Thread: Saab advertising incorrect fuel economy figures on car advert

I purchased a Saab last year, specifically for commuting. Therefore the fuel economy figures heavily influenced my decision making on what car to buy.

The original car advert states the wrong fuel economy figures. My car has a performance upgrade on the engine management system. This was stated on the advert. Yet the MPG figures are for a normal engine. This means that the car's fuel economy doesnt even come close to what Saab have advertised.

I was only aware of this after buying the car and spending some time investigating why my fuel economy was so poor. I managed to speak to the engine upgrade company and obtain the real MPG figures. There is a BIG difference.

I am very angry because I would not of bought the car if I'd of been presented with the correct MPG figures.


I have written to Saab Great Britain, but have not had any response back.


The problem is, I love the car, and dont want to get rid of it, regardless of its poor fuel economy.

But I still think that Saab should have their knuckles wrapped for what is essentially false advertising. Whether it be by accident or not. As they have sold a car based on false fuel economy figures.

I am keen to ensure this doesnt happen to anyone else. I wonder if there are other car manufacturers out there doing the same.

I would like to escalate this, as Saab have not responded, what would be my next step ? The Department Of Trade and Industry ?

Any advice would be appreciated.

Similar Threads:

• More Fuel Economy? Redex??
• Use car advert not accurate...any rights?
• Used car not as described in advert

They all do it! the consumption figures are based on goverment and EU guidelines for comparison only, and do not form part of any implied specifiaction or contract or part of the conditions of sale.
The test are carried out to strict rules so they are comparable and do not reflect road conditions or any driving style. They are conducted in a Lab on a rolling road with various bits not on the car and using a run in ( used engine ). Also not all models are tested they are allowed to interpelate between models and engines.

yeah, I've had that response from the Saab online customer service website. And yes, its out of order if they arent reflecting realistic and acheivable consumption figures.

If that isnt annoying enough. In my case I have a Saab 9-5 1.9Tid Sport with a Hirsch Engine Upgrade.

But the fuel consumption figures advertised are for a bog standard 1.9Tid.


Which are even more inaccurate. Surely theres a case there of false advertising ?

They have to publish figures its an EU requirement, not manufacturers.

yes, I realise that. But if they have published consumption figures for the wrong model of car, then surely thats false advertising ?

you say your car has an engine upgrade, i take it this is to give it more performance. therefore you obviously want your car to go faster- this unfortunately does not go hand in hand with fuel economy. to get any where near the manufacturers figures you need to drive so carefully it is unbelievable, wellying about won,t help at all.

read my previous posts.

They advertised the fuel consumption figures for the normal engine. Not the figures for the saab approved hirsh upgraded engine.

So regardless of how I drive, they have put the wrong consumption figures on their advert. Whether unintentional or not, surely its false advertising.


And yes, I do realise that more performance comes at a cost.

I did a test back in August, after filling up with BP Diesel Ultimate, resetting the trip computer, switching off the aircon and every other electrical system in the car, and also coasting with the foot on the clutch at every oppurtunity, I was still only briefly able to reach the combined MPG of 41mpg. Which is ludicrous, because you simply cannot drive a car like that.

but you did briefly reach the figure quoted, therefore technicaly the vehcle is capable of reching that figure. a manufacturer- especially with a diesel- is going to quote the absolute highest figure they can achieve, as it is a sales point.

no, I reached the COMBINED 41 mpg figure, whilst free wheeling over 50% everywhere over long distances, with no air con, in perfect weather conditions, whilst using more expensive diesel to achieve better fuel economy.

City Driving published figure is 37mpg.
Long Distance Driving published figure is 56mpg !!!!!!!!

If I drive the car sedately and in normal driving conditions I get 31mpg.

So you can see, that the car can only manage the average MPG, only in exceptional circumstances.


But all this is irrelevant. You seem to fail to grasp the basic issue here. Which is the fuel economy figures that they published are incorrect. They are for a standard engine, not a remapped one.

How many times do I have to explain it to you ?

hirsch website seems to give the fuel economy figures for the modded vehicles.

"Fuel comsumption figures are quoted to help with a purchase decision"

And NO, you DONT understand the point I am making at all. The MPG figures advertised were for a normal 1.9Tid engine, not one with a Hirsch Upgrade. This is FALSE ADVERTISING. And my purchase decision was BASED ON INCORRECT FIGURES.

Christ almightly. Its not rocket science. Do you lot work for Saab ?


And yes, I obtained the correct MPG figures from Hirsch directly, and they differ hugely from the standard 1.9 TiD engine. They are a lot closer to the economy I am managing.. which is fine... BUT THESE FIGURES WERENT ON THE ORIGINAL ADVERT.

so you have had a dealer fitted/aftermarket upgrade although approved by saab not fitted in the factory therefore not subjcted to the eu legislation manufacturers have to follow to produce and print mpg figures for standard factory cars

or am i missing something?????

I think you're missing the OP's point.

The advert was for a particular model of Saab - the 19TiD with Hirsch upgrade, but the figures listed in the advert were for the car without the upgrade.
This is not that different from the car ads on TV which have have 'starting from £xxxx' in large print over footage of the top spec version (costing twice as much) and then a tiny disclaimer saying the headline price is for the very base model.

I can understand why the OP is annoyed, but if I were in his position, I'd have double-checked the figures with Hirsch.

LancerQRL - a performance upgrade doesn't necessarily mean worse fuel economy. I have a 9-3 with a performance ECU upgrade and get around 10-20% better mpg.

when a manufacturer makes a car- the car is designed to give the best all round performance possible, taking into account fuel economy, reliability, power, torque etc. when a upgrade is carried out it is usually a software update to the ecu and alters the original settings. this may indeed lead to a increase in fuel econmy but against a slight drop in torque maybe. as rscott101 points out if fuel econmy was a greatest desire then maybe the original op should have researched the figures a bit better.