new focus mileage

[geanso]

hey tuners,
is it me or is the focus fairly thirsty for a 1.6L.i'm comparing it to my shark(1.8L) which i sold to buy the focus.
I definitely got better mileage with the shark, filling up once every two weeks.
making similar runs i have to fillup once a week.
(normal tong to east runs in traffic)

is this normal??

[gfbl]

i will try and measure mines and get back to you

[geanso]

it seemed to sort itself out got 415k/full tank last wk.

[noshownogo]

you sure it wasn't your driving style for that period, or greater usage of the a/c at the time?

[geanso]

not really,driving style remained the same.and a/c is almost always on.

[Kashman]

not really,driving style remained the same.and a/c is almost always on.

check your setting if its on sport you'll burn more fuel

[damieG82]

this sounds like simple physics working here. First off, japanese cars typically have a slighty lighter grade of steel used in its construction, and the inferior quality plastics also add it the reduced weight. This coupled with an engine which would give a more favourable power-to-weight ratio meant that the Galant could be a little more fuel efficient.

But you should clock actual mileage of the Focus (hope you did the same with the Galant for a true comparison)... its not good enough to look at how long it takes between fill ups, because I suspect the Focus has a smaller fuel tank than your Galant did... so assuming the Focus might actually have the better mileage, the fill ups would be more frequent still.

[nes123]

this sounds like simple physics working here. First off, japanese cars typically have a slighty lighter grade of steel used in its construction, and the inferior quality plastics also add it the reduced weight. This coupled with an engine which would give a more favourable power-to-weight ratio meant that the Galant could be a little more fuel efficient.

But you should clock actual mileage of the Focus (hope you did the same with the Galant for a true comparison)... its not good enough to look at how long it takes between fill ups, because I suspect the Focus has a smaller fuel tank than your Galant did... so assuming the Focus might actually have the better mileage, the fill ups would be more frequent still.

I doubt that is the case...based on some googling I saw the new focus' max fuel capacity was rated at 13gallons= approx 59litres of fuel...with that said euro cars tend to have larger tanks..not to insult anyone but bottom line is gas consumption is not really that impressive for the focus.In addition most Japanese cars' average fuel capacity is usually 50liters max...

[damieG82]

^^ nope.... just got the figures for both cars and it really is physics at work.

Ford Focus 1.6 Ghia/Titanium (auto) spec:
1.6 DOHC L4, 100hp, 150nm, kerb weight 1286kg, power-to-weight ratio 77hp/ton, fuel tank capacity 55 litres

Mitsubishi Galant 1.8 Viento Exceed (auto) spec:
1.8 DOHC L4, 138hp, 181nm, kerb weight 1260kg, power-to-weight ratio 109.5hp/ton, fuel tank capacity 64 litres

So just as I suspected, the Galant is in fact lighter, and coupled with a more powerful engine, and a larger fuel tank means it would achieve better mileage and better range... the power to weight ratios explain it all... the higher the power figure per ton, the easier the engine has to work and is thus more efficient (within reason of course: a 1.6 & a 1.8 are very similar in size, but you can't compare a 1.6 with say a 2.5 which would obviously have an even better ratio).

Unfortunately I could not find any fuel consumption figures for the Galant with the 1.8 engine, but the Focus manages 7.7L/100 kms in the combined cycle, which is very respectable for the size and spec of car that its 1.6 has to chuck around.

And its not a brand or Jap vs Euro thing either, since the CS model Lancer has a power to weight ratio of 81hp/ton but manages a thirstier 8.0L/100 kms combined. The Corolla, which many argue is the most fuel efficient in this class, returns 7.5L/100 kms... so the Focus is not at all far off from the category 'leader' (as far as consumption goes).

[nes123]

preach!!

[thegtiman]

^^ nope.... just got the figures for both cars and it really is physics at work.

Ford Focus 1.6 Ghia/Titanium (auto) spec:
1.6 DOHC L4, 100hp, 150nm, kerb weight 1286kg, power-to-weight ratio 77hp/ton, fuel tank capacity 55 litres

Mitsubishi Galant 1.8 Viento Exceed (auto) spec:
1.8 DOHC L4, 138hp, 181nm, kerb weight 1260kg, power-to-weight ratio 109.5hp/ton, fuel tank capacity 64 litres

So just as I suspected, the Galant is in fact lighter, and coupled with a more powerful engine, and a larger fuel tank means it would achieve better mileage and better range... the power to weight ratios explain it all... the higher the power figure per ton, the easier the engine has to work and is thus more efficient (within reason of course: a 1.6 & a 1.8 are very similar in size, but you can't compare a 1.6 with say a 2.5 which would obviously have an even better ratio).

Unfortunately I could not find any fuel consumption figures for the Galant with the 1.8 engine, but the Focus manages 7.7L/100 kms in the combined cycle, which is very respectable for the size and spec of car that its 1.6 has to chuck around.

And its not a brand or Jap vs Euro thing either, since the CS model Lancer has a power to weight ratio of 81hp/ton but manages a thirstier 8.0L/100 kms combined. The Corolla, which many argue is the most fuel efficient in this class, returns 7.5L/100 kms... so the Focus is not at all far off from the category 'leader' (as far as consumption goes).

C1/307 Focus/CMAX carries a port fuel injected (PFI) Sigma fixed cam engine as an option. The inertia class for a Euro/Russian C307 is 1150kg-1180kg. The E53A Galant carries a Direct Injection engine. This vehicle is better compared to a Mondeo, VW Passat, BMW 3 series Merc C class etc all which carry 1.8 varients and are mid size saloons.
You talk about combined cycle for the Focus. This would be for a NEDC cycle. The JDM Galant does not rate CO2, FE or Emissions by the same cycle. It is actually a more stringent std. These cycles are simulated on a chassis dynometer and form the homologated specs, marketing can use to promote the product. The Galant would do better on these cycles because with direct injection you can minimise your emissions and CO2 in the first 60secs of the cycle.

[damieG82]

thegtiman, I hear ya and agree about the comparison being off between the Focus and the Galant... but keep in mind its the 2 cars geanso has had experience with, and was comparing... I assume he was thinking a bigger sized and bigger engined car like the Galant should not be more fuel efficient than a Focus, so I got into the details to explain thats not always the case.

[thegtiman]

I can see where geanso was coming from, from a development point of view, as the Galant has a more advanced engine (DI) and has to be developed on a more stringent cycle JDM vs EC. What he is stating in a real life East to POS cycle, seems to be correlate to what was just said.

[geanso]

hi guys was away for a bit.nice to see a simple question resulting in a slew of technical information.actually damieG82 that was my train of thought,
the focus is really heavier in truth(in a good way) you feel the solidness on the road
and mentally quite safe that at high speeds some cross wind wouldn't flip u over.

[Triniranger]

good day

i have a question, did your ghia come with a sheild over the tappit pan cover?