Most fun car for 35mpg in the real world?

[Chris71]

I'm sure this has been touched on before given the timeliness of the issue, but what car do you reckon represents the most fun for a genuine 35+ mpg?

That’s to say being driven in real world driving conditions by an enthusiast; not doing 68mph on a deserted motorway, and certainly not being nursed along under test conditions on the manufacturer’s rolling road...

So where would your money go? To avoid anyone stating the obvious I’ll start with the Lotus Elise.

Anything eligible - sports cars, hot hatches, diesels, hybrids, downsized petrols...

Edited by Chris71 on Monday 17th January 16:15

[yellowbentines]

mx5 - I won't avoid one of the best choices just because it's an obvious choice!

[V88Dicky]

Clio 172 Cup, or perhaps a 182 Trophy.

[RobM77]

Caterham 7. Most people would agree that a 7 is the most fun car full stop, regardless of any mpg. The fact that they can easily better 35mpg makes them a clear winner here

Edited by RobM77 on Monday 17th January 16:17

[redgriff500]

I was going to say Elise too !

So how about a Ginetta G15 or Dare G4

I suspect a cheaper answer would be a kitcar.

A sub 1600 Caterfield might get there (though mine never did)

GTM, Sylva Phoenix etc

[theironduke]

My 944 can manage that....

[Chris71]

yellowbentines said:

mx5 - I won't avoid one of the best choices just because it's an obvious choice!

• ahem*

PH mythology accepted, but from my time of MX5 ownership I'd suggest you'd be lucky to get over 35mpg in real world use.

redgriff500 said:

A sub 1600 Caterfield might get there (though mine never did)

I didn't do the sums, but my (relatively rapid) 1600 Supersport Caterham was very good on fuel at low speeds. Ironically a steady motorway cruise used more fuel than thrashing round the lanes, because although it only had a miniscule 508kgs to carry round it had the aerodynamic properties of a house brick...

Edited by Chris71 on Monday 17th January 16:18

[kambites]

Unless a Caterham can manage it, I'd say an Elise S2 111S like mine.

Unless you'e allowed modified cars, in which case I'll have a Honda K20 in my Elise please.

Edited by kambites on Monday 17th January 16:16

[hornetrider]

Chris71 said:

• ahem*

PH mythology accepted, but from my time of MX5 ownership I'd suggest you'd be lucky to get over 35mpg in real world use.

Not if you've got a new shape one.



I'd also say Elise btw.

[Twincam16]

RobM77 said:

Caterham 7

As I understand it they're surprisingly bad on fuel (Used to work with a guy who ran one as a daily for the best part of a year). All revvy low down, so it doesn't help the cause, then the aerodynamics ruin the economy at higher speeds.

I reckon something like a Sylva Stylus would be better on the fuel whilst providing similar thrills as it at least has a nod to aerodynamics.

[mat205125]

Chris71 said:

yellowbentines said:

mx5 - I won't avoid one of the best choices just because it's an obvious choice!

• ahem*

PH mythology accepted, but from my time of MX5 ownership I'd suggest you'd be lucky to get over 35mpg in real world use.

This was the experience of a friend of mine, and a pity as I'd really liked one too. The Mk2 1.8 cars are meant to be better than the low geared Mk1 1.6 cars, however.

[Chris71]

Hmm, maybe I should have said 40mpg.

Impressed if you're getting over 35mpg in mixed driving in a 944. My slippery 2.5-litre 924S just about managed 30 on a good day.

[teeCup]

V88Dicky said:

Clio 172 Cup, or perhaps a 182 Trophy.

^^THIS! Fantastic fun for the running costs.

[Chris71]

Twincam16 said:

RobM77 said:

Caterham 7

As I understand it they're surprisingly bad on fuel (Used to work with a guy who ran one as a daily for the best part of a year). All revvy low down, so it doesn't help the cause, then the aerodynamics ruin the economy at higher speeds.

I reckon something like a Sylva Stylus would be better on the fuel whilst providing similar thrills as it at least has a nod to aerodynamics.

My dad's got a Stylus and I know a couple of people who've raced them. The speed difference at the end of a long straight is easily visible to the Seven-type cars. I can also speak from the other perspective - my (280bhp/ton) Caterham was a supercar chaser on tight bits of track, then level pegging with things like M3s in the medium stuff, and then left for dead by modern hot hatches at the end of long straights like the one at Bedford...

I think for low speed town/country lane use you could get 35mpg out of a Seven with the right engine. I suspect even as a 2nd car/toy mine returned the best part of that if I kept the speed down - that was a 1.6 K-Series, albeit in rather lightweight trim.

Edited by Chris71 on Monday 17th January 16:27

[ambuletz]

afew possible suggestions.

clio sport, fiesta ST, ibiza cupra, polo gti, 106 GTI, suzuki swift sport, mini cooper (mini cooper S), SportKa, lupo GTI (stupidly expensive for what they are though).

[300bhp/ton]

theironduke said:

My 944 can manage that....

What true average? As in what you can expect most times you drive it and drive it in a normal manner?

[Chris71]

ambuletz said:

afew possible suggestions.

fiesta ST
Sport Ka

I'd be a little surprised there, I thought both were known for their somewhat disproportionate thirst? The same arguably for the Swift - didn't Richard Porter's come out in the high twenties? There again, life as an Evo long termer might not be entirely representative of the average motorist...

[Guvernator]

Chris71 said:

I'm sure this has been touched on before given the timeliness of the issue, but what car do you reckon represents the most fun for a genuine 35+ mpg?

That’s to say being driven in real world driving conditions by an enthusiast; not doing 68mph on a deserted motorway, and certainly not being nursed along under test conditions on the manufacturer’s rolling road...

So where would your money go? To avoid anyone stating the obvious I’ll start with the Lotus Elise.

Anything eligible - sports cars, hot hatches, diesels, hybrids, downsized petrols...

Edited by Chris71 on Monday 17th January 16:15

I'm sorry but this is a silly queston very amply demonstrated by Top Gear recently. Most modern fairly efficient sports cars will be capable of doing 35mpg or having fun but not at the same. If you are having fun in a car, it's not going to return 35mpg. An M3 can probably do 35mpg or it can do 9mpg depending on how you drive it. A Prius can do 60mpg or 9mpg depending on how you drive it although I doubt the Prius would be any fun no matter how hard you drove it.

In any case enthusiastic driving and 35mpg are mutually exclusive in that you can't do them at the same time, however they aren't mutually exclusive in that you can't achieve them in the same car at different times. I very much doubt there is a car invented yet which could return 35mpg while being driven enthusiastically.

[hornetrider]

Road Trip Lite - it's free

[RobM77]

Chris71 said:

Twincam16 said:

RobM77 said:

Caterham 7

As I understand it they're surprisingly bad on fuel (Used to work with a guy who ran one as a daily for the best part of a year). All revvy low down, so it doesn't help the cause, then the aerodynamics ruin the economy at higher speeds.

I reckon something like a Sylva Stylus would be better on the fuel whilst providing similar thrills as it at least has a nod to aerodynamics.

My dad's got a Stylus and I know a couple of people who've raced them. The speed difference at the end of a long straight is easily visible to the Seven-type cars. I can also speak from the other perspective - my (280bhp/ton) Caterham was a supercar chaser on tight bits of track, then level pegging with things like M3s in the medium stuff, and then left for dead by modern hot hatches at the end of long straights like the one at Bedford...

I think for low speed town/country lane use you could get 35mpg out of a Seven with the right engine. I suspect even as a 2nd car/toy mine returned the best part of that if I kept the speed down - that was a 1.6 K-Series, albeit in rather lightweight trim.

Edited by Chris71 on Monday 17th January 16:27

Mine was a fully specced Roadsport VVC and averaged about 40-odd from day to day and I measured 30mpg on a track day (and I wasn't hanging around!). 35mpg is easy.

As for the comment above on relative performance to M3s, on my last track day I left the pits with two E46 M3s in front of me and by the end of my self imposed 15 minute stint (it was open pit), I had lapped both of them. That was the full Bedford Autodrome circuit, including that really long straight. I realise that I'm an experienced racer, but surely the fact that I had rubbish tyres on my 7 made up that difference? With decent tyres and suspension, a standard R300 is quicker round Brands than a 996 GT3 - just watch Mark Hales' "How to Drive Brands" DVD for a back to back comparison with him driving both cars to their limits. It's not just the tight corners, it's everywhere.

Edited by RobM77 on Monday 17th January 16:36