250 Auto Fuel Consumption

[Richwood]

When I first bought my 220d fuel consumtion was an issue as I do about 20k miles per year. I would say this is the major consideration of all IS buyers as 70% are now diesel models on the road.

I must say after my Saab 93 Tdi i was disapointed with the consumption and this has been covered countless times in this bb. The main criticism is the "official" figures are 44 mpg and I was getting 40 mpg - hence disapointed.

Having written the car off in a M5 pile up with a lorry in March I bought a 250 auto because of the fab engine. Now I am averaging 35 mpg "official" figures 31 mpg - hence v. happy.

I drove back from Oxford to Derby 112 miles and averaged 42.5 mpg. Ok I drove no more than 75 mph.

My point here is my expectation was so much higher with the 220d and it disapointed as a result and lower with the 250 auto but it exceeded expectations. But they are both great cars. The official figures are biased towards fleet/corporate purchasers so if youare an individual purchaser go for 250 auto every time. You won't be disapointed. IMHO

By the way if you are buying a windsor blue IS 220d black interior, 6 months old, 4500m, with Parrot Hands free kit fitted above right vent and in Rep of Ireland probably my old one rebuilt!! beware!

[neal]

When I first bought my 220d fuel consumtion was an issue as I do about 20k miles per year. I would say this is the major consideration of all IS buyers as 70% are now diesel models on the road.

I must say after my Saab 93 Tdi i was disapointed with the consumption and this has been covered countless times in this bb. The main criticism is the "official" figures are 44 mpg and I was getting 40 mpg - hence disapointed.

Having written the car off in a M5 pile up with a lorry in March I bought a 250 auto because of the fab engine. Now I am averaging 35 mpg "official" figures 31 mpg - hence v. happy.

I drove back from Oxford to Derby 112 miles and averaged 42.5 mpg. Ok I drove no more than 75 mph.

My point here is my expectation was so much higher with the 220d and it disapointed as a result and lower with the 250 auto but it exceeded expectations. But they are both great cars. The official figures are biased towards fleet/corporate purchasers so if youare an individual purchaser go for 250 auto every time. You won't be disapointed. IMHO

By the way if you are buying a windsor blue IS 220d black interior, 6 months old, 4500m, with Parrot Hands free kit fitted above right vent and in Rep of Ireland probably my old one rebuilt!! beware!

I am also impressed by fuel consumption on my 250 SE-L. My previous LS430 drank like a fish (both early & late models) I would get around 15 - 17 mpg. I drove from from Speen (Newbury) to home (Derby) last weekend and received 32mpg. Average mph was 85. Very impressed and also love the radar cruise. Goes up or down in 5mph increments. Very handy. It actually kicked down as i was doing 80mph to return to 100mph. Just ordered a rear spoiler for it too.

[Harrydavy]

When I first bought my 220d fuel consumtion was an issue as I do about 20k miles per year. I would say this is the major consideration of all IS buyers as 70% are now diesel models on the road.

I must say after my Saab 93 Tdi i was disapointed with the consumption and this has been covered countless times in this bb. The main criticism is the "official" figures are 44 mpg and I was getting 40 mpg - hence disapointed.

Having written the car off in a M5 pile up with a lorry in March I bought a 250 auto because of the fab engine. Now I am averaging 35 mpg "official" figures 31 mpg - hence v. happy.

I drove back from Oxford to Derby 112 miles and averaged 42.5 mpg. Ok I drove no more than 75 mph.

My point here is my expectation was so much higher with the 220d and it disapointed as a result and lower with the 250 auto but it exceeded expectations. But they are both great cars. The official figures are biased towards fleet/corporate purchasers so if youare an individual purchaser go for 250 auto every time. You won't be disapointed. IMHO

By the way if you are buying a windsor blue IS 220d black interior, 6 months old, 4500m, with Parrot Hands free kit fitted above right vent and in Rep of Ireland probably my old one rebuilt!! beware!

Must agree, I certainly wish i'd gone for the 250 auto!! Think flying into a pile up might be a bit dramatic to get a new one though!!

[matt555]

My chicks got the average upto 32mpg on her IS250 SE Auto - Her tank average is normally 32-33mpg. but then i ruin it

I think the average will settle down to an amazing 33mpg after a few more months.

Just for a bit of info - i manage 44 mpg out of my Grande Punto 1.9TD and that is with thrashing it everywhere lol! on a run upto Aylesbury i managed 52mpg over 3 days and 240 miles.

I would expect the 220D to return well over 45mpg?

[SiWhite]

I would expect the 220D to return well over 45mpg?

You'd be disappointed (or very bored trying to achieve it).

[Scarlet Pimpernell]

Ditto guys - I wish I could get a 250 Auto - one problem - no cash :o though I am looking again...

BMW320i (petrol) Touring hits 40-48mpg regularly on a run, and the 535d (twin Turbo) can hit 44mpg on a run averaging rapid rates too...so Lexus isn't that economical comared to the competition - even a 325i should match the IS 250 (does on paper)

[saracen]

Ditto guys - I wish I could get a 250 Auto - one problem - no cash :o though I am looking again...

BMW320i (petrol) Touring hits 40-48mpg regularly on a run, and the 535d (twin Turbo) can hit 44mpg on a run averaging rapid rates too...so Lexus isn't that economical comared to the competition - even a 325i should match the IS 250 on paper

I am actually thinking of a second hand 535d for my next car... :shutit: As well as the SC430, the RX400h, the Boxster... why oh why are there so many cars to choose from!

[Scarlet Pimpernell]

Ditto guys - I wish I could get a 250 Auto - one problem - no cash :o though I am looking again...

BMW320i (petrol) Touring hits 40-48mpg regularly on a run, and the 535d (twin Turbo) can hit 44mpg on a run averaging rapid rates too...so Lexus isn't that economical comared to the competition - even a 325i should match the IS 250 on paper

I am actually thinking of a second hand 535d for my next car... :shutit: As well as the SC430, the RX400h, the Boxster... why oh why are there so many cars to choose from!

The only thing that is disappointing on a 535d is the knobbly ride...the performance, steering, fit and finish and a Media pack with optional Headsup display are real strengths - Performance wise the car is on a par with the GS450h (slightly slower 0-60) but the massive surge of torque makes up for it...and you get a big boot...

Go drive one......

[Matus]

I started to use http://www.spritmonitor.de to compare the real consumptions. Once there is enough cars in demanded class, the statistics can show pretty nicely the real consumpton.

58 pieces of 320d E90+E91 (touring) have average of 7,18l/100km - 39,3mpg.

Unfortunately there are only 4 pieces of IS220d (including mine :D ), they have 7,41l/100km - 38,12mpg - this is not enough to have proper statistics, but anyway - on the example of 320d it's clear, that anything over 40mpg is good. In the times of EURO IV and EURO V, together with 5* NCAP, the cars are heavy. Forget the consumption over 48mpg...

PS: 6 pieces of 535d have the average 9,24 - 30,57mpg

[Scarlet Pimpernell]

Matus - you are right. However, drive the 535d on a long run - 15% town road and 85% motorway - and 40+mpg is achievable unless you thrash it - then it really drops sharply...!!

With 220d 40+ is achievable, but looking at the official figures, 45+ should be achievable. It is, but it's never easy. You hav to use the gears very carefully and try hard...On the other hand, when I tested a 320d (approx 1.5hour drive - a mix of urban and motorway total 50 odd miles) it achieved over 47 mpg according to the trip computer - with 10% over reading it was probably closer to 43mpg at worst, and I wasn't sparing the horses...so on a run like that it would have achieved 50mpg if I tried to keep it sensible...if I drive the 220d like that I would be lucky to get anywhere near 40mpg.

Back to topic - the 250 Auto on the other hand can achieve what the government figures say and actually beat them easily. So when they tested the 220d, they were lucky...or the tester/driver knew how to eek out max MPG...

The bottom line of this thread is that the 250 Auto can almost match the 220d in some conditions - which is really worrying! I never take my 220d over the speed limit unless to safely overtake, and can average a consistent 42.5mpg tank average, with 75% motorway driving. The same journey in a 250 Auto is 38mpg - as proven in a the courtesy cars. It just isn't worth having the 220d for that extra 4mpg. There are too man7y compromises, though you do get used to it...

Things have changed recently, but for ages Diesel was 5p more per litre than petrol in the UK...now they are almost the same...and I would much rather have the Auto for it's refinement

[Infinity]

Delighted with my 250 sel auto. I average 32 -34 mostly combined. My best ever was a Friday run back from

Manchester. I deliberatly did this to see what i could get. I filled up with Shell standard unleaded just before M602 then after the 165 mile run along the M62 and up the A1.

The display read 56.4mpg. I must confess i took it really easy coasted down hill and slip streamed up hills

with the AC off and mirrors folded in. But the numbers speak for themsleves. I used less than 1/4 tank.

I really dull run, but in heavy traffic you cant drive at more desireable speeds so i went for the numbers rather than speed.

Infinity...........