Gerrycan

An interesting read but how does the same 1.5tsi engine perform below official figures in the two Audi and better in the Karoq?? To me that says they should be subjecting a number of individual vehicles of the same model to see what result variation is realised.

@jonsym, I sympathise with your almighty consumption drop, and the lack of assistance or even empathy from the dealers. I've got a couple of questions and suggestions for you: Is your car fitted with a PPF? What is your recent 'normal' sort of journey (distance, speeds, highway or town)? The latter question is less relevant if no Petrol Particulate Filter is actually fitted. Someone has already suggested that your car system setting may have been changed by accident to metric but as pointed out by another that would be pretty evident (we run metric settings in Australia)...however you may want to check that it has not been changed accidentally to American gallons which are smaller than Imperial (British) gallons as that would be much less obvious. US gallons was/is an option on both my mk2 and mk3 Octavia. Assuming the measurement has not been changed and the reading is accurately reflecting higher consumption then it is possible (but admittedly unlikely) the fuel was contaminated. I would expect the car to be running really badly and barely able to tick over if the fuel was that bad. I can't see how Stop/start operation would be affected by bad fuel, well it would stop, but not start again. if the dealer only topped up the battery and did not actually test it then it may be worthwhile getting it checked. Stop/start can be hard on batteries and there have been a few reports in Briskoda of premature battery failure. Probably depends on the usual journey type and maybe what happened to the car over lockdown? Very unlikely it is the air filter, degradation tends to happen over a longer period, not overnight. Fuel filter? again I'd expect the car to judder or stop from fuel starvation, not just worsen consumption. Assuming none of the above it may be worth your while contacting the selling petrol station and registering a complaint (hopefully bought on credit card for confirmation). 1) it registers that you recognise a possible problem with the fuel they supplied and if it manifests in later possible engine issues then it strengthens your claim for compensation. 2) Others who have filled there may have had the same problem and reported their issues which may prompt an ethical company to be proactive (don't hold your breath for that). In fairness what they don't know they cannot investigate. I know two separate incidents in our tropical Northern Territories where contaminated diesel fuel was sold from individual stations (pumps?) and numerous vehicle engines were damaged. It was only the the fact that the NT equivalent of the AA or RAC were able to collate the increase in call outs that they were found out and the vehicle owners compensated. In one of my mate's case he did unexpectedly well out of it when all the inconvenience factors were thrown in Edit: Just another thought: I don't know all the details of the UK lockdown and release but UK 95 octane fuel has a legal requirement for 5% Ethanol content which is not usually a problem but IF the fuel had been stored for an excessively long time (lockdown closure and /or lower general fuel use) and IF storage had been slightly compromised (allowing some moisture contamination) then the ethanol and petrol would separate and you MAY have been unlucky enough to fill with a less than optimal mix? A lot of 'IFs' but you would think the next fill would resolve the problems.

A quick google suggests petrol particulate filters were introduced to the VW group from September 2018 so it seems likely yours would have it. Surely it is only a problem if the tuner says it is. I would have thought a remap would make the filter more effective by running hotter?

When was the car manufactured?

Uk holiday and a hire Kia Cerato manual 1.6d (I think, as there were no markings). Most of our mileage was on motorways and I was sticking to speed limits, not that there was much opportunity to speed with the heavy traffic and the many sub 70mph restricted zones. The upside was the surprisingly good mpg and repeated calculated 70mpg tank fills. The first tank was about 60mpg but when I learnt to ignore the car's gear recommendations and give it a few more revs in each gear it actually improved the consumption. Ideal car for what we needed but as boring as all ..... to drive. We really enjoyed touring Cornwall and later the Welsh border area but after Covid restrictions lift we'd love to come back and 'do' Scotland. Maybe late 2022 as Australia is really behind in our vaccinations but the momentum is starting to build now. Get my first on Tuesday Be interested to hear how you get on with the Ioniq.

Having experienced an EV I am not surprised the disks can get get quite rusty. The strong retardation off 'throttle' initially took me by surprise. It's a bit of a badge of honour really.

When we drove around similarly the steep and narrow roads of Cornwall in a diesel our consumption dropped by 20mpg to 50mpg so I know where you are coming from. I said earlier that EV are excellent for urban journeys but I suspect that they are also good in the terrain and journey type you describe. Every time you brake you are not converting your inertia to heat but putting something back in the battery. At this early stage of battery development I don't think it is feasible to try to implement a common interchangeable format because the technology is likely to become outdated very quickly. Bad enough trying to standardise the plugs. I recently read about developments in Aluminium based batteries (by an Australian university) that acted more like a supercapacitor so although it did not quite have the energy density of Lithium it offered potentially relatively low cost from common materials, light weight, no temperature issues during use, long life and the ability to charge in seconds. Of course take the claims with the usual pinch of salt but interesting none the less. My 'perfect' EV would offer superior efficiency to any existing EV, so either be like the Lightyear 1, or better still the Aptera. The latter is sort of a futuristic cross between my first vehicle, a BMW Isetta 3 wheel bubble car and the aerodynamics and seating position of the gliders I used to fly. I do like good aerodynamics in a vehicle which is why I can't bring myself to go back to an SUV, petrol or electric.

EV are perfect for urban travel, but I agree that interstate is a more challenging. I'm confident that things will change. I have had solar panels for 10 years and they have paid for themselves times over but when I do eventually get an EV I think I will probably invest in a much bigger PV and domestic battery system. Currently my backup plan for long blackouts is a $250 2kW petrol generator for the fridge freezer, everything else is luxury really. Candlelight is so romantic

@Baldur73 I genuinely did not see that coming, but that is from my perspective of the Australian market which is way behind the UK in adopting and promoting EV. You have done your sums for your particular circumstances and it makes sense. The cheapest Scala here is the 1.5tsi manual and is priced at A$28000 drive away, while an Ioniq EV is A$53166. I currently buy our 95 Ron fuel priced at A$1.35 (although that can increase by up to 50% more for a few days). There are no financial incentives to buy an EV in my state of South Australia (Victoria have just announced a $3000 subsidy but are likely to impose a 2cent per kilometre 'road tax' for EV and hybrid because they pay no fuel excise). So you can see there is no real financial logic for us to buy an EV......however Despite our federal government's ongoing love of carbon, particularly coal, there are going to be big changes over the next 3 to 5 years driven by improved renewables and battery technology (and international condemnation of the Aus Govt stance with punitive carbon taxes). One thing for sure is that implementation of the Australian electrical grid revolution is going to be really painful, expensive and not well thought out because politics. If there is one thing that Covid has taught us is that the countries that have handled it the best have followed scientific advise. The same will stand for climate change. Using similar logic to you I've decided to forego buying a new replacement car and wait for more affordable and hopefully more efficient EVs to appear on the Australian market, hey it might be a Skoda by then. From your original post I'm surprised you were only averaging 54 mpg in a diesel driving frugally on a long commute? From my limited experience of driving a diesel in maybe soon to be 'Lesser Britain' I would expect at least 10mpg more.

Nice write up@sthodgson , I tend to agree that driving tiddler cars is a lot more fun than most realise. I've got a now 18 yo Toyota Echo 1.3L manual that is still a hoot to drive. I have prevaricated over its replacement and the price of new and second hand cars has gone up so much that I am losing interest in replacing a perfectly functional runabout that still gives good economy. I recently looked up the Citigo engine specs for another thread and was blown away by what it offers for its tiny size. I am not really interested in the power but the torque on offer. A really good NA engine target is 100Nm per litre engine size, this is rarely achieved and then usually at very high revs. My 1.3 L offers a useful 122Nm of torque at 4400rpm a high percentage of the target which pretty reasonable for its generation but note that the max 63kW of power is at 6000rpm so a relatively small power band. However when you look at the Citigo engine you get an unusually high 95Nm for the one litre engine but at the incredibly low 3000 rpm with max power of 55kW at 6200rpm. I am not sure there is any other production NA petrol engine offering such a wide range and driving flexibility. These numbers are not going to give the car anything other than adequate on-road performance but I think the real difference is its relative efficiency compared to my older generation engine. Only the Up! was sold in Australia for a short time, but I keep my eye out for a tidy low mileage version but they are as rare as hen's teeth and usually a couple of thousand km away interstate :( Just out of curiosity what revs does yours show at 70mph?

Lots of threads discussing headlight upgrades if you perform a search. In summary the general recommendation is that it is too expensive to upgrade from halogen to legal LED. Replacement with LED bulbs (available on the internet) usually have too much scatter and will fail MOT or vehicle inspection if stopped. Bi-Xenon upgrade is also not recommended as that requires a lot of additional legal installation of electronic and headlight washer controls. Cheaper to buy a vehicle with it fitted at factory. Usual recommendation is to fit Osram or Philips halogen bulb upgrades. Minimal cost, noticeable improvements but bulb life maybe short, especially on bad roads with lots of vibration. How old is your car? The facelift with the split headlights was generally considered to have better optics on the halogen than the original mk3, which I have.

It could be the fuel tank shape but I don't think so. I read an article at least a couple of years back where an unnamed Ford engineer confirmed it was standard practice across the industry to give drivers good vibes to think they had covered a good distance on half a tank. Same as the water temperature gauge does not move from its standard normal position when it has warmed up. It will only register higher temps if there is something really wrong and then you have got to act. The water temperature does vary (within acceptable operating temperatures) in daily driving but they chose not to show it, because some drivers panic at the slightest (within norms) rise and head off needlessly to the garage. On a run we can get about 500km off the first indicated half tank but usually about 380km off the second half tank before being urged to refill (usually about 48 litres).

A manual Citigo should be able to handle that terrain with few issues but as others have said you would have to select the right gear and rev the engine. Why not look at a Fabia 1.0tsi, or if you have a price ceiling, the older 1.2tsi. Both are available with a small turbo to boost low rev torque and make ascending hills so much easier especially if you have a load or other passengers in the car. The 1.0 non turbo engine in the Citigo provides 95Nm of torque at 3000 rpm which, by the way, is sensationally good for its engine type. The mk3 Fabia 1.0tsi (with turbo) produces 175Nm of torque from 2000 rpm and that extra torque at lower revs makes it much easier to drive in hilly country. The previous 1.2tsi engine available in the Fabia is probably even better for your purposes giving the same torque from as low as 1400 rpm. I believe there are other options available in the UK that provide up to 200Nm of torque, if you buy the DSG automatic or 6 speed manual. I have no experience of the Citigo, but I do drive a small and very old Echo offering similar performance, and I have driven a loan 1.0tsi Fabia which I thought was terrific and was also very impressed by its excellent consumption. You could look at any other similar engined vehicle in the VW and SEAT range if the selection of second hand cars is limited. Now that things are opening up don't forget that important test drive to see what YOU like.

I have not experienced any unusual sounds from my manual transmission. I cannot remember any mention of any 'whistling manual transmission' in any Briskoda thread for the 7 years I have been on here. Many other complaints of internal booming of course.

Over the years I've never known anyone mention rear transport blocks. The front ones are there to avoiding the risk of nose crunches driving on/off loading ramps during shipping. So unless there have been changes to shipping standards I don't think you will find anything at the back. I'd certainly get the dealer to do the work and give them the opportunity to offer a free service or something as some sort of compensation for your inconvenience, and patience. At least you complained here early and got good advice. At least one historical report was from the second owner of the vehicle

With the expected usage described by @MrDeeJay of 3 mile run to work, and some shopping trips, then based on my experience in my manual 1.4tsi with a typical 20 deg C starting temperature ,through a fairly free flowing urban environment, at an average of 31 kph, and no real attempt at economy driving, then the OP should get better than 40 mpg. Of course consumption could be better or worse for the OP depending on how many stops, traffic flow and the start temperature, his journey experiences. A good idea getting an older car without a PPF because the PPF will not get up to operating temperature with that short a run. Similarly the 1.0tsi is better for shorter trips because there is less engine mass to warm up and lets face it a 3 mile journey or shopping trips do not need anything with real performance. If you do give the 1.0tsi some welly then it is capable of getting to 100kph in under 11 seconds anyway. Heat will be coming out the vents far earlier in a trip (1 mile?) in winter with either petrol engine compared to a diesel. I suspect in winter the exhaust will fill up with water from condensation from a sequence of short trips. Last winter (ours are a bit more mild than the UK) my wife, who uses our Octavia for an 8 mile commute complained that the car was gurgling when she started it in the garage and she was right. I think the main problem is the low revs she generally uses.

As mentioned by @FrankNicklin the 1.5tsi in the Octavia has ACT whereas the 1.4tsi, in the Octavia, does not. However the 1.4tsi when fitted in the Superb did have ACT. The other major difference is that the 1.5tsi has a variable turbo and I think this was the first application of its type in a mass produced 'cheap' petrol engine. The 1.5tsi disappeared from production for quite a while during WLTP standards introduction which suggests they had some issues meeting emission standards (which would be a high priority following 'Dieselgate'). Similarly it took an inordinate amount of time to issue 'kangaroo' fixing software, again probably due to the difficulties meeting emission and consumption standards. I found it interesting that the simpler 1.0tsi engine was available throughout the WLTP introduction. It is interesting that here in Australia with our sub-standard Euro 5 standards that the VAG group has chosen to replace the 1.5tsi option with the old 1.4tsi engine attached to an Aisin 8 speed torque converter box on the new Octavia, Karoq and new Golf. Official consumption is notably poorer than the original 1.4tsi with dsg or manual, I don't regard it as an improvement on my current 7 year old Octavia. The 1.5tsi is available in Australia on the Scala in manual and DSG versions and I have been seriously looking at it as the base manual is competitively priced for that sized turbo engine but I have underlying reservations about the engine's complexities and reported driving issues, although I am not sure if the latter would apply to the PPF-less version sold here. Might even look at a 1.0tsi manual Polo as that would be up to A$5k cheaper and it will take forever for the new Fabia to introduced here. My work is making it difficult to arrange the time for test drives.

We've owned our 1.4tsi manual for 7 years and it still amazes me with its performance and economy. I had a loan Fabia 1.0tsi, the lower power 5 speed manual version, and @FlyingGecko 's comments are pretty spot on. The 1.0tsi is brilliant for its capacity, it produces 200Nm of torque which is the equivalent of a 2 litre NA engine so by all users accounts it goes really well, even on the highway. The 1.0 tsi would be marginally more economical but by every other measure the 1.4tsi is better being more powerful and smoother. Don't expect any petrol engine to be economical doing short runs from cold in an urban environment. It is just not possible but I'd put money on the fact that no other petrol engine could do much better for consumption than the 1.0tsi I drove.

Adelaide, 2014, mk3, 103kw, 1.4tsi Octavia wagon. I've been on this forum for about 7 years and the majority of contributors are really helpful. Now Australia is getting an increasing number of Skoda with different engines and transmissions it is slightly less relevant for us than it has been, but still a great forum to participate in. I reckon there are about a dozen inverted contributors. Sorry but my OCD has to tell you you have not got a 'Koroq'

The 'kangarooing' complaints came from manual owners, DSG users did not experience the same problems.

I think you will find the mk3 1.5tsi had the same issues. Lots of threads in all models that used it but most seemed reasonably happy with the update (although some did say they got worse consumption after).

Sorry you will have to measure how much fuel you put in and distance covered to confirm display accuracy. AND Test speedo accuracy against GPS (speedometers are usually optimistic) Test odometer accuracy against a know distance (odometers are usually much more accurate than a speedo but I have owned one new car that where the odo overread by 8%). If that all stacks up then you have a really good one.

Is your mk4 a manual and has it had the software updates?

Both my kids (now adults) learnt on manuals, which is very much the exception here. Most of their friends here would not have a clue how to drive one even though they are allowed to. I think our state of South Australia is the only one here that does not segregate auto and manual driving certification which is a bit weird. I'm sure your daughter will enjoy it. While it was fortunately not a problem for our daughter, we would have been happier getting her one with as many safety features as your Citigo has.

Looks great but the driver's rubber mat looks like it could do with a replacing Good on you for getting a manual.