Interesting comment's ,relieved that I have 2.0 110 hp 53 mpg on a run should improve with age ( like myself )

My 1.2 SE Manual on my A5/A51 trip fro Nuneaton to Crewe and back. 5000 miles on clock now

Driven 'normally' ie 55-65mph on Aroads not taking it particularly easy = 42mpg ish

Driven spiritedly - hard acceleration/pushing on returns 37mpg or thereabouts.

Driven with a view to maximising the mpg has returned a best of 54mpg for the trip.

All figures are off the computer and I have established that my computer is 1.5mpg optimistic.

The max mpg was achieved by travelling at no more than 50mph and using minimal

throttle when accelerating.

Also, forward planning at roundabouts/traffic lights so braking was not required as often as it might.

Finally, making use of the Yetis good handling by carrying higher speed round bends, not braking

as if yer granny was in the car.

Newly back from a fantastic break in a lovely sunny Brittany, France, I have the results of how my 1.2 DSG Yeti did on the MPG front- and it is pretty surprising!

Over 910 miles of mainly fast Autoroute driving, I managed…

…24.7 MPG!!!!

Seems like we were all a long way off! My prediction of 32 mpg seems a bit naïve now! The onboard computer was saying 25.6 mpg on the way there, and 26.1 mpg on the way back, which shows that it shouldn’t be trusted.

In mitigation to the little fella though, the car was fully loaded with two adults, a toddler and heavy baby seat and packed with luggage for us all. It also had a roof rack on, with a single racing bike on it. I've read that such things can add 10% to fuel consumption, so maybe without that it might have got nearer to 28mpg. The air con was also blasting which I'm sure played a part.

However, what I am certain caused the drink problem was that I wasn't hanging about. Probably 75% of the mileage was on deserted French toll Autoroutes, sat on Cruise Control at 130kph /81mph (per sat nav, though indicated at 136kph on the maxidot). Cruise Control did cause the engine to hunt between 6 and 7th to keep up the speed frequently, and on some of the long motorway gradients it went down to 5th and even 4th and 5250 rpm in a couple of places.

Overall the average speed on the way there was 60mph, and the way back 59mph and I stuck fervently to the speed limits in France. So, it wasn’t mega-speed, but obviously this sort of stress on a small engine does the fuel consumption no favours. On the way down to the Channel tunnel, we were running a bit late so i did 'press on' on a bit and for the hour down to the tunnel down the M20, the fuel computer was reading 22.1MPG which didn't bode well!

Not great, but I have managed to consol myself with the following thoughts:

• Fuel consumption aside, the car was an excellent companion for the journey and I would not hesitate to take the car on such a journey again. I drove for 7 hrs for each way, and the car was very comfortable, no back pain or anything, and I could have driven much further had the need arose. My wife and the my two year old had no complaints as well. The car felt incredibly refined and relaxing to drive and be in, and it certainly did not feel it was working as hard as it was. The Yeti is really a very impressive piece of kit for driving long distances at speed, and that comes from someone used to BMW’s and Audi’s

• I don’t do this sort of thing very often, and for the other 99% of the cars’ use, the 1.2 is perfect for what we use it for.

• OK I admit, fuel consumption for the 1.2 is proving to be slightly below expectations, but the rest of the 1.2’s engines plus points aside, you need to remember that the engine is cheaper than the equivalent 110 diesel by £1,300 or so. Working it out, for my 9000 miles a year, assuming that the diesel does 45 mpg and the petrol 35 mpg, it would take about 5 years of ownership to recoup the extra money paid for the diesel. For me I wanted a Yeti and I wanted an Auto, so at the time I had no choice but to go for the 1.2, but honestly if I was choosing again, I would still make the same choice.

Not good, but considering a roof rack empty can make 20% difference, then you stick a bike on it..........................................................

I bring my experience to return from the summer tour in Salento (Puglia / Italy). 3200 km with a total average of 13.7 km / l. Some considerations: the realm of the yeti are the roads with a limit of 110 km / h. For me there and 'was difficult to stay on 15 to 16 km / l on these roads. With great care I have also learned about 17 km / l. Consumption is rising past the 120 km /h.

regards

Edited 27 June, 201015 yr by ChicoItaly_Yeti

Not good, but considering a roof rack empty can make 20% difference, then you stick a bike on it..........................................................

I don't think it is quite 20%. AutoExpress seems to indicate it is a lot less. They tested fuel consumption myths from all manner of things a few years back (on an Astra) and a laden roof box caused the sum total of difference in fuel consuption of 0.2 MPG. And they only got a 20% increase when they added three people in the back, a fully laden roof box and two bikes on the roof. I was amazed as were they. Here is their link to a few other myths about fuel consumption:

http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/news/autoexpressnews/229776/the_mpg_mythbusters.html

Now a roof rack with an empty bike rack is not as aerodynamic as a roof box, so who knows the exact impact of that. But with the A2 I do know there is a 10% knock with bikes on the roof. Does not matter if it is one or three. With my roof box it is far less. If I keep the racks on without bikes I notice no difference in fuel consumption.

Interesting thing a friend mentioned the other day: everyone normally puts their roof boxes on the wrong way around! The blunt end should face FORWARDS! And if you think about it, the most aerodynamic shape (eg that of the A2 and Prius) has a very tapered rear end (the Kamm back) to smoothly let the wind release from the car. Food for thought when you put your roof box on next time!

I average about 42 mpg in my 1.2. However, I made one jouney at the weekend with a substantial increase in carried weight and, despite modest speeds, only averaged 35 mpg. The 1.2 is a great base engine for the range and suits me but I can see why the diesel makes more sense for many of you.

ive only just hit 40mpg, im my 1.6 focus after 38,000 and 3 years!!....and i tend to drive below 60mph everywhere now...with a mountain bike on the roof ive seen 34-35 avg' so im hoping the 1.2 yeti ive ordered will hit 40mpg at least...

Computer shows ~6.2l/100km for my 1.2DSG on a daily basis when commuting to work. This is ~46mpg if I have converted this correctly. The ride (30km ~ 19miles) consists of 50/kmh (~31mph) and 80km/h (~50 mph) legs. The best day so far has shown only 5.9l/100km, which I think is awesome for this type of a car.

Computer shows ~6.2l/100km for my 1.2DSG on a daily basis when commuting to work. This is ~46mpg if I have converted this correctly. The ride (30km ~ 19miles) consists of 50/kmh (~31mph) and 80km/h (~50 mph) legs. The best day so far has shown only 5.9l/100km, which I think is awesome for this type of a car.

The REALLY interesting figure I am waiting for is what the new 1.4 TSI achieves compared with the 1.2 TSI in the real world, specially motorway journeys at 70-80 mph.

The REALLY interesting figure I am waiting for is what the new 1.4 TSI achieves compared with the 1.2 TSI in the real world, specially motorway journeys at 70-80 mph.

My money would be on that it would be MORE economical than the 1.2, as it's less stressed. Though at lower speeds, I would imagine it would be slightly worse.

Just a hunch!

Edited 20 August, 201015 yr by mwas123

Just returned from a week of driving around Pembrokeshire. Averaged just over 44mpg for the week (700 miles). Very happy with that.

Just returned from a week of driving around Pembrokeshire. Averaged just over 44mpg for the week (700 miles). Very happy with that.

Hi shrub only 700 in a week i left home Friday at 5.30pm for the Yorkshire run and a bit of sight seeing around Leeds and ripon when i arrived home Sunday 11.45pm i had done 720.

i managed 370 on Sunday, managed 41mpg for the trip a lot of low gear hills on the moors and the cruse control set at 80 (did i say 80 meant 70 officer) all the way home I'm happy with that

My money would be on that it would be MORE economical than the 1.2, as it's less stressed. Though at lower speeds, I would imagine it would be slightly worse.

Just a hunch!

I suspect you are right, but I guess we will have to wait till someone actually has the 1.4 TSI before our suspicions are proven. Sadly for me it is a bit academic because Skoda have told me that the 1.4 TSI will not be available with the DSG box; I can't conceive of going back to a manual after 5 years with the DSG box on my Octy so unless Skoda have a change of heart it will have to be either a Golf or the new Focus (2011) with their "Powershift" DSG equivalent. Mind you apparently Hyundai and Kia have a DSG equivalent in the wings so by 2011 their 5/7 year warrantied softroaders could be worth a look.

I can't conceive of going back to a manual after 5 years with the DSG box on my Octy so unless Skoda have a change of heart it will have to be either a Golf or the new Focus (2011) with their "Powershift" DSG equivalent.

Have you considered trying the 1.2 DSG ? It's got great performance, and feels more like a 1.6 really. We're now averaging around 42mpg.

Edited 21 August, 201015 yr by tarbat

Have you considered trying the 1.2 DSG ? It's got great performance, and feels more like a 1.6 really. We're now averaging around 42mpg.

Yes, and I am likely to have a test drive. However, the MPG results here and in the press really seem to strongly indicate that the 1.2 TSI - lovely engine though it is - is really stressed hauling a Yeti for long distances at speed. MPG in the mid 20's low 30's doesn't imply an unstressed comfortable engine/vehicle mating.

Yes, and I am likely to have a test drive. However, the MPG results here and in the press really seem to strongly indicate that the 1.2 TSI - lovely engine though it is - is really stressed hauling a Yeti for long distances at speed. MPG in the mid 20's low 30's doesn't imply an unstressed comfortable engine/vehicle mating.

I find it a very unstressed comfortable engine/vehicle mating. As I've posted elsewhere, we averaged 39.2mpg when we did our regular summer tour of the relatives. Approx. 1400 miles from the north of Scotland, A9 to central belt, M6/M5 to Devon, A303 etc. to Bournemouth and Basingstoke, then A303 A34 M40 M6 A9 home. Most done at the legal speed limits. It's the most economical car we've ever had, and was very relaxed cruising at motorway speeds.

Yes, and I am likely to have a test drive. However, the MPG results here and in the press really seem to strongly indicate that the 1.2 TSI - lovely engine though it is - is really stressed hauling a Yeti for long distances at speed. MPG in the mid 20's low 30's doesn't imply an unstressed comfortable engine/vehicle mating.

If it wasn't for the economy at high speeds, you would never know it was stressed. As i' ve posted before, the engine is incredibly refined as a long distance cruiser and I'd have no hesitation at all in recommending it for long journeys. I think 75mph seems to be the tipping point on economy. 70 mph it's fine, it's just get it near to 80 and beyond and that's when it starts to like a drink.

Happily, over the last 1000 miles of more 'normal' driving, my 1.2 dsg has averaged 38 mpg which I'm very happy with.

my 1.2 manual is averaging in the 50's....consisitently..1300 miles in ...even playing with the turbo today with some boy racers, it was in the high 40's

Had our first long run this weekend, North Wales to south Wales. Went via the A483 through Newtown, Llandridnod Wells and Builth Wells, which as anyone who's been that way has loads of winding, hilly corners and some very sharp bends. We have been doing that run for years, and have never had such a good journey as in the Yeti, most cars sway about like mad on the bends, but as others have said, the Yeti, although only 2WD, went round them all without drama, really like being on rails! This was our main surprise of the trip really, having done it with several MPV type vehicles in the past and hated it.

The other pleasant surprise was the economy, a mixture of about 100 miles of twisty, hilly roads and the rest of the 400 miles total fast dual carriageway and normal roads, not particularly going slow but driving normally, we had an overall average of 44mpg.

We had no squeaks or rattles, the car performed faultlessly, even in the torrential rain on the way down.

The only change we made when we got there was to disable the automatic rear wiper operation via maxidot. It is linked somehow to give the rear window a wipe for every so many front wipes, and we found it often wiped a dry rear screen, and it was disconcerting to hear it dragging across when you didn't expect it, and prefer to do it manually.

All in all a very happy experience and really pleased with the combination of the 1.2 and DSG, made light work of the hills. Only downer, didn't see one Yeti!! Jessica

Edited 22 August, 201015 yr by jessica

Jessica,

You should hace popped in and said hello!!

Jessica,

You should hace popped in and said hello!!

Maybe we'll meet up on one of the Yeti meets that TP organises, we're a bit tied up with sick relatives in Cardiff and an old dog at present, so our visits down south are a bit rushed, but thanks for the invite!

And I must've been hiding too!

Lancashire and back today (255 miles). Average indicated fuel economy for round trip was 47.1 mpg. I admit to driving 60-70 mph rather than pushing it though. No squeaks or rattles now that I have cleaned the door rubbers.

As I was driving along I began to think of ways that Skoda could improve the (almost perfect) Yeti for the facelift. Maybe we should submit a list to Skoda between us? Probably be a case of shouting at a brick wall from what people say about SUK? I was thinking that they should ditch the pointless 160 mph speedo and replace it with a 140 mph clock with wider spacing so that 30, 50, 70 mph can be indicated. Maybe a little more insulation from tyre noise on bad surfaces. Not much else though which says it all really.