Gerrycan

Impressive, but the spare wheel is only the front wheel off a kid's tricycle though

Weight is important but not the only factor, my lowly 1.4tsi Octavia estate (circa 1350kg) is easily the best coasting vehicle I have driven and the small engine provides stuff all engine braking down even moderate gradients. I think your 1660kg weight is quite amazing. I would have expected close to 1800kg for such a big and powerful vehicle as are most other vehicles in that category. Out of curiosity what does your engine indicate it consumes at idle, mine is around 0.5L/hour (no ancillaries on). I'd expect the 1.5tsi in the Karoq to be similar.

Not disputing the sound noises, just the elapsed time from the original post. Reminds me of a meeting we had at work on long outstanding software change requests. We were able to knock two off the list because both requestors had died in the meantime.

Took you over 2 years to come up with that unoriginal comment?

I think you are right. Just the 19" rims fooling me. Paintwork does look very good though.

I like that colour, not seen it on our Australian roads. Has it been lowered? And congratulations to you both on your recent addition.

We are here for you mate. We all have our issues and mine is bikes. I cannot throw them away because of the good memories. Got 7 in the garage and oldest about 45 years old which I still use.

1004 kilometres and still a few litres left in the tank, brilliant. An ambition of mine with the 1.4tsi to better a 1000 km. Got close a couple of times but chickened out as I had 3 others in the car on long trips and did not want to run out of fuel somewhere remote on a 40 deg day. Maybe one day when I am by myself with a bit of tme on my hands

That will need a fair bit of effort to buff out, 🤣 You might need an electric buffer though, but I'm sure @Lee01 will have an unused one for you in his garage......and some Spak

Scandinavian ICE vehicles usually have a Webasto or an electric pre-heater fitted. So in their case, not so different?

Doesn't that engine have a dual injection system, direct and port injection? I'm happy to be corrected but I thought the direct injection operates during low revs and idle and the port injection contributes during larger throttle and higher revs. Maybe the port injection has got a bit blocked through lack of use?

That is really encouraging. All other things being equal EV energy consumption is directly related to speed. However it sounds like the your inadvertent drafting of other vehicles at 50-55 mph would have significantly reduced your aero drag and energy consumption, increasing your real range. In the early days of the Tesla S, a Scandinavian couple managed to near double the official range on a charge but I think their average speed was something like 18kph. I think your expectation of reduced winter range is realistic with reduced battery efficiency and cabin heating. A warm garage for your baby could make a bit of difference though . Your short EV run to the shops will still monster any ICE vehicle in any conditions though as their consumption is always at its worst after first start.

I could not match the 83 mpg figure with my 1.4tsi manual, in the very best of local Aus conditions and no a/c on I'd still be 10 mpg adrift. If I matched the average speed I'd probably be close to 15 mpg adrift. No hypermiling or dangerously close drafting (our interstate trucks do continuous 100 kph speeds and you have to allow about a safe 3 second gap or you may end up running into a 'roo in the middle of the road the truck had the ground clearance to miss) I have driven in the UK on moving busy motorways and A-roads in similar conditions described by the OP and together with the benefits of Active Cylinder Deactivation I can understand how the remarkable displayed consumption could be achieved (even allowing for a possible slightly optimistic reading). The traffic really is nose to tail there , I had to adjust because every time I left my 'safe' gap another vehicle felt the need to dive into it. I thought the loan Fabia manual 1.0tsi I drove just over a year ago could be capable of 90+mpg in optimal warm conditions (flat road and not exceeding 65kph). I'd turned off the a/c in 40+ deg C temps to prove it once but after a bit I was saying "bu##er this for a game of soldiers" and turned it back on. That 3 cylinder engine is really economical but not available in an Octavia here.

@BBDom, I am curious whether your manual 1.5tsi has had the software fix applied to fix the 'kangarooing' since others seem to think it worsens consumption?

I would consider the lower mileage and manual transmission a wise choice. Enjoy the new car and your camping trip.

@Rogi, is the model you are looking at a manual transmission or equipped with the DSG auto? If the DSG then perhaps it might be prudent to ask for responses from high mileage DSG users.

Yes, that initial raspy sound, well I think it sounds like Darth Vadar breathing lol. On the occasions when it does not happen the average consumption to one kilometre is significantly better than usual. I think your theory is spot on.

I have a 1.4tsi which is about 7 years old but relatively low 'mileage' at 66,000 km. The only issue I have had was a water pump failure and replacement. Common with the VW diesels but relatively rare for this petrol engine. When the pump was replaced it involved some engine dismantling and they reported some carbon sludge. Not surprising since we do so many local short journeys which does not give the engine a chance to warm up. The questions I would be asking are: Regular servicing Type of driving for the 100k mile distance ie stop/start taxi work or regular longer distances. with a preference for the latter. The type of driving will have an effect on the potential internal carbon build up problem. Cam belt replacement is another potential issue for this age/distance as well. As far as I know there have not been any actual belt failures reported in this forum though. I think the engine itself is very good, very smooth, potentially very economical depending on how you drive, low rev torque is outstanding with relatively low lag. While it will happily rev smoothly to the redline, that is not where it does its best work as the torque curve falls off sharply after 4k revs, that is why it only produces 103kw/140bhp max power but very respectable torque of 250Nm for 1500-4000 rev range. Mine uses little to no oil between annual services. I have one small issue with mine from new and that is after the first start of the day the engine is often very jerky in first gear for the 50 metre drive to the road. Once on the road and able to rev out then there is no problem. The strange thing is that it does not always happen and I cannot find a factor that could explain it. Doesn't matter if the first start temperature is near zero or 40+ degrees centigrade (Adelaide, Australia).

Combi/estate or liftback/sedan? Is your mk4 noticeably bigger inside than the equivalent mk3?

@budster, I know you can do the front wheel removal and vertical storage thing with 3 bikes in a Honda Jazz so it is all to do with storage shape not just total size. I am mulling over getting a Fabia estate and I have to investigate the option of doing the same with that.

None really. I just find it a bit incredible that companies like RR and Bentley maintain specific spare trim stock for decades old vehicles. Maybe the OP can achieve his required aesthetic with a real wood veneer?

No I can cheat a bit by only having to remove the front wheel and the quick release seat tube. The wife's bike is a small conventional parallel frame and my bigger bike has a sloping top tube as does the hardtail 26" mountain bike. It is tight so I imagine bigger frames would need both wheels removed and that is a bit of a faff. I hate attaching bikes outside a car.

I'd go for fake 'carbon fibre' trim rather than fake 'wood' because it will be so much lighter 🤣 My brother-in-law needed some replacement real wood veneer for his older Rolls Royce. No problem as RR keep a few sheets in stock for every individual vehicle they have made so you get an perfect match. He was also surprised how reasonably priced it was.

The mk4 sedan is very aerodynamic and if you don't need the minimal extra load space of the estate (and the couple of points worse drag factor) then probably the preferred option I value my mk3 estate because I can put three adult road bikes inside vertically (wheels removed) and carry three people. This would not be possible in the sedan. The aerodynamic penalty for the mk3 estate is minimal (cd 0.30 sedan, 0.31 estate).

This question has cropped up before and the general consensus from those who had experience of both was that the 1.2tsi was probably the smoother and slightly more tractable of the two, very little difference in performance but the 1.0tsi was more economical. Like ShyVRS245 I had a Fabia 1.0 tsi courtesy car for a week and was very impressed by the excellent consumption and reasonable performance (my loaned version was the lower powered 5 speed manual). Kicking myself a bit that I did not buy a new Fabia manual before they dropped manuals from the Australian market