Which car have the best FC? Mitsubishi i, Subaru R1, R2?????

[SZY]

Which car have the best FC? Mitsubishi i, Subaru R1, R2?????

 

1)Mitsubishi i

2)Subaru R1 ~ 23kml

3Subaru R2

[Amortifiedpenguin]

all are terribly ugly cars.

 

*runs*

[SZY]

all are terribly ugly cars.

 

*runs*

 

Out Of Topic

[Quantum]

Which car have the best FC? Mitsubishi i, Subaru R1, R2?????

 

1)Mitsubishi i

2)Subaru R1 ~ 23kml

3Subaru R2

the best one is QQ and picanto

15km/l

 

[Ladykillerz]

can be either one if the car is not moving, the FC stays zero.

[Biglittlebean]

Mitsubishi i is about 13kml.

[Kenopps]

Can consider the Toyota iQ also. Local review http://www.sgcarmart.com/news/review.php?AID=117 got 25.5km/l.

[Octopus]

Which car have the best FC? Mitsubishi i, Subaru R1, R2?????

 

1)Mitsubishi i

2)Subaru R1 ~ 23kml

3Subaru R2

 

Aug 09 Torque magazine got an article on paper FC vs actual FC.

 

Six members drive the following car normally for 10 days taking turn, so to get as accurate results as real life situation as possible.

 

1) Audi A4 1.8T = actual fc 9.4 km/litre

2) Honda Jazz 1.3M = actual fc 12.5 km/litre

3) Kia Forte 1.6A = actual fc 9.5 km/litre

4) Mitsubishi i = actual fc 16.1 km/litre

5) VW Tiguan = actual fc 6.9 km/litre

[Octopus]

I'm a bit surprise by the results of Jazz 1.3M and Forte 1.6A, I thought their actual fc should have been better...

[Paddie]

Can consider Peugeot 107. 16-17km/L no problem.

[Windchoco]

Somehow I think that when you are used to a more powerful car, say a 1.6L, then u change to a smaller car, say pica, QQ, u will tend to revv a lot bcos the performance isjust not that satisfactory for the smaller cars...

So my take is that when u buy small cc car, not necessary will get good FC.. Just IMO...

[Watwheels]

Which car have the best FC? Mitsubishi i, Subaru R1, R2?????

 

1)Mitsubishi i

2)Subaru R1 ~ 23kml

3Subaru R2

Lets say we look at real world driving instead of what is on paper.

A lot of factors affect fc, like the routes you take, driving style, the type of tires you use, brand of fuel etc etc.

 

Between the above 3, I feel that the difference in fuel bill savings are negligible, if that's what you are looking for.

[Ruzhyo]

I sold my Mit i after 2 years because it is super thirsty car.

 

Have to rev and rev to keep turbo running to keep up with traffic.

 

But the good thing is can be good friend with the petrol pump people. See them ever other day. 1 week pump 3 times.

 

Tank is tiny also, only can pump about 25 - 28L but spec say 35L

 

Start that time, they tell me 18km/L, later they revised to 16km/l

 

I try very hard to get 15km/L but have to drive like old lady. Have to imagine the acclerator is tou fu.

 

Normal driving I get 10km/L only.

 

Now I change to 1.6L Conti car, get better FC ah.

 

Avoid Mit i, problem child, here spoil there spoil. The service at C&C sux also.

 

 

[Paddie]

Normal driving I get 10km/L only.

 

10km/L??

 

That's terrible. Was there something wrong with your particular unit?

[Ruzhyo]

Nope.

 

No problem with the engine.

 

many problem elsewhere

 

2.5 yr old car

 

Both front AND rear axel worn out. Steering colum worn out. Rear axel boot tear, belt broken, alternator broken, gasket blown, water pump broken, door seal leak and many many many more.

 

But the great thing about this car is it is super easy to park and the accleration is quick. 0-100 in 10sec on paper but I suspect it is faster then that.

 

Best avoid.

 

Just ask around the Mit i club people. The i car is problem child.

 

But for 'face' reasons may not admit lah.

 

[Observer]

you doing survey or what? one moment say the old civic now ask this...everytime no tao no beh...

[Invigorated]

I sold my Mit i after 2 years because it is super thirsty car.

 

Have to rev and rev to keep turbo running to keep up with traffic.

 

But the good thing is can be good friend with the petrol pump people. See them ever other day. 1 week pump 3 times.

 

Tank is tiny also, only can pump about 25 - 28L but spec say 35L

 

Start that time, they tell me 18km/L, later they revised to 16km/l

 

I try very hard to get 15km/L but have to drive like old lady. Have to imagine the acclerator is tou fu.

 

Normal driving I get 10km/L only.

 

Now I change to 1.6L Conti car, get better FC ah.

 

Avoid Mit i, problem child, here spoil there spoil. The service at C&C sux also.

 

No problem with the engine.

 

many problem elsewhere

 

2.5 yr old car

 

Both front AND rear axel worn out. Steering colum worn out. Rear axel boot tear, belt broken, alternator broken, gasket blown, water pump broken, door seal leak and many many many more.

 

But the great thing about this car is it is super easy to park and the accleration is quick. 0-100 in 10sec on paper but I suspect it is faster then that.

 

Best avoid.

 

Just ask around the Mit i club people. The i car is problem child.

 

But for 'face' reasons may not admit lah.

 

 

I beg to differ. have been driving the car for about 2 years and mileage is abt 50+k. So far, aside for the usual wear and tear e.g change of wipers, batt change, I have not had the issues you've mentioned (fingers crossed). But have to agree with you that service at C&C sux big time!

 

Maybe you've got a lemon? Don't see how "for 'face' reasons may not admit lah", cos if there are major issues, I would be the first to warn my friends not to get this but this is not so.

 

Do you do mostly city driving? The i car is not designed to be sporty and rapid fire. To save FC, you have to drive it frugally like you would for other makes i.e. rev below 4k rpm. For FC, my i has never touched below 11.5 km/l, that was with 50% city and occasional revs to 5-6k rpm. Was testing the lowest FC I would get for the car then.

 

For my normal driving, I would hit 13.5-15.5 km/l with 75% highway, 25% city. Ever hit 18km/l but that was almost 100% highway. But I'm sure that the R1 and R2 fares better due to lack of turbo.

[Sammy_koh]

might be a lemon