mumof4 Posted October 17, 2007 Report Posted October 17, 2007 Since i own a gas guzzling veccy, i gotta say that i only bought it coz it was cheap, and cheap to insure.Im getting around 33mpg in her as i drive her the way i used to drive my Gal and i would get high 40.low 50mpg out of her.And i aint no conservative driver.I have lead foot syndrome every now and then. Havent done that many long runs in the vectra only a couple i think since i had her,but shes a gem to drive.Though i do miss the Galaxy an awful lot.Saving me pennies up for another.
gio Posted October 17, 2007 Report Posted October 17, 2007 Since i own a gas guzzling veccy, i gotta say that i only bought it coz it was cheap, and cheap to insure.Im getting around 33mpg in her as i drive her the way i used to drive my Gal and i would get high 40.low 50mpg out of her.And i aint no conservative driver.I have lead foot syndrome every now and then. Havent done that many long runs in the vectra only a couple i think since i had her,but shes a gem to drive.Though i do miss the Galaxy an awful lot.Saving me pennies up for another. them vectras are petty good on long runs, hired one back in 2001 a 1.8 drove 2500 miles for our anual holidays at an average of 42 mpg! and i drive neither conservative nor at a 100 mph.
mrchipz Posted October 17, 2007 Author Report Posted October 17, 2007 Hi Me and my other half regularly compete to see who can get the best mpg out of our gal (sad I know). Constantly amazed by ours (diesel 99reg). We normally average around 53 on most journeys though we have had it up to the 70s with a fair bit of coasting. My main arguement for not buying the gal was worries over fuel consumption upgrading from a very economical diesel escort. I am happy to of been proved wrong.Definately have the last laugh on all those squeezed into expensive petrol guzzling saloons. A friend has gone from a diesel gal to a very posh vauxhall vectra petrol saloon with three kids and two dogs. She is getting an average 28 mpg!!!! The husband choose the car and he's not very popular now. Having the mpg on the dash has definately changed the way I drive. I can think of a lot better things to spend money on than fuel especially with the latest 2p stealth tax "but that's another rant for another day". i am indeed glad you are happy with your galaxy,i bought mine as a towcar but it has proved itself to be a decent vehicle. "last laugh" not sure about that bit, i assume those who have bought expensive gas guzzlers did so because they could and they can afford to run them too. I only get around low 40s mpg out of my galaxy 50mpg was achieved over a 500 mile run through italy austria germany to fill up point in luxemburg,which i was not totally happy with given that the same run took 1.5 hours less in my other car whilst still achieving over 50 mpg. My point is and has always been if you use the same driving style that some use to get pretty good mpg out of their galaxies and apply them to other cars,then the mpg of the galaxy would be pretty good,but not that good. ie, i get low 40ishmpg out of the galaxy on my regular run.If i use the wifes punto[petrol] and it take my the same time to get there i get mid 40mpg whilst using cheaper fuel. Bit of a weight difference between a Galaxy and a Punto though. Not a fair comparison.Like to see ya get 7 in a punto legally!If you have option of having 2 cars to choose from all well and good.Me personally, i'd sooner have 1 car that does the lot.Welcome to the Sharalaxy!
mumof4 Posted October 17, 2007 Report Posted October 17, 2007 You are right there chippie, way difference between a wee punto and a gal so to compair is very unfair, now i can see why you dispute gals getting over 50mpg coz yours doesnt gio.Maybe you should look to your car and driving style rather than say everyone else is wrong.
mrchipz Posted October 17, 2007 Author Report Posted October 17, 2007 What are those little blue squares for under my membership details on the left hand side of posts?
gio Posted October 17, 2007 Report Posted October 17, 2007 Bit of a weight difference between a Galaxy and a Punto though. Not a fair comparison.Like to see ya get 7 in a punto legally!If you have option of having 2 cars to choose from all well and good.Me personally, i'd sooner have 1 car that does the lot.Welcome to the Sharalaxy! "does the lot" by what definition ? does it do the lot? As for the 7 seats bit, am i to assume that you bought the vehicle with this as its main priorty? if so you are a point. if not again we are talking mpg are we not? "Not a fair comparison" actually it is,you started this thread on mpg, therefore mpg is the issue size and weight are not. I am only putting things into perspective maybe a decade ago 50 mpg was indeed something, but not today not even for the inferior mpgs that a petrol car gives. and infact even a lot of petrolcars can give this mpg without the need to go to the extreames that some go to,to aquirre their figures. like i said i bought mine to tow with, i expected better mpg without the need to drive in a different fashion to what i usually drive. therefore in comparison to the numerous diesels i have owned and sticking to the same driving style, NO i do not found the galaxy to be as economicalas other think,but i found it practical to tow a caravan and loaded with luggage for 2 or 4 people. Note if i did not have a large caravan, the truth is i would not keep or need the galaxy,i would replace it with a queiter and more economical car.
gio Posted October 17, 2007 Report Posted October 17, 2007 You are right there chippie, way difference between a wee punto and a gal so to compair is very unfair, now i can see why you dispute gals getting over 50mpg coz yours doesnt gio.Maybe you should look to your car and driving style rather than say everyone else is wrong. maybe you should read all the posts again, as "everyone" does not agree with you either over this issue ! and by the way my galaxy does not do over 50 mpg normally that is true, but lady dont make the silly mistake of presuming anything concerning why it does not! The reason it does not is down to choice my choice as to how i drive, swiftly and safely, and not down to any sort of ability issue.Cannot for one minute see anyreason what so ever that getting 60 mpg would be a problem for me except for boredom! and respect for other road users. Clearly you cannot see my point what so ever, as i do not dispute it, but dispute the fact that the only way to do so is not using normal driving for the majority of the driving puplic. Also i feel some have a fixation with the magic 50 number, i mearly would like to point out that 75 is the new 50 so if you read my previous post, you will see that i found it extremly funny that fuel economy and the galaxy are forever being mentioned in the same breath! like 50 mpg is something great! in todays car market! "unfair" there is nothing unfair in comparing the punto to the galaxy! the galaxy has a diesel engine that is sopposed to be 20/30% more effiecent,and the fact that your own allie SK claims the drag of the galaxy is merely 0.34,{the punto is no better} and that once moving weight does not play a major issue . " source bmw" then yet again you do not know what you are talking about! and now i await your rant!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
mrchipz Posted October 17, 2007 Author Report Posted October 17, 2007 You are right there chippie, way difference between a wee punto and a gal so to compair is very unfair, now i can see why you dispute gals getting over 50mpg coz yours doesnt gio.Maybe you should look to your car and driving style rather than say everyone else is wrong. maybe you should read all the posts again, as "everyone" does not agree with you either over this issue ! and by the way my galaxy does not do over 50 mpg normally that is true, but lady dont make the silly mistake of presuming anything concerning why it does not! The reason it does not is down to choice my choice as to how i drive, swiftly and safely, and not down to any sort of ability issue.Cannot for one minute see anyreason what so ever that getting 60 mpg would be a problem for me except for boredom! and respect for other road users. Clearly you cannot see my point what so ever, as i do not dispute it, but dispute the fact that the only way to do so is not using normal driving for the majority of the driving puplic. Also i feel some have a fixation with the magic 50 number, i mearly would like to point out that 75 is the new 50 so if you read my previous post, you will see that i found it extremly funny that fuel economy and the galaxy are forever being mentioned in the same breath! like 50 mpg is something great! in todays car market! "unfair" there is nothing unfair in comparing the punto to the galaxy! the galaxy has a diesel engine that is sopposed to be 20/30% more effiecent,and the fact that your own allie SK claims the drag of the galaxy is merely 0.34,{the punto is no better} and that once moving weight does not play a major issue . " source bmw" then yet again you do not know what you are talking about! and now i await your rant!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 'Moving weight does not play a major issue' What a load of cobblers! You push a wheel barrow with a bag of cement in it up hill then try pushing a Galaxy up hill with 10 bags of cement in it. I think you'll notice the difference!Even if BMW did quote it, y repeat it if you know it can't be right!
gio Posted October 17, 2007 Report Posted October 17, 2007 I believe i said it didn't play a major factor should have said normally! no more so than does drag, butyou got me there though up hill dam,shame there are no down hill sections though because that would surely more than balance it out!
mumof4 Posted October 17, 2007 Report Posted October 17, 2007 and now i await your rant!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Im not going to rant, far from it. Lifes too short...more important things in life than MPG. By the way, thank you for calling me a lady, dont get called it very often..B1tch is usually what i get called.
gio Posted October 17, 2007 Report Posted October 17, 2007 and now i await your rant!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Im not going to rant, far from it. Lifes too short...more important things in life than MPG. By the way, thank you for calling me a lady, dont get called it very often..B1tch is usually what i get called. I would never ever call you anything but a lady. being rude is one thing, but bad manners, not exceptable.
mumof4 Posted October 17, 2007 Report Posted October 17, 2007 Very true, its nice to be called a Lady every now and then and it certainly made me smile.
Rusty Nail Posted October 17, 2007 Report Posted October 17, 2007 So to summarise - Diesel Galaxy's aren't efficient????? I lost track :D All I know is that previously we had a 1.8 Auto Zafira which did about 28 MPG, I also own a petrol 3 series BMW E46 saloon which will do 33 MPG and the Galaxy which returns 43 MPG - all on the same journeys. I can comfortably fit 3 kids with thier appropriate seats in the Galaxy and still fill it up with loads more and still get great MPG (in my opinion). I feel better now :D
MadBaz Posted October 17, 2007 Report Posted October 17, 2007 Mass (weight) plays a huge role in terms of mpg and any one who says it doesn't ought to go back to school, and as for balancing out on the downhill, speed limits aside, I'm sure sales of Andrex will quadruple when 44 tonnes of artic come past at 110mph. As for a quieter and cheaper car, Kia do something called the Sedona, I'm sure theres a forum too.
gio Posted October 19, 2007 Report Posted October 19, 2007 (edited) Mass (weight) plays a huge role in terms of mpg and any one who says it doesn't ought to go back to school, and as for balancing out on the downhill, speed limits aside, I'm sure sales of Andrex will quadruple when 44 tonnes of artic come past at 110mph. As for a quieter and cheaper car, Kia do something called the Sedona, I'm sure theres a forum too. you have clearly never seen a restricted hgv lorry come past at a very unrestricted speed downhill ! Feel free to quote your school physics lessons on the subject!!! "Kia sedona" now that is ugly! "forum too" no one forces you to read my posts! maybe you should try some self control rather than telling someone where to go, unless you are willing to take your own advice!!! Edited October 19, 2007 by gio
mumof4 Posted October 19, 2007 Report Posted October 19, 2007 Mod cap on Gents please try and keep this topic amicable.If it degenerates anymore it will be closed. MPG topics do get heated but i have no wish to see it turned into a slanging match.We each have our own opinions and each of us believe we are right in what we believe. If you wish to debate MPG then please use the correct section to do so, Mod cap off
MadBaz Posted October 19, 2007 Report Posted October 19, 2007 you have clearly never seen a restricted hgv lorry come past at a very unrestricted speed downhill ! Indeed I haven't, as the overwhelming majority of lorry drivers are very professional and do not speed and the restricters fitted no not stop them speeding. (dipping the clutch/placing in neutral/just not braking going downhill, will cause the vehicle to exceed their restrictions).Going back to the weight/mpg issue, if mpg does not increase when going uphill, then an increase in energy is not needed to overcome the effects of gravity therefore the momemtum of the vehicle would not have any external forces applied except drag/friction, therefore I could in theory attain the same momemtum with a 50cc engine. NASA are gonna be p155ed when they find out they could launch the shuttle with nothing more than a fart! Gio you talk a load of B******* and to trounce Newtonion Physics just highlights your ignorance, To nitpick and place sarcastic replies to everyones posts is not going to win friends, anyone can become a keyboard warrior and take any persona they like, I for one do not like yours.
gio Posted October 19, 2007 Report Posted October 19, 2007 you have clearly never seen a restricted hgv lorry come past at a very unrestricted speed downhill ! Indeed I haven't, as the overwhelming majority of lorry drivers are very professional and do not speed and the restricters fitted no not stop them speeding. (dipping the clutch/placing in neutral/just not braking going downhill, will cause the vehicle to exceed their restrictions).Going back to the weight/mpg issue, if mpg does not increase when going uphill, then an increase in energy is not needed to overcome the effects of gravity therefore the momemtum of the vehicle would not have any external forces applied except drag/friction, therefore I could in theory attain the same momemtum with a 50cc engine. NASA are gonna be p155ed when they find out they could launch the shuttle with nothing more than a fart! Gio you talk a load of B******* and to trounce Newtonion Physics just highlights your ignorance, To nitpick and place sarcastic replies to everyones posts is not going to win friends, anyone can become a keyboard warrior and take any persona they like, I for one do not like yours. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Escape_velocity. here you go just for you! The question was not the rights and wrongs concerning speeding! but how a mass moves! which means your reply was more than a little nit picking it was totally off topic! and by trying to use NASA ! in you argument you have really lost the plot. Clearly you do not know what you are talking about "drag/ friction" friction is an externally force of gravity! re read your post. Then re read my earlier one about not a "major issue" of corse you would be right if one was trying to drive up mount everest but alas i do not believe, that is on the m1 ! "sarcastic replies" yes i remember the one about going to another forum? no sorry, that was you.!
mumof4 Posted October 19, 2007 Report Posted October 19, 2007 Ok guys, thread closed. Take it to debate.Bit more leeway in there if you wish to shout each other down.
Recommended Posts