Poll: 1.0L Mirage engine = 7.5% better fuel economy. Would you choose it?

[owl]

Please go to the fuel log on this fine site.

Look at the 1.2 and 1.0L manual cars. The twenty percent larger engine uses less than 1 percent more fuel...not 7.5 percent. That can be attributed to driver technique, easily.

On a track with controlled conditions, the difference would be even less.

I stand by all my previous posts.

[Daox]

That is real world driving with an incredible amount of variables in different environments.

The fact is, on a standardized test done on a dyno the 1.0L scored a 7.5% fuel economy increase over the 1.2L. That really should say it all. That means no frugal/thrifty owners to mess up factual data reporting.

Also, I'm not saying that less cylinders doesn't make a difference, it certainly does. I'm just talking about the 1.0L 3 cylinder vs 1.2L 3 cylinder.

[alex16]

Was the dyno test done with both Europe spec taller 5th gears I'm assuming, I would like to get the 5th gear and replace just the hear in my trAnsmission.

Either way the 1.0 will get better mpg but I agree the variables are wild. Just like my 1.2 5 speed won't beat most cvt cars because of my mountain cold region I drive in.

[25Plus]

I made a comparison of the 1.0 and 1.2 liter engines. Same gear ratios mean same engine speeds and same torque needed for a specific speed. In my example 37 Nm at 2850 rpm/100 kph (road resistance power of 10.5 kW means about 11 kW motor power).

If you compare the torque needed for 100 kph with the lowest unit fuel consumption (position might not be very accurate) you see, that the distance in the 1.0 is smaller than in 1.2 liter engine because the 1.0 liter engine has to work harder.

Therefore fuel consumption is lower in the 1.0 liter engine.

1.0 liter engine: 4,88 l/100 km
1.2 liter engine: 5,11 l/100 km

So fuel consumption of the 1.2 liter engine is about 5 % higher.

With the smaller engine you need to rev higher to get the same power and you have to change to lower gears more often to climb hills what means higher fuel consumption, too. Perhaps I get a 1.0 liter Space Star as a rental car when my Space Star 1.2 has a service. Then I can compare better in real world driving.

[MetroMPG]

Thanks for the extra calculations, 25Plus.

[Zero]

It depends on the country. If I were in Germany, I would select the 1 liter, but in the USA 1.2 liter.

[owl]

If you compare the torque needed for 100 kph with the lowest unit fuel consumption (position might not be very accurate) you see, that the distance in the 1.0 is smaller than in 1.2 liter engine because the 1.0 liter engine has to work harder.

Therefore fuel consumption is lower in the 1.0 liter engine.

1.0 liter engine: 4,88 l/100 km
1.2 liter engine: 5,11 l/100 km

So fuel consumption of the 1.2 liter engine is about 5 % higher.

With the smaller engine you need to rev higher to get the same power and you have to change to lower gears more often to climb hills what means higher fuel consumption, too. Perhaps I get a 1.0 liter Space Star as a rental car when my Space Star 1.2 has a service. Then I can compare better in real world driving.[/QUOTE]


If Consumer Reports has any credibilty left, their numbers provide food fod thought.
In many cases, the smaller engine provides the same, or worse fuel consumption than a much larger engine. On this fine Mirage site's own 1.0L to 1.2L fuel comparison chart there is less than one percent difference in fuel usage. I really wish there were another 50 1.0L owners reporting so we had a better sampling.

http://www.greencarcongress.com/2013...in-larger.html

[MetroMPG]

Did you check on the European spiritmonitor.de site? It has more 1.0L Space Stars (and Mirages) and so should offer a more valid comparison that the 3 1.0L cars in our own fuel log.

[owl]

Did you check on the European spiritmonitor.de site? It has more 1.0L Space Stars (and Mirages) and so should offer a more valid comparison that the 3 1.0L cars in our own fuel log.

I could not find the mileage figures on that site. Please post the specific URL with the numbers.

I did find these numbers, though...

1.2L 50 mpg

http://www.nextgreencar.com/view-car...anual-5-speed/




1.0L 48 mpg

http://www.nextgreencar.com/view-car...anual-5-speed/

[25Plus]

I could not find the mileage figures on that site. Please post the specific URL with the numbers.
I did find these numbers, though...

1.2L 50 mpg

http://www.nextgreencar.com/view-car...anual-5-speed/

1.0L 48 mpg

http://www.nextgreencar.com/view-car...anual-5-speed/

You only have to look on my two links, that I postet and you quoted in your last post:

1.0 liter engine: 4,88 l/100 km
1.2 liter engine: 5,11 l/100 km