English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

14 answers

add more detail please, a modern 2.0i is far more economical than a 1.8 carb engine. Newer engines are far more economical to run regardless of the .2 cubic. If it is not a large car you are looking at and need it to be cheap to run look at a smaller engine size.

2006-11-11 00:11:57 · answer #1 · answered by camshy0078 5 · 2 0

It really depends on which 1.8 and 2.0 litre engines you are comparing. Firstly, are the manufacturers the same? Secondly, are the engines from the same family? (Toyota has at least 6 current engine families). Thirdly, are the engines from the same generation within the families? (Some engines are improved year on year, so a 2003 model may have better MPG than a 2002 model with the same engine). There are so many factors to consider it's scary. Don't always believe manufacturers MPG figures either. It's not their fault as the goverment test the vehicles and tell the manufacturers what they can quote. The goverment test is unrealistic as one of the tests has the car starting in an ambient temp of 20'C and taking THREE minutes to accelerate to 30mph!

2006-11-11 11:20:52 · answer #2 · answered by Bandit600 5 · 0 0

Generally, the 1.8 is more economical. Often there are tax advantages associated with this, to prove the point.
A lot depends on the power to weight ratio - if you put a 1.4 or 1.6 in instead, the fuel consumption could then increase, as the weight would be too much for the power available, making the engine work harder...

2006-11-11 08:12:18 · answer #3 · answered by Byjiar 3 · 1 0

Depends, some 2 litre engines are more economical than some 1.8s, and vice versa.

2006-11-11 08:11:31 · answer #4 · answered by Ray P 4 · 2 0

Depends who's engine, what you use it for, the old Rover O series was more economical as a 2000 than a 1700, but it was designed as a 2000 and bodged into a 1700,
If you want economy get a Diesel.

2006-11-11 08:21:48 · answer #5 · answered by "Call me Dave" 5 · 0 0

hi johngrand i know for a fact with vauxhall engines 1.8 is the motor of choice i have a 1.4 astra and would like to transplant the 1.8 but for health reasons i cant do it but i will later if i get fitter 2.0 need s more fuel tio be that bit more punchier best of luck

2006-11-11 08:25:07 · answer #6 · answered by not a mused 3 · 0 0

it depends on the model. the new 1.8 honda civic is as economical as a 1.5 engine giving you a return on average of 44mpg. but gives you the power of a 2 litre .

2006-11-11 08:09:54 · answer #7 · answered by mum 1 · 3 0

2 litre is 2000 cc 1.8 is 1800 cc

2006-11-11 11:38:30 · answer #8 · answered by ? 7 · 0 0

Size is not important! Fuel efficiency is related to the displacement of the engine but there are much more important factors which determine overall fuel effciency for a vehicle or engine. Most countries have labeling requirements for fuel efficiency which allow you to compare vehicles by fuel economy or efficiency.

2006-11-11 09:12:08 · answer #9 · answered by Steven M 1 · 1 0

I don`t think there is enough of a difference in size to affect the economy ether way. I would say the weight of the automobile it is in that would make the difference. More weight more fuel.

2006-11-11 08:16:25 · answer #10 · answered by bill a 5 · 0 1

fedest.com, questions and answers