[Matt12345]

These figure aren't going to make happy reading for the member who though he might get near 54mpg.

My apologies (this is an edit) I didn't realise that it's the same person, but 42 to 44 mpg is pretty good!

There really should be something done regarding the figures manufacturers provide, even though most know them to be widely inaccurate.
Although Honda seem to think the figures they provide are nearer real world values than others, according to a salesmen?

 

[Matt12345]

I bought this car because the specifications state that the car does 54mpg which I think is fine. At the moment, Im getting about 38mpg and that is not urban driving which is a far cry from 54mpg.
Unfortunately you do not get to test drive a car for a week so you go by what reviews you read by the manufacturer

You are never going to see 54mpg, not unless it's motorway driving at 56mph down hill.:lol:

 

[Matt12345]

DSB3008 if you are interested in fuel consumption (as you seem to be) then why did you buy a tall powerful petrol car with an automatic gearbox in the first place?

My manual 308 hatchback 1.6 BlueHDI DIESEL regularly averages 69mpg+ and does 700+ miles per tank of fuel Also, it can do 0-60 in less than 10 secs, so what's not to like?

It emits only 84mg/km of CO2 (major greenhouse gas) and no more Nitrous oxide gases than most modern petrol cars with 120bhp engines

So why do we all tow the line in thinking we need an SUV & Diesels must be bad?
+How many miles do you intend doing per year?

Autos are no less efficient nowadays.
Petrol to diesel obviously are.

For the OP 38 to 40mpg seems the norm. On a 1.2 on a car this size it seems reasonable.

I the quoted figures are nonsense, for all manufacturers some manage to exaggerate more than others.

My current car a MINI (5 door) although more powerful/faster and similar curb weight ( probably more ) returns 35 mpg and this is driven quite hard.

The 1.2 is essentially a little underpowered.

Things will improve by a few mpg with 15K plus miles on it