Hyundai i40 fuel efficiency

tuamroadgalway

Hi All,
I bought a Hyundai i40 last year.
I have spent a huge amount of time, differing driving styles, calculating actual fuel efficiency by filling tan up the limit and clocking how much km travellled before the next fill up to the limit etc.
I can only conclude that this car, despite all the advertising regarding fuel economy, start/stop etc. is very hard on fuel. It is certainly the most thirsty i ever owned. I struggled to get 6.2l/100km on very easy driving.
I know the published figures are not achievable, but by 50%?
Anyone else any experiences?
I note Hyundai in the US were fined massively for 'overestimating' their fuel economy.
Tuam road

MuppetCheck

What type of driving do you do?

In my experience driven normally modern diesels rarely give anywhere close to their claimed figures.

colm_mcm

Just to be clear, the US overstated mpg was as follows

1mpg out 580,000 cars
2mpg out. 240,000 cars
3-4mpg out 80,000 cars

tuamroadgalway

tuamroadgalway wrote: »

Hi All,
I bought a Hyundai i40 last year.
I have spent a huge amount of time, differing driving styles, calculating actual fuel efficiency by filling tan up the limit and clocking how much km travellled before the next fill up to the limit etc.
I can only conclude that this car, despite all the advertising regarding fuel economy, start/stop etc. is very hard on fuel. It is certainly the most thirsty i ever owned. I struggled to get 6.2l/100km on very easy driving.
I know the published figures are not achievable, but by 50%?
Anyone else any experiences?
I note Hyundai in the US were fined massively for 'overestimating' their fuel economy.
Tuam road

Is it petrol or diesel ?

The NEDC test is to blame most of the time as the test is ridiculous and in no way reflects real life driving and should be abolished.

SO if the cars are released with NEDC consumption figures then they are to blame and the manufacturers will simply go along with it.

Yes in the U.S a lot of people get together and sue car companies, that will never happen in Europe.

Ford recently had to send out cheques to owners of their hybrid models because they over stated the economy.

colm_mcm

OP, what does your trip computer say you're getting?

tuamroadgalway

Its a 1.7 diesel, my driving is about 80% motorway, the remainder is decent secondary roads.
My trip computer varies, but on a very good day i am getting 6.2 - 6.4 l/100km. On a bad day it would be 7-7.4l/100km.
I have treid other ways of measuring it and it works out around the same.
I have had 3-4 other cars over the last 8 years approx and each one delivered better fuel economy (passat, volvo v50, insignia, 408). Even driving the above cars hard would beat the i40 being driven like a baby.
I realise those fuel economy tests massively overestimate the economy, but in any real world test versus any of the cars above, the 140 is rubbish.
Incase anyone says the trip computer is inaccurate, i realsie that so i use the following test.
Fill tank to absolute lip. Drive for any length while recording kms. Fill to the lip again while recording the litres required. Divide one by the other to calculate l/100km.

colm_mcm

My petrol civic is getting those figures. Do you buy your fuel in any particular garages, have you spoken to the dealer?

sillymoo

I am driving a i30 1.4L diesel. I easily get about 6.2L/100km driving mostly on good primary roads, motorways and occasionally some regional roads. I would certainly not drive in a fuel efficient way! It's probably not a very fair comparison given the smaller car but I'm quite happy with the fuel efficiency I'm getting giving my driving habits.

tuamroadgalway

I buy fuel mainlyt in applegreen, but have done the test with fuel from other garages. I have spoken to the dealer and got the usual guff, driving conditions, wind resistance, driving style etc.
Its not that its 10% off, its way off and as said before worse than any car i have ever owned.

Lockster

I have an i40 estate with the same diesel engine as yours that I've had since the end of May. I also keep an eye on the fuel economy using an app on my phone and since new I'm averaging 6.4 litres/100 km (43.85 mpg). I'm also driving in mixed conditions but I'm also a little disappointed with this, my old 2.0 litre diesel Skoda Superb was better than that.

pajor

I get diesel in one of the cheapest garages in county Waterford. Running up and down from Dublin on Saturday, trip computer said I did 5.7L/100km for the whole trip in the 1.6 TDI Octavia. Car was filled with a mattress and all sorts.

So it's definitely not the fuel.

Anyone know who actually makes the Hyundai engine?

Mar4ix

my wifeys polo 6r 1.6 tdi, with 75 horses mostly m50 plus lil city drive on computer shows 5.7 l ./ 100 km.

Once i was going to Limerick with it, in supper dooper eco mode .. . 4.0 l /100 km ... but thats very boring trip tbh.

sasol

People should not take the trip computer as a basis for calculating what the mpg is. In my experiance these are very often, way off.

My opinion is that you should fill the tank to the brim, drive it until virtual empty and then calculate based on distance travelled. I know my trip computer is a waste of time - it tells me I am geting 48mpg when I am actually getting about 35mpg

sentient_6

sasol wrote: »

People should not take the trip computer as a basis for calculating what the mpg is. In my experiance these are very often, way off.

My opinion is that you should fill the tank to the brim, drive it until virtual empty and then calculate based on distance travelled. I know my trip computer is a waste of time - it tells me I am geting 48mpg when I am actually getting about 35mpg

My opinion is your slightly wrong. Calculate after filling again. The amount put in, the 'second time' is the amount used over the distance traveled from the first fill. Thus it can be done at any stage over the tank, not necessarily until nearly empty, though the emptier the tank the less any slight variance of the top up level will effect the results. Thats why some only go to the first click etc. I tend to brim it till i see the fuel.

& while im at it trip computers are always a bit out alright but certainly not by that much, the trip computer or yourself is doing something wrong.

colm_mcm

pajor wrote: »

Anyone know who actually makes the Hyundai engine?

They make it themselves, its a development on the older 1.6 crdi engine from the i30/kia ceed

sentient_6

I average 6.2 - 6.5 out of the 2 litre crdi in the sonata, the i40 should surely be doing alot better.

pajor

colm_mcm wrote: »

They make it themselves, its a development on the older 1.6 crdi engine from the i30/kia ceed

Does that not explain something then? Or am I just being cynical? :rolleyes:

colm_mcm

pajor wrote: »

Does that not explain something then? Or am I just being cynical? :rolleyes:

I'm not quite sure what you're getting at, but its not like they've never made engines before. We have the 1.6 crdi 116hp and its a little cracker (not bought in from another manufacturer either btw)

Vote 4 Pedro

This is something ive been looking into myself lately,
I've a Audi A3,1.6TDi, 7 speed S Tronic
driving carefully everywhere i go, but not annoyingly so i'm getting between 4.2L/100km to 4.5L/100/km, on the cars display,
on a tank full of €60 Diesel i'm getting just over 900 km travelled, good or bad ?

sasol

sentient_6 wrote: »

My opinion is your slightly wrong. Calculate after filling again. The amount put in, the 'second time' is the amount used over the distance traveled from the first fill. Thus it can be done at any stage over the tank, not necessarily until nearly empty, though the emptier the tank the less any slight variance of the top up level will effect the results. Thats why some only go to the first click etc. I tend to brim it till i see the fuel.

& while im at it trip computers are always a bit out alright but certainly not by that much, the trip computer or yourself is doing something wrong.

Your calculation technique makes sense.

I have my car 7 years now and from day 1 , the trip calculator has been way off , so I tend to treat them all with a sense of distrust.

sentient_6

sasol wrote: »

Your calculation technique makes sense.

I have my car 7 years now and from day 1 , the trip calculator has been way off , so I tend to treat them all with a sense of distrust.

I'd be curious to see where your big trip computer difference is coming from. Your not using u.s. gallons for your calculations by any chance? When the tank is nearly empty are you using the volume figure of an completely empty tank or estimating what could be left....because say for example my fuel light comes on when the trip computer says over hundred km's left, but in fuel terms thats could be up to 7 litres still in there, thats a fair bit, & impossible to truly quantify in any case.

TheBigGreen

http://www.honestjohn.co.uk/realmpg/hyundai/i40-saloon-2012

1.6 GDi 42.8 mpg - -
1.6 GDi Blue Drive 47.1 mpg - -
1.7 CRDi 115ps Blue Drive 65.7 mpg - -
1.7 CRDi 136ps 55.4 mpg 47.8 mpg 86%
1.7 CRDi 136ps Automatic 47.1 mpg 45.0 mpg 95%
1.7 CRDi 136ps Blue Drive 62.8 mpg 48.5 mpg 77%

pajor

colm_mcm wrote: »

I'm not quite sure what you're getting at, but its not like they've never made engines before. We have the 1.6 crdi 116hp and its a little cracker (not bought in from another manufacturer either btw)

I do mean mostly in terms of fuel economy, but I do think I'm just being cynical.
Looking at figures in the past though for Japanese and Korean made diesel engines, in terms of economy and emissions they weren't exactly up to scratch with European diesels.

sasol

sentient_6 wrote: »

I'd be curious to see where your big trip computer difference is coming from. Your not using u.s. gallons for your calculations by any chance? When the tank is nearly empty are you using the volume figure of an completely empty tank or estimating what could be left....because say for example my fuel light comes on when the trip computer says over hundred km's left, but in fuel terms thats could be up to 7 litres still in there, thats a fair bit, & impossible to truly quantify in any case.

I'm using the uk calculation . 4.55 liters per gallon.

When the 'distance to empty' reaches 0 , then I fill up.

Just totally inaccurate. I gave up on it a long time ago.

corkgsxr

tuamroadgalway wrote: »

I buy fuel mainlyt in applegreen, but have done the test with fuel from other garages. I have spoken to the dealer and got the usual guff, driving conditions, wind resistance, driving style etc.
Its not that its 10% off, its way off and as said before worse than any car i have ever owned.

I find applegreen fuel to be muck

tuamroadgalway

OP here.
Are there any other i40 drivers who experience such poor fuel consumption. Mine is worse than any other car I owned previously, so much so that I am thinking of getting rid of it.
The reason I bought it was for fuel economy, if it can deliver better (r at least the same) as previous cars I don't want it.

barryfitz

Hi OP, could you post your own calculation versus the trip computer?

My old man got an i40 back in Jan or Feb, 1.7 diesel saloon. He certainly seems to getting better fuel economy that the figures you have stated. Any time ive sat into the car the Average figure is around 5.5-5.8, he resets it on most fillups and does a decent bit of mixed driving

He had the 1.6 diesel i30 (5 speed 2010 model) before the i40 and he only recently commented on how much better on fuel the i40 is Vs the i30. All his observations are based on trip computer, not sure he has calculated manually.

Caliden

Vote 4 Pedro wrote: »

This is something ive been looking into myself lately,
I've a Audi A3,1.6TDi, 7 speed S Tronic
driving carefully everywhere i go, but not annoyingly so i'm getting between 4.2L/100km to 4.5L/100/km, on the cars display,
on a tank full of €60 Diesel i'm getting just over 900 km travelled, good or bad ?

'€60' means nothing in the context.

How many litres.

Vote 4 Pedro

Caliden wrote: »

'€60' means nothing in the context.

How many litres.

Sorry i should have said it was
€60 spent on diesel at 1.48 per/l = 40.54 litres

tuamroadgalway

OP here, I don't want to get into the question of whether the trip computer is accurate or not to take over the thread: in my experience it consistently underestimates the consumption by 10-15% minimum, but then it depends on what distance it is doing the calculation over (since reset of trip meter).

What I want to focus on is whether the i40, by manual calculation or by trip computer uses more fuel than other average cars (given that it is supposed to be much better).

barryfitz

My question about trip computer Vs manual calculations was just curiosity...

To answer you initial question based on the ould chaps car, your consumption is respectably higher than his. The figure of 5.5-5.8 given earlier is with him driving normally. Ive taken his car on an "eco drive" of about 100 KMs (50/50 motorway/backroads) and averaged 4.4 l/100KM, that was sticking to 110 KM on the motorway sections. Seems to be something a bit off with yours.

Whats the best you have gotten out of it? over what distance? and what types of roads were you on?

tuamroadgalway

Cheers Barryfitz,
Best I ever got was 5.9 over about 100 km drive on motorway roads at less than 100 km/hr. That was driving it very easy.
Point is every car I had before this I could horse them and get better consumption than that. Maybe its just my individual car but im not sure

Caliden

Vote 4 Pedro wrote: »

Sorry i should have said it was
€60 spent on diesel at 1.48 per/l = 40.54 litres

Works out at 4.54l/100km which is pretty good.

~62mpg in the old way of measuring things.

MuppetCheck

tuamroadgalway wrote: »

Cheers Barryfitz,
Best I ever got was 5.9 over about 100 km drive on motorway roads at less than 100 km/hr. That was driving it very easy.
Point is every car I had before this I could horse them and get better consumption than that. Maybe its just my individual car but im not sure

Might be worth asking whoever you bought it from if you could borrow another one and try it for a couple of days against your own.

Stallingrad

Makes me feel good about the 6.9l/100 I'm getting in my silky smooth petrol 1.4TSi Passat. :P

Foreign Sports

I have a 1.7 CRDi 136ps Blue Drive manual (U.K import).

I have been averaging between 58 - 62 mpg indicated per tank since i bought it.

Tank is 70 liters and i regularly get over 800 miles per tank before refilling.

This is with 80% motorway / 20% urban driving.

I have found the Hyundai i40 forum fairly informative. You will find that there are many i40 owners posting on that site who are not impressed by the fuel consumption they are achieving.

http://www.talkhyundai.com/hyundaiforumuk/forum/11-hyundai-i40-forum/

corkgsxr

I think the small diesels need to be driven in a specific manner to achieve decent mpg. And deviation and its only average

Barrowstreet

I also have an i40 and am very dissapointed with the fuel economy. It is far worse than my previous car, which was a 2L TDI Audi A6. I will probably get rid of the i40 early 2014. Published figures are not even remotely achievable. I feel cheated as i expected it to be at least a bit better than my A6, but instead its much worse. Again i have measured it every way possible (filling the tank and then measuring the amount taken to refill it is the most accurate method).

ian87

My gfs father bought 5/6 of these as reps cars last year. He said never again as they are so heavy on diesels. He has about 60 vehicles on fleet ranging from small vans, large vans, Hyundai Tucsons, and a fair smattering of passat estates. He reckons the i40 is the thirstiest of the lot. And that is running the fleet exclusively on topaz fuel.

road_high

Sounds very dissapointing. They were heralded as a very green new car and look great. Too good to be true!

Dozz

Hi. I bought a 2014 i40 blue efficiency model 2 months ago (Irish model) and am averaging 50 and below m.p.g.
Am very disappointed with this to be honest. The garage have offered to carry out a fuel efficiency test (????) Which I will get done but my question is this.
Where do I stand from a legal point of view, as m.p.g. was a major factor in my purchase.
Hyundai are quoting m.p.g. figures 25% more than are achievable in real world conditions.
Surely my consumer rights are affected due to the provision of misleading information?

MuppetCheck

They all do it to be honest but there's also many other variables such as driving style, type of roads, weather.

slimjimmc

MPG figures are based on strictly controlled tests to EU standards which are rarely repeatable in the real world. If the car manufacturer doesn't claim them to be true life economy then there is nothing you can do if the tests comply with EU law.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_European_Driving_Cycle

Dozz

Yep, I never expected to match the test figures but certainly a 25% overestimation figure has to be misleading.
I have been nursing the car since I've bought it (I don't drive fast at all) and best m.p.g. was 50 according to my calculations, it's less now.
So I've gone from 53 mpg on a 5 year old focus with no "eco" additions to less than 50 on a brand new car with all the bells and whistles.

dutopia

Jaysis, my 1.6 Focus petrol gets 9.2L/100KM...

Stallingrad

Dozz wrote: »

So I've gone from 53 mpg on a 5 year old focus with no "eco" additions to less than 50 on a brand new car with all the bells and whistles.

But all the bells and whistles carry weight. You are driving a bigger car, more comfortable car with bigger engine, and your fuel economy almost matches your old Focus. 50mpg is not to be sniffed at. If great MPG was really such a major factor you should have bought a smaller car, or a hybrid.

cerastes

dutopia wrote: »

Jaysis, my 1.6 Focus petrol gets 9.2L/100KM...

Thats pretty horrendous

hellyeah

iiiim in a 1.6 petrol focus and get 7.2/100klm. I drive fairly hard.
think the above focus driver has a coilpack issue.

dutopia

hellyeah wrote: »

iiiim in a 1.6 petrol focus and get 7.2/100klm. I drive fairly hard.
think the above focus driver has a coilpack issue.

Hehe that one is fixed now but it's been like that for a while. Maybe because it's an auto & lots of city driving?

Dozz

Sorry lads mine was the 1.6 diesel.

Dozz

43 m.p.g. on the latest calculations. Worse it's getting.