Which is likely to be more economical?

Soldato
Joined
1 Apr 2014
Posts
18,535
Location
Aberdeen
Gonna be travelling backwards and forwards between Bromsgrove and Plymouth weekly.

That's 3 hours plus any delays by car. It's four and a half by train - plus each end so perhaps 5 hours. I used to do a weekly commute of a similar length. I took the train. I went up on Sunday night and came home Friday night.

There's something you haven't mentioned: who's paying for it?
 
Man of Honour
Joined
17 Oct 2002
Posts
159,534
That's 3 hours plus any delays by car. It's four and a half by train - plus each end so perhaps 5 hours. I used to do a weekly commute of a similar length. I took the train. I went up on Sunday night and came home Friday night.

It's a crap journey by train and very expensive as well. I used to do it a lot and eventually gave up and just used my car. Cross country price the fares on the route and even with jumping through hoops with split tickets etc it was significantly more than the marginal cost of using the car eventually.
 
Associate
OP
Joined
24 Dec 2006
Posts
1,028
Location
Worcs.
So, been to Plymouth and back twice now. Once in each car. I am typically there for 3 or 4 days at a time. Work will be contributing by paying about £90/month.

The i10 is a lot more economical.

The Kia is £65 to fill up and will just about get there and back with very minimal use in Plymouth. The i10 is the same but costs £38 to fill currently. In terms of comfort, my feeling is that yes the Sportage is better but as a straight line motorway run the i10 was fine.
 
Soldato
Joined
22 Apr 2009
Posts
3,659
Location
North-West
You would end up red lining the whole motorway trip in the i10 if you wanted to do 70 mph.

I have a Picanto I would never do a journey that far in it.

I can't see there being much in the MPG and the Sportage would be a nicer drive.
 
Soldato
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
10,632
Location
Notts
At £1.15/l for diesel that works out at 30mpg for 372 miles, which sounds way too low. Works out at 49mpg in the i10 at £1.10/l. This is ignoring any small amounts of driving you do there, so perhaps add a few mpg onto the above figures.

The worst Honest John “real MPG” figure for a 2016- Sportage 2.0 diesel manual 4WD is 37, and that will be an average over mixed driving rather than a pure motorway run. You ought to be getting at least 38/39 on that run, not 30.
 
Last edited:
Associate
OP
Joined
24 Dec 2006
Posts
1,028
Location
Worcs.
At £1.15/l for diesel that works out at 30mpg for 372 miles, which sounds way too low. Works out at 49mpg in the i10 at £1.10/l. This is ignoring any small amounts of driving you do there, so perhaps add a few mpg onto the above figures.

The worst Honest John “real MPG” figure for a 2016- Sportage 2.0 diesel manual 4WD is 37, and that will be an average over mixed driving rather than a pure motorway run. You ought to be getting at least 38/39 on that run, not 30.
Its a 64 plate Sportage so not the latest version. I’m gonna keep using the 15 plate i10 for now as it has cruise control (as does the Sportage) and is comfortable on a run.
 
Last edited:
Caporegime
Joined
22 Oct 2002
Posts
26,810
Location
Boston, Lincolnshire
More economical looks like it'd be the i10 judging by Honest Johns figures.

Kia 2.0 CRDi 4WD Official 46.3–49.6 mpg Real world 36.8 mpg

Hyundai i10 1.2 Official 57.6 mpg Real world 47.8 mpg

However, trundling along at 70mph I reckon there wouldn't be much in it. Either way I'd certainly be taking the Kia over the i10.

Things like this are very situational. My Ignis Sport has a combined mpg of 40 my Saab 30. Yet on a motorway journey not only am I more comfortable in my Saab but more economical due to gearing at motorway speeds.
 
Man of Honour
Joined
25 Oct 2002
Posts
31,707
Location
Hampshire
Your choice but surely the Sportage is better to drive unless the i10 is top spec vs low spec sportage? Even the 1.2 is a very weak engine as no turbo (84hp) so I had expected your experience with mileage to be closer due to i10 being less well suited to motorway speeds.
 
Man of Honour
Joined
17 Oct 2002
Posts
159,534
It sounds like something is wrong with your Sportage.

My 1700kg automatic 3 litre 5 series does circa 50mpg on that route.
 
Soldato
Joined
12 Jul 2007
Posts
16,316
Location
South East
"£65 to fill up and it just about gets there and back" isn't very scientific - You should have reset the average MPG readout - but it does sound like excessive consumption. I had a Sportage like the OPs a few years ago for a work trip and I can't be 100% sure it was the 2.0 but I do recall being surprised at how little fuel it used for my 190-mile round trip to Bournemouth.
 
Back
Top Bottom