"Wrong. I managed over 70mpg with a bike carb'd 1.4. That engine had never achieved that with its Efi."

as already stated, but i had to echo it again, the world of club polo is now laughing at you

do you actually know what 70mpg is?

Wrong. I managed over 70mpg with a bike carb'd 1.4. That engine had never achieved that with its Efi.

Shame you don't still have that engine in the car. I'd have paid for a tank of fuel to see you prove that.

Depends how you drive. Wasnt fun,and wouldn't be practical in rush hour,but it was nice to know i could. Another thing about the ABD was that it was still good when putting the foot down a bit.

The bigger AEE's ability to pull fifth from 1,200rpm relatively comfortably meant it should've done well,but i never did a proper economy run,and it could never do as well with the same gearing at the same speeds as the smaller engine anyway. Neither have i done such a run with the valver,but i doubt i'll see over 60mpg now,unless i crawled it on a night run.

mate you have got to be shitting me!

seriously, you cant get 70mpg, your measuring "tools" are incorrect, or were incorrect

Jesus christ, stop bullshitting!

You do realise your claiming the same economy at the latest prototype high-pressure injection VAG diesels? But at the same time boasting 3 times the power...

And a well calibrated EFi will win hands down over any carb set-up.

to put it into context for everyone, you are saying to a full tank on a mk3 polo, you would get 600 miles

and what is more annoying is we have all posted this last time a MPG post came about, and you still insist on posting this utter rubbish

to put it into context for everyone, you are saying to a full tank on a mk3 polo, you would get 600 miles

I've managed 500

Over 70mpg from a bike carb'd 1.4... what have you been smoking?!

But back on topic... I doubt tax will decrease no matter who comes into Power (I'm talking about the bigger parties). All they do is tell people what they want to hear, then get voted in and fail to deliver.

Edited 3 September, 200917 yr by Iscariot

reading all this about how much of what we pay for fuel is tax.. i feel absolutely raped! just watching mr.brown on the news as i type and it has actually really pissed me off!

but i do find it interesting how so much of the governments income is based around the automotive industry and it makes me wonder how they will get their income in the future should the car ever become obsolete.

and i also don't think our roads are that bad.. they could be alot worse! and being in cardiff where they are digging up and repairing most of one of our main roads (A48), i suppose if the government did suddenly have a spending spree on the roads.. everyone would just complain about the roadworks!

and also just to add about having an immigration program like Australia's.. on the face of it it seems like a good idea. but then, if everyone who comes in has a degree or trade - they are going to be competing against our own tradesmen. i don't see the problem with letting people in without qualifications.. but i don't see the logic in giving them benefits to live off! don't give them anything and they will have to get a job to survive, or go back to where they came from.

and i also don't believe you got 70mpg from a carb'd 1.4 either.. maybe your missus toppedd the tank up without telling you or something?! (wish mine would..)

I do have an inclination to agree with the guy who posted earlier stating that fuel is very cheap considering what goes into getting it out of the ground. But I feel that is edging away from the subject a little. Fuel IS CHEAP. The tax is the horrendously over weighted part of the price we all pay at the pump.

If a prospective government proposed a plan that ring fenced all energy taxes to fund future nuclear / hydro electric / off shore wind etc etc power, then I for one would be happy (ok.. accept) paying it.

I'd also like to have the Fuel Tax & VAT ammounts printed on all receipts like in the states. If people actually saw where they're money was going they'd spend less time bitching about oil companies profits and more time voting!! (don't get me started on that one..)

My Off topic bit from the fuel duty rise: I also don't have a problem with an oil companies (or any company for that matter) making a profit. The free (in most cases) market dictates the price. I do have a problem with government bail outs of rotten institutions and burdening it's population with huge national debts for a generation.

I for one will be putting all the spare cash I can afford into oil futures and riding the surge back upto $140 per barrel. I suggest you do the same!

Edited 3 September, 200917 yr by gofaster100

I know I get raped on fuel with tax, but when I pay all the rest of my tax, income tax, council tax, company car tax it just all takes the piss really.

The politicians couldn't run a piss up in a brewery.........but look!!!!!!........the nation will pick up the pieces!!!!!

where does all the money go?

On military expenses. To quote an ex-army mate of mine, "We'd be calling in 200lb bombs when a 20lb would have done, just to see what it did!".

Imagine how many litres of fuel a tank drinks through, just on exercise..

and then you have to pay the blokes on exercise, and their ammunition...

No blame pointed at the actual soldiers. Just the motiv behind needing them..

Imagine how much the airforce costs

Edited 4 September, 200917 yr by randombadger69

when 1/2 nukes would have done :)

Wrong. I managed over 70mpg with a bike carb'd 1.4. That engine had never achieved that with its Efi.

Shame you don't still have that engine in the car. I'd have paid for a tank of fuel to see you prove that.

if you can get 70mpg then I'm the pope lol

even my 406 hdi doesnt hit that,its close but 70mpg is alot.

and like someone said everyone is laughing now lol.

back to the drawing board i think lol

I believe your 406 weighs more than two of my Polos. How do you think you can shift all that without using more fuel?

I get the economy because i can drive properly. I've uprated the brakes but i rarely use them,because if you have to brake,then you've clearly used too much accelerator. As i said,its impractical to drive like this in all traffic,but i could certainly get more out of your 406 than you've managed.

Now i dont care who believes me. Its not like I'm gonna get a medal,is it? You've never met me,doubt you will,and neither of us care. So do or dont,whatever.

Nice to see some keeping it on topic,though my connection to the two subjects would be this: Why do the authorities keep adding more obstacles? Traffic lights on roundabouts that dont need them,steeper speed ramps etc etc.. To stop people like me from getting 70mpg perhaps? They're working hard to promote the act of stop/start traffic and that doesn't help us drive efficiently.

And as a result,they sell more oil and we pay more tax. And so does the industry. Weighing cars down by forcing manufacturers to make them so heavy seems to be a similar tactic.

The roads are like a crazy golf course compared to twenty years ago,cars are double the weight,and that's why people are still driving around using a similar amount of fuel.

If you agree,type it. If you wanna ridicule,type it. But that's another 2p from me and i believe it to be a genuine one.

Traffic lights on roundabouts

This one has me raging! Local town has two mini roundabouts with pedestrian fucking crossings on them, whats the point in putting in a mini roundabout! It blocks the whole town up, the worst bit.. the pedestrian crossing is for the supermarket!! Fucking noooo, what's wrong with subways or walkovers!!!! Oh thats right long term it'll save the public money, can't have that!

I believe your 406 weighs more than two of my Polos. How do you think you can shift all that without using more fuel?

I get the economy because i can drive properly. I've uprated the brakes but i rarely use them,because if you have to brake,then you've clearly used too much accelerator. As i said,its impractical to drive like this in all traffic,but i could certainly get more out of your 406 than you've managed.

Now i dont care who believes me. Its not like I'm gonna get a medal,is it? You've never met me,doubt you will,and neither of us care. So do or dont,whatever.

Nice to see some keeping it on topic,though my connection to the two subjects would be this: Why do the authorities keep adding more obstacles? Traffic lights on roundabouts that dont need them,steeper speed ramps etc etc.. To stop people like me from getting 70mpg perhaps? They're working hard to promote the act of stop/start traffic and that doesn't help us drive efficiently.

And as a result,they sell more oil and we pay more tax. And so does the industry. Weighing cars down by forcing manufacturers to make them so heavy seems to be a similar tactic.

The roads are like a crazy golf course compared to twenty years ago,cars are double the weight,and that's why people are still driving around using a similar amount of fuel.

If you agree,type it. If you wanna ridicule,type it. But that's another 2p from me and i believe it to be a genuine one.

is there a right way to drive???? i couldnt care less how i drive,if I've got to get somewhere than I've got to get some,I'm not going to sit at home and plan if they is any speedbumps or traffic lights.and i can get good mpg out of the 406 i.e. i went to london on tuesday and used 1/4 of a tank and i coverd 280miles and i was in the centre for an hour and a half so if you would like to meet and were put in a tenner each and just drive we will see who runs out first

back to topic now lol. lets go electric lol maybe not

MikeyMK

oh my god you are actually retarded

not only do you post this load of rubbish, you try and back it up saying you "drive properly"

even if you got in your car and drove it at 60mph in a straight line you would not get 70mpg

you are even now telling someone you can do your magical work on their car!

seriously dont post again or i am going to ban you, you are giving misleading information, and no idea why you still insist on posting it?

lol...^^ power trip much?

didnt mythbusters prove that sitting up the arse of a lorry at 50 improves your mpg by like 70%?

MikeyMK - You've been speaking gospel in this thread. MikeyMK for PM anyone?

I would like to take this opportunity to retract my earlier statement.

Mikey, just to polish up on some basic knowledge, here you go:

http://dsc.discovery.com/games-quizzes/fuel-myths/

Edited 4 September, 200917 yr by Liquidice

lol...^^ power trip much?

didnt mythbusters prove that sitting up the arse of a lorry at 50 improves your mpg by like 70%?

na its not a power trip at all, it just angers me that someone can be so actively narrowminded

he might aswell tell me he can fly!

MikeyMK

oh my god you are actually retarded

That's a shame,just the other day you told someone to refrain from personal attack,and i thought you were doing your job well as a result.

My current estimation of you is irrelevant,but if you want to ban me for doing something hundreds of people do on here - claiming something i cant prove - when you cant prove otherwise,then crack on.

its not a personal attack, its my own personal assumption based on what you have said, and i stand by it

re⋅tard  [ri-tahrd, for 1–3, 5; ree-tahrd for 4] Show IPA

–verb (used with object)

1. to make slow; delay the development or progress of (an action, process, etc.); hinder or impede.

–verb (used without object)

2. to be delayed.

–noun

3. a slowing down, diminution, or hindrance, as in a machine.

4. Slang: Disparaging.

a. a mentally retarded person.

b. a person who is stupid, obtuse, or ineffective in some way: a hopeless social retard.

seriously tho can you not see 70mpg is impossible? are you blind to this? if your in a hole stop digging springs to mind

how did you measure this? is it regular your car does this?

It was a tongue in cheek comment about banning you, I'm not even allowed to ban anyone for reference lol

I've stated what i recorded,and that peoples views regarding my facts are irrelevant to it.

If someone says a Golf GTi airflow meter gave them 6bhp i take it or leave it. Same for Top Gear claiming to have cracked 90mpg in a Polo circa 60% heavier. Its not for me to turn the topic into an episode of Eastenders about it.

I've done extensive research and development on my car,but what details are here? People dont even know what tyre pressures i was running. How about seeing this from my point of view?

The engine no longer exists (although the same gear ratios do) and so i cant prove it,but i was there,and not only did i calculate it myself on pump measurement but the fuel simply wasn't there on board for it to be far wrong - unless the floorpans were full as well.. So its my word you have,and that is all i can and will offer. And its clearly never gonna be good enough for you but it is for me because i experienced it.. So its stalemate. Pointless going any further with this,then.

Unless you can tell me what else i can do,of course? Offer donkey rides? Video could take a while.. A solo economy run is obviously pointless,and even a hope for 60mpg with this engine would be just as unbelievable..? You'd still not believe it,so what's the point?

This is just going nowhere,and my other points have been pushed aside by it,so this whole topic is a waste of my time.