I know how to drive a car to get the best out of the fuel, and can say for sure that a manual is miles more economical than a DSG. People can argue and post comments as much as they like, makes no difference. My figures speak for themselves. They are also borne out by the fact that, being a taxi, it's running brim to brim full every day so i can get an accurate measure of mileage and cost of fuel each shift.

Try as i might i couldn't get the DSG to top 39mpg, yet 50+mpg is easily achievable in the manual with no difference in driving style.

Maybe the CR engine is better and more suited to the DSG, but my 2 140pd's, manual wins hands down.

39MPG You obviously don't know how to drive an auto to get the best out of the fuel. I got 53mpg out m y CR170 picking it up from the dealer with only 9 miles on the clock. I would struggle to get that in the 1.9 PD 130 - Mrs got 51mpg on the same journey (as she drove my old car back) in that car and thats got 67k on the clock.

Yes but he's a taxi driver, not the most economic of driver profiles I wouldn't have thought.

Yes but he's a taxi driver, not the most economic of driver profiles I wouldn't have thought.

Can of worms has just been opened.....

39MPG You obviously don't know how to drive an auto to get the best out of the fuel. I got 53mpg out m y CR170 picking it up from the dealer with only 9 miles on the clock. I would struggle to get that in the 1.9 PD 130 - Mrs got 51mpg on the same journey (as she drove my old car back) in that car and thats got 67k on the clock.

I say again, both used as taxi's, manual still is, so stop start town driving. Thats what my comparison is based on. Think i know how to drive an auto just fine thanks. Even manually changing up to drop revs made no difference. 39mpg.

Well mine must be faulty then :wonder:

Think my figures also speak for themselves - Same journey, same time, in convoy.

Edited 19 April, 201016 yr by jrw