold-face_1f976.png) Moreover, I couldn't find -7℃ on the temperature control dial...
Fortunately, the seats can be heated. :D
-
In my experience it is most economical to set AC to about +/- 3 to 5 degrees of the outside temperature.
I don't think my wife would agree if it's -12℃ here in winter. (https://em-content.zobj.net/thumbs/120/sony/336/cold-face_1f976.png) Moreover, I couldn't find -7℃ on the temperature control dial...
Fortunately, the seats can be heated. :D
I agree with the principle of not altering temperature more than you really need. But where I am at present 37 c is forecast next week . Dropping the car only to 32c would help but not enough. I intend solving the dilemma of using more fuel by sitting under a tree during the hottest part of the day. (Works for seasickness as well) Also i set at 22c as a comfortable happy medium, but will switch temperature control off completely as often as i can.
I believe the Jazz design uses cabin air to keep the HV battery at its most efficient operating temperature. It assumes that passengers will maintain cabin temperature at a tolerable level . (some designs, especially full EV's, have special heating and cooling circuits just for its battery. ) If you endure extreme cold or heat to save fuel at some point it may be counter productive to battery efficiency.
-
I believe the Jazz design uses cabin air to keep the HV battery at its most efficient operating temperature. It assumes that passengers will maintain cabin temperature at a tolerable level . (some designs, especially full EV's, have special heating and cooling circuits just for its battery. ) If you endure extreme cold or heat to save fuel at some point it may be counter productive to battery efficiency.
The vehicle is probably clever enough to reduce the discharge and charge rates if the battery is outside its preferred temperature range. This could be another factor contributing to the big drop in fuel economy during cold weather.
-
Latest figures @ 11418 miles
-
Latest mpg @ 11853 miles.
Two motorway trips totalling 360 miles with cruise set 72mph.
-
2021 Jazz Executive
After 31.000 miles my average fuel consumption is 68,9mpg.
Best consumption was 85,9mpg, 35,68l of fuel and driven 673 miles :D :D :D :D
-
At almost 29,000 miles I have averaged exactly 65 mpg . Which I think is pretty amazing as I always make rapid progress on longer trips which dip to a journey average of 55 ish across 200+ motorway miles at 70 mph( plus a little bit I wouldn’t want to admit to…..!!) I often indulge in the leaping away from roundabouts or traffic lights …my best recorded mpg is 130 + going across a large town in summer for 8 or so miles ..😄
-
I live down in penwith and have a 2023 plate ex jazz. I drive up to about 60- 65 on main roads and mileage is now on 2300. Genuinely not dropped below 68 mpg most 80mpg . Son also has one and he regularly attains
68 mpg.. both love this model..
-
That's good for those speeds.
For me, for the last 2 years, it's been :
70mph = 50mpg
60mph = 60mpg
50mph = 70mpg
Never fluctuated and that's with just me in the car and flat roads.
-
3.9l/100km over last 15,000 miles/24,000km. That's just over 70mpg.
-
Latest mpg @12311 miles, no motorway since last fill and good weather gives second highest mpg and overall average since new increasing a little
-
Bagged one of those elusive 1000km tanks today.
-
wow! What was your driving profile / average speed for this distance?
-
I've no idea what kind of average speed. Being in London means a lot of very slow stop-start driving. When I'm out of town, I'm happy to keep to similar speeds as lorries. Much of the distance was done in rolling Kent countryside, mostly alone and with no heavy loads. I don't use the Econ button any more because it seems to make me drive with a heavier foot and it wasn't actually making the car any more economical, in fact possibly less economical. With Econ off it's easier to drive with a far lighter foot.
Oh, and I try never to drive like I'm late.
-
Yesterday we came home from 10 days holiday in Lithuania. Total covered 1802 km (1120 miles). Car with 2 people and quite fully loaded. Various road types, motorways, A and B roads plus quite a bit of (very busy) urban traffic in Vilnius and Kaunas.
On the motorways we maintained a maximum of around 120 km/h (75 mph).
Total number of liters fueled 76.42 (16.81 gallons).
First tank in Poland (E5) the two fill ups in Lithuania (E10).
Average (actually measured) consumption 4.24 l/100 km. (66.62mpg).(https://www.cheesebuerger.de/images/midi/froehlich/a025.gif) The BC gave 4.1 l/100 km. (68.9mpg).
-
That's some impressive figures! - I'm looking forward to my first fill-up; presently at 700 km with BC claiming an additional 380 km of range and an average consumption of 4,1 L/100km (68,9 mpg) - somehow, this doesn't add up with a 40 L petrol tank :D
-
That's some impressive figures! - I'm looking forward to my first fill-up; presently at 700 km with BC claiming an additional 380 km of range and an average consumption of 4,1 L/100km (68,9 mpg) - somehow, this doesn't add up with a 40 L petrol tank :D
I think it sometimes recalculates its estimated remaining range based on your most recent average consumption. If a period of exceptionally gentle driving brings your consumption down to say 3,0 L/100km it will recalculate the range based on this lower consumption continuing until you refuel. In practice the opposite often happens. A couple of times I have had say 100 miles remaining range, which would comfortably get me to cheaper fuel in town rather than filling on the motorway. But near the end the remaining range dropped so much faster than actual distance covered, it left me anxious I would not make it. :-\
-
I think it sometimes recalculates its estimated remaining range based on your most recent average consumption. If a period of exceptionally gentle driving brings your consumption down to say 3,0 L/100km it will recalculate the range based on this lower consumption continuing until you refuel.
Thank you, I think you might be onto something here.
-
Latest mpg @12674 miles, 130miles motorway since last fill and good weather.
Early fill as passing cheap petrol at ASDA.
Accumulative mpg creeping up.
-
That's some impressive figures! - I'm looking forward to my first fill-up; presently at 700 km with BC claiming an additional 380 km of range and an average consumption of 4,1 L/100km (68,9 mpg) - somehow, this doesn't add up with a 40 L petrol tank :D
I think it sometimes recalculates its estimated remaining range based on your most recent average consumption. If a period of exceptionally gentle driving brings your consumption down to say 3,0 L/100km it will recalculate the range based on this lower consumption continuing until you refuel. In practice the opposite often happens. A couple of times I have had say 100 miles remaining range, which would comfortably get me to cheaper fuel in town rather than filling on the motorway. But near the end the remaining range dropped so much faster than actual distance covered, it left me anxious I would not make it. :-\
Yes, I've had that rapid dropping in the projected range and shared the same ''range anxiety.'' My distance covered plus range is currently at around 1,050km but I doubt that I'll get much beyond 950km before my next fill.
-
Latest fill figures @ 13111 miles, good weather no fast trips, average creeping up again.
-
Now coming up to 3 months old with 2191 miles on the clock, overall fuel consumption 69.2MPG.
My usual road test from Solihull to Stratford-on-Avon is seeing much the same consumption rates as previous, in spite of the additional power and torque available from the latest version of the Mk4 Jazz.
Yesterdays trip recorded 84.5MPG going out and 77.6 on return. Consumption is always better going out as Stratford is 320Ft lower than my location
The A3400 is restricted to 50MPH with several sections down to 30 and the return trip takes in a couple of country lanes. Round trip, just under 40 miles.
The Honda+ App is working fine, but a bit slower to function than I remember with the previous Mk4.
For me, the main reason for having it is the Car Location function, in the event of it being stolen.
-
Do also check mpg by calculator using fuel in and miles since fill to verify onboard figures?
-
Do also check mpg by calculator using fuel in and miles since fill to verify onboard figures?
Done that, only about 1.5 to 2 MPG difference, not worth worrying about ;D
-
Do also check mpg by calculator using fuel in and miles since fill to verify onboard figures?
Done that, only about 1.5 to 2 MPG difference, not worth worrying about ;D
I still do the manual calculation. Slightly bigger variation than yours - the onboard computer varies between 3 and 4 mpg optimistic. I sense the Mk4 is slightly better than the Mk3 in this regard - in that car it was almost always at least 4 mpg optimistic.
But you are right - it's a bit of a faff and, given I know the computer is 3 (ish) mpg out, I don't know why I don't sack it off - I carefully write down the mileage, keep the receipt, reset trip A and rush to the lap top to update Spritmonitor. I don't need this stress ;D
-
Temperature now srarting at 7/9 Deg C in morning, screen display of mpg dipping, will see if step change at next fill.
-
Did a top up yesterday. 4 bars left on the fuel gauge so just under half full. 64.2 on the car's computer translating to a genuine 61.1. I think the MK4 computer is a tad more accurate than the Mk3. Guess if the engine is being used primarily as a generator there will be less variation in revs?
This was only the 4th refuelling in 2023. Possibly one more before Christmas. Service booked for next Wednesday and the total mileage will be just a tad under 4,000 in the 2 years I've owned it. Don't think I will need another car at my age so this could be the last vehicle I own.
-
1 bar left on the fuel gauge and 61mpg, I fill up once a month now compared to every two weeks in my old Mazda. I'm happy ;)
-
Did a top up yesterday. 4 bars left on the fuel gauge so just under half full. 64.2 on the car's computer translating to a genuine 61.1. I think the MK4 computer is a tad more accurate than the Mk3. Guess if the engine is being used primarily as a generator there will be less variation in revs?
This was only the 4th refuelling in 2023. Possibly one more before Christmas. Service booked for next Wednesday and the total mileage will be just a tad under 4,000 in the 2 years I've owned it. Don't think I will need another car at my age so this could be the last vehicle I own.
My last fill-up was 27th May and still got just under half a tank. Also just under 4000 miles.
Only keeping it for an impending house move. Still hunting though, nothing suitable yet.
Must get out later this week to charge the HV battery, half an hour tour of south Reading should do .....
-
If the difference between the computer estimates and reality from forecourt readings is only about 7 litres over 2K miles per year is it really worth the bother of comparing ? . For my typical 8k miles per year the difference will be the cost of 28 litres per year. This will show up in my bank balance from actual puchases.
I know my fuel consumption is better than most. Job done.
-
Do also check mpg by calculator using fuel in and miles since fill to verify onboard figures?
Done that, only about 1.5 to 2 MPG difference, not worth worrying about ;D
I carefully write down the mileage, keep the receipt, reset trip A and rush to the lap top to update Spritmonitor. I don't need this stress ;D
Just noticed your comment about Trip A.
I have mine set to, ‘Automatically reset at every fill up’ presumably opening the fuel door triggers it.
-
Its not the fuel door . It sometimes doesnt trigger a reset if you only add a small amount of fuel. Its probably related to movement of the fuel gauge float.
-
Its not the fuel door . It sometimes doesnt trigger a reset if you only add a small amount of fuel. Its probably related to movement of the fuel gauge float.
I discovered with that trip setting that if you put in a small amount of fuel - £10 in my case, because of motorway service station prices - the displayed range does not reset. It's disconcerting to have 0 miles range displayed even though you know there's enough fuel to get you home.
-
Its not the fuel door . It sometimes doesnt trigger a reset if you only add a small amount of fuel. Its probably related to movement of the fuel gauge float.
Yes, you could well be correct, my usual procedure is to fill up to full, when the gauge is down to 2 or 1 bar.
However, last weekend I had to do a 240 mile round trip and prior to the start, topped up the tank from roughly half full and it still reset OK.
-
The low fuel input issue has been evident on recent Civics as well, since at least 2006
Their problem is that the magic seats take up the space normally reserved for a more cube shaped fuel tank.
As a result the Civic, and probably the Jazz, has a very flat but long and wide fuel tank under the front seats. For the float to move enough to register movement more fuel needs to be put in
-
If the difference between the computer estimates and reality from forecourt readings is only about 7 litres over 2K miles per year is it really worth the bother of comparing ? . For my typical 8k miles per year the difference will be the cost of 28 litres per year. This will show up in my bank balance from actual puchases.
I know my fuel consumption is better than most. Job done.
I know in my heart of hearts that you are right ;D It's a pointless exercise for me given I know the computer is about 3 mpg optimistic give or take. Was going to give it up at the last refuelling but didn't. There was a time when I didn't bother with it at all.
-
If the difference between the computer estimates and reality from forecourt readings is only about 7 litres over 2K miles per year is it really worth the bother of comparing ? . For my typical 8k miles per year the difference will be the cost of 28 litres per year. This will show up in my bank balance from actual puchases.
I know my fuel consumption is better than most. Job done.
I do the calculations meticulously because the result helps me improve on my driving economically, plus it serves as an early warning sign for anything amiss with the car.
I have just come back from a trip to southern France and have noticed that prolonged motorway trips kind of ruin the MPG-average :D
However, I found the Jazz to be comfortable and extremely relaxing on longer journeys (500 miles each way).
-
Yes - prolonged cruising at motorway speeds is not good for fuel economy in a hybrid. Which drew attention to this some years ago now with hybrids performing less well than diesels in this scenario.
For ma, however, my driving is a perfect match with a hybrid because I do very little high speed motorway work.
-
If the difference between the computer estimates and reality from forecourt readings is only about 7 litres over 2K miles per year is it really worth the bother of comparing ? . For my typical 8k miles per year the difference will be the cost of 28 litres per year. This will show up in my bank balance from actual puchases.
I know my fuel consumption is better than most. Job done.
I do the calculations meticulously because the result helps me improve on my driving economically, plus it serves as an early warning sign for anything amiss with the car.
I have just come back from a trip to southern France and have noticed that prolonged motorway trips kind of ruin the MPG-average :D
However, I found the Jazz to be comfortable and extremely relaxing on longer journeys (500 miles each way).
What MPG did you get on the motorway trips?
-
What MPG did you get on the motorway trips?
I have tried to "swim with the flow" which is around 100 to 120 km/h (63 to 75 mph) which momentarily sent the consumption up into the high fives.
As you can see from my signature the overall consumption is still in the low fours - however the latest trip across Switzerland (220 miles) on my way back with an average of 4.8 (58 mpg) isn't accounted for as I haven't fueled up yet.
-
What MPG did you get on the motorway trips?
I have tried to "swim with the flow" which is around 100 to 120 km/h (63 to 75 mph) which momentarily sent the consumption up into the high fives.
As you can see from my signature the overall consumption is still in the low fours - however the latest trip across Switzerland (220 miles) on my way back with an average of 4.8 (58 mpg) isn't accounted for as I haven't fueled up yet.
I have heard that Switzerland may be introducing an 80 kph (50 mph) speed limit on all their motorways. That will solve it, unless you leave the country ;D
I tend to avoid Swiss motorways anyway as you need to buy an annual vignette even if you are only transiting in a day. And they often seem to be underground . I prefer scenic routes anyway.
-
I have heard that Switzerland may be introducing an 80 kph (50 mph) speed limit on all their motorways.
Yes, this is being discussed as a measure to keep traffic flowing more smoothly during rush hours.
Regarding the toll of CHF 40 a year for all of Switzerland's motorways: Did you happen to err to France or Italy? These countries are charging far more for the use of their motorways (and there is no yearly "flat rate" like in Switzerland or Austria)!
-
..... and it works
Back in 2004 they limited the western section of the M25 clockwise whilst they widened it to 4 lanes.
This work went on for 2 years and during that time the traffic ran far more smoothly and I got home quicker than when it was 70 before and after when it became a carpark again
-
Latest fill data, looks like my style will settle it arounf the 54 figure overall, mode B and eco, D for any steady driving with cruise control on.
-
Yes - you do get to a figure after a year or two. My average mpg hovers around 56 mpg and that's over 2 years (but only 4,000 miles). Within that figure are some significant peaks and troughs - just off the the top of my head a low of 45 mpg and a high of 64 mpg. I have never actually got 56 mpg! Arithmetic mean is the name of the game here.
Mostly urban but what kills my mpg is the use of the ICE engine to heat the car's interior in the colder months. If I did longer trips I suspect my mpg would be closer to 60.
-
Mostly urban but what kills my mpg is the use of the ICE engine to heat the car's interior in the colder months.
Why not use the seat heater(s) and the steering wheel heater?
-
Assuming you mean turning off the heating completely:
I don't think turning off the main heating system and relying on seat and wheel heaters alone is a good idea
How do you keep the inside glass clear on cold days when they mist up due to interior moisture
Also, it's known that not running the aircon regularly, which is part of the heating system, damages some of it's working parts
-
You can however play around with the settings. When driving in town for a short journey I turn the climate system off to shut down the engine. Once on the highway - engine running anyway - I turn it on.
Leaving it turned off always is not a good idea; you end up with a very humid car.
-
Much as i am concerned about the environmental impact of using more fuel my main concern is being able to see. So I take whatever steps are necessary to clear mist and ice asap.Heating the cabin for my comfort can wait. I will wear warmer clothes if necessary although I seldom need to as heated seats work well and quickly, while using less fuel. Same in summer, I wont get roasted alive ,or get so hot and bothered it affects my concentration just to save a small amount on air conditioning. I might open a window instead but that has a similar mpg penalty. Or for the biggest saving if the ambient temperature is tolerable I turn air con off and keep the windows shut.
It tends to be self balancing. Those who only do a few thousand miles a year tend to do more short trips with a cold car,and pay an mpg penalty. However much they adjust things to save fuel on heating/air con they will only ever save a small percentage on what is an already a relatively small annual fuel usage. Those who do a higher annual mileage will do most of their mileage with the car/engine already warmed up.
Certainly try and save fuel where possible. Every little bit helps. But is it worth getting too paranoid about it? There are bigger fuel savings to be made by driving more gently, or , shock horror, not using the car at all if you could walk etc.
-
Assuming you mean turning off the heating completely:
I don't think turning off the main heating system and relying on seat and wheel heaters alone is a good idea
How do you keep the inside glass clear on cold days when they mist up due to interior moisture
Also, it's known that not running the aircon regularly, which is part of the heating system, damages some of it's working parts
My thoughts exactly and, lets face it, if you do a very low mileage as I do then the cost of fuel becomes much less of an issue.
-
I hate, and will not drive, in gloves, hat, heavy coat, etc
I like to be comfy at the wheel so I wear suitable clothing to allow free movement
Modern heaters do warm up fairly quickly and my MK4 Jazz is quicker than my previous ICE cars
-
To start with, our car is parked in a garage underneath our apartment, so it is never covered in snow or ice when we leave home in the winter.
Perhaps it would be useful to explain how we use the seat and steering wheel heating when it is really cold. (https://www.cheesebuerger.de/images/midi/verschiedene/k022.gif)
At the start we switch off the heating system completely, but switch on the seat and steering wheel heating. When a trip is planned over a (very) short distance (for example a shopping center), no more than a few kilometers/miles, the heating remains off (it would still be ineffective or barely effective at the "finish" anyway). However, the seat heating is effective after a very short time.
If a longer trip is planned, the start is identical, but the heating is switched on (and seat and steering wheel heating off) after some time, when the ICE has warmed up reasonably.
If the windows start to fog up, that is of course also a sign to turn on the heating. Fogging is hardly a problem for us as the car is kept in a frost-free, dry garage.
And as a born Dutchman, I also think: I paid for the seat and steering wheel heating, so I also use it, otherwise it would have been a waste of money. :P
-
I hate, and will not drive, in gloves, hat, heavy coat, etc
I like to be comfy at the wheel so I wear suitable clothing to allow free movement
Modern heaters do warm up fairly quickly and my MK4 Jazz is quicker than my previous ICE cars
I have worn my "big" coat in the car but I have never worn a hat or gloves. I'm a bit glove phobic - you don't get any "feel" - I don't even wear gloves when I'm gardening unless tackling prickly stuff. I will wear them in situations where I don't have to use my hands - walk - that sort of thing.
I would be no use in a polar exploration. ;D
-
Latest fill info, start oftemperature in morning below10degC, next fill will show effect again.
-
...Average of 57mpg over two years and 17750 miles. Climate control on from day one.
-
I have feeling if we plotted mpg vs yearly miles vs mpg for all members it would be a straight line of less = more
-
1 year old this week, just over 2000 miles and my average is just under 57mpg.
Highs of 110 and lows of 30's. All in all, very happy with that, considering the cars main use is very short 2-3 mile cold start trips, with a handful of 20-60 mile trips.
-
1 year old this week, just over 2000 miles and my average is just under 57mpg.
Highs of 110 and lows of 30's. All in all, very happy with that, considering the cars main use is very short 2-3 mile cold start trips, with a handful of 20-60 mile trips.
Wow!
Almost exactly my mileage and pattern of usage. I'm showing 56.4 (calculated manually) over 4,000 miles in two years. I do loads of those 2 to 3 mile jobs as well - a killer in the winter but I like my comfort so the Climate Control stays on.
It's the most economical car I've ever owned.
-
Latest fill info, low ambients setting in, overall average holding up. until a few more winter fills.
-
Latest fill, massive fall due to low ambients, averaging about -2C since last week, also some motorway travel of about 130 miles.
First dip in accumulative mpg.
-
My MK1 is doing around 30 mpg at the moment but saying that it does have a hole in the centre silencer around one of the exhaust rubber mount pins . Sounds like it's got a straight through pipe and environmentalists would go nuts. Not looking forward to getting it up on axel stands and cutting of the rusty bolts to remove it and wrap it with exhaust bandage. Got some new bolts to pop on . Hope they (Fit) m8X40mm.
-
If you have a mk 1 doing 30 mpg are you not torturing yourself by reading the mk4 mpg thread where 90+ mpg is not unknown and if it drops below 60 mpg there are probably a reason such as cold weather, short journeys, high speeds etc.? ;D
-
Latest fill, massive fall due to low ambients, averaging about -2C since last week, also some motorway travel of about 130 miles.
First dip in accumulative mpg.
Yes - haven't needed to fill since the cold weather set in but the pattern of previous winters will be repeated with a massive drop in mpg as the ICE is used to heat the car. The fibometer is showing 51.9 at the moment which, if previous experience is a guide, will equate to around 48/49 mpg. The last tank was around 62 mpg.
I'm used to it now and happy with my overall mpg of 56.4 mpg over 4,000 miles - the most economical car I've ever owned. The fact that the gap between high mpg and low mpg is larger than any car I've owned is something I'm used too. Certainly not going to do the EV thing of keeping the heater off and wearing my big coat!
-
Certainly not going to do the EV thing of keeping the heater off and wearing my big coat!
You don't have to wear your big coat. Try maybe once with the heating OFF and the seat and steering wheel heating ON...
-
We all have our opinions and likes/dislikes but turning the cabin heating off seems daft to me
Buy a car for over £20k and then worry about a few quid a month and just have warm hands and rear end
Doesn't keep the inner glass clear and you end up with a cold nose :)
Nice warm air out of the vents ....... lovely
-
We all have our opinions and likes/dislikes but turning the cabin heating off seems daft to me
Buy a car for over £20k and then worry about a few quid a month and just have warm hands and rear end
Doesn't keep the inner glass clear and you end up with a cold nose :)
Nice warm air out of the vents ....... lovely
I was amazed when I had the E previously, the number of owners that would keep the climate control/heater off and just use the heated seats and steering wheel, just to get a fraction more range. I am in the same camp, I just don't get it.
Getting from A to B, dry and comfortable what ever the weather is what a car is about.
-
the seat and steering wheel heating ON...
Oh you MK4 owners live the life of Riley! :D Gloves for us early Jazz owners.
-
Latest fill with ambients gone up about 4degc in last week a 3.73mpg improvement still with some really mucky motorway driving.
-
My energy smart meters at home are the same. Surprising how much energy consumption goes up and down with just a few degrees change in the weather. I knew to be frugal anyway without a display,but it can help.
-
As others have reported, the recent low ambient temperatures have had a marked effect on my mpg. Current tankful has only done 180 miles so far and mpg is showing as 50.5 (Trip A). However, Trip B still shows 61.2 over 6,000 miles since new in September 2021. I keep a spreadsheet of mileage/litres and this currently calculates an average since new of 59.43 mpg. I'm happy with that, seeing as most of my journeys are short shopping trips with stop/starts in between, and the occasional trip around 30 miles.
-
Just filled up today. Didn't really need to but had a nectar points offer for Esso Supreme. MPG now down to 49.5 on this last tank (real as opposed to computer).
This was the 5th refuelling this year. In fact I could quite easily have made that 4 without ever getting to the squeaky bum stage. I'm on less than 2000 miles a year now. At my age I won't need another car.
-
Latest fill added to history.
Cold weather motorway run included.
Overal mpg remaining reasonably stable.
-
Since filling up at the end of December, my Trip B average has struggled to keep above 40mpg. Unfortunately I am mainly doing very short journeys (shopping), so I don't expect it to improve any time soon.
-
Since filling up at the end of December, my Trip B average has struggled to keep above 40mpg. Unfortunately I am mainly doing very short journeys (shopping), so I don't expect it to improve any time soon.
I tend to bump along at about 45 (ish) during the winter. I do mainly shopping trips but my mpg seems a bit better than yours - this is almost certainly because I often go the long way round to the shops just to keep the battery charged up!
-
Latest fill figures added.
Overall mpg roughly stable.
cold weather effect reversed now - in time for next cold snap.
-
Latest update - as expected overall increase with "higher" ambients, ha ha.
Overall since new now @ 54.46mpg
-
Why not apply a linear scale to the X-axis?
-
@aphybrid: Why not apply a linear scale to the X-axis?
-
Can do when I find time but would make spreadsheet unnecessarily large.
will transpose for your benefit to alternate
-
try this - makes the date axis illegible?
-
My latest update to history. Looks like evening out for summer running around the 54.41 level.
Last fill included a trip of 150 miles each way with many miles in highland single track B roads. Including a descent of 20.9 degrees average from 240 metres to 27 metres above sea level, not a nice noise from transmissiom when coasting on this slope.