I have an auto 2002 Forester that I would say is quite economical. My wife bought a five-speed manual 2004 Forester that has nearly the same peak power but is far more economical in terms of fuel consumption.
While I spend a thousand bob to Thika and back to Nairobi, she will spend Sh800. This is something I have tested myself and I know it is not tuning because I take both to Subaru Kenya for diagnostics and service. So, is a manual vehicle more fuel friendly that an auto? And if yes, why?
Yes, and for two main reasons. First is a fact that a manual gearbox allows you to short-shift, that is shift up way earlier than an auto would, like at 1,700rpm from first to second.
With an auto, the computer decides when to shift up or down, so there is a tendency for these engines to operate at higher (and racier) rpms, thus pushing up the fuel consumption.
Second is the clutch. Unless the car has an electronically operated friction clutch, most autos tend to have a power sapping fluid clutch, also called a torque converter.
It does not transmit 100 per cent of the engine torque to the transmission; there is some slippage and thus losses at the clutch. These losses translate into less mechanical efficiency and hence higher fuel consumption.
I wish to enquire about the Toyota Verossa. My friends tell me that I may have problems with it when it comes to spare parts and that I should go for Premio instead. Could you kindly advise me on this with respect to fuel consumption in both cars?
The Verossa and the Premio are not in the same class. Your friends should have referred to Mark II or Mark X, which are all similarly sized.
The Premio is a small, compact saloon with a very economical engine while the Verossa is a mid-sized semi-luxury saloon and may be performance-oriented. The bigger engines mean they cost more to fuel over a given distance compared to the Premio.
On a personal note, I do not like the Verossa’s looks. It featured prominently on my list of ugly cars.
I am planning to buy a car in January but I am not sure what car I should go for. I will mostly require the car to run work-related errands within the CBD and occasionally outside Nairobi.
With the skyrocketing fuel prices, I am keen on a car that is not “thirsty” but I also do not want something that is small and too girly (IST, Vitz — no offence meant).
I have in mind a Premio, Allion, NZE, Avensis, or a Nissan Primera. I am also torn between buying the car locally (one that has not been used on Kenyan roads) and importing. Kindly advise.
You want a small car? You want economy? And you want something not too girly? And, in the name of nation-building, you also want a locally sold unit? Forget Allion, forget Premio, forget NZE. There is a car that fits the bill exactly, though — Maruti Omni.
It is dirt cheap, even brand-new, it is small but handy (seeing as to how it is a van), and that puny 800cc engine will burn less petrol than anything else on the road, other than a motorcycle.
On the question about the handbrake sign, highlighted here some time back, it happened to my old model Ipsum too. When the handbrake was disengaged, the light would stay on. When I did a diagnosis, I found that the problem was the brake fluid lid.
Thanks for the heads up, but the lady said performance was also compromised, so my thinking was that the handbrake itself was increasing the load on the engine.
I have a 2002 Toyota Vista 4WD with a D-4 VVT-i 2000cc engine. The engine light would go on and off for a while, then stay off for months. I did a diagnosis that yielded “p1653 SCV circuit motor”.
I changed the oxygen sensor and the plugs and cleaned all the speed sensors at the wheels, but there was no improvement.
Now, the car misfires in the morning and produces smoke before attaining the operating temperature. I have also realised its consumption has gone up. I was advised by my mechanic to use synthetic oil for service. What could be the problem and where can I get help?
SCV is the swirl control valve and I think it needs replacing. This is one of the weak points of a D-4 engine. I do not know anybody who can open one up and put it back together. Pole.
I drive an automatic 1.6 litre 2002 VW Golf Mark 4 (station wagon). Unfortunately, I have never driven other cars so whenever people ask me about its consumption compared to other vehicles, I am at a loss. Could you please clarify or provide insight into the following issues.
1. What, in your view, is the normal consumption in km/litre for a 1600 cc vehicle (whether Mitsubishi, VW, or Toyota) in peak traffic (Nairobi situation) and on the highway?
2. When I suddenly slow down, like when approaching a bump or something is crossing the road, accelerating afterwards is problematic, the vehicle behaves as if it is in neutral gear. But if you step on the acceleration pad once then release and then step on it again, it picks up well. Please unravel this for me.
3. When driving, mainly on the highway, at gears three to five, should the rev indicator settle at, say, less than 2,000? How should the rev counter ideally behave when driving? Does the consumption of the vehicle change when the rev counter is higher?
Finally, it may be a good idea for you to lead a forum for motorists to exchange experiences. For instance, you can organise a forum for Mitsubishi Galant owners on where they physically meet and share experiences such as how they rectified a particular problem.
1. In traffic, expect anywhere between five and nine kilometres per litre, depending on the severity of the gridlock. On the highway, anything from 14 kpl upwards is possible, with as much as 24 kpl for a diesel engine of that size.
2. Is your car automatic? If so, then the gearbox is what we call “lethargic” or slow thinking; it takes some time before it realises that it should have geared down by that point. If not, another suspicion could be a jamming throttle pedal, so much so that the first gentle prod does nothing, so releasing and depressing it again resolves the jam, allowing it to move as it should. Just a theory.
3. Ignore the rev counter. How does the car feel and sound? If it stutters, judders, or sounds like it is about to stall, the revs are too low or the road speed is too low for that gear and you should downshift. If the engine sounds belligerent, high strung, “shouty”, or if the needle points towards the red line, shift up or ease off the throttle, you are almost over-revving the car. And yes, at higher rpms (4,000 plus), the fuel consumption is a little bit higher than at mid-level revs (2000-3500 rpm).
Finally, visit www.carbaraza.com to start a discussion topic — physical meetings will call for a venue, an announcement and, knowing Africans, refreshments will be expected. In other words, non-refundable costs. So I prefer the Internet.
I am interested in purchasing a mini-van and I am inclined towards a Nissan Serena 1990cc, but everyone I know advises that I should get the Noah instead. I am sorry, but I think Toyotas are a bit over-rated. Would you kindly compare the two vehicles in terms of consumption, road handling, parts, and anything else that you may find useful, especially for female drivers?
Yeah, the people’s faith and belief in Toyotas is damn near religious in intensity, and for good reason. Count how many cars you see and express the number of Toyotas in that group as a percentage and you will see what I am talking about.
The Serena, if we are to go by reputation, has an ugly ancestry — one of the earlier models (late ’90s) earned the dubious honour of being the slowest accelerating new car on sale (at the time), taking a calendar-filling 19 seconds to clock 100 km/h from rest.
Later versions are, of course, better than that, but the damage has already been done. There is a new version out (2012), but I doubt this is the car you intend to buy.
Consumption should be broadly similar but the Serena may edge the Toyota out slightly, but nothing that cannot be corrected with a small adjustment in driving attitude.
Handling is a mostly redundant characteristic in vans (I do not see you oversteering a Serena on purpose) but maybe the Toyota takes it here.
Parts and service also go to the Toyota; there are plenty around, so mechanics have been practising a lot and dealers bring in spares in droves because of the ready market.
So, against my better judgement, I would say go for the Toyota if you want a cautious approach. Go for the Serena if you have a pioneering spirit; who knows, you might start a fad like someone did with the Galant some years back.
I am planning to buy a Toyota Cami. Is it friendly to a low -lass earner and does it have different ccs? What are its general advantages and disadvantages? Where would be the best place to buy one?
It is very friendly to a low-class earner — cheap to buy, cheap to run, and will rarely break down (it is also called Daihatsu Terios). I know it is 1300cc, but there could be a 1.5 somewhere in the line-up.
Advantages: It is small and, therefore, easy to park and not too thirsty. It can also do 85 per cent of the off-road tricks that a Land Rover Defender can. Disadvantages: It is bloody uncomfortable, 100 km/h plus on the highway is more dangerous and nerve-wracking than an afternoon as a matador, and the small size means you will be getting pretty intimate with your passengers.