Post ONLY Your Fuel Economy Figures

[BlackSuperb]

To stay sort of on topic. I downloaded an iPhobe App called Accufuel (cost all of $1.20 or so) which seems to have a nice interface for keeping fuel consumption records and it even shows L/100 Km if you want.

Road Trip Lite does a similar job and is free.

Sorry, off topic post.

[gregozedobe]

well... i have diesel... hpw about getting around 2 litres per 100km i have proofs

Before I accuse you of BS I'd like to see not only your "proofs" but a detailed description of vehicle, mods, distance covered, operating conditions and how the consumption was calculated (the figures the MFD claims can't be considered accurate as they are almost always optimistic, sometimes by up to 25% in the case of my Transporter).

I have gotten some fabulous consumption figures on long downhill runs, and on the flat I can squeeze into the mid 4l/100km territory with my Transporter if I sit on 80kmh, unfortunately there is a very real chance of being rear-ended by an inattentive "cruise-controlller", so I don't do it these days (also it is extremely boring and takes way too long to get anywhere).

In my Octavia I have way too much fun enjoying the acceleration and cornering it does so well to be worried about fuel consumption figures (mostly short trips around town, so usually in double figures, on trips it is a lot better).

[apom]

I was bored at the traffic lights so I tried a little experiment. I turned the AC off and watched the l/hr change. After trying it a couple of times I now know that it costs 40 cents/hour to run the AC (based on $1.20/lite for diesel).
At 20,000km per year with an average speed of 60km/hr and having the AC on for 50% of the time it will cost you $66.00 or somewhere around 50 litres of fuel per year.

That's today's fuel/cost saving tip.

But But But... you haven't taken into account the extra deodorant one must buy to compensate for sitting in the traffic and sweating. Additionally, you havent taken into account the health care bills one would have to face as I have the window down and inhale the diesel fumes from the guy next too me.

Wait it gets worse, now I turn up to a business meeting sweating and stinking like diesel and then lose credibility and business!! Think I would happily hand over the $66

[K1W1]

But But But... you haven't taken into account the extra deodorant one must buy to compensate for sitting in the traffic and sweating. Additionally, you havent taken into account the health care bills one would have to face as I have the window down and inhale the diesel fumes from the guy next too me.

Wait it gets worse, now I turn up to a business meeting sweating and stinking like diesel and then lose credibility and business!! Think I would happily hand over the $66

Actually I know people are joking but I did.
I assumed that the AC was only on 50% of the time. Maybe that 50% happens to be day time driving and the 50% with the AC off is night time. I guess I should also have qualified the original statement by saying that I live in Melbourne and often the heater is required not the AC.

[samogonochka]

I was going down the hill - truth - around wollongong, but in 5th gear, with a/c on, foot off the pedal, and i was going around 80 in 60 zone.... i couldn't believe it myself, so i took number of pics of the display
temperature was around 22, 2 people in the car... as i mentioned before i have octy 2008 since jan 2009, 1.9 TDI, manual, already done over 20K.
the road wasn't just flat downhill, it was serpentine type, and do believe me as I enjoy my ride as well, quite often leaving other cars behind me (sometimes at costs of speeding fines ;-(

[Transporter]

I was going down the hill - truth - around wollongong, but in 5th gear, with a/c on, foot off the pedal, and i was going around 80 in 60 zone.... i couldn't believe it myself, so i took number of pics of the display
temperature was around 25, 2 people in the car... as i mentioned before i have octy 2008 since jan 2009, 1.9 TDI, manual, already done over 20K.
the road wasn't just flat downhill, it was serpentine type, and do believe me as I enjoy my ride as well quite often leaving other cars behind me (at costs of speeding fines ;-(

That somehow doesn't count.
If, you would've switch A/C off your fuel consunmption down the hill and foot off the accelerator would be 0L/100km.

[K1W1]

The pictures that you posted are all over a 2km distance.
I too can get 2.6l/100km but imo a 5km run downhill run with a 300m drop in altitude from our house to the railway station doesn't really count as typical running. What is your average over a whole tank?

[dazag]

Bring up the No.2 "overall fuel consumption" page ( Top right corner it shows a 1, which resets every 2 hours if it's not being driven) The Number 2 page will give you an overall for the tank (if you rest the No.2 page at each refuel) or since you last manually reset it.

This is what I quote my fuel figures off - is the No.2 page as it's a more accurate reflection of my true fuel consumption.

Are people quoting their figures from the #1 or #2 readings?

So Sam, what was your consumption reading for the 914km on the trip meter?? That will be more accurate then the downhill run

[samogonochka]

Boys - don't get too serious of course the true consumption is a bit higher - but that was first time when i had this reading, the minimum before was around 4l/100km... On average - if mostly driven on highway - its 5.5-5.8, but in city - its 6.5-6.8... quite often i drive with family behind - so car is full...

[selurs]

Oh, be nice to sam...err, whatever that name is...if we go by that logic I can claim the 6.7L/100kms my RS TSI (yes, note, TSI) achieved over a 60Km journey in only its second week of life. We will not mention that a good 6 odd kms of that was downhill under engine braking (0l/100kms), and the rest was at highway speeds. I just liked the almost-diesel-like look of that. Of course, the next day, I accelerated hard, and registered a journey of around 11l/100kms, but that too shall go unmentioned

[gregozedobe]

Bring up the No.2 "overall fuel consumption" page ( Top right corner it shows a 1, which resets every 2 hours if it's not being driven) The Number 2 page will give you an overall for the tank (if you rest the No.2 page at each refuel) or since you last manually reset it.

Memory [2] will also automatically reset itself after 99hrs 59mins, 9999 miles (or kms ? ) or 999 litres, whichever happens soonest.

Note that the trip computer fuel consumption figure tends to be a bit optimistic compared with actual usage. The fill to fill method will be more accurate, especially when averaged over several tankfulls.

[Tezzwokka]

I was going to start a new thread but I think it will be OK to use this one as it's fuel consumption related.

So, my RS has a sticker on the fuel flap saying use 95RON fuel which I have been doing by getting it at my local Safeway servo with a discount as it was convenient and I figured should have fresh fuel since it's so popular. Maybe not.

Anyway, I had an old shell discount docket for some reason and the tank was almost empty, so I thought I'd try out a tank of V-power to see if it made any difference. Wow, it sure did, almost immediately. These cars are much more sensitve to fuel than others I've had. A quick start from the lights now ends up with lots of wheelspin and the traction control light flashing like mad, and it runs smoother with much less hesitation from take-off with the DSG.

After this I did a look through the fuels and lubricants section of this forum which confirms that 98 RON is the way to go for increased performance AND better fuel economy, at least in the older models. Shell is not well thought of but it worked in my case, but now I'have to try out the other brands. I will have a good opportunity as I'm going on a long trip - 4000+km - next month and will do a non-scientific comparison and post it here.

I'm beginning to think that the lower octane rating has been applied so that people aren't scared off from buying Skoda's & VW's by the high cost/unavailability of fuel.

[woofy]

I still don't understand why some of the pre FL ones have both 98 (mine) and 95 as the minimum, why it seems to vary between builds I don't understand, unless people are reading them differently, mine has 98 and then in brackets (95). Our 6 has 95 and then brackets (91) for when you get desperate.

[brad]

After this I did a look through the fuels and lubricants section of this forum which confirms that 98 RON is the way to go for increased performance AND better fuel economy, at least in the older models. Shell is not well thought of but it worked in my case, but now I'have to try out the other brands. I will have a good opportunity as I'm going on a long trip - 4000+km - next month and will do a non-scientific comparison and post it here.

I've posted a number of times about the 95/98ron difference. I worked out that with the better economy, it was <$100 a year more to run 98.

I'm beginning to think that the lower octane rating has been applied so that people aren't scared off from buying Skoda's & VW's by the high cost/unavailability of fuel.

yep! Subaru did the same thing with a lot of their cars (said they were fine on 92ron when they were actually poo). Aussies are such tight-wads with fuel

[PROJET - L]

I was going to start a new thread but I think it will be OK to use this one as it's fuel consumption related.

So, my RS has a sticker on the fuel flap saying use 95RON fuel which I have been doing by getting it at my local Safeway servo with a discount as it was convenient and I figured should have fresh fuel since it's so popular. Maybe not.

Anyway, I had an old shell discount docket for some reason and the tank was almost empty, so I thought I'd try out a tank of V-power to see if it made any difference. Wow, it sure did, almost immediately. These cars are much more sensitve to fuel than others I've had. A quick start from the lights now ends up with lots of wheelspin and the traction control light flashing like mad, and it runs smoother with much less hesitation from take-off with the DSG.

After this I did a look through the fuels and lubricants section of this forum which confirms that 98 RON is the way to go for increased performance AND better fuel economy, at least in the older models. Shell is not well thought of but it worked in my case, but now I'have to try out the other brands. I will have a good opportunity as I'm going on a long trip - 4000+km - next month and will do a non-scientific comparison and post it here.

I'm beginning to think that the lower octane rating has been applied so that people aren't scared off from buying Skoda's & VW's by the high cost/unavailability of fuel.

Not sure if I should answer this ( it does relate to fuel usage though).

Wife put 95 in the car on first refill after getting it.
Next day it was like driving with the hand brake on.
That afternoon I went and bought some octane booster
and give it half a bottle (almost full tank).
Whoosh it was back to life after only 25kms or so.
They are fast learners (1.8TSI in my case), and LOVE higher octane fuel.
It would be interesting to see the result of Octane booster added to a tank of 98 to see if there would be any positve result.