des Posted December 6, 2011 Report Share Posted December 6, 2011 I bought a 2007 KIA Sportage a few months ago for £8250. Top spec Titan model, 2.0 petrol engine. The manufacturers guide says it'll do 35mpg on a combined cycle. 40+ on the motorway. Well I've run it dry maybe 15 times since buying it and the very best return I have got was 26mpg. The KIA dealer was made aware right from the off and have replaced various hoses and pipes each time with the promise, it's sorted now. Each time, still the same on economy. I have to work out my mileage and consumption weekly with work and KIA have asked me to do several 100mile consumption tests (all at my cost) and still, results of between 20-25mpg (I stress here that 70% is motorway miles at 60mph in cruise control). After all this they now say that there is a 50% tolerance limit on thier quoted economy figures, and because 20mpg half of thier quoted figures they will not do anything!! I have owned 5 cars since passing my test and I'm not stupid enough to think that they will all achieve thier economy stats, however all the rest are usually only 4-5mpg out. This is ridiculous. I get about 260 to a tank costing £60+ a go. Now I want my money back but feel I've probably got no chance at all. It seems you can return anything you ever buy unless it's a car!! Does anybody know where I stand? What are trading standards likely to say about the issue? I'll be calling them tonight. Rant over, thanks in advance... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
des Posted December 6, 2011 Report Share Posted December 6, 2011 had simular problem clutch went after 3 wks faxed my warrenty to a lawyer told me i was stumped so i didnt proceed with trading hope to name and shame Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aldivalloch Posted December 6, 2011 Report Share Posted December 6, 2011 No offence intended, Wildfowler12, but I think you've been a touch naive.... You've bought a heavy car (over one-and-a-half tons), made heavier still by all the extra kit that's included in a top-of-the-range model. Being a tough-looking soft-roader, it hasn't exactly got cutting-edge aerodynamics..... It's got four-wheel-drive and so has more moving oily-bits which need lots of lovely unleaded to keep them turning. You've been tempted to use the toys. Cruise control does indeed dent economy. Whereas the average driver will quite naturally lose a bit of speed going uphill and gain a bit going downhill, cruise control relentlessly maintains a constant pace. I bet you've been using the climate-control, too! Well, it knocks spots off your fuel economy as well, because the energy to power the compressor has to come from somewhere. And you need to be realistic about the vendor's position. New cars come with a set of consumption figures that are the result of tests carried out at particular speeds in an artificial environment, dictated by standards set down by the motor industry and possibly by law. Manufacturers are not allowed to quote any other figures. Whilst it goes without saying that the figures don't reflect what's achievable under real road-conditions, what these figures do permit is COMPARISON, inasmuch as they allow you to gauge whether one car is potentially more economical than another. When cars are sold used, salesmen inevitably hark back to these original, flatteringly unrealistic figures. What the salesman quoted you is actually probably achievable - but perhaps only on a downhill slope on a warm day and with a tail-wind - and with the climate control and cruise control switched off! And when all's said in done, would you really have expected him to say, "It's lovely motor, sir, but it absolutely guzzles fuel and you'll never be a way from the pumps!"? He's a CAR SALESMAN. He has to shift cars to make a living! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hamster Posted December 6, 2011 Report Share Posted December 6, 2011 I thought cruise control was supposed to save fuel? It is and does if you know how to use them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wildfowler12 Posted December 6, 2011 Author Report Share Posted December 6, 2011 I dont thinks it's being nieve i'd say more looking through tinted glasses! Haha, I agree with everything you've said, but surely putting a 50% tolerance limit on economy figures is wrong? As I mentioned, my past 4 cars where only ever about 3-5mpg different to the quoted figures? Not 15-20mpg out. It is and does if you know how to use them. Teach me!! Haha I use it currently on the motorway at about 58mph, 2500rpm. Other than that I leave it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BerettaSV10 Posted December 6, 2011 Report Share Posted December 6, 2011 Was thinking of trading in my Mondeo for a nice kia I spotted as I am only getting around 23 to the gallon, will have to have a re-think. Might of been trading in one gas guzzler for another one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wildfowler12 Posted December 6, 2011 Author Report Share Posted December 6, 2011 Avoid at all costs!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
super sharp shooter Posted December 6, 2011 Report Share Posted December 6, 2011 I dont thinks it's being nieve i'd say more looking through tinted glasses! Haha, I agree with everything you've said, but surely putting a 50% tolerance limit on economy figures is wrong? As I mentioned, my past 4 cars where only ever about 3-5mpg different to the quoted figures? Not 15-20mpg out. Teach me!! Haha I use it currently on the motorway at about 58mph, 2500rpm. Other than that I leave it. Absolute madness saying there is a 50% tolerance on fuel economy. Im annoyed for you wildfowler KIa has to be the worst ever on the other hand Hyundai customer service is great. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hamster Posted December 6, 2011 Report Share Posted December 6, 2011 Teach me!! Haha I use it currently on the motorway at about 58mph, 2500rpm. Other than that I leave it. The trick is to learn to engage it at all STEADY speeds, regardless of whether it's 30,50 or 75 mph. There is no way your right foot could be as precise in keeping things level as an electronic device but you must remember to disengage it where going down hill for example or anticipate well in advance if you're going to brake anyway so again disengage. I have to say there is a vast difference in performance and quality of different cruise controls fitted to different cars. The ones fitted to mid range cars can be quite primitive for instance, where you press R for Resume is the key to how good the system is. On cheap cars if you do this at say 30 mph having set cruise at 72, the car suddenly drops a gear and launches itself (automatics) to get to the speed as fast as possible. This alone is more than annoying, never mind the waste of fuel. Quality cars waft towards the target speed much more slowly . The other factor is of course the actual ergonomics of the system, mid price cars are not as effortless in use as the better cars. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlaserF3 Posted December 6, 2011 Report Share Posted December 6, 2011 Going slightly off tangent...I have a 1.3 petrol Toyota Yaris, my average mpg, according to the computer is about 45mpg. When my wife drives a similar journey she cannot manage to achieve any where near 45 mpg, she normally manages about 38 mpg. But I would not expect a 4x4 to be economical at all. Do you really need one? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacksdad Posted December 6, 2011 Report Share Posted December 6, 2011 I think its got more to do with driving style than we realise! Anyone remember to Top Gear episode where they drove a super eco-mini around the test track at its flat out speed, followed by something like a 5 litre V8 BMW (the actual cars escape me but the sizes are near enough!). The mini used more fuel than the big bruiser, as the latter was just tootling round without breaking a sweat, basically rolling along at idle... :blink: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markm Posted December 6, 2011 Report Share Posted December 6, 2011 My AWD ford kuga is hitting just under 40 all in. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
88b Posted December 6, 2011 Report Share Posted December 6, 2011 Absolute madness saying there is a 50% tolerance on fuel economy. Im annoyed for you wildfowler KIa has to be the worst ever on the other hand Hyundai customer service is great. Hyundai have been good over the two small problems with my I10, seems odd KIA should be different as they as the same company as Hyundai, the new Sportage uses the same 1.6 petrol and 6 speed trans as the IX35. We almost bought Deb an IX35 last thursday but her legs hit the bottom of the dash board and shee can't reach the brake pedal. Next stop WAS going to be try a Sportage. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HDAV Posted December 6, 2011 Report Share Posted December 6, 2011 Going slightly off tangent...I have a 1.3 petrol Toyota Yaris, my average mpg, according to the computer is about 45mpg. When my wife drives a similar journey she cannot manage to achieve any where near 45 mpg, she normally manages about 38 mpg. But I would not expect a 4x4 to be economical at all. Do you really need one? That makes me feel much better about getting my 42 mpg over 38k according to the computer I think its got more to do with driving style than we realise! Anyone remember to Top Gear episode where they drove a super eco-mini around the test track at its flat out speed, followed by something like a 5 litre V8 BMW (the actual cars escape me but the sizes are near enough!). The mini used more fuel than the big bruiser, as the latter was just tootling round without breaking a sweat, basically rolling along at idle... :blink: That was Stig in Prius being chased by Clarkson/May in an M3 BMW Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacksdad Posted December 6, 2011 Report Share Posted December 6, 2011 Cheers hdav! shows you how the 'official' mpg figures can mean naff-all! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Geordie Posted December 6, 2011 Report Share Posted December 6, 2011 My old Mondy V6 would get me from Newcastle to Norwich on just under half a tank. My cavalier 1.8 could manage 50mpg if driven frugally. My old Volvo 340 1.7 would get 51mpg I now have a 1.2 and dont even get 45mpg. :C My friend bought a brand new Hyundai I10 and that dont return more than 48mpg either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unapalomablanca Posted December 6, 2011 Report Share Posted December 6, 2011 I'm getting around 18 mpg (us gal )from my 4.7 jeep,thank god the cost of fuel is comming down.I filled up yesterday for $3.17 a gallon is the price dropping back home ? No its ******* going up, its £6.17p for petrol per gallon and diesel is now a fair bit more. Its all tax to pay for the u.k.underclass! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pimpkiller Posted December 6, 2011 Report Share Posted December 6, 2011 its horses for courses realy. My parents traded in a citroen c1 which did 60mpg pootling about and got the hyundai i10 1.2 which should of been similar but is no where near as economical probably because its a more powerful car being made to go slow, if it was let off the leash a bit it would be much better. I own a panda 1.2 8v which is quoted as being 51mpg average which is about spot on, on a good run it will do 62mpg average but put it in the hands of my girlfriend for a week to go work in and its more like 36mpg a big difference, some people cant flippin drive Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pimpkiller Posted December 7, 2011 Report Share Posted December 7, 2011 besides all that guff the best you can hope to achieve realistically is the average quoted fuel economy not maximum, as its impossible to drive a car at maximum efficiency, you can try and drive at 57.8 mph all day but as soon as you meet traffic, overtake or pull up at some lights your average gets knacked. If you are getting 26mpg from a 2 litre petrol 4x4 you are doing well. Dont forget either the rising cost of fuel will make you think your car has a whole in the tank, fuel has jumped from £1 to £1.30 quickly so that's like -30% economy for your money :( Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elgreco Posted December 7, 2011 Report Share Posted December 7, 2011 We have just got rid of our Kia Sorento XS due to the VERY poor MPG. £110 to fill the tank and 410 miles later it's begging for a drink!!! Never again will I buy a Kia Tom Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wharf Rat Posted December 7, 2011 Report Share Posted December 7, 2011 Hyundai have been good over the two small problems with my I10, seems odd KIA should be different as they as the same company as Hyundai, the new Sportage uses the same 1.6 petrol and 6 speed trans as the IX35. We almost bought Deb an IX35 last thursday but her legs hit the bottom of the dash board and shee can't reach the brake pedal. Next stop WAS going to be try a Sportage. I had loads of probs with my Hyundai. The waranty was OK, but I had to get the importer to fax autherization to the dealer each time it needed fixing as the dealer always claimed that whatever went wrong wasn't covered. Flogged it in the end though. It was made of monkey metal - bearings and joints wearing out early and allsorts - wouldn't have another. My old Silver Shadow was a brilliant car however. 12mpg on a run and 8 round town, and with the air-con on... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kes Posted December 7, 2011 Report Share Posted December 7, 2011 Its like the way you drive - some good, some bad. My Hyundai I 35 returns 40 mpg readily and has never been a problem in any way, nor the Tucson I had for 3 years before it. The dealer is always helpful and the service is cheap as chips. Perhaps we should all recognise that what we need in buying a car is a 'hard driving' MPG and a 'carefully driven' MPG. Manufacturers wont do it though as its Turkeys voting for Christmas. I was told my new Range Rover would do 20-25. IT didnt -it blew a cyclinder head gasket within 3 weeks of getting it, and over its lifetime driving 17 -18 mpg. it lost over £25K in 3 years and cost a fortune to service, never again. A new Ix 35 costs £23K (top of the range) and the price difference buys a lot of juice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
super sharp shooter Posted December 7, 2011 Report Share Posted December 7, 2011 We have just got rid of our Kia Sorento XS due to the VERY poor MPG. £110 to fill the tank and 410 miles later it's begging for a drink!!! Never again will I buy a Kia Tom I get 32 out of my xt and I think they are the Same engine Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elgreco Posted December 7, 2011 Report Share Posted December 7, 2011 I get 32 out of my xt and I think they are the Same engine Not sure but XS was constant 4WD think the XT is switchable ? Tom Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wymberley Posted December 7, 2011 Report Share Posted December 7, 2011 YOU WANT TO START AN INTERNATIONAL WAR ............... DONT MENTION THE FULE PRICES us gal 3.78 ltr 0.83cents per ltr canadain gal 4.55 ltr 0.95 cents per ltr UK gal your first born and some apparently Delete "apparently"! :o 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.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.