Ram1500 EcoDiesel V6 revealed!

[Scooby074]

I watch Topgear on BBC and a lot of the time cars get seem to get twice the mileage they do here. Even the cars with 400hp get good mileage.

This Jag hits 60MPH in 4.8 with a topspeed of 171MPH. It gets 33USMPG.
Jaguar F-TYPE | Engines & Performance | Pricing & Specs


The US version get 27MPG. That is not twice as much but still 6MPG.

2014 Jaguar F-TYPE, F-TYPE S, F-TYPE V8 S Specificationss | Jaguar USA

Thats likely due to the "Driving cycle" they use in the UK vs. what they use in the USA. If you compare the Canadian l/100 from here: Jaguar Canada - Jaguar F-TYPE, F-TYPE S, F-TYPE V8 Specifications | Jaguar Canada to the UK l/100, you'll see that the City to Urban and Highway to Extra Urban are different but the end result, the "Combined" are very close, within 0.1l/100.

 

[94BULLITT]

Thats likely due to the "Driving cycle" they use in the UK vs. what they use in the USA. If you compare the Canadian l/100 from here: Jaguar Canada - Jaguar F-TYPE, F-TYPE S, F-TYPE V8 Specifications | Jaguar Canada to the UK l/100, you'll see that the City to Urban and Highway to Extra Urban are different but the end result, the "Combined" are very close, within 0.1l/100.

You are probably right. What about the Focus getting 79MPG's though?

 

[Scooby074]

You are probably right. What about the Focus getting 79MPG's though?

Different engine? We only get the 2.0l gas here that is a NA only engine.

Off the top of my head, over there they get a 1.0l gas 3 cyl, 1.6l gas (several HP versions, with various mileage), 2.0l gas high performance, 1.6 diesel, 2.0l diesel... Im likely wrong on a few of those displacements, but close.

EDIT
Ok. looked it up. The Focus in the UK that gets 3.7l/100 extra urban is the 1.6l diesel. Ironically it gets that same mileage in both 95 and 115 Hp versions. That translates into 63.6USmpg. or 76 imperial mpg EU. It also gets 4.2l/100 combined (56 USmpg)

The 1.6 gas, 105 and 125hp get 4.7l/100 or 50usmpg E.U..

Interestingly they dont seem to sell the 1.0l in the UK.
http://www.config.ford.co.uk/fordconnection/multimedia/gbr_en/00i/yyh/gbr_en00iyyhfuelspc.htm

Edit 2.
They do sell the 1.0l in Germany. It gets 4.8l/100 combined, so worse than the 1.6 diesel which gets 4.2 with the start stop> the 1.0l may do significantly better in Urban mileage however, but I couldn't find the spec.


Another neat thing is that they offer the engines with and without the "Stop-Start" feature. There is a bit of difference in mileage with the Start-stop. 4.5 vs 4.2 l/100

Im sure there is more than just mileage at play for the 1.0l. They have various road taxes etc. that are based on emissions, not to mention congestion charges and registration, so I cant comment on whether the 1.0l is actually cheaper to run overall.

German Ford site:http://translate.google.com/transla...refox-a&hs=G5J&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official

 

[94BULLITT]

Different engine? We only get the 2.0l gas here that is a NA only engine.

Off the top of my head, over there they get a 1.0l gas 3 cyl, 1.6l gas (several HP versions, with various mileage), 2.0l gas high performance, 1.6 diesel, 2.0l diesel... Im likely wrong on a few of those displacements, but close.

We would not need a hybrid with that powerplant.

 

[3930dave]

Different engine? We only get the 2.0l gas here that is a NA only engine.

Off the top of my head, over there they get a 1.0l gas 3 cyl, 1.6l gas (several HP versions, with various mileage), 2.0l gas high performance, 1.6 diesel, 2.0l diesel... Im likely wrong on a few of those displacements, but close.

Now if Ford would just do a 2L diesel wagon here...... :drool: .... we'd finally have some competition for VW !

Rgds, D.

 

[Scooby074]

We would not need a hybrid with that powerplant.

Nope. Which is kinda the issue. Government has "embraced" hybrids. The die is cast there.

VW went on record against hybrids, mostly because they figure that hybrid mileage can be had cheaper and less complex with diesel. They have, however brought out a hybrid this year just to compete in the market because they "had" to.

 

[Scooby074]

Now if Ford would just do a 2L diesel wagon here...... :drool: .... we'd finally have some competition for VW !

Rgds, D.

No argument here although a 1.6l with a manual getting 76mpg would be schweet!. I love wagons (estates).

 

[Midniteoyl]

I watch Topgear on BBC and a lot of the time cars get seem to get twice the mileage they do here. Even the cars with 400hp get good mileage.

This Jag hits 60MPH in 4.8 with a topspeed of 171MPH. It gets 33USMPG.
Jaguar F-TYPE | Engines & Performance | Pricing & Specs

The US version get 27MPG. That is not twice as much but still 6MPG.

2014 Jaguar F-TYPE, F-TYPE S, F-TYPE V8 S Specificationss | Jaguar USA

Again, the EU uses different mpg tests than the EPA

 

[3930dave]

Again, the EU uses different mpg tests than the EPA

And, don't forget, modern engine and (auto) trani design being what it is, changing fueling and shift points is just a matter of twiddling a few digital bits/bytes.

Wouldn't explain huge differences, but when you program a USA engine/trani for great stoplight performance, the NRG has to come from somewhere.

Rgds, D.

 

[3930dave]

Nope. Which is kinda the issue. Government has "embraced" hybrids. The die is cast there.

VW went on record against hybrids, mostly because they figure that hybrid mileage can be had cheaper and less complex with diesel. They have, however brought out a hybrid this year just to compete in the market because they "had" to.

If somebody saw your comment 35 years ago, they'd think it was concerning some Woody Allen futuristic dystopian comedy.

Did you vote for that ? I didn't. So much for democracy.

Rgds, D.