Can it be true?
#1
Can it be true?
Hi All
I'm currently driving a 1.6 automatic rover cabriolet, but am looking to change. I've had 4 litre XJ40s in the past, but fuel economy is becoming important these days, so i want something that isn't much worse than my current rover.
I've noted the following figures claimed for the X300 3.2 on the autotrader website in the UK:
Fuel consumption (urban) 19.8 mpg
Fuel consumption (extra urban) 37.7 mpg
Fuel consumption (combined) 31 mpg
And this is what the same site says for my rover:
Fuel consumption (urban) 26.5 mpg
Fuel consumption (extra urban) 40.2 mpg
Fuel consumption (combined) 30.3 mpg
Looking at the combined figures, can they really be this close?
I know that my Rover does 30mpg in the real world. What are people getting in their 3.2 Jags? I'm mostly on country roads cruising at about 55mph, with some town and hill driving too.
If these Jag figures are even close to true, I think i know what I might be buying next!
Thanks
Richard
I'm currently driving a 1.6 automatic rover cabriolet, but am looking to change. I've had 4 litre XJ40s in the past, but fuel economy is becoming important these days, so i want something that isn't much worse than my current rover.
I've noted the following figures claimed for the X300 3.2 on the autotrader website in the UK:
Fuel consumption (urban) 19.8 mpg
Fuel consumption (extra urban) 37.7 mpg
Fuel consumption (combined) 31 mpg
And this is what the same site says for my rover:
Fuel consumption (urban) 26.5 mpg
Fuel consumption (extra urban) 40.2 mpg
Fuel consumption (combined) 30.3 mpg
Looking at the combined figures, can they really be this close?
I know that my Rover does 30mpg in the real world. What are people getting in their 3.2 Jags? I'm mostly on country roads cruising at about 55mph, with some town and hill driving too.
If these Jag figures are even close to true, I think i know what I might be buying next!
Thanks
Richard
#2
The Jaguar 3.2 AJ-16 engine is a wonderful, reliable, unit, but it ain't made for economy. Some years ago, I used a local tyre place where the father founder of the present owner had a new X300 3.2, and only pootled around the Nantwich area in it (being elderly). I gather he got around 20 mpg.
If you want the Jaguar, buy it, but it is not going to have the same costs as your Rover; they will be higher. You have to be realistic. I know what I would rather have though, and it wouldn't be the Rover !
If you want the Jaguar, buy it, but it is not going to have the same costs as your Rover; they will be higher. You have to be realistic. I know what I would rather have though, and it wouldn't be the Rover !
#4
I do think the Jaguar is ok on the fuel
This thread handles the 3.2, I know, but I just want to say that my 4.0 uses on average 13.7 litres/100 kilometers, which as far as I can say is not bad. (18 mpg according to this calculator: http://www.pege.org/fuel/convert.htm
Both my Chrysler Grand Voy (15l/100km=15 mpg) and my Porsche 928 (18l/100km = 13 mpg) spend A LOT more than that (my Merc 200 CDi can not be used to compare these. It is after all a diesel).
I'm not familiar with the mpg figures (sorry) so I don't know if the figures in my examle is correct. Also please note that the car has been used in town/city ONLY, so the fuel cosumption when driving on motorways should be a lot less. On Saturday I will found out, going 400 kilometres to my friends wedding.
Brgds
Cato
Both my Chrysler Grand Voy (15l/100km=15 mpg) and my Porsche 928 (18l/100km = 13 mpg) spend A LOT more than that (my Merc 200 CDi can not be used to compare these. It is after all a diesel).
I'm not familiar with the mpg figures (sorry) so I don't know if the figures in my examle is correct. Also please note that the car has been used in town/city ONLY, so the fuel cosumption when driving on motorways should be a lot less. On Saturday I will found out, going 400 kilometres to my friends wedding.
Brgds
Cato
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)