V40 mpg

[denecaster]

I used to own a Honda CR-V. It was a very comfortable, very reliable car, but the mpg was disappointing and, after its 97000 miles, it had started to run a bunch of little niggles that eventually made me think I need something less expensive.

The car tax was also a bit stiff - it rose to £275 a year this April.

So I looked around and settled on a 2015 64 plate V40 R-design. It's also a decent car, but it's a bit bumpy (sporty suspension, I suppose) and I'm also getting nowhere near the figures I should supposedly get.

Now, I know it's a sporty version, but...I looked on Autotrader, and the official figures as quoted on there were tax was nothing and the combined mpg should be over 70.

I don't drive like a hooligan, never have. I know everyone says that, but the official combined mpg for the CR-V was 41, and I used to get 44 on average.

So I thought with the tax savings and supposed 70+mpg, the V40 would save me a serious amount of dosh.

But so far I'm lucky to be getting over 50mpg combined.

That's a hell of a difference. There's no way my driving has changed that much, and it's made me really disappointed with the car.

Any ideas? Is it down to Volvo telling porkies in the same way Volkswagen got caught doing a few years back, and I've fallen for it? Or is it something else?

[Tannaton]

Whilst it's the sporty version, the engines are the same as the normal versions.

You don't say which engine you have - diesel, petrol, 1.6, 2.0 ? D2, T3 D4?

[denecaster]

Sorry, you're right, my apologies.

I have the 2.0 D4.

According to Autotrader, the running costs should be -
Urban 67.3mpg
Extra urban 78.5mpg
Combined 74.3mpg.

The tax is correct - I paid nothing at all, as it's supposedly less than 100g/km CO2 emissions - but as for mpg, I'm not getting anywhere close to those figures.

[Kev0607]

What kind of miles are you doing? Local runs, long journeys?

[denecaster]

Both.

I'll do occasional short trips down to the shops, but most of my mileage is done on my trip to work, which is a mix of country roads, dual carriageways and motorways.

Overall, though they're the same as I was doing in the CR-V - same trips, same roads, same traffic, same style of driving.

But in the Honda I was getting better than official figures, in the V40 way less.

My point is, we all know the official figures aren't accurate, but are they really that far out that in one car, I'm better than official, in the other way worse?

[Kev0607]

Originally Posted by denecaster

Both.

I'll do occasional short trips down to the shops, but most of my mileage is done on my trip to work, which is a mix of country roads, dual carriageways and motorways.

Overall, though they're the same as I was doing in the CR-V - same trips, same roads, same traffic, same style of driving.

But in the Honda I was getting better than official figures, in the V40 way less.

My point is, we all know the official figures aren't accurate, but are they really that far out that in one car, I'm better than official, in the other way worse?

Have a look here;

https://www.honestjohn.co.uk/realmpg/volvo/v40-2012/d4

It appears the D4 mpg figures are very optimistic.