Clio 200 MPG?!?!?!

[adste89]

Hello, I have had my clio 200 now for 2 weeks and am still running it in (haven't gone above 4000 rpm).

I am getting 26 MPG at best, how is this possible!?

The combined fuel is supposed to be 34.4 so how can I not get close to that driving this slow!

What are you getting?

 

[granty24588]

as the engine loosens up you will get more in return for mpg, but i would not think ull get much better than early 30's

 

[Wests Renault]

197's and 200's aren't great on fuel. As granty said you'll prob average 30ish once the engine has loosened up

 

[SBV116]

lol, if you get 30mpg your driving like my dead gran, mine averages about 27-28 pootling about!

 

[ChrisH]

Yep. Mines on 25 mpg that's with the odd run and stop/start driving in traffic.

Chris

 

[Gaz_]

Best i ever had out of my 197 was about 28mpg. With the same routes driving my 172 Cup i get 36 lol

 

[DNP182]

MPG is sh*t...but if you buy most regarded sub-20k hot hatch, what you expect???

 

[Jaws]

Man up! Mid 20's if i'm lucky in the EK9 and thats a 1.6.

 

[Jamie]

MPG is sh*t...but if you buy most regarded sub-20k hot hatch, what you expect???

Well, I don't think you have a point tbh, of which I'm not trying to sound rude.

The ONLY hot hatch I know producing such low mpg is the 200. The 1*2 range produces 40mpg on the motorway. Pug GTI's don't have a problem and I know someone who had a Corsa VXR which easily did 30mpg too.

A good example is someone I was speaking to at the last NW meet. He has a 370Z which is 2mpg less than a 197. It's just silly. A V6 powered, quite heavy car is on par with a NA, "light" (ok, ish) Renault Clio. If I wanted a car which did 25mpg on runs I'd be looking at a whole host of other cars...

As good as the 200/197 is I think it's a massive down point. My Trophy does not get driven for fuel economy and I'm getting 35mpg. I also have a decat. If I could afford 25mpg when spending 15k on a new/used car I'd consider an Evo, Alfa GTA, M3 and Clio V6. Those running costs means the Clio is up against bigger fry.

Saying this, I still love them. I just love to slate its fuel economy.

 

[DNP182]

Well, I don't think you have a point tbh, of which I'm not trying to sound rude.

The ONLY hot hatch I know producing such low mpg is the 200. The 1*2 range produces 40mpg on the motorway. Pug GTI's don't have a problem and I know someone who had a Corsa VXR which easily did 30mpg too.

A good example is someone I was speaking to at the last NW meet. He has a 370Z which is 2mpg less than a 197. It's just silly. A V6 powered, quite heavy car is on par with a NA, "light" (ok, ish) Renault Clio. If I wanted a car which did 25mpg on runs I'd be looking at a whole host of other cars...

As good as the 200/197 is I think it's a massive down point. My Trophy does not get driven for fuel economy and I'm getting 35mpg. I also have a decat. If I could afford 25mpg when spending 15k on a new/used car I'd consider an Evo, Alfa GTA, M3 and Clio V6. Those running costs means the Clio is up against bigger fry.

Saying this, I still love them. I just love to slate its fuel economy.

fair enough points...hence why I am seriously considering selling my 197 and jumping ship to an Ibiza Cupra lol. Upto 44mpg, good performance and handling (not quite Clio 197 / 200 territory), improved reliability and quality finish / interior!

 

[granty24588]

jamie is exactly right. and i dont think its a case of "manning" up! its a case of them been so pish poor on fuel compared to other hot hatches. They all return mid to late 30's. if i nurse my yozza'd clio i can return a true 38mpg working it out and not taking notice of the trip.... ( not saying it would be wrong) and yes that is really driving like a granny, but just did it to see what i could get out of it! normally average 32mpg combined?!

 

[KMB]

Mine averaged 34mpg over the first 1000 miles, but disappointingly has never really improved on that

It seems to be the only real downside to the 200.......

Given that my previous Jap cars (including a Rev3 MR2 Turbo and an S2000) all managed similar economy with more performance it's definitely below par on economy.

 

[Šįk]

evo seem to be getting ~30mpg in there 200.

PSJ.

 

[Gorms]

I have averaged 30.1 over 9k in mine. Dont think that is too bad to be honest. All my driving is country lanes and when i do hit a motor way it sometimes does 35mpg. Not to bad when a couple of my mates who have M3s average low 20s.

Also dont forget the computer isnt all that accurate as it does not take everything into account. Left mine ticking over for well over an hour once and it told me i had used no fuel!?!

Gorms

 

[Mark One]

anyone know of any non-bullshit reason why these new F4Rs are doing do badly against the old 1*2s?

Is it purely a weight issue?

 

[DNP182]

35mpg Gorms...very surprising. That's the first I've heard of anyone getting that. Not bad, but still not fantastic.

 

[richard1]

29.6 MPG Here over the last 3000 miles.

 

[SteveS Cup]

Not that I'm a big worryer about mpg but I'd be pissed if my 172 was below 30mpg... They're not "that" quick so how can you justify such shite mpg!?

It's one thing which really puts me off an R27...

 

[Munson]

The ONLY hot hatch I know producing such low mpg is the 200.

I know of at least ONE that is worse

 

[Munson]

anyone know of any non-bulls**t reason why these new F4Rs are doing do badly against the old 1*2s?

Is it purely a weight issue?

Yeah weight mainly. You'd need a few extra Big Macs if you had to walk around with a 200kg backpack

 

[Mr Burns]

I don't understand the whole "I'm selling my car because it's thirsty" theory. If your financial situation has change and you need something more economical then fair play, but surely if you knew you were buying a hot hatch you can't expect fantastic MPG. I was suprised at the 197's poor economy, but I'm not about to cry about it. It is a 200 (sorry, 190) bhp 2.0 hatchback after all.

 

[Munson]

I agree. It shows a lack of preparation in the buying decision. The petrol gauge in my car goes down quicker than the speedo goes up, but I knew that before I bought it so give a f**k.

 

[granty24588]

at the end of the day if you want a economical car go get a dci clio and stop moaning. everyone should of looked at the fuel before huying i certainly did and did it put me off no! coz the grin factor outways it well easy.

 

[Gorms]

The quicker the fuel gauge goes down in my car the more i smile Roy what do you average in your frs?

Gorms

 

[Jamie]

I don't understand the whole "I'm selling my car because it's thirsty" theory. If your financial situation has change and you need something more economical then fair play, but surely if you knew you were buying a hot hatch you can't expect fantastic MPG. I was suprised at the 197's poor economy, but I'm not about to cry about it. It is a 200 (sorry, 190) bhp 2.0 hatchback after all.

I just don't agree. Expecting it to be thirsty yes, being as heavy on fuel as commonly known turbo cars no. Even Evo seemed suprised at the low MPG the 200 got on a test. I don't read too many of the magazines but it was on the car of the year shoot out, after which, one of the lads was getting it as a long termer. He had just finished driving it for a week and suprised that he was on xx mpg when he hadn't hammered it.

However, in your reply you mentioned the phrase "fantastic mpg". I just want to highlight in the context of hothatches what it is to me. Very bad fuel economy is in the 20's. Ok, but heavy MPG is 29-32. Reasonable is 33-35. Good is 36+. This is further more on a tank of fuel, not just I've gone out and raped it or just sat on the motorway at 65mpg for 3 hours.

The lowest I've had my 182 on an overall tank is 32. That was a fair amount of stop start and booting. The best I've had is 38 which was following a long motorway journey (These are actual, i.e. I worked them out myself at the pump not from the trip). I know a few people with 200's which I reguarly speak to and have to say I really like the 200 so have a reasonable interest but they tell me that on a run they get 20's. Blimey. I also know someone with an M3 of which he says on a run he can get about 30.

 

[LouisQ]

I'd say the weight makes a fair difference, plus the obvious increase in power (all be it minimal).

In my 182 if i am by myself on a run to London i get 46-47, did the same run with 2 passengers and a boot full and got 38! so its all relative

 

[Louism]

5500 miles and i am on 22.4 mpg

 

[LouisQ]

Nice name

 

[granty24588]

5500 miles and i am on 22.4 mpg

hahahha good work!! driving it hard, now that is evo-impreza territory, that would put a 172-182-197-200 to shame!

glad ive got my little 172cup with good mpg n fun to drive

 

[Gorms]

5500 miles and i am on 22.4 mpg

louise you do know there is a 6th gear dont you?

It might look like a G but it is a 6!!!

Gorms

 

[Louism]

louise you do know there is a 6th gear dont you?

It might look like a G but it is a 6!!!

Gorms

Its all about third

 

[Louism]

Nice name

Cheers dude, the [word filtered] (ok sounds like plastics with an s) on here read it as Louise

 

[Mr Burns]

I just don't agree. Expecting it to be thirsty yes, being as heavy on fuel as commonly known turbo cars no. Even Evo seemed suprised at the low MPG the 200 got on a test. I don't read too many of the magazines but it was on the car of the year shoot out, after which, one of the lads was getting it as a long termer. He had just finished driving it for a week and suprised that he was on xx mpg when he hadn't hammered it.

However, in your reply you mentioned the phrase "fantastic mpg". I just want to highlight in the context of hothatches what it is to me. Very bad fuel economy is in the 20's. Ok, but heavy MPG is 29-32. Reasonable is 33-35. Good is 36+. This is further more on a tank of fuel, not just I've gone out and raped it or just sat on the motorway at 65mpg for 3 hours.

The lowest I've had my 182 on an overall tank is 32. That was a fair amount of stop start and booting. The best I've had is 38 which was following a long motorway journey (These are actual, i.e. I worked them out myself at the pump not from the trip). I know a few people with 200's which I reguarly speak to and have to say I really like the 200 so have a reasonable interest but they tell me that on a run they get 20's. Blimey. I also know someone with an M3 of which he says on a run he can get about 30.

I think you're taking my response out of context and reading too much into it. I've owned various other hot hatches including 172/182s and I'm also aware that the mk3 is noticably less economical. My point was that plenty of people have sold or threaten to sell their cars for this reason, which I don't understand... Especially as they're prepared to take a financial hit in order to change their car. Comparing MPG with other models has to be taken with a pinch of salt too as it depends how they're driven. My Leon Cupra R was quite good on the motorway and awful driven hard, where the 182 was poor and the motorway but considerably better on the country blasts.

 

[TELFORDS_LURK]

Usually averaging just under mid 20's. My previous 197 was slightly worse.

 

[Louism]

Usually averaging just under mid 20's. My previous 197 was slightly worse.

See its not just me.

 

[barker22]

alot of people seem to think they are driving eco when they really arent. i know because i used to do this, you get up to 30mph and stay there and think your doing well because your staying at the speed limit. its all about how you get up 2 that speed

 

[kenny172]

Im on 3800 miles and averaging 27mpg, don't really care though

 

[ForceIndia]

I think you're taking my response out of context and reading too much into it. I've owned various other hot hatches including 172/182s and I'm also aware that the mk3 is noticably less economical. My point was that plenty of people have sold or threaten to sell their cars for this reason, which I don't understand... Especially as they're prepared to take a financial hit in order to change their car. Comparing MPG with other models has to be taken with a pinch of salt too as it depends how they're driven. My Leon Cupra R was quite good on the motorway and awful driven hard, where the 182 was poor and the motorway but considerably better on the country blasts.

Suppose it's the difference between seeing the figures on paper, and seeing money falling out of your pocket. I do think it's mental that it's closer (in mpg) terms to a Porsche etc than other hot-hatches. FFs the new cooper s is quicker in a straight line than a 197/200, but more economical than my 172!

 

[Dave]

MPG really put me off the 197/200s.

 

[chrisbturbo]

My 182 used to give mid 30's mpg on long motorway trips but now my daily trip to work is only 7 miles one way so i only get about 27 mpg with an average speed of 17 mph between fillups.