poor fuel consumption

BX Tech talk
User avatar
DavidRutherford
BX Digit man!
Posts: 2706
Joined: Wed May 18, 2005 5:07 pm
Location: Placing comments on YouTube.

Post by DavidRutherford »

I see your point, but the general consensus is that the 16 manual will achieve 40mpg (as yours does), whereas the 16 auto will only achieve high 20's. Not unlike the situation with a 19D. Manual will do mid 50's mpg, whereas the auto gets high 30's.

I seem to remember Stuart Hedges mentioning that Snoopy, the MK1 16 auto was remarkably heavy on fuel too.
this might be a signature
User avatar
Tim Leech
Over 2k
Posts: 15565
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 11:12 am
Location: Derbyshire
My Cars: Various
x 141

Post by Tim Leech »

I must have been lucky then lol. The ZF box seems to be regarded as one of the best of its time but I imagine the torque converter is what uses the juice, hence why modern manufacturers are going for these new twin clutch direct shift gearboxes nowadays to get the emissions down etc.
Lots of Motors, mostly semi broken....
kiwi
Over 2k
Posts: 2380
Joined: Sat Jan 13, 2007 10:20 am
Location: Nouvelle Zealande
x 4

Post by kiwi »

Add to what I gave earlier I found some records for the 1600cc Manuals I had in the UK and 28mpg was my average with town driving around Plymouth and its outskirts on a long run to london via the A303 did get 38mpg in the 19GT but that had a weber replacement.
1991 BX19 TZS 04/01/91 (Deceased)
1990 BX19 TRS 27/10/89 (Reborn)
1992 BX19 TXD (Ex UK - K 744 SDF) 15/06/92
1990 BX19 TZS Auto 06/11/1989
1992 BX TZD Turbo Estate (Ex UK) 1/07/91
Post Reply