Gerrycan

I have to mention the incredible London Marathon results. The winner Sawe in 1:59:30 and Kejelcha only 11 seconds behind. The breakdown of the results is almost beyond belief Averaging a smidge over 21 kph, the 2nd 21km in 59 minutes, the last 5km a couple of seconds faster that the fastest Parkrun registered (allowing that Parkruns are 'for fun' so distance and timing accuracy can be very 'iffy'). Apparently Sawe has been drug tested once every 3 days on average over the last few months at his own request since a few African based athletes have recently been detected taking either performance enhancing drugs or masking agents.

Both of my sport watches have accuracy issues counting my steps at work due to my wrist being stabilised when pushing product around on trolleys. So, I put one in my pocket and the other on my wrist. The wrist unit counted around 18k steps and the one in the pocket 40k steps. Similar results when I reversed the watches being worn and carried in pocket. During free walking (ie not at work) they both register near identical results. I'm still unable to work out the huge disparity in pulse count between the two units during exercise. I'd have to borrow either my son's or his wife's chest monitoring units to do this, but they both take their daily gym session monitoring very seriously. I might have a chance to borrow one when they take a family holiday to Fiji, that is if they treat it as a real holiday.

Last week I came home very late from work to find my wife had gone to bed, but ominously the car manual was left open where it references 'low coolant warning'. A small puddle of coolant under the pump confirmed that the pump replaced in early 2020 had failed again. Luckily the warning happened close to home and there was no overheating. Quoted A$2000 from the dealers and A$1700 by an VW independent specialist (halve those prices for UK pound conversion). The independent said they could do it straight away once they had confirmed the problem and sourced the parts required which usually have to be sourced from the eastern states with a couple of days delay especially with current Hormuz situation created diesel shortages. The leak was slow enough for me to drop it in on Tuesday morning on the way to work (cycled the rest) and fixed by Wednesday arvo (cycled from home to pick up) for less than A$1500 (inc our 10% goods and services tax), so well pleased. Although we have been lucky to avoid any engine damage with the failed pumps it is concerning how unreliable this part is when I consider the remote parts of Australia, we have travelled to in this car. I'm talking dirt roads and no mobile phone cover and the few other cars we meet are usually heavy duty 4WD. Might have to look at some satellite options next time we venture further afield whenever fuel is again more abundant and hopefully cheaper.

I'm no expert but thought that SCR dosing (Urea based?) was injected into the exhaust gases to reduce NOx and so would have no effect on the buildup of intake carbon deposits. I think my 12yo and 120km 1.4tsi (direct injection) is experiencing a similar issue. Car drives perfectly well but consumption at highway speeds has worsened noticeable since it was new. Not unexpected since 90% of the time the vehicle is driven short distances in an urban environment. I love the old diesels to drive but would not consider a diesel, new or old, unless I was doing a lot of long distance driving, preferably pulling a caravan .

Spoke to someone recently who describes himself as 'semi-retired from running' as he only (lol) currently does about 120km a week! He is tossing up whether to increase his training to try to get to the next Olympics! He works for a living, married and his wife is expecting their first. Puts a different perspective on the attitudes of some very entitled and overpaid professional athletes.

The run was completed in somewhat hot, humid and therefore uncomfortable conditions which forced a few stops, but it did reveal a few things. a) I am hopeless at putting a watch on a 'wrong' wrist ie using my left hand to put it on my right wrist. b) My dominant right wrist is unexpectantly smaller than my left. c) The distance measurement was pretty close at 0.02km (20 metre) variation overall, but the new unit was far faster reporting distance travelled and more consistent on reporting current speed. d) The new unit reveals that the old unit was probably not accurate reporting heart rate during the run, and the new Garmin much more in line with what I would expect at my age. The average heart rate for the run varied by a considerable 20 bpm. More independent checking required, I think. e) Both units reporting of my vO2 max for the run were identical. One funny thing though is that I had set up a Garmin Connect account about 10 years ago with a cheap unit I found on the beach (I tried contacting Garmin to find the owner to no effect) and did not bother to put in my birth date but accepted the default which now thinks I'm a 36 year old. On the basis of a couple of runs the Garmin says I have a biological age of 32. Be interesting to how that stat changes when Garmin respond to my request (can't do it online myself apparently) to double my real age on the system.

I am now the 'proud' owner of two working GPS sports smart watches. After I bought a new Garmin unit as replacement for my malfunctioning Fitbit, I chanced on a web site with suggestions on how to factory reset the 'dead' Fitbit with a complex sequence of activations on the one external button.....and it worked. I will adopt the new one as it has several features I like but it will be interesting to compare how the two units report the same run. Yes, I will be the idiot runner wearing two units tomorrow morning.

The internet was right, the Fitbit Versa 3 is not a reliable unit having irrevocably failed the other day after about 2.5 years. I cosseted it more than previous units, like avoiding swimming with it, although it was worn every day, but still disappointed. A few days to my birthday so will probably go for a Garmin unit and accept contributions from the family toward its purchase. Don't need an elite unit but would like GPS, running and activity stats, and 'advanced' heart rate functions, as well as the ability to answer phone calls on my mobile (which has been a surprisingly useful feature). Not sure which specific unit yet but probably priced in the two to three hundred pound price range. Garmins can be quite large and clunky though which do not suit my skinny wrists.

No current lung infection - tick Recovered from medical procedure - tick Run out of excuses - tick So out for some light morning runs before the sun gets up and temperature gets too unbearable. I can't work out whether I was shamed or inspired to run again by my daughter in law getting up at 4 am on Christmas morning for a 25 km run and my uk great nephew participating in a Christmas morning parkrun in near zero temps.

Annnnnd then after only two runs I contracted another respiratory virus. Had to have a clinical PCR test to find out, this time, I had 'Human pneumovirus' and the planned medical procedure deferred. Pretty fed up with just coughing and not running this year, to be honest.

Have you managed to get any test drives of your choices? What did you think of each?

Annnnd then I get a bronchial infection that took me out of running action during the four weeks break I had from work.🤧 Resumed running yesterday and back to 6 minute kms but no ambition to improve for the moment with a small medical procedure due.

Might be the dpf sensor was stuffed up by the cleaning process or not reattached properly?

Since I have had access to a gps I have confirmed that nearly all my cars odometers are accurate (depending on tyre wear) within a couple of percent. The exception was a Hyundai Santa Fe mk1 V6 which turned out to be about 8% optimistic. The speedometers on a previous mk2 and current mk3 Octavia were/are about 7% optimistic. The Santa Fe was 10% optimistic. I don't really care about speedo accuracy once I know the variance as I can allow for it. An optimistic speedo is useful if lending the car to my son :) Fuel economy display figures are based on fuel used and distance travelled and do not use the display speed. So I always do a quick calculation when I refuel with actual distance and refuel amount. My 2014 Octavia mk3 1.4tsi fuel display was slightly pessimistic when new but over its life and 117k km the display has progressed through very accurate to increasingly optimistic, so I now have to take off 0.3l/100 off the display to a more accurate figure. A simple test is to set the cruise control (which is related to the speedo display) for a set figure (say 60kph) and then reset the average speed display for journey while in motion, after a few hundred uninterrupted metres the average speed calculated by distance travelled is shown and can be compared against the speedo. I would have hoped that VCDS would have allowed adjusting the displays for speed, distance and consumption separately, but according to the OP this might not be the case?

I've never owned or even driven a VW 1.0mpi but I have great respect for it from some of the consumption claims in the Briskoda Citigo section. The power figure of 75ps at 6200 rpm is respectable although not unremarkable as is the torque figure of 95Nm but the kicker is that maximum torque is achieved at a comparatively low 3000 rpm and I think that is almost unique for its size and type. Not many engines, regardless of size, could match that and small capacity engines usually produce their max torque at 4000+ rpm, like my 22yo 1.3L Toyota requires 4400 rpm. Having extoled its virtues, it is still only a normally aspirated 1 litre engine and you can't expect too much of it. I can't find much on the web about performance of the 1.0mpi but there were figures that said acceleration from 80 to 120 kph was 31 seconds in 5th gear and 20 seconds in 4th gear. To me that suggests the manufacturer's gearing is (not surprisingly) about optimal and that a longer top gear is likely to worsen performance and consumption. I have driven a more powerful 1.0tsi Fabia manual and was extremely impressed by consumption and ability to cruise economically at highway speeds, with a load, at sub 3k rpm. That would be my choice if looking for a better balance than you currently have. Like others, I see little point in all the work and expense involved for an extra gear and a potentially less satisfying car.

I was not aware of this option until earlier this week when a young lady at work, who currently wears glasses and is only in her early twenties, told me she is having cataract operations on both her eyes over the next month. She too says she will have individual eyes set for different focal lengths and the brain will work it out. I don't think she drives but might suggest that glasses for better depth perception might be a good idea if she does take up driving a car.

Our 2014 1.4tsi Octavia wagon has only done 117K km but with a lot of very short slow local journeys. Although it still drives very nicely, I feel that fuel consumption is slightly down from when it was brand new. All I really want to do on mine is to get a camera inspection of the inlet valves to see if carbon buildup is to blame and whether some remedial action is required. Do still love the car though and it is now irreplaceable as Skoda no longer sell a manual in Australia.

Every now and then the Australian new car market delivers a limited window on an apparent bargain that demands close consideration, even if the car is not what I would have ever normally considered Over the years the ones that stood out for me were: The first iteration of the Toyota GR86 at a then AU$30,000 (just half it for rough GB pounds so £15,000) The introduction of the Toyota Yaris GR86 locally was a 1000 cars at $40,000 (£20000) drive away (which includes road tax and insurance for a year) was supposed to last 6 months to sell out and it actually only took 2 days. Even the Fabia 2 once had a drive away deal at only $17000, which I still kick myself for not taking up. MG4 was on sale for $30,000 drive away just over a year ago. They have since admitted they were losing over $10k a car on that deal. Then there are some Stellantis vehicles Jeeps, Fiats etc that have lost a huge amount of market share and they take something like $20+k off the initial offer to offload stock, but expressions involving bargepoles spring to mind. The latest one that has caught my attention is the Cupra Formentor VZe which is being offered at $27k off list price with a $43000 drive away deal to offload a large backlog of stock imported too late for a, since closed, tax window. This is the one with the 10kwh battery and 1.4tsi engine and is soon to be replaced with a model with double the battery and the 1.5tsi engine hence the urgency. As a (still casual working) pensioner this is still a fair financial commitment, even if it is a bargain, and for something that is not necessarily as ideal as our current mk3 Octavia which constantly delights with its ability to swallow enormous loads. Recently have picked new chairs and garage racking where the warehouseman has expressed disbelief that the goods fitted inside the Octavia It appalls me that a relatively small battery and electric engine can add nearly 400kg to the vehicle weight (over our car), that is has no spare tyre (a big deal for me on long Australian trips), that the vehicle economy is apparently worse than our car when in hybrid mode (judging by reports on Briskoda for similarly configured mk iv Octavia hybrids). The savings from locally running on electric would not be as great as say the UK where your off-peak rates seem incredibly low compared to ours and our fuel is cheap compared to GB prices. Might have to do some spreadsheet work on this one and it deserves a test drive at the very least.

A couple of weeks ago the 2025 edition of the 3000km race from Darwin to Adelaide concluded in Adelaide and I went up to view the vehicles on public display. There were two classes: The "F1" equivalent "Challenger" class winner finished in just under 35 racing hours at an average speed of 86.6kph The other is the "Cruiser" class, which aspire to carry one or more passengers other than the driver, and the winner finished in 44 racing hours at an average of 68.7kph. The race has been conducted for a number of years but the first time it was conducted in winter (winter below the tropic of cancer anyway). Less sun for power but also less heat stress on the drivers in their pods. Externally there are a lot of visual similarities in the Challenger class to achieve low aerodynamic drag, the allowed 6 square metres of solar panels. The driver is either centrally mounted or offset to one side. Internally there is much more variation depending on whether they could afford a carbon-fibre monocoque or went for a more conservative and cheaper skinned tubular steel frame. The suspension engineering was pretty impressive because maximum speeds could be as high as the 130kph limits in the Northern Territory and also had to survive traversing cattle grids at speed. Aero is so important because they not only need low drag but must have stability to survive crosswinds and gusts from oncoming road-trains. It is all cutting-edge stuff and talking to a couple of the support teams they had their work cut out getting sleep in tents (in the outback), maintaining the cars and then driving all day between obligatory control points. Lots of videos online and a good place to start is: Bridgestone World Solar Challenge 2025

Yesterday's 7km run with 5':30" /km averages, which means I managed to knock off at least 4 seconds per kilometre from recent bests. Didn't think I'd really be able to get back to where I was a year ago so pretty rapt with this. Calves are hurting now which suggests it was achieved with a bit more rebound and less plodding.

The DPF on the diesel could be nearing the end of its life. Frequent posts here for high mileage diesels with poor running and high consumption issues when this happens. It is possible to get a report on the ash content in a DPF. Finding a reasonable car on a lowish budget is a real issue these days.

Just achieved my sub hour 10km target, 10.1km in 58m 28sec. Did not set out to do it, but went out slowly trying to keep my heartrate down (another story), felt good, the weather was really nice, and I thought why not? Probably not as much preparation as I would have liked, so I did find the last 2km quite hard to push through. I won't aim for greater distances, but I will try to make it an occasional target with the hope of making the effort easier and/or a little faster.

Skoda must have better market penetration in your state than mine. No friend of mine has one although one guy I'm on 'nodding terms' with down the road has a Kodiaq. Do you belong to a Skoda club? While it is a temptation to generalise about using 91RON from your experiences you might like to consider there are situations where it might be poor advice. For many years European manufacturers restricted what they sent us due to our poor fuel quality which centred principally around sulphur content. When I first came to Aus near 40 years ago the exhaust literally stank like a New Zealand volcanic spring. Over time fuel standards improved dramatically so that diesel match Euro standards and petrol was substantially improved. Currently max sulphur content for Euro and US petrol standards are 10ppm and Australian are 150ppm for standard (91) and 50ppm for premium (95/98). The VW group identified that vehicles fitted with PPF (petrol particulate filter), now mandated in Europe, could have the unit severely compromised from even one fill of our 91 RON fuel (pure or E10). As far I can remember it was only the Superb 280 4x4 that was imported with the ppf but I really don't know the what the status is now as what cars may, or may not, have a ppf fitted. Most VW group cars of the last decade would have anti-knock sensors, so possible for lower spec engines like 1.0/1.4/1.8 tsi (with no ppf) could run on 91RON without obvious issues but I suspect it may require a few tanks of higher grad fuel before the ECU advanced timing for better performance/efficiency. As to whether it would be noticeable or not? I remember that some of VW group higher spec 2.0tsi equipped vehicles (RS, Type R?) imported to Australia have recommended 98RON with 95ROn as a fallback and definitely not 91. One of Mazda's turbo petrol engines is designed to accommodate 91RON to 98RON (91 RON equivalent is also available in the US), and their blurb said that the 98 RON produced 12kw more in that engine. At the other extreme my 2003 Toyota Echo's manual quite openly says the engine is designed for Australian 91 RON and while higher RON can be used it is pointless and a waste of money.

Like most things in Australia, there can be a little variation on available fuels and the rules governing E10 constituents depending on which state you live in. As far as I am aware, nationally, the E10 uses our base 91 RON fuel with 10% Ethanol added which takes it to 94 RON rating. The issue is not with the ethanol/petrol mix but the fact it is has a slightly lower RON rating (a marginal issue I suspect unless you regularly push the engine to the red line), but more so about the 91 RON fuel having a much higher sulphur allowance than 95+ RON fuels. Not going to be much of a problem with the one-off half-tank fill you did, but not something you would want to make a regular thing. In South Australia our E10 is not allowed to advertise the (nominal) 94RON rating because the pump has a very small sticker on it saying that the Ethanol content is "up to 10%", which means that the RON rating could actually end being anything between 91 and 94. What confuses me more is the 100RON fuel you claim to use: 1) As far as I am aware the highest-octane fuel generally available on Australian forecourts is Premium 98RON. Yes, you can get 100 RON PULP fuel (even 110 RON) but these are racing fuels that suppliers specifically recommend NOT using in standard road going cars as it ruins the catalytic converter. 2) Even more worrying is that you may be using E85 fuels (rated at 105RON), fairly rare on petrol forecourts but can only be used on a very small range of engines and definitely NOT in a Skoda 2.0tsi engine, or any VW engine sold in Australia (unless you imported a model from Brazil). A few years ago, the Australian National Government sort of committed to raising fuel standards to match Europe but has got bogged down with all sorts of lobby groups and it has gone pretty quiet on that front despite their more recent commitment to the NVES scheme to reduce vehicle emissions. Coincidentally, for the first time in over 50 years of motoring, today I started accidentally putting 91 RON in my 1.4tsi Octavia (I use 91 in my other car) but realised after 3.5 litres and went and paid before putting in a further 30 litres of 95 RON.

Post should really be in "General Automotive Chat" section but: New or second-hand, and what model level are you looking at? What features are important to you: ride comfort, handling, entertainment features, panoramic roof, electric seats, lumbar support adjustment (in passenger seat), cloth or leather, air-con or climate control, headlight performance, mostly local driving, or long distance, rear space for family commitments/children/teenagers/elderly parents etc etc.????? What price variation/deals, warranties, servicing packages are available? Location of nearest local reputable dealer for servicing should not be overlooked either. Have you test driven both to make up your own mind? Got comparative quotes from dealers to compare features on similar priced models. If not, then why not as most of the things that could swing your decision either way will be very subjective?