2014 Mirage 1.2 vs. Ford Fiesta 1.0 ecoboost - which has better mileage/fuel economy?

[spacester]

uh? the fiesta got a even smaller cargo? i geuss that the max with the rearback down right?
because the boot of the mirage is really small....

[MetroMPG]

Canoe - thanks for that extra info. Learned something new today.

It's like putting a horse to pull a car without wheels everyday and giving two whips as the turbo, it will soon be over with the engine.

And thanks for the laugh!

[m4v3r1ck]

Canoe - thanks for that extra info. Learned something new today.



And thanks for the laugh!

Anytime

Fiesta's cargo's bigger than space star's

[spacester]

2011 fiesta



2013 fiesta

295 liters



mirage

235 liters!!

visual it seems that the boot of he fiesta is bigger!! and on dutch papers i read that is also bigger 295 for the fiesta and 235 for the mirage

maybe with the back seat down but thats not what i am going to do every time i go shopping for food

[m4v3r1ck]

I c thanks for the info, i owned the 2008 fiesta previously

[night9]

I can just see the Mitsu folks dusting off their U.S. plans for the Mirage "ECO" now.

... lower ride height, underbody panels, slightly bigger/longer aero "spoiler", smart alternator with regen, eco-5th gear, start-stop...

We can only hope!

[night9]

Ideally they would give it a 6 speed option like the chevy cruze eco adding an additional "eco" overdrive gear. Not that they would for cost reasons.

[Canoehead]

After reading Spacester's "correction", I did the typical "I must be right on the internet" thing and went back to my source to find proof. Turns out I was wrong. My apologies.

Per Ford of Canada the Fiesta cargo capacity is 719L seats down, 422L seats up. It was the ST model that has the reduced capacity of 286L seats up - I was looking in the wrong column or wrong model, it seems.

As the Mirage only provides one cargo volume number, and it is 487L, it seems likely that this measurement is with the seats down (maximum cargo).

Edit to add...

But wait - using the Ford Canada "compare vehicles" tool, I find this:
Cargo Volume with Rear Seat Up (ft³)
Ford Fiesta: 15.400
Mitsubishi Mirage: 17.2
Honda Fit: 20.6

With rear seat down - data not available for Mirage, but the Ford and Honda get 26 and 57.3 cubic feet respectively.

Also of note - the Ford of Canada compare tool is the most detailed I have seen - giving all sorts of information not included on others'. I did find one item at least, however, that seemed obviously incorrect - citing a range of over 2000 miles on the hwy for the Ford, and 1600 miles for the Fit. Likely a conversion error in the formula (between l/100km and MPG)

[danwat1234]

Does anybody know if the 2014 Fiesta 1 Liter in the USA comes with auto start/stop? On the Ford website is mentions regenerative braking of some sort (a smart alternator most likely) but no mention of auto start/stop. On the specs page for the USA Fiesta there is no data for the 1Liter engine, which is where one would probably find smart alternator and auto start/stop info.

[spacester]

After reading Spacester's "correction", I did the typical "I must be right on the internet" thing and went back to my source to find proof. Turns out I was wrong. My apologies.

Per Ford of Canada the Fiesta cargo capacity is 719L seats down, 422L seats up. It was the ST model that has the reduced capacity of 286L seats up - I was looking in the wrong column or wrong model, it seems.

As the Mirage only provides one cargo volume number, and it is 487L, it seems likely that this measurement is with the seats down (maximum cargo).

Edit to add...

But wait - using the Ford Canada "compare vehicles" tool, I find this:
Cargo Volume with Rear Seat Up (ft³)
Ford Fiesta: 15.400
Mitsubishi Mirage: 17.2
Honda Fit: 20.6

With rear seat down - data not available for Mirage, but the Ford and Honda get 26 and 57.3 cubic feet respectively.

Also of note - the Ford of Canada compare tool is the most detailed I have seen - giving all sorts of information not included on others'. I did find one item at least, however, that seemed obviously incorrect - citing a range of over 2000 miles on the hwy for the Ford, and 1600 miles for the Fit. Likely a conversion error in the formula (between l/100km and MPG)

looking at the pictures any human can see the fiesta got a larger ( with seats up )
so dont know what they are comparing..