159/Brera 2.4 Fuel Consumption

[KoFFiE]

Originally Posted by keithglos

...
The GT would take 6 miles to get water temp up, the 2.4 takes 3 miles. This shows a significant waste in producing heat, and means short journeys have a much heavier penalty on consumption. I intend to try better grade fuel next.

My 147 1.9JTDm (8v)'s fuel consumption drops heavily once the engine is on temperature (as in: not the water-temp). 37MPG with cold engine, 47 MPG once on temperature (according to the computer, and since the remap, the average on it is usually +-5 miles too optimistic to what I see at the pump). I wouldn't be surprised if it would be the same for the 2.4 in the Brera/Spider, maybe the default mapping does this on purpose to heat up the engine quicker and get better consumption figures? (I know they use different tables for different engine temp ranges, but no idea what the exact differences are).

[juventino]

Originally Posted by Andy1248

Did a test in mine by driving to Swansea and back all on the M4 mway..
Going to Swansea was doing 8o to 85 most of the way and got 30 mpg
On the way back not in a hurry so kept the car at 65 and got 32 MPG
The average for combined driving 50% Mway 50% Urban is 27 mpg
This is not an acceptable figure.. The Tech Spec for the 2.4 is 52.3 MPG for Mway
30.7 mpg for Urban and 41.5 mpg for Combined
I have contacted my dealer and they have spoken to the Area Director and they are now taking the car in for test for a couple of days next week.
If I get the same answer as other on here such as "there is nothing wrong with the car" then I will take this matter further.
If i bought a bottle of Whiskey that was suppose to be 40% proof but when I tested it was only 25% proof I would complain and have the right to a monetary compensation for the misrepresentation by the vendor..
The same will be for the car I have downloaded the tech spec from the AO website as evidence of the advertised MPG..
with Diesel at £1.30 a Ltr this engine is not a cheap alternative to petrol anymore especially with these MPG figures..
Will I give the car back if they can not sort this out tooooo right I will and I will be looking for some form of compensation... I love the car but the MPG is so different from their advertised figures it would keep annoying me every time I filled it up and every time I looked at the on board computer..
I will post the result of my visit to the dealer after the car has been tested...

Good luck. I am in the same 'boat'...along with everyone else though. I have completed 4700 miles in my 2.4 SW and during this tank of fuel and the last one, I have been 'trying' to stick to the speed limits but with only 2/3 MPG of a difference. There is no fun in 'MPG-watching'. Ithink i'll bring the passion back into driving my Alfa and drop the consumption back to 30 MPG - driving on M and A roads with no traffic as I work shifts. Even shifting gears (3-6th), I struggle to get over 30 mpg on a slight hill on the motorway!!!...somethings not right. My other half has just bought a Bravo 1.9 TD and is immediately getting 48-50 MPG. I know its a 1.9 and a smaller car but it is only 200kgs lighter (2.1/4 average male)and the engine is from the same 'family'.
I am like yourself...frustrated and feel cheated.
Keep me posted.

[sprintracer]

I am thinking of buying a 2.4 Brera and this thread is worrying. I race an alfa romeo but my work car is a honda 2.2 diesel. I gives 250llb/ft and I drive with a heavy right foot and always get 42-45 mpg average. If I drive sensible I get 50mpg. if I drive super sensible i can get 55+ average. One thing I have noticed on this thread is that people try to compare with other engines and the previous 2.4 engines of the 156. You have to remember that the 159 and Brera's are 20v engines and will by nature use more fuel. Also you may think you are driving economicably but it is not always the case. Cruise control will nearly always give you worse mpg as it can not anticipate road conditions such as inclines etc. Also staying in a higher gear is not always best. Working through the gears sensibly is far better than missing gears. I drive approx 1500 miles per week I have had lots of time to see what works best.
This doesn't change the fact that the cars are not returning what Alfa promise. I hope Alfa come up with a fix or admit the figures are unachievable. If you think about it though the honda fuel economy may roughly be 20% better but you get 20% less power. You can't have everything. I guess you just have to decide what is more important.

[Spider95]

The fuel consumption is certainly important when the competition are continuously improving the performance of their diesels.

Take BMW. The new 320d has an intriguing 2.0 diesel engine. How do they do it?? From memory the power is: 178bhp, 265 odd torque, claimed (!) combined 57mpg, and (wait for it) 130g CO2.

Surely with this competition the Alfa diesels are being left for dead?

[keithglos]

Update: My Croma is sort of related, having the 200 bhp 2.4 Aisin 6 speed sequential auto, and 1650 kgs.
I have now done 900 miles in 5 weeks, 25000 now. Virtually no heavy traffic mostly main road 50 - 60.
Average about 36.5. As expected acceleration kills the consumption, it takes a long time to coax it back to economy mode. The instant mpg also shows that uphill work uses far more than the GT. (about 250kgs less). Where the GT would do about 25 mpg the Croma is about 15. How is this car supposed to do 45 mpg? I think it would if I was at 50 -60 in 5th gear on the flat level. My previous 3 cars (Fiat diesels) have all averaged the extra urban mileage. From what I see remaps don't help the true economy figures.

[mikeyw]

Originally Posted by keithglos

Update: My Croma is sort of related, having the 200 bhp 2.4 Aisin 6 speed sequential auto, and 1650 kgs.
I have now done 900 miles in 5 weeks, 25000 now. Virtually no heavy traffic mostly main road 50 - 60.
Average about 36.5. As expected acceleration kills the consumption, it takes a long time to coax it back to economy mode. The instant mpg also shows that uphill work uses far more than the GT. (about 250kgs less). Where the GT would do about 25 mpg the Croma is about 15. How is this car supposed to do 45 mpg? I think it would if I was at 50 -60 in 5th gear on the flat level. My previous 3 cars (Fiat diesels) have all averaged the extra urban mileage. From what I see remaps don't help the true economy figures.

Keith - you must be gutted after the incredible economy you somehow squeezed out of that GT....should be improving though with 25K on the clock !

[cooper1997]

Originally Posted by juventino

Good luck. I am in the same 'boat'...along with everyone else though. I have completed 4700 miles in my 2.4 SW and during this tank of fuel and the last one, I have been 'trying' to stick to the speed limits but with only 2/3 MPG of a difference. There is no fun in 'MPG-watching'. Ithink i'll bring the passion back into driving my Alfa and drop the consumption back to 30 MPG - driving on M and A roads with no traffic as I work shifts. Even shifting gears (3-6th), I struggle to get over 30 mpg on a slight hill on the motorway!!!...somethings not right. My other half has just bought a Bravo 1.9 TD and is immediately getting 48-50 MPG. I know its a 1.9 and a smaller car but it is only 200kgs lighter (2.1/4 average male)and the engine is from the same 'family'.
I am like yourself...frustrated and feel cheated.
Keep me posted.

I have a 2.4 159SW and get between 450-500 miles per tank. This compares to 250-275 miles from the V6 GT which was my last car. Personally I think thats ok especially considering the power and torque of the 2.4.

Having said that, I didn't change for the better fuel economy!

[keithglos]

Mike - I should have got the 1.9, but I don't do much mileage as you see, and it gives me something to think about.
I am told this is my last car, what a way to go. (good or bad?) Like I once described a car as "exceptional condition".
With connect nav (I don't need it) and leather it was invoiced at just over £8000. Tax is higher, but insurance less. Also it's invisible, doesn't incite road rage (I hope) and almost as cheap as the Vauxhall Signum with which it shares floor and suspension.
But the 6 speed Aisin auto is great.
This is a bit off thread, but I would like to find some mechanical/electronic reasons for the general thirst of the 2.4.

[Dougie166]

100mile A & B road round trip yesterday with four up - 35.5mpg. Usual short trips back and forward to work (6 mile each way) - 30 mpg.

I am enjoying the car more now with resultant loss in fuel consumption but it is a great drive

[mrbuzz]

I have read all the comments on fuel consumption with interest. Am I going wrong somewhere and driving too slow???? I am averaging 33 mpg on the computer after about 800 miles mostly short trips and through town. I did a longer 50 mile round trip cross country A and B roads and clocked 39.5 at an average 40 mph and not what I thought was driving conservatively. Whilst this isn't up to the Alfa specified levels it seems to be a lot better than most.

[keithglos]

Is it possible the new cars have a different ecu map, like the 2.2 is reported to have. If so we would think it would be reasonable to remap the older cars to the new standard, but I suppose AR would not admit this.

[willow]

Had the 2.4 for two years now. Consistently 30mpg around town and 35-38 on a run, hasn't changed since 5000 miles.
On another note seem to have finally minimised the 'stagger' problem in 2nd and 3rd gears. No joy through the dealership - finally resolved (almost!) on the third tank of BP Ultimate.

[keithglos]

Half a tank of BP ultimate made no mpg difference to the Croma Auto.
Just experienced a DPF regen, and will probably fill up at Sainsburys
in about a week. Check the mpg then.

[keithglos]

Originally Posted by mrbuzz

I have read all the comments on fuel consumption with interest. Am I going wrong somewhere and driving too slow???? I am averaging 33 mpg on the computer after about 800 miles mostly short trips and through town. I did a longer 50 mile round trip cross country A and B roads and clocked 39.5 at an average 40 mph and not what I thought was driving conservatively. Whilst this isn't up to the Alfa specified levels it seems to be a lot better than most.

Just looked on Italiaspeed and Fiat seem to have improved the mpg figures on the 2.4. The later version of the Croma extra urban is 52 mpg, whereas my earlier one is 46.6. I am getting 36 - 37. The 159 2.4 is quoted at 52 mpg as well. In the past I have always achieved the quoted extra urban figures, in 11 years, 3 Fiat diesels and nearly 170000 miles.

[Dougie166]

450 mile trip in Scottish Highlands this week - Just under 41mpg at an average speed of mid forties, great roads

[BartonAlan]

Been doing a bit more driving since my last post.

I averaged 39 mpg in a holiday trip of about 900 miles, not much town driving. By doing not much town driving you avoid the exhaust filter burn-off. My normal journey to work (20 miles) is similar and I average 38. I am hopeful that this will improve as I bed the engine in (my previous 156 with the 175 bhp engine took fully 10k miles to bed in). It is already loosening up noticeably after nearly 4000 miles.

To answer previous comments, you do better if you watch the consumption. You do worse with town driving. At lower than 70 mph having the roof down makes little difference.

A few niggles with the Spider, nothing serious but nuisance.

Another make of car suggests doing a heavy booted session of driving to clear the exhaust filter. Anyone any experience?

But love the Spider. Why don't you see more of them?

[Fraser]

Recent trip to Speyside via Dundee, the A9 and back via Glenshee (over the Lecht) into a strong headwind. The car was fully loaded with four adults and a bootfull of luggage and averaged 34mpg. Quite happy with that actually.

[keithglos]

Just taken nearly 6 weeks to do 354 miles, mostly light traffic. Average to fill up 38.2 mpg. Look forward to the next check.

[Paul J]

My last two tanks have averaged 36.5 mpg, even one that had THREE regen cycles over the duration of the tank. This is doing my usual commute as posted before, which I was only getting 33 - 34 mpg on. The difference? Tyre pressures .

[dpat]

still averaging 40 mpg in the 1.9 JTDm - no matter what the driving or the conditions it always averages out at 40 mpg over a tankful

[mikeyw]

Guys,

I've just been speaking to my local dealer about a 159ti which i'm on the lookout for, during the conversation I raised the issue of dissapointing consumption against stated figures and was very surprised to hear that the figures are actually produced by an independant body and not by the manufacturers themsleves, much the same as the NCAP rating.

So these figures have not come from Alfa so not massaged in any way. The beauty of the independant approach is the consistency of the results as conditions are identical. So Alfa are not testing their cars stripped out going downhill with Kiera Knightly driving

Apologies if you knew this anyway but i bet quite a few , like myself, didn't.

Mike.

[dpat]

I didn't mikeyw so thanks for the info

[Paul J]

Originally Posted by mikeyw

Guys,

I've just been speaking to my local dealer about a 159ti which i'm on the lookout for, during the conversation I raised the issue of dissapointing consumption against stated figures and was very surprised to hear that the figures are actually produced by an independant body and not by the manufacturers themsleves, much the same as the NCAP rating.

So these figures have not come from Alfa so not massaged in any way. The beauty of the independant approach is the consistency of the results as conditions are identical. So Alfa are not testing their cars stripped out going downhill with Kiera Knightly driving

Apologies if you knew this anyway but i bet quite a few , like myself, didn't.

Mike.

I'd be interested to know how many miles they test over, because dpf regeneration has quite an effect on mpg (at least on the trip computer). If they don't do enough miles for it to kick in then the quoted mpg would be skewed.

[rossogtv]

All this info has all but killed my interest in buying an oil burner Brera. My commute to work is about 6 miles each way ,so looking at the general consesus of this thread i will probably struggle to reach 30 mpg and have numerous regens of the DPF to contend with.
P.S. Can someone try to talk me into it ??

[mikeyw]

That's my commute length with stops for child drop-offs etc....maybe I need a re-think as well on the Diesel TI assuming the same DPF problem applies !