Stutopia Posted December 8, 2013 Share Posted December 8, 2013 I needed four seats at short notice on Friday so went to my usual rental place. I was pretty pleased to get a Focus, as it was a late call and not many cars left. I'd feared some sort of Chevvy Spark or Hyundai I10 so a Focus was a decent result. I keep thinking of one for a winter/sensible car so thought it'd be a good test run. What I got wasn't the standard 1.6 rental offering but the Ecoboost. A 3 cylinder, 1.0 litre TURBO I've never driven FI, would it have too much power for me? In terms of the usual stuff, decent focus interior and spacious, everything is lightweight and easy to handle etc etc, a fine car interior (some squeaks mind) in comparison to the rest of its class IMHO. However, the engine sucks the sweat from a dead man's balls. Allegedly the turbo Ecowarrior delivers 100bhp, which is probably more than my first car, a 1.2 Clio. However, it was totally insipid to drive. Now I realise Zed owners probably aren't their target market, and it was fine around town, but this is not enough to get me juicy. My old Clio was so much more fun in the city. The weirdest thing is, I did a run over to Sheffield, so a selection of city, motorway and A road action (snake pass rules BTW). The (majority mileage) motorway stretch was appalling, I had to shift down to third to overtake anything, an incline (not a hill) causes asthmatic wheezing and when I got sat behind Fred & Mable on snake pass I had literally nothing to use to get passed their Ford Ka safely. The worst bit is, it averaged 40.3 mpg, for the whole journey! Now where's the bloody Eco in that? The Shark returns 30mpg on the same run, at similar (top) speeds, yet makes me gush just when I start her up and hear that V6. Who is going to buy a car with rubbs performance but with only 40mpg as the reward? I was expecting 55 mpg at least. I don't get how they think people will be enticed into these small engine turbod Eco cars, when there's no juice when you floor it and no spectacular mileage figures to please your wallet - it's the worst of both worlds. Do you think this is the way all cars are eventually going to go? Is the Zed the last Tyrannosaurus Rex waiting to become extinct and replaced by the Donkey Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete87 Posted December 8, 2013 Share Posted December 8, 2013 The trouble is on big cars like these if you put a too small engine in it, it is constantly struggling and uses more fuel. I still think the best eco cars are the vw group tdi's I've got a 2004 2.0 tdi remapped it is just as quick as civic type r 's and on a long run I can average 60 mpg. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stutopia Posted December 8, 2013 Author Share Posted December 8, 2013 The trouble is on big cars like these if you put a too small engine in it, it is constantly struggling and uses more fuel. I still think the best eco cars are the vw group tdi's I've got a 2004 2.0 tdi remapped it is just as quick as civic type r 's and on a long run I can average 60 mpg. Now that is a car with the best of both worlds, makes total sense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wayne370Z Posted December 8, 2013 Share Posted December 8, 2013 That mpg is pathetic. My RCZ averaged only 1/2 mpg less with a 200bhp 1.6 turbo ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stutopia Posted December 8, 2013 Author Share Posted December 8, 2013 I had two over 65 nervous passengers in there, so you can imagine how easy I was taking it. I dread to think what I'd have got under spirited conditions. Despite their frenchness those RCZs have a certain, Je ne sais quois about them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andy james Posted December 8, 2013 Share Posted December 8, 2013 Had a similar experience last week. As some of you know my daily driver is a Pug 107!😆 Booked in for its first service and drove away with a brand new 208. Was only told its a turbo diesel ,and after a few miles couldn't believe how gutless it was and any progress around town was to rev the nuts of it second gear! On closer inspection of the handbook and the tax disc which was nil cost found out I was driving a 1200cc Dyson/Swampy Eco warrior car that had 1 bhp less than my 107 which weighed 500kg more!! There is a saying "there ain't no substitute for cc's😃 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wayne370Z Posted December 8, 2013 Share Posted December 8, 2013 (edited) "Despite their frenchness those RCZs have a certain, Je ne sais quois about them" Yeah, I was never such a big fan of French cars but I really liked it and only swapped it for the Z because for the first time in my life I became able to afford what was one of my all time "almost affordable" favourite high performance cars. The Z was obviously quite a hike in sportiness/performance, not really though in respect of features/gadgets/user comforts. A drop in practicality and a huge drop down in terms of the affordability of the running costs compared to the RCZ. I would definitely be interested in the RCZ -R when it comes out in the new year with an extra 70bhp but similar running costs and the extra practicality if I wasn`t just going to keep the Z now forever ! Edited December 8, 2013 by Wayne370Z Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GIXXERUK Posted December 8, 2013 Share Posted December 8, 2013 I hired a 1.4 corsa and it was dangerously slow ! And it drank petrol My work car is a Clio dci remapped to 110bhp and costs £20 a yr to tax, I have never seen under 65mpg and on a run of 200 miles it returned 79.8 mpg !! Cheaper than walking ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dynamic Turtle Posted December 8, 2013 Share Posted December 8, 2013 I hired a 1.4 corsa and it was dangerously slow ! And it drank petrol My work car is a Clio dci remapped to 110bhp and costs £20 a yr to tax, I have never seen under 65mpg and on a run of 200 miles it returned 79.8 mpg !! Cheaper than walking ! Sure your trip computer isn't being a bit optimistic there? If not, that is truly astonishing. I'd still rather destroy the environment though Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GIXXERUK Posted December 8, 2013 Share Posted December 8, 2013 I hired a 1.4 corsa and it was dangerously slow ! And it drank petrol My work car is a Clio dci remapped to 110bhp and costs £20 a yr to tax, I have never seen under 65mpg and on a run of 200 miles it returned 79.8 mpg !! Cheaper than walking ! Sure your trip computer isn't being a bit optimistic there? If not, that is truly astonishing. I'd still rather destroy the environment though Definitely not, I did the maths using fuel/miles etc and it backed up the trip comp, regularly see 70+ mpg, when I looked 3 yrs ago only the Prius/hybrid cars had better mpg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.