I’m happy with it but I usually I drive hard and round pretty hasty and I’m happy with it 
The problem i see with changing the speed limit for cars to 80MPH, with trucks going slower now than ever, and the average car driver a) ignoring the speed limit by at least 10 MPH and b) looking as far in front as the end of his radiator, the closing speed between the rear of a truck and the front of the car is going to be much greater. The average car driver does not have the neccesary skills to deal with this, and rear end shunts between cars and trucks will increase and become much more serious than now.
If they must increase the speed limit, then it needs to be policed much stronger than it is now. Heavy fines for exceeding 80 MPH, not a let off if your doing under a ton. Also, how about enforcing the highway code more, such as lane discipline and undertaking, both of which are getting much worse than ever.
New car fuel economy figures have a 56mph category, could this be the magic number? Assuming manufacturers try and make the figures look as good as possible by tuning their cars to make this speed the most efficient.
That Tiff Needell was on the radio somehow claiming the increased speed limit would be more economical than being stuck in traffic. Duh! Typical petrolhead, as if getting to the next hold-up quicker makes you more economical.
if you were to travel 40miles would travelling at 1mph use less fuel than travelling at 80mph?
Clarkson gave the if the engine is switched off argument today in the sun.
But we all know most of us realistically travel at 80 85 so it won’t make a difference plus the car that travels at 55 still will travel at 55 l.
Just wish. Truck limiters was at 60 it would make a difference. As lots of firms would still run at 52 56
When I started driving it was on pre 88 trucks and running at 60-65 was great.
bubsy06:
if you were to travel 40miles would travelling at 1mph use less fuel than travelling at 80mph?
I doubt it, if going by engine revs per distance travelled is anything to go by, though, all things being equal, you can bet that moving e.g. a Saturn V at a very slow speed is more economical (and not just because of the cost of having to brake harshly from 80) - it’s an indisputable fact that the power needed to overcome wind resistance is proportional to the cube of velocity, You wouldn’t need such a big engine to propel something at 1mph though hills might be interesting.
Not ever having read The Sun (just looked at some of the pictures on I think the third page in), I presume Clarkson is doing his usual specious thing and claiming 80mph is more economical than being stuck in traffic, as per his cronies.
For mine 50mph = 18.5mpg, 70mph = 20mpg but 90mph = 22.5 - 24mpg 
It’s built for cruising not crawling 
Admittedly at above 120 it drops like a Greek government bond 
Rob K:
kr79:
My Audi a3 2.0 tdi sits bang on 2000rpm in top gear 6th and will doo around 50mpg but if you sit at 80 it drops down to about 42mpg.
From what I can see recently as I have been looking at updating it most diesels have a six speed to drop the revs down to help fuel economy and 70 is where good economy peaks. So fuel economy arguments don’t make sense.It’s not 70. Lower than that, more like 50. At 70 there’s too much air resistance for good mpg figures. 42mpg at 80 in a 6 speed 2.0 tdi is pretty shocking
Its an Audi. Nice cars,not too clever on fuel compared to similar marques. I ran an Audi 2.0 tdi for 6 weeks as a loaner. Used a lot more diesel than my bimmer. The visits to the derv pumps became tedious.
Hi all, I run a sprinter 311 (loaded all the time 3380 kg) with fire extinguishers and equipment (ex class 1 driver and hgv mechanic, but saw the light lol), I dont do more than 60 - 65 mph and on a recent run of 1600 miles all round uk for a contract I have it returned 32.8 mpg, however I have also a mitsubishi L200 and at best it will only do 27 mpg, to run that at 80 mph on the motorway would be ringing the neck of it and I could probably watch the fuel gauge descend, so I will definatley not be doing 80 mph.