197 vs 200 consumption

[skny]

So I read a clio 200 review, stating its inner city consumption at around 12 ltrs / 100 km, and this is pretty much the same as the 197, but then the review says it can even go 5 ltrs lower outside the city..... averaging at about 9 llitres per 100 km....... gotta say, that sound fn unbelievable, anybody switched from a 197 to a 200 that could clear this up? are they really more efficient out of town, highway driving, or was this review a complete bull ???

 

[captain_caveman]

This does not answer your question but my 200 is doing 24 point something mpg at the moment and I don't do much town driving; I'm not that bothered by the low mpg as I like to hear it beep (after it is fully warmed up).

 

[MikeLYR27]

To be honest mate i think they will be the same. Maybe a little difference but minimal!!

 

[skny]

thanks for your replies, so that's all just bull, I can make it 8 litres / 100 km but then I need to drive 50 mph in 6th gear, not possible in a 197 to stand it but dont the longer gear ratios on the 200 make any difference? there should be a straight, first production 197 comparison to the latest 200 to see how they perform and how they consume in the city / motorway, I'd be glad to know...

 

[Nath]

I've only just clocked up 1,200k's so this is probably not representative but the consumption as per the display is showing better in the 200 than I got out of the 197. Just before I sold the 197 it was showing a little over 10l/100 (over several thousand k's) while the 200 is showing 9.5l/100 currently. Time will tell whether this is all down to the mix of driving but for a new tight engine that's not a bad result so far...

 

[KMB]

Over 5000 miles (calculated tank fill to tank fill) = I have 34mpg SUL average on the 200

Highest point for a full tank is 36mpg, lowest is 29mpg, mixed driving but with long motorway journeys inc.

Trip computer lies, always around 2mpg lower than reality.