Alfa Romeo Forum banner

1 - 19 of 19 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
6 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Hello All!

I've read a few posts on here relating to poor MPG from 147's, and I think mine has been pretty poor recently (half a tank only getting 150miles - Mainly motorway driving) I Changed the thermostat yesterday as I noticed that the temp gauge took forever to get to 90 and then when driving fell to 60-70 and I was told this can cause poor fuel consumption.

My main worry is having just filled the car with 3/4 of fuel, my trip computer is telling me my range is only 145 miles?!? That seems very low to me, does anyone know if these things are accurate? I've got a long drive planned on Thursday so will be recording what sort of MPG I get, but in the meantime is there anything I can check myself to see if there are other issues affecting the fuel consumption?

Thanks in advance
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
30,252 Posts
The only way to properly check the average MPG is by brimming the tank, zeroing the trip, run the tank down, brim it again. Then calculate the MPG from the mileage on the trip and the amount of fuel it took to brim the tank again.

These engines are not great for MPG though unless you are cruising on low throttle at a constant 60mph.

If the temperature is dropping below 80degC, your thermostat is sticking open (it should sit close to 90 all the time)... is it still doing that with your new one?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,271 Posts
Sadly the twinspark engine compared to say a 1.8 avensis in terms of fuel economy is dreadfull.This was not an issue a few years ago but now they cost £245 a year to tax and barely make 30mpg this has affected sales and values especially with petrol costing shedloads the engine first appeared around 1995 engines have changed a lot in the mean time.The jts will do up to 7 mpg more a gallon which helps. Ive sold 4 Jts powered 156s in recent times with an average overall fuel consumption of 35-37 mpg over several thousand miles.
You can see why most later Alfas are diesels cheaper to tax and 35-55 mpg.My 156 2.4 jtd averaged 50 mpg and ive recently aquired a 1.9 jtd 16v multijet which is easily doing over 52 mpg.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,307 Posts
Whilst have a 1.6, the fuel economy is pretty similar, I average about 29-31mpg and get around 360mi to a tank.

When mines full the range sits at 185 until it's worked itself out - I just take no notice of it
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
245 Posts
In my 2.0 147 Im averaging 29.5mpg over the last 1500 miles (since I last reset the ECU) 60% motorway miles on my daily 40 mile commute to work...

I don't drive like a hooly but I don't hang about from standing start either...

Also the range is a calculation over the last few minutes average mpg/ fuel usage so may well be low from cold or fresh after a spanking of the right pedal...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,393 Posts
My old 156 JTS was averaging around 32 mpg, which was not much different from my previous 2.0 TS. I have only had the GT 3.2 V6 for a couple of weeks and am getting 23 mpg....

To put it in all into perspective, Car magazine are running a new Focus ST on a long term test. Ford say it should do 44 mpg, car are getting 25.7 in normal everyday driving!!!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
Thanks for the replies guy's!

Slightly relieved reading all this! Was worried my bargain purchase was turning into a lemon!

The new Thermostat is now holding steady at 90 so at least thats now sorted but I'll do what David C suggests and brim the tank this Thursday as I've got a long drive so should use the tank and can work out the MPG. I've also reset the trip computers to see how far they are away from my calculations!

To be honest, I love the car so I'm prepared to put up with poor MPG if it's a common thing among these cars.

Thanks All
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,307 Posts
Glad your stats sorted anyway. These cars are well worth the extra fuel cost in my opinion.

Out of interest my average mpg is usually fairly close to what I work out over the cost of a tank
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,227 Posts
Indeed - if in doubt go to fuelly.com and check it out for a similar car to see real world mpg.

If I would have known about the mpg of the 1.6l I would have made the jump to 2.0l.
But really as others have said. Compared to rivals Alfa's are expensive to tax / insure and run compared to other car marquees in the same bracket.

This means that the values as Jim says means they depriciate fast. But the secret is they drive very nicely. You get alot of gadgets and they look and sound nice. If you can put up with the poor mpg and running costs. Your rewarding with an above average driver experience.

I've not drove any other car that puts a smile on my face almost as much as a motorbike.
On paper a 1.6 147 shouldn't be as fun. 10second to 60 and 120mph in a weighty car shouldn't be fun. Its should be dog slow and awful. But it still makes me smile some how.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
611 Posts
I don't actually find my remapped 2.0 too bad on fuel to be honest. My father has a Giulietta 1.4MA and I don't think it's that much better.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,266 Posts
Every time these mpg questions come up I'm amazed at the low figures some of you are getting. My 1.6 is still returning a genuine 41 mpg over the last three weeks I was at home. That all sorts of driving and I don't hang about either.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,227 Posts
Think you got a good one then Rockhopper. As most on fuelly are all arounf the 30mpg mark.

The newer engine I plonked in mind is slightly better on fuel (Probably due to better compression) but still around the 30mpg mark. Thats 95% city driving at an average of 18mph.

If I never use the redline I can get that up to 32mpg. An on a run driving miss daisy I can get it above 35mpg but that will be motorways only.

Maybe you have super duper wheel bearings and 40psi tyres or better ambient temperture or maybe you just drive in the torque band improving fuel effciency. Who knows.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,227 Posts
Have you lowered the car and taped up all the gaps. Run mini wheels and have no traffic?
Whats your average speed on the trip?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
611 Posts
adf83, what remap did you have done and who by?
It was done by red dot in enfield about 4 years ago. I'm not saying the remap improved fuel economy, but it certainly didn't make it noticeably worse. Car was originally down on power, I think 135bhp, but was at 160bhp afterwards. (That's what the printout said anyway)!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
611 Posts
It was put on a rolling road before and after, and produced those figures. I can't vouch for the accuracy of them though. I'd hope the tuner was doing it properly/fairly.
 
1 - 19 of 19 Posts
Top