Official Fuel Economy Thread (formerly Highway economy).

[team_v]

I can average 8l/100km on the highway but it hasn't been properly worn in yet.
Actual average of normal driving is around 10.5 at the moment as i keep testing out APR stage 1.

[clip]

Went for a drive up to Gladstone and back over the long weekend - just over 1000k's all up. Economy on the way up according to the MFD was 5.5l/100km, and 5.8 on the way back -

why on earth would anyone buy one of those horidly expensive and production poluting hybrid things when you can get that sort of economy from a diesel that has some performance!

[mojo]

Just worked out my economy based on the fuel pump litres and the trip meter, and it's 6.4l/100k. I would guess the MFD figure would be more accurate?

[jimbomort]

Mojo, no actual is what you get, MFD is an approximation. Of course actual requires filling to same point in tank, accuracy of pumps etc, so can be a bit out. Your calc looks a bit high relative to the MFD in my experience.

Ours is a manual TSI. Testing over 5-6 tanks, has shown that the MFD in ours is consistently about 0.2-0.3 l/100 under actual (ie so slightly optimistic). Your calc looked at least 0.6 more than your MFD (wasn't sure if 6.4 was av for whole trip or just the return leg).

You should be able to get into the mid 5's with a manual TDI on hwy trips. At the speed limit (100) without air con, I have often got into the high 6's (ie 6.7/. with our TSI per MFD and occassionally lower. Driven very economically I think even the TSIs could get into the high 5's and TDI's I would think into the high 4's. However by very economically I mean travelling at a steady 85-90, and no air con, not practical for hwy driving or long trips. Travelling at a steady 60klm/hr in 5th might get even lower, but that is nuts.

There is no doubt the TDIs are very economical and the TSIs are quite good too considering - enjoy

[Transporter]

Just a word of caution on TDI driving for the best fuel economy all the time, especially the manual ones!

Remember that the dual mass flywheel (DMF) doesn't like to be driven in low revs in highest gear.
VNT Turbocharger needs good 3/4 - full throttle once a day to keep variable vanes clean (they can seize-stop moving when driven seductively).

Any of the above will cost you a lot more than you saved on fuel.

[team_v]

Also driving off boost can produce excess soot buildup in the DPF which is quite costly to repalce if it clogs up.
Running on boost heats up the exhaust gasses enough to purge the soot from the exhaust.

[mojo]

My "actual" figures were for the whole trip. Even at 6.4 I'm pretty happy, and based on jimbomorts observations maybe it was actually a bit lower than that.

I'm sure I could have achieved better figures. We had the A/C on the entire trip, and I very rarely put it into 6th - I tried to keep it above 2000rpm most of the time.

[NZTiguan]

My "actual" figures were for the whole trip. Even at 6.4 I'm pretty happy, and based on jimbomorts observations maybe it was actually a bit lower than that.

I'm sure I could have achieved better figures. We had the A/C on the entire trip, and I very rarely put it into 6th - I tried to keep it above 2000rpm most of the time.

You would certainly get better economy in 6th and I understand the most economic revs for the diesel Tig is around 1750. I regularly get (actual not mfd BUT mfd on mine is usually within .1) 6.6l/100k on a Trip with the auto but that's on NZ hilly and windy roads, air con on, often 4 up and running at around 105 to 110 kph (last trip average speed shown on mfd at the end of the day was 93 kph).

Cheers

[tig_one]

I'm driving a 2010, manual TDI Tig and getting low 6's going to work and mid 5's on long trips.
The car is never allowed to "lug" (low speed / high gear) and the run to work has about 20km of motorway in it.
Very happy with the performance and the economy.
Cheers,

[jcubed]

2.0 TDi Tiptronic Economy

Hi All,

Me again.

What one should bear in mind in doing economy comparisons between different countries, is that the national speed limit in Australia is 110 km/h if I recall correctly, 75 mph in the UK and a similar 120km/h here in South Africa.

Then also the accuracy of the VW speedometer - which is 5% optimistic at 120 km/h, and the 12% optimistic fuel consumption reading of the trip computer.

So I used to drive with a Garmin Nuvi 5000 on my dash on long trips, driving at a TRUE 124km/h. By this time the speedo indicates in excess of 130 km/h, and I still have a 6km/h leeway prior to being pulled over for speeding.

Over 48000 km, I have averaged 12 km/l AT THE PUMP, with the trip computer consistently indicating around 13.5 km/l.

So i.t.o. fuel consumption, SA should be the worst, followed by the UK - which is pretty flat and mostly at sea level, and then Down Under for the lower speed limit.

For those that have followed my other posts, the Freelander 2 was the correct choice. Can't talk fuel consumption here, as the 3.2l i6 delivers 12-13l/100km. But then, there is no substitute for cubic inches, and fuel remains a bargain at any price - as long as it's cheaper than whiskey...

[borbor1313]

My best ever on the inaccurate MFD was 5.1l/100km. Done with very gentle accelaration,timing traffic lights,coasting down hills.Never have been able to get it below the magic 5 so i ve given up . Now I can just thrash it and still get 7-7.5l/100km so very happy..... TDI of course

[jcubed]

Hi borbor1313,

I agree, the deliberate driving for economy - at times arching your back to see if the car would not coast up to the stop sign without touching the accelerator - takes all the fun out of driving.

Seeing your realtime consumption on the Tiguan MFD is actually a deterrent to driving with enthusiasm. So I recommend displaying something else there .

[jimbomort]

Hi All,
What one should bear in mind in doing economy comparisons between different countries, is that the national speed limit in Australia is 110 km/h if I recall correctly, 75 mph in the UK and a similar 120km/h here in South Africa.

Then also the accuracy of the VW speedometer - which is 5% optimistic at 120 km/h, and the 12% optimistic fuel consumption reading of the trip computer.

.........the Freelander 2 was the correct choice. Can't talk fuel consumption here, as the 3.2l i6 delivers 12-13l/100km. But then, there is no substitute for cubic inches, and fuel remains a bargain at any price - as long as it's cheaper than whiskey...

Jcubed of course that assumes all drive at the speed limit, simply driving at 10 below speed limit instead of 10 above can make a big diff in any country. Your point I think is that its important to know the speed at which economy is at.

Maybe the TDIs are diff or SA models, but our TSI Tigs MFD fuel reading is within <5% of actual (that confirmed over at least 6-7 tanks). Optimistic sure, but no where near 12% in our case.

No substitute for Cubic inches? Give me the 2.0 TSI motor with the APR upgrade anyday. A fantastic motor and with plenty of grunt down low and over a wide rev range. The R32 golf and its demise shows more cubes is not always more.

Driving for economy no fun? A challenge as good as any other and makes for a relaxing drive and perhaps even better drivers, very much in the interest of the driver then to anticipate and maintain traffic flow as much as possible. Anyway each to his own, but as much as I enjoy a fang, I see no point to driving hard all the time (no doubt Sharkie would disagree), dont get anywhere any quicker, just more fuel, more emissions etc.

Anyway some different perspectives and experiences

[jcubed]

Hi Jimbomort,

Just to put matters straight - I am not supporting hammering a car as being an alternative to economical driving. I am quite a slow-couch myself, trying to maintain my speed but not rushing off from each traffic light to reach it.

It is nice however, knowing that the power is there when you need it in an emergency situation.

Regarding your point -

No substitute for Cubic inches? Give me the 2.0 TSI motor with the APR upgrade anyday. A fantastic motor and with plenty of grunt down low and over a wide rev range. The R32 golf and its demise shows more cubes is not always more.

I have included a link to the latest Toyota Auris advert being screened here. Guess who represents the normally aspirated vehicle .

YouTube - New Toyota Auris X Sport Advert

JJJ

[Sharkie]

.... Can't talk fuel consumption here, as the 3.2l i6 delivers 12-13l/100km. But then, there is no substitute for cubic inches, and fuel remains a bargain at any price - as long as it's cheaper than whiskey....

As jimbomort said .... cubic inches mean nothing these days ..... you'd be much better off in a APR 2.0TSI Tiguan both from a power and a fuel economy perspective.

The 3.2 Freelander makes 171kw and 317NM of torque .... at highveld levels you'd lose 18% of that due to the altitude .....

An APR TSI Tiguan makes 189kw and 402NM of torque ..... more than 350NM of that is available from 1750rmin to 5000rmin ... imagine how that would go towing anything .... and at highveld altitude loses only 9% of power ....

So in your situation on the highveld you'd be looking at 140kw & 260NM from the Freelander and 178kw & 365NM from the Tiguan with that massive flat torque curve ....

Shouldn't take an engineer to figure out which 1 will far outperform & out tow the other in all but the roughest conditions ..... and as a bonus a TSI will return highway consumption in the 6-7l/100km bracket on the highway ....

Tiguan for the win ..... again ....