Simple question really.

Is a less fuel efficient car less efficient even when crawling in traffic?

Would/does a 2.0 car use more fuel while sat still/crawling than a 1.0, or is the usage the same??

Obviously when traffic frees a 2.0 will drink like a fish compared to a 1.0; however if 90% of the time it's sat in traffic are the MPG figures going to be nearer each other?

Is a less fuel efficient car less efficient even when crawling in traffic?

Would/does a 2.0 car use more fuel while sat still/crawling than a 1.0, or is the usage the same??

You always need to maintain a certain fuel-air ratio in order for combustion to happen - so if you've got a larger displacement, you'll have more air so need more fuel. As to whether the difference would be noticeable - probably more so on a petrol than on a diesel.

Obviously when traffic frees a 2.0 will drink like a fish compared to a 1.0

Not necessarily - a small engine sat at high revs going 70mph could use more fuel than a large engine sat at lower revs achieving the same speed.

Yes. Some Fords display GPH when idling.

A 5.4l V8 uses about 1GPH whilst a small engined car uses about 0.2GPH

Ok let me rephrase the question

If one had a second car whose purpose was 99% commuting and is likely to spend 90% of it's journeys crawling through 10 miles of traffic once a mornng and once an evening

Is say a 2.0L petrol Seat Ibiza GTI 8v going to cost more whilst sat in that traffic than say a 1.25L Ford Fiesta ?

Is say a 2.0L petrol Seat Ibiza GTI 8v going to cost more whilst sat in that traffic than say a 1.25L Ford Fiesta ?

Yes - how much more would probably be hard to quantify as there's lots of variables involved, but as a guide you could look at the urban fuel consumption figures for each car.

Thanks Rob

I thought as much but needed it confirmed

how much more would probably be hard to quantify

Hopefully not enough to overshadow the extra fun factor available when the road is clear and the opportunity presents itself

Good question,

When we had a 2.0 Fabia ( that could out do a Mustang # ) i did a back to back test over the same route with a 1.2htp about an hour apart so same weather conditions, to get and keep to the same speeds the 1.2 had to be worked alot harder even when on the town section. Overall the 2.0 was .5mpg better.

# for older forum members

overall the 2.0 was .5mpg better.

i'll expect to take things like a king in no time them