Fabia 1.6 CR TDI 90bhp appalling fuel consumption

[raisbeck]

Just registered on here to say this. I think you're expecting far too much, Mike. As you said in your thread at the start, you're replacing a Euro3 engine with a Euro5. These Euro5 engines are complicated beasts, with so many emission controls to try and satisfy stupid European taxes.

All diesels need a good while to bed in, particuarly VAG diesels. They don't generally start going properly until north of the 50k mark.

Anecdote: One of our pool cars at work is an old Passat B5 with the 130hp 1.9PD engine. I've done long trips in that, filling brim to brin and got well over 65mpg. Not bad for an old junker with 90k on the clock, and a 5 speed box. I've then gone on to do the exact same trip, in basically the same time in a 1.6TDCI Focus (90hp). The Focus with 10k on the clock only got 44mpg. There's progress for you.

Personally, I wouldn't touch a diesel engine car that's less than 10 years old. I had so much trouble with commonrail diesels. Now I drive an old petrol Mondeo, and the engine is sweet as a nut at 72k, and apart from filters and oil and one set of plugs, it's had nothing. It's run perfectly. It gets a consistant MPG all year. True worry free motoring, and it's cheap to run as I only do 6k a year.

Cant argue with that

My PD Fabia is a more economic and smooth running beast now I am at over 50k. It got a whole lot better at around 30k.

Diesels strength used to be simplicity, reliability and economy. Now its complexity with worse economy for the reasons you state. Mostly whats changed is the sales pitch....

Should never have got rid of steam cars........ :no: Where's my Luddite hat.

[Guest]

Raisbeck, I'm quite happy to start a joint development program for 'Steam Cars'. This time next year we could be 'millionaires'!!

[Danny_W]

I'm pleased I found this thread on a search engine

I have today been looking at a 105 CR Fabia. I currently have a 100bhp Seat Ibiza 07 plate with the same 45 litre tank PD engine. I fancied a change and looking at the tank range quoted of 650 odd miles, now I fully expect that to be well OTT. My Ibiza 1.9pdi engine delivers on my 50 mile commute to work 500 mile tank range easily and has since new. I get 500 miles winter or summer from a 40 litre refill, ignoring the trip computer is 57mpg and I sit at 70mph for the motorway parts of my journey.

Looking at this thread with the same size fuel tank I wouldn't get near that with a new fabia, I think I might have to look elsewhere or just keep what I have. I was hoping for a 500 mile tank range again :(

[kiansdad]

skoda customer services are incompetant,

my 61 plate fabia has intermittent electric window issues

they fail to go up or down

the diagnostics at DM KEITH say NO error.

Therefore they cannot fix my car, They cannot spend time on looking at my vehicle because without a fault code off their diagnostics machine, Skoda will not pay them to diagnose the fault under warranty.

Customer services are still months down the line looking for a solution. I get told I will be keep informed, but I do not.

Dealer is not interested, on one visit they insinuated I was telling porky pies. So the next time the fault occured i drove to the dealer left the engine running and made their mechanic view the fault.

Skoda Customer services are incompentant

and D M KEITH if the computers says ''No'' then it is tuff luck, your car does not get fixed

I want to reject the vehicle so much . but i like the car apart from its naff fuel consumption. My aim is to annoy Skoda and be the customer from hell. Watchdog, Auto express, What car here i come.

[raisbeck]

Raisbeck, I'm quite happy to start a joint development program for 'Steam Cars'. This time next year we could be 'millionaires'!!

Sadly with a hosepipe ban we wont even be able to fuel it....besides all this rain put the flame out

[raisbeck]

but i like the car apart from its naff fuel consumption.

I dare anyone to tell him he isn't driving it right...

[kiansdad]

I am driving it right. I have ready many a topic on here.

I get 45 ish around town

I get 52 ish on a long run

If i drive like a flatcap i may get late 50's

ok bright spark mr i know it all, tell me how i should drive it then i will agree or disagree

[raisbeck]

I am driving it right. I have ready many a topic on here.

I get 45 ish around town

I get 52 ish on a long run

If i drive like a flatcap i may get late 50's

ok bright spark mr i know it all, tell me how i should drive it then i will agree or disagree

you missed the point completely. There are some who think its the drivers fault, I dont. I was wondering if any of them would try to tell you your driving it wrong...

[Guest]

you missed the point completely. There are some who think its the drivers fault, I dont. I was wondering if any of them would try to tell you your driving it wrong...

What do you think it is Raisbeck? What research have you done?

[raisbeck]

What do you think it is Raisbeck? What research have you done?

As with most things in the real world I tend to listen to those actually experiencing the problems. Of course driving a car in a specific manner focused on economy is going to help, but its not specific to one particular model. The point is that there are many people who despite following advice and changing their driving style still get poor economy from the cr engine. Same applies across Seat and VW using the same engine. Fiat is the same with the twinair engine which a friend has and despite all attempts to modify driving style the economy isnt even close to whats advertised.

Given the real concerns people have over unrealistic economy figures i do feel its a little patronising to tell them it will all get better in a few years when they put a load of miles on the car or they are just poor drivers.

I have the utmost respect for your knowledge of all things motorised but I reserve the right to disagree with you without having to spend months researching an opinion....thats all.

I shall leave the remainder of this particular thread to your extensive research.

[xreyuk]

To be fair, I did see a post on these forums about how 'eco' versions of cars are further away from their claimed MPG statistics compared to normal cars. They are still higher mpg for the most part.

However, one the guys in work has a 1.8 diesel BMW 3 series, that is an 11 plate and only has 5,000 miles on the clock. He is averaging 70mpg without much effort.

[Ad Lav]

I wouldn't call 50 - 60mpg that bad... try mine in the middle of winter doing town journeys - 27mpg :(

[xreyuk]

I wouldn't call 50 - 60mpg that bad... try mine in the middle of winter doing town journeys - 27mpg :(

For a car (my car anyway) that claims 83mpg for motorway driving, and when other people are easily getting mid 60s at 70mph, it does get frustrating!

[Guest]

Given the real concerns people have over unrealistic economy figures i do feel its a little patronising to tell them it will all get better in a few years when they put a load of miles on the car or they are just poor drivers.

I have the utmost respect for your knowledge of all things motorised but I reserve the right to disagree with you without having to spend months researching an opinion....thats all.  

Utmost respect to you to. I don't think anyone, especially not me, would question your right to an opinion that is contrary to mine or anybody elses. MPG's are a contentious issue involving many aspects, driver, topograhy, etc etc that need to be right. You know all that anyway. But this mpg thing is nothing new, it has always been the case customers complain about it, petrol or diesel. 30 years ago it was just the same. I've been on the receiving end at dealerships too many times and it's has always been sorted in the end with the techniques mentioned in mine and others posts and once the car has been found to be ok and we've seen the customer driving. Rarely is it anything other than the driver not being used to the car or his driving habits are just not conducive with good mpg near to advertised figures. Yet they always think they are great drivers and it's the car. But customers complain more now (as they should if they feel something is wrong) because cars are capable of many many more miles per gallon and customers expect to realise that economy all the time. But to achieve that requires some effort from them and even then they won't always get the book figures. You've even pointed out yourself you had to alter your driving technique to get the best out of your car. You found that easy, but many others don't and need help.Well like you, I'm MPG worn out now! I, like you, will be leaving this one now. See you in another thread I hope.

[io1901]

Aren't all cars subjected to the same standard test? I think all modern cars are designed to do well in these tests driven a certain way. If you don't drive the car in the most economic way you won't get any where near the published figures, In the past I have always managed to get to get near or exceed the publish figures - but recently in the two most recent cars I have struggled to get close.

I think the test no longer is valid and needs to be changed.

[Master02]

The test does not reflect the real running of the car i.e. when they are doing the test the car is probably not doing a 'regen' for the bloody DPF! The current official figures are at best misleading and at worst outright lie! I got better MPG out of my old astra than the GII (65-72MPG). I have listened to the various advice on these forums and I still can't do more than 65MPG! (I do about 10 miles on country roads and 20 miles on motorway). Used V-power diesel for less soot, experimented with various driving styles including never drop RPM below 2K unless car is coasting and I am extremely disappointed as the MAIN reason for buying the car was for economy.

I think the main problem is with the ECU software which decides how and when to 'regen' wasting fuel. I do the motorway trip on 2500rpm and just before I reach home on the country roads, it decides to 'regen' - the garage is filled with smell of diesel! I will have the car checked out at 10K service, however I am sure they will find nothing wrong with it...

The car itself is great and lovely to drive with the engine purring most of the time. I wish VW will come out and admit the official figures are a fib of someone's imagination!

[delta925]

Another thought for debate ......

For those of us who for whatever reason experience significantly higher fuel consumption for 100+ miles after a regen could we get a MOT emissions test fail if the test was during this higher consumption period because the engine is running less efficiently?

No! The MOT test is just a smoke test for diesels. Your DPF prohibits virtually all smoke.

Estate Man,

Thanks for this - I assumed these days there was a pollution level check too.

[veloplus]

I'll declare my hand and state that my 19,750 mile, 6 month old Superb Combi GL 1.6Tdi is currently recording an average (from new) of 63.90 mpg. I have a 45 mile motorway commute and travel on as part of my job.

My last three fill-ups have seen 900, 901 and 897 miles range and just shy of 70 mpg. These figures can be scrutinised on Spiritmonitor.de and Fuelly.com.

I came from Octy and Superb 1.9Tdi 105's and have had to adapt my driving style to reflect the change form a PD to a CR diesel engine.

My average cruising speed is 55-57mph. Whilst I appreciate this may seem too low for some folks, the benefit in reducing just 10mpg, for example, travelling at 60mph rather than 70mph pays dividends at the pump.

I am sure that by adopting a hypermiling approach when driving a Fabia, or indeed, any 1.6 Tdi engined Skoda, will result in more pleasing fuel economy.

[veloplus]

Aren't all cars subjected to the same standard test? I think all modern cars are designed to do well in these tests driven a certain way. If you don't drive the car in the most economic way you won't get any where near the published figures, In the past I have always managed to get to get near or exceed the publish figures - but recently in the two most recent cars I have struggled to get close.

I think the test no longer is valid and needs to be changed.

If you read car magazine reports of economy competitions, it is far easier to exceed manufacturers published figures in a gas guzzler, where there the manufacturer is not so keen to achieve the best possible fuel economy.

By the same token, it is very hard to get close to published mpg figures when driving a Greenline or equivalent 'eco' model. The manufacturers of such models go to great lengths to squeeze out the best fuel economy, as this will often influence large fleets and leasing companies who buy in large numbers.

[delta925]

skoda customer services are incompetant,

my 61 plate fabia has intermittent electric window issues

they fail to go up or down

the diagnostics at DM KEITH say NO error.

Therefore they cannot fix my car, They cannot spend time on looking at my vehicle because without a fault code off their diagnostics machine, Skoda will not pay them to diagnose the fault under warranty.

Customer services are still months down the line looking for a solution. I get told I will be keep informed, but I do not.

Dealer is not interested, on one visit they insinuated I was telling porky pies. So the next time the fault occured i drove to the dealer left the engine running and made their mechanic view the fault.

Skoda Customer services are incompentant

and D M KEITH if the computers says ''No'' then it is tuff luck, your car does not get fixed

I want to reject the vehicle so much . but i like the car apart from its naff fuel consumption. My aim is to annoy Skoda and be the customer from hell. Watchdog, Auto express, What car here i come.

Generally as cars have ever more electronics built in, regardless of if they are really needed, both the in-car and garage computer diagnostics are a valuable tool. Also when there is a problem that can not be reproduced in the workshop the technicians job to diagnose the cause can be almost impossible.

However just because the diagnostics have not detected and logged the fault it must not be assumed there is no fault.

In principle it is fair enough for HQ to have to authorise spending more than a certain amount of time on a fault but telling the customer effectively ' tough luck - go away and put up with the issue ' let alone implying they are lying and the issue does not really exist is simply wrong.

One solution would be to have a specialist technician to deal with the awkward problems and who has a full set of modules, sensors etc to swap in responsible for an area.

[Guest]

Hi delta, you are quite right in what you say. Many franchised dealers have a specialist to sort problems at their own expense simply because manufacturers will only pay for so much diagnostic work and sometimes it needs a bit longer to sort the problem. That's what I used to do. But we had a separate 'sparky' specialist for this sort of thing as all garages do usually. Customers ofen tend to think of technicians as nothing more that fitters because they just plug the computer in and then do what it tells them to do. But that's not true at all. Technicians have never had to know more stuff than now. You have to have computers to plug in to access the complex systems on cars now. It's when you get a fault that doesn't show up on the system that a technician will prove his or her worth. They have knowledge and training that is invaluable to find the problem. And virtually all faults are found for customers without difficulty, but due to the nature of the beasts these days, it can take a while to replicate a faulty. Substitution of engine and electrical parts can prove valuable in tracing faults as you say.

[Igloo Vindaloo]

For a car (my car anyway) that claims 83mpg for motorway driving, and when other people are easily getting mid 60s at 70mph, it does get frustrating!

No-one claims 83mpg for motorway driving. The extra-urban test only includes a short period at 120km/h (75mph), but most driving around 70-100km/h, where the car is much more fuel efficient ["]http://www.dieselnet.com/standards/cycles/ece_eudc.php]. For example, this morning I got 2.9 L/100km (97mpg uk) at a constant 91km/h on a 20km run. Unfortunately most people don't drive cars like that. (Nor do I usually!)

[logiclee]

Some interesting results for the 1.6TDi on What Car's new true mpg site.

I compared the 2.0CR TDi to the 1.6CR TDi in the Passat and put my driving style in which 2/3 motorway, driving economically.

2.0CR TDi Passat SE

True mpg 54.3mpg

True Average 54.8mpg

Govt Average 61.4mpg

1.6TDi Passat SE and the figures are...

True mpg 45.1mpg

True Average 45.6mpg

Govt Average 64.2mpg

So according to What Car if I'd have gone for the "more economical" 1.6TDi I'd be 9mpg worse off.

They have only tested the vRS Fabia upto yet.

Cheers

Lee

Edited 2 May, 2012 by logiclee

[Master02]

http://www.honestjohn.co.uk/RealMpg/Results?manufacturer=skoda

[punyXpress]

Also:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring/new ... -boss.html