View Poll Results: Would you have chosen the 1.0L engine if it were an option?

Voters
77. You may not vote on this poll
  • Absolutely! Even better economy and enough power for me.

    46 59.74%
  • Hmm... I'd have to compare against the 1.2L.

    7 9.09%
  • Only if they turbocharge it!

    16 20.78%
  • Not a chance! 1.2L is as low as I will go.

    8 10.39%
Page 7 of 9 FirstFirst ... 56789 LastLast
Results 61 to 70 of 82

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

  1. #61
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    canada
    Country
    Canada
    Posts
    56
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 16 Times in 11 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by 25Plus View Post
    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
    Ah yes. I was using the phone and did not notice the underlined, shortened link.

    Your rental of a 1.0L car may be the only solution. You will have to make a serious effort to drive it exactly the same as a 1.2

    There is something with the international numbers comparison that bothers me. Pèople buy these cars because they want to save money. That is one reason to drive in a modest fashion. There is at least one another reason. The price of gasoline in many parts of the world is double or triple what it is in the US. Many of these places also have higher income taxes. When you have a greatly reduced take home pay you will tend to respect your cash flow a lot more. That will almost guarantee that you use the gas pedal very carefully and it will be reflected in the fuel consumption numbers.

    Another factor may be the composition of the gasoline itself. Blends are going to vary around the world.

    It seems the only way to get good statistics is to do the testing in the same place at the same time with the same driver using rally car techniques to keep the timing honest.

    There are probably other factors I am missing now.

    Now, how can we get fifty of each vehicle for you? I am lost for ideas there...


        __________________________________________

        click to view fuel log View my fuel log 2017 Mirage ESpecially frugal hatch 1.2 manual: 49.3 mpg (US) ... 20.9 km/L ... 4.8 L/100 km ... 59.1 mpg (Imp)


  2. #62
    Senior Member 25Plus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Germany
    Country
    Germany
    Posts
    141
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 80 Times in 49 Posts
    I drive nearly the same way every day and can tell you the fuel consumption figure before starting the engine in a few weeks - regarding weather conditions and wind .

    If the 1.0 liter engine needs 0,2 liter less fuel, I should notice this difference .
    Mitsubishi Space Star 1.2:
    Daihatsu Cuore L251:

        __________________________________________

        click to view fuel log View my fuel log 2015 Space Star Klassik Kollektion+ 1.2 manual: 67.5 mpg (US) ... 28.7 km/L ... 3.5 L/100 km ... 81.0 mpg (Imp)


  3. #63
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Location
    West Virginia, USA
    Country
    United States
    Posts
    16
    Thanks
    3
    Thanked 9 Times in 6 Posts
    I drove a VW Vanagon for quite a few years. It was 0 - 60 in about 18 seconds. Even with the smaller engine, the Mirage is a rocket ship by way of comparison. I'd pay extra for the 1.0L.

        __________________________________________

        click to view fuel log View my fuel log 2015 Mirage DE 1.2 automatic: 42.1 mpg (US) ... 17.9 km/L ... 5.6 L/100 km ... 50.5 mpg (Imp)


  4. #64
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Location
    Mitsu
    Country
    United States
    Posts
    1,359
    Garage empty: add car
    Thanks
    256
    Thanked 315 Times in 246 Posts
    I wouldn't pick 1.0, but I'd pick taller final drive which it comes with.

        __________________________________________

        click to view fuel log View my fuel log 2015 Mirage DE 1.2 manual: 46.4 mpg (US) ... 19.7 km/L ... 5.1 L/100 km ... 55.7 mpg (Imp)


  5. The Following User Says Thank You to cyclopathic For This Useful Post:

    inuvik (12-19-2015)

  6. #65
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Location
    Denmark
    Country
    Denmark
    Posts
    369
    Thanks
    232
    Thanked 36 Times in 33 Posts
    All this BSFC BS... I drive a diesel car with instant fuel consumption... the lower the speed the higher the gear the better the fuel economy. same goes for the mirage...

        __________________________________________

        click to view fuel log View my fuel log 2015 Mirage Intense 1.2 manual: 47.9 mpg (US) ... 20.4 km/L ... 4.9 L/100 km ... 57.6 mpg (Imp)


  7. The Following User Says Thank You to Cleartec For This Useful Post:

    flatbroke (05-21-2016)

  8. #66
    That is true when cruising.


    The Mirage's speed vs. fuel consumption graphs clearly show that when cruising in top gear, the lower the speed (and therefore the lower the engine RPM) the better your fuel economy.


    BSFC can be confusing. It is not saying to CRUISE at a certain RPM. It's saying if you require a given amount of power (EG. accelerating or climbing a steep grade), there are definite RPM ranges that are more efficient than others.

        __________________________________________

        click to view fuel log View my fuel log 2014 Mirage ES 1.2 manual: 63.2 mpg (US) ... 26.9 km/L ... 3.7 L/100 km ... 75.9 mpg (Imp)


  9. The Following User Says Thank You to MetroMPG For This Useful Post:

    Cleartec (05-31-2016)

  10. #67
    Junior Member fanfare's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Somewhere in the country-side
    Country
    Panama
    Posts
    28
    Thanks
    84
    Thanked 10 Times in 5 Posts
    I would get the 1.0 L in a heartbeat!

        __________________________________________

        click to view fuel log View my fuel log 2014 Mirage GLS 1.2 automatic: 43.4 mpg (US) ... 18.4 km/L ... 5.4 L/100 km ... 52.1 mpg (Imp)


  11. #68
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Country is Europe, state is Germany
    Country
    Germany
    Posts
    1,713
    Thanks
    234
    Thanked 1,158 Times in 670 Posts
    Just for the record, my 1.0L MT shows a "B"-average consumption of 4.3L/100km.
    The "B" average has never been reset, the car has about 40 000 on it.

  12. #69
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Location
    Canada
    Country
    Canada
    Posts
    253
    Thanks
    27
    Thanked 49 Times in 37 Posts
    I'd have to test drive it onto a highway on ramp. I have driven cars with slow 0-60, but there is a fine line between okay and actually annoyingly slow hahaha

  13. #70
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    Nova
    Country
    United States
    Posts
    424
    Thanks
    101
    Thanked 124 Times in 84 Posts
    I'm driving a 1.0 L Metro now, so a 1.0L with a few options would be a nice upgrade.



Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •