My punto 1.3 multijet van does around 52mpg at 70/75mph.
At an indicated 57/60mph, around 74mpg.

These are steady speeds on relatively empty motorways and in the latter
example fitting in with the speed of HGV`s in the inside lane.
And trying not to accelerate using obvious turbo boost.
I once had one of the non turbo Perkins Prima Maestros and it *always* did
around 60mpg at higher 70/75mph speeds, typically 10mpg better than the
Punto. But 10mpg worse than the Punto at 56/60mph.

It got me wondering, why?
The maestro much heavier, 1994cc against the Fiats lighter body and 1248cc

The fiat has a gaping grill, and no *air dam* under
the bumper where The maestros air grill entrance was less severe and it
had that 70s style sheet metal airdam under the bumper. It got me
wondering, what happened to those "air dams" under the front bumper that
were supposed to give a venturi effect and reduce drag under the car? And
why did speed affect the Maestro much less regarding fuel consumption.
It was bigger, heavier... is it air resistace, or was that old Prima
really THAT good.
Mik

Mik <dont.bother (AT) bluyoder (DOT) co.uk> wrote:

Emissions controls and loads of other stuff.

--
Steve H 'You're not a real petrolhead unless you've owned an Alfa Romeo'
http://www.italiancar.co.uk - Honda VFR800 - MZ ETZ300 - Alfa 75 TSpark
Alfa 156 2.0 TSpark - Fiat Marea 20v HLX - COSOC KOTL
BoTAFOT #87 - BoTAFOF #18 - MRO # - UKRMSBC #7 - Apostle #2 - YTC #

In message <pan.2006.05.28.19.49.34.639678 (AT) bluyoder (DOT) co.uk>, Mik
<dont.bother (AT) bluyoder (DOT) co.uk> writes

You sure of that? Even small cars are heavy now.

I can't find what a Maestro diesel weighed, but a 1.3 weighed about
875kg and a 2.0 litre petrol MG version weighed about 985kg. A diesel
Montego weighs about 150kg more than a 1.3 petrol one, so I'd be
surprised if the diesel Maestro weighed much over 1025kg.

Punto van weighs 1005kg, according to Fiat's hideous and Flash-laden
site.

--
Steve Walker

On Mon, 29 May 2006 11:05:12 +0100, Steve Walker wrote:

Maybe it was the driving experience without power steering that has left a
memory of a heavier car.
That and the maestros big donk of an engine..
I thought about emmissions as well and Steve H has a good point about the
emission gear.
A puzzle though why there is a big reversal of the Maestros MPG advantage
at lower speeds,) in favour of the Fiat to an extra 12 MPG (or so).
I had initially thought it was aerodynamics,(air dam for example in the
Maestro working at higher speed) but now wonder if there is a sort of
*sweet spot* in the torque curve of the Fiat 1.3 Multijet ( 2,000 Revs )
that allows the exeptional mid 70s MPG, and was not there to the same
extent in the Clubman D with the Perkins Prima?
Beyond these 2 cars I
guess I was just musing on MPG figures and aerodynamics, with particular
reference to the seeming demise of the below bumper airdam ( and wondering
whether without them form was taking preference over function)
Mik

Mik wrote:
64mpg @ 56mph for the Maestro is about right.

60mpg @ 75mph is nothing like the manufacturers claim of 46mpg.
Even the Montego with the later engine only claims 52mpg.

On Tue, 30 May 2006 09:23:41 +0100, Peter Hill wrote:

Thanks Peter, I found that link interesting. Certainly shows how it can
Can be done without spoilers.
Mik

On Tue, 30 May 2006 12:37:29 +0100, Nick Finnigan wrote:

And it makes feel a lot better towards the Fiat at higher speeds.
Thanks
Mik