As some of you may know my other half has a 307 1.6 HDI and it's always had poor fuel economy as she only gets about 34 pootling around town. I put it down to the DPF which I'm still trying to get sorted at a 'reasonable' price.
Talking to someone at my work who owns the 508 1.6 HDI with the silly auto/flappy paddle box which is obviously much newer and still under dealer warranty they're getting.......32 MPG around town!
As an additional bit of info they've now decided to trade it in for a 2008 as it will more economical, when I asked which engine they said the 1.4 HDI Good luck with that then!
1996 1.9 TD LX (Gone but not forgotten)
2003 2.2 HDI SE
Are any of the 307's any good? Again I'll throw my mates 2.0hdi into the mix with about 44mpg max.
Maybe It's just the big barge 406 that can achieve such dizzy heights.
2000 W 2.0hdi 110 7 seat estate Blue.
And this glue is for my submarine not for putting up you're f*c*ing noses, and dont think i dont notice cos i do... Buy your own f*c*ing glue!!! Fatty Lewis Twin town 1997.
We have a '53 plate 307 1.6i 16V petrol, had it from 7,500 on the clock and it ticked over 90k last week. It has been absolutely perfect, nothing has gone wrong*. Literally the only money spent has been service stuff.
However I do think they were a bit hit and miss; if you got a lemon then it would be endlessly going wrong. Can't say anything on the diesels either, haven't driven one.
* Edit: I lie, the bonnet release cable snapped and had to be replaced.
2002 V6 SE Coupé (210bhp) - (Aegean Blue)
2002 D9 2.2 HDi Exec Estate - Samarkand Blue PM me for PP2000 diagnostics around Surrey
It'd be interesting to know what sort of mpg you're getting on that.
32 mpg out of a modern diesel is utterly crap, doing mostly short journeys I'm getting close to that* out of the yoyo and that's petrol, 150bhp, heavy and has all the aerodynamics of a house brick
*I got bored with keeping score but last June the totals were 562.2litres 6367.5km 8.8292108363l/100km 31.9939054031mpg I said close...
DIVVUN CAAL ME MUSTARD MITT! I don't think I often made (make!) it into the 40s in the D9 either But then most of the journeys I do are so short the engine doesn't get time to warm up properly.
I tend to drive like an old dear, mainly due to the old dear in the passenger seat "do we have to drive this fast? Look out, there's a car/child/cat/tree/leaf coming!"
DPFs, Cats and working heaters all cause higher consumption on diesel cars. My old 306 DT would do 65+mpg at motorway speeds, and a good 50+ around town. No Cat, No DPF and the only time the interior temp rose above 'tepid' was when the sun shone. In their natural state, diesels don't produce excess heat for creature comforts so it has to be 'forced' to generate the extra heat by burning extra fuel. Removing the Cat alone can improve mpg by over 10% on some cars, and I would guess that depending on how car is used generally, a saving could be made by removing the DPF.
My current 406 gets nicely 'toasty' driving around in the current weather, and clears ice off the screens in a few minutes, but I have already noticed that the mpg is nowhere near the 306.
Rolebama wrote:Removing the Cat alone can improve mpg by over 10% on some cars, and I would guess that depending on how car is used generally, a saving could be made by removing the DPF.
Neither of which you can legally remove, more's the pity. So that just leaves the heater...
I have been hearing 'rumours' about the introduction of new MOT test procedures which means that all cats, dpfs and the like haave to be fitted if the car was originally supplied with one.
I have heard about people removing the innards from both cats and dpfs, but not yet heard how they fared on MOTs. Before it's demise, my old 306 TD had neither yet on each of the four MOTs I put it through, the Testers all commented about how clean it was for a diesel. Most of my driving is done on major A roads and motorways which probably helped.
Below 2500rpm the 2.0 HDi 90 in the 406 produces more power and torque than the 1.6 HDi 110.
I rarely ever rev above 2500rpm.
So you must really have to thrash the 1.6 to get it to move.
rwb wrote:Below 2500rpm the 2.0 HDi 90 in the 406 produces more power and torque than the 1.6 HDi 110.
I rarely ever rev above 2500rpm.
So you must really have to thrash the 1.6 to get it to move.
Good point! the driver of the 1.6 will be pressing more on the gas than the 2.0. The 2.0 can be hauled around at ridiculously low revs and small throttle inputs and be quite happy.
My cousin works for Ford as a Development engineer-type and the small 1.0 3-cylinder petrols have been returning shitty MPG's since their launch and it appears to be linked to how they're driven and the noise they make - they sound quite roarty so the driver is kinda egged on to keep it up....consequently the little engine spend most of its time being pushed hard.
Cars in my care:
2021 Kia Spottage 1.6 Pez Turbo Dual Clutch Gearbox Trickery
2013 Renner Twingo - donkey work
Good luck with that then!
I don't think I often made (make!) it into the 40s in the D9 either 
But then most of the journeys I do are so short the engine doesn't get time to warm up properly.
