Welcome to the site. I imagine the Mirage will get better mileage as well. However, I'm not sure how much better it'll really be.
Welcome to the site. I imagine the Mirage will get better mileage as well. However, I'm not sure how much better it'll really be.
Custom Mirage products: Cruise control kit, Glove box light, MAF sensor housing, Rear sway bar, Upper grill block
Current project: DIY Nitrous oxide setup for ~$100
__________________________________________
View my fuel log 2015 Mirage DE 1.2 manual: 47.2 mpg (US) ... 20.1 km/L ... 5.0 L/100 km ... 56.7 mpg (Imp)
Just to clarify, is the Mini a diesel?
Nope, it's the same petrol/gasoline 1.5L 3-cyl turbo we get in North America.
__________________________________________
View my fuel log 2014 Mirage ES 1.2 manual: 62.4 mpg (US) ... 26.5 km/L ... 3.8 L/100 km ... 74.9 mpg (Imp)
No, it's a petrol engine.
One thing that I'd love about the Mirage is the fact that it's a naturally aspirated engine. I think the engine of the Mini Cooper is a masterpiece considering its good fuel economy for a 136 hp engine, but I really don't like turbocharged engines. Many people think it's an advantage because you don't need to shift gears as much when the full torque is available at only 1250 rpm, but to me this is boring. I like to work (shift) for performance when it's necessary.
I imagine the Mini is quite a bit heavier than the Mirage as well. Last time I checked was a few years ago, so this info (US specification) is a bit out of date:
Car Horsepower Weight (lbs) Weight / Horsepower 3. Mini Cooper 121 2535 21.0 12. Mitsubishi Mirage 74 1973 26.3
Thread: Mirage vs competitors, power to weight ratio comparison
__________________________________________
View my fuel log 2014 Mirage ES 1.2 manual: 62.4 mpg (US) ... 26.5 km/L ... 3.8 L/100 km ... 74.9 mpg (Imp)
__________________________________________
View my fuel log 2015 Mirage ES 1.2 manual: 49.6 mpg (US) ... 21.1 km/L ... 4.7 L/100 km ... 59.5 mpg (Imp)
You might be right, but the big question is how much better fuel economy I could get. My fuel consumption in the Mini is better than the average by 1.8 liters. But if I could only do 0.5 liters better than the average Mirage 1.2 driver on spritmonitor.de it would be less than 0.4 liters better than with my Mini.
It's really tough. I want one of the most eco-friendly cars that I could get (because my ideology has changed a lot over the last 1-2 years), but I would need at least a 0.5 liters advantage over my Mini to justify the switch since the Mini has other advantages that I mentioned earlier (especially the seats).
What I can definitely say is that I find it much easier to undercut the fuel consumption specified by the manufacturer in a car with a naturally aspirated engine than with one of these popular (at least in Europe) modern downsized engines (small displacement and turbocharged).
Then again I don't know if this is also true for a car with a small naturally aspirated engine. My experience is based on cars with larger engines (2.0+ liters) that I had in the past. For example I had a Toyota GT86 (before my change of ideology) with 200 hp and a 2.0 liter 4cylinder engine that is specified with a combined fuel consumption of 7.8 liters. I frequently managed to go below that figure. In winter only by a few tenth but in summer about 1.0 liter (Edit: even on my 10 Km short distance commute)
I think it would be quite hard to improve your observed gas mileage by 0.5 liters/100 km, which per my calculations is about a 10 percent improvement over what you reported to have observed on your test drive.
I say this because if I have a tank that is mostly city and I drive it hard without thinking about fuel savings, vs a tank that is mostly highway and I drive very gently I see a 13-14 percent fuel mileage improvement but that's with different drive styles and situations. If on your test drive you were in the best gear and were not driving it very hard I do not see a way to improve by 10 percent unless you resort to extreme hypermiling techniques all the time.
If you want the best mpg, get the Mirage with the 1,0 engine especially if you rarely need to accelerate quickly and don't mind a very soft suspension, and maybe add the lights later.
I say keep the Mini if money is not an issue. Lets face it, you are already getting great gas mileage in that car, its a much nicer car, it has the power for the rare situation you might need it, and it handles really well if you just want to have a bit of fun every now and then. Also, the seats as you mentioned. If you have a bad back I say absolutely do not risk getting a car with seats that may aggravate it, physical pain is never ever worth it.
Well, that would be a question in which you might be the best judge, and it sounds like you have certainly done your research.
The Mirage responds great to fuel-saving techniques. However, as with any car many short trips don't help. An internal combustion engine does best when it's warmed up. To that point, some forum members here improve their fuel economy by installing a engine block heater and use it in all seasons to help get the engine up to operating temperature more quickly. A quick search of the forum will show who is using one and their results.
I'm curious to know if commuting by bicycle is a possibility? I ride my bicycle in to work though not every day. I used to ride every day and through winter too but have become a fair-weather cyclist lately. It's the best fuel economy you can get.
__________________________________________
View my fuel log 2015 Mirage ES 1.2 manual: 49.6 mpg (US) ... 21.1 km/L ... 4.7 L/100 km ... 59.5 mpg (Imp)
ECO-driver (06-29-2017)
Unfortunately using a bike is not an option. Mostly because of myself (I don't like it too hot, I don't like it too cold, I don't like it too wet etc. ) but also because the possible routes to my workplace are really annoying. Sometimes there is no bikeway at all or if there is it's right next to a main road with lots of traffic which annoys me.
I wonder how much I could improve the fuel economy of my Mini Cooper by changing the tires. Currently I drive 205/45R17 in the summer and 195/55R16 during winter. Both tire sets are not optimized for fuel consumption.
Maybe with 195/55R16 (or even 175/65R15) during summer and 175/65R15 durcing winter and with fuel saving tires I could squeeze out another 0,2 - 0,3 liters.
I really have no idea how big the potential of this measure would be. What do you think?
Eggman (06-29-2017)