Like other owners of the Fabia with the new 1.6 (105) diesel engine, I am very disappointed with the fuel consumption of this car. I find I am getting around 10 mpg less with the new engine than I was with my previous Fabia with the 1.9 tdi engine. Also this car does not tackle hills as readily as my previous car. I bought this car on the understanding that it would use less fuel than my previous car, why are Skoda going backwards when it comes to fuel consumption? Back in 1995 I was running a Ford Escort 1.8 tdi which was better on fuel than my present car.

Welcome to the site Lederhosen, thanks for posting your information on your car. We are all very interested in this subject as you can tell. Please tell us how many miles your car has done and what sort of use...motorway, town, mixed driving it is put to and what miles per gallon you seem to be getting. I have been researching this subject for many reasons over the last six months and have made some interesting discoveries.

I would point out that like you, several people on this board have initially been disappointed with the fuel economy but not actually that many. But by far the overwhelming majority of those that initially said they were not happy now say there cars are fine. So I wouldn't be too concerned if your car is still quite new with only a few thousand miles on the clock. There is no doubt achieving the manufacturers figures in some DPF equipped cars is much harder to start with for the first few thousand miles due to several factors. But from my research, it seems that usually all is well. I've been flamed by some for saying this but I can only go by my own research which has been quite extensive, and the people I know who have this car. As an engineer and ex technician I have been trained to deal in facts and getting to those facts often reveals a different picture to the one that is painted.

Welcome to the site Lederhosen, thanks for posting your information on your car. We are all very interested in this subject as you can tell. Please tell us how many miles your car has done and what sort of use...motorway, town, mixed driving it is put to and what miles per gallon you seem to be getting. I have been researching this subject for many reasons over the last six months and have made some interesting discoveries.

I would point out that like you, several people on this board have initially been disappointed with the fuel economy but not actually that many. But by far the overwhelming majority of those that initially said they were not happy now say there cars are fine. So I wouldn't be too concerned if your car is still quite new with only a few thousand miles on the clock. There is no doubt achieving the manufacturers figures in some DPF equipped cars is much harder to start with for the first few thousand miles due to several factors. But from my research, it seems that usually all is well. I've been flamed by some for saying this but I can only go by my own research which has been quite extensive, and the people I know who have this car. As an engineer and ex technician I have been trained to deal in facts and getting to those facts often reveals a different picture to the one that is painted.

Eh oop Estate Man

My Fabia has, I admit, only done about 2000 miles from new and I am hoping from reading other postings that my car's fuel consumption will improve with age. I live in very rural North Yorkshire close to both Lancashire and Cumbria borders hence it is a wee bit hilly here. At the moment my car is averaging about 57 mpg as compared to about 64 mpg for my previous 1.9 tdi Fabia. It is not possible to get up any great speed in this area and 40 - 50 mph is the norm. The two 1.9 tdi Fabias I have previously owned returned excellent mpg figures from day one so I don't understand why this one doesn't. As an example, if I drive from home to Lancaster (about 16 miles) the 1.9 tdi averaged about 69/70 mpg and this 1.6 about 60/61 mpg all at a speed as mentioned earlier.

Eh oop Estate Man

My Fabia has, I admit, only done about 2000 miles from new and I am hoping from reading other postings that my car's fuel consumption will improve with age. I live in very rural North Yorkshire close to both Lancashire and Cumbria borders hence it is a wee bit hilly here. At the moment my car is averaging about 57 mpg as compared to about 64 mpg for my previous 1.9 tdi Fabia. It is not possible to get up any great speed in this area and 40 - 50 mph is the norm. The two 1.9 tdi Fabias I have previously owned returned excellent mpg figures from day one so I don't understand why this one doesn't. As an example, if I drive from home to Lancaster (about 16 miles) the 1.9 tdi averaged about 69/70 mpg and this 1.6 about 60/61 mpg all at a speed as mentioned earlier.

Hi Lederhosen, there seems to be many factors as to why the cr1.6 is bit slow to start giving good mpg. You may already know some or all of these factors, but just in case you don't here goes!

Firstly, the engine is designed to be a bit revvier than the 1.9PD engine that you previously owned. It has a shorter stroke engine and when new doesn't like being driven in high gears at low speed. This uses more fuel. In addition it has a learning ecu that watches how you drive and adapts fuel injection to match your particular driving style (that goes on for 3000 miles). The engines are also very very tight for the first 5-6,000 miles which reduces fuel consumption and reduces power. Make sure you don't go too easy with the engine. It will continue to bed in for many thousands of mile yet. Follow the running in instruction. It is important. Many peope when they first get their new cr1.6 tend to drive in too higher gear. 5th gear for example is no good for fuel economy under 60mph. The engine is turning too slowly and is slightly under stress in 5th gear below that speed. This uses more fuel. So learning to drive it differently to your previous diesel is essential. Rev it more, ignore the dash gearchange lights that tell you when to change up. Once you do that many find fuel economy improves. Don't use 5th gear at all if you are in a slow rural driving situation. Your mpg will be much better in 4th gear as many on here will tell you. My sister has the cr1.6 and is getting 67mpg all the time in rural Suffolk, she hardly ever uses 5th gear! Initially she was getting just 52-54mpg. But to start with she was driving it like her 1.9TDI PD Octavia and not using enough revs. She altered the way she drove the car and immediately noticed an improvement. Now with over 5k on the clock everything is fine. It seems that driver adaption is a very important part of getting good mpg, more so with these modern DPF equipped cars than other previous non DPF cars. Drive it like you did your old diesel and you probably won't get good mpg!

Good luck and keep posting please with any improvements you get.

Hi Lederhosen, there seems to be many factors as to why the cr1.6 is bit slow to start giving good mpg. You may already know some or all of these factors, but just in case you don't here goes!

Firstly, the engine is designed to be a bit revvier than the 1.9PD engine that you previously owned. It has a shorter stroke engine and when new doesn't like being driven in high gears at low speed. This uses more fuel. In addition it has a learning ecu that watches how you drive and adapts fuel injection to match your particular driving style (that goes on for 3000 miles). The engines are also very very tight for the first 5-6,000 miles which reduces fuel consumption and reduces power. Make sure you don't go too easy with the engine. It will continue to bed in for many thousands of mile yet. Follow the running in instruction. It is important. Many peope when they first get their new cr1.6 tend to drive in too higher gear. 5th gear for example is no good for fuel economy under 60mph. The engine is turning too slowly and is slightly under stress in 5th gear below that speed. This uses more fuel. So learning to drive it differently to your previous diesel is essential. Rev it more, ignore the dash gearchange lights that tell you when to change up. Once you do that many find fuel economy improves. Don't use 5th gear at all if you are in a slow rural driving situation. Your mpg will be much better in 4th gear as many on here will tell you. My sister has the cr1.6 and is getting 67mpg all the time in rural Suffolk, she hardly ever uses 5th gear! Initially she was getting just 52-54mpg. But to start with she was driving it like her 1.9TDI PD Octavia and not using enough revs. She altered the way she drove the car and immediately noticed an improvement. Now with over 5k on the clock everything is fine. It seems that driver adaption is a very important part of getting good mpg, more so with these modern DPF equipped cars than other previous non DPF cars. Drive it like you did your old diesel and you probably won't get good mpg!

Good luck and keep posting please with any improvements you get.

Its not just the CR this applies to. The 1.4 TDI PD DPF Greenline (same gear ratios as CR) needs to be driven in the same way. These longer gear ranges are to me just a fiddle for getting past the EU emission regs. In the real world practical driving makes 5th gear largely redundant except on motorways/dual carriageways. After 25000 miles in my Greenline one thing is obvious, 5th gear is pointless below 60 mph. Its noisier, lumpier, less responsive and economy is worse. I also question the long term effect of burbling along at low engine rpm as regards clogging up your EGR valve and turbo variable vane system.

For all those folks that remember 'overdrive' buttons, 5th gear is like that....its a high speed cruise gear. I also found that burbling along in 5th increased the frequency of DPF regens.

Keep that engine spinning properly and warm, it will thank you for it.

I expect on the CR the lower rpm isue is less noticeable than a PD as the CR is 4 cylinder and smoother. Do that on a PD engine and it will tell you its not happy !

Of course, all the above could be rubbish, as its just my own opinion based on what I have found to be true in the case of my own car.

Its not just the CR this applies to. The 1.4 TDI PD DPF Greenline (same gear ratios as CR) needs to be driven in the same way. These longer gear ranges are to me just a fiddle for getting past the EU emission regs. In the real world practical driving makes 5th gear largely redundant except on motorways/dual carriageways. After 25000 miles in my Greenline one thing is obvious, 5th gear is pointless below 60 mph. Its noisier, lumpier, less responsive and economy is worse. I also question the long term effect of burbling along at low engine rpm as regards clogging up your EGR valve and turbo variable vane system.

For all those folks that remember 'overdrive' buttons, 5th gear is like that....its a high speed cruise gear. I also found that burbling along in 5th increased the frequency of DPF regens.

Keep that engine spinning properly and warm, it will thank you for it.

I expect on the CR the lower rpm isue is less noticeable than a PD as the CR is 4 cylinder and smoother. Do that on a PD engine and it will tell you its not happy !

Of course, all the above could be rubbish, as its just my own opinion based on what I have found to be true in the case of my own car.

You always make sense Raisbeck...prolly because you're an engineer! My standard 1.4TDI is lower geared in 5th gear as you know but I still find the 'mpg sweet spot' is over 60mph when in the cruise. 55mph doesn't do it and it uses slightly more fuel at that speed.

Edited 23 April, 201115 yr by Estate Man

Hi Lederhosen, there seems to be many factors as to why the cr1.6 is bit slow to start giving good mpg. You may already know some or all of these factors, but just in case you don't here goes!

Firstly, the engine is designed to be a bit revvier than the 1.9PD engine that you previously owned. It has a shorter stroke engine and when new doesn't like being driven in high gears at low speed. This uses more fuel. In addition it has a learning ecu that watches how you drive and adapts fuel injection to match your particular driving style (that goes on for 3000 miles). The engines are also very very tight for the first 5-6,000 miles which reduces fuel consumption and reduces power. Make sure you don't go too easy with the engine. It will continue to bed in for many thousands of mile yet. Follow the running in instruction. It is important. Many peope when they first get their new cr1.6 tend to drive in too higher gear. 5th gear for example is no good for fuel economy under 60mph. The engine is turning too slowly and is slightly under stress in 5th gear below that speed. This uses more fuel. So learning to drive it differently to your previous diesel is essential. Rev it more, ignore the dash gearchange lights that tell you when to change up. Once you do that many find fuel economy improves. Don't use 5th gear at all if you are in a slow rural driving situation. Your mpg will be much better in 4th gear as many on here will tell you. My sister has the cr1.6 and is getting 67mpg all the time in rural Suffolk, she hardly ever uses 5th gear! Initially she was getting just 52-54mpg. But to start with she was driving it like her 1.9TDI PD Octavia and not using enough revs. She altered the way she drove the car and immediately noticed an improvement. Now with over 5k on the clock everything is fine. It seems that driver adaption is a very important part of getting good mpg, more so with these modern DPF equipped cars than other previous non DPF cars. Drive it like you did your old diesel and you probably won't get good mpg!

Good luck and keep posting please with any improvements you get.

Hi Estate Man

Thanks very much for your reply. I am very interested in what you tell me, I am sure you are right. I did start driving this car as I did my previous 1.9 tdi but have recently taken to spending more time in 4th gear but I still have to make a conscious effort to do this. Certainly this car accelerates better than my old car as well as being more comfortable. It took me a while to "take" to this car and was rather regretting I had changed cars at all, but having gotten more used to this one I am now quite pleased with it.

Hi Estate Man

t have recently taken to spending more time in 4th gear but I still have to make a conscious effort to do this.

I know what you mean. My gearbox is very long, longer than the standard Fabia and it took me a while to relearn the best way to drive. It just goes against how I have driven all my previous cars. I still dont feel quite right not cruising always in top gear. The mpg and performance prove the different style but try telling my sub conscious that !!

Long gearing is becoming more common place, and we can expect it more and more. On the 2010 Passat diesel manual 6th gear was 31mph/1000rpm but the bluemotion model was geared at 37mph/1000rpm for 6th.

For 2011 all manual diesels get the Bluemotion gearing, 5th in the 2011 car is nearly the same as 6th in the previous years model.

Economy is up but performance has really dropped off in the top 3 gears.

Cheers

Lee

Great reading, with all the experience here, what is the best speed for mpg to be cruising on the motorway in my greenline 2 ?

It's looking like 60ish in 5th about 2000 RPM.

For town driving just under 30 in 3rd about 1600 RPM, my car read 70MPG on my good run to work this morning.

it's a very interesting comment made about driving diesels differently to petrols, very true though. it took me a while to adjust to diesel driving and get proper economy. whereas i find it easy to get very good mpg(always above stated figures) in petrol cars

Very good thread. I used to own a CR 2.0 TDI VRS Octavia, and while the economy on that was pretty good for what it was (170bhp, massive car compared to the Fabia) the economy was poor to begin with. I unfortunately wasn't worried enough to take tank to tank readings, but when new, the car computer read low to mid 40's, and once I'd bedded it in properly, I was easily seeing low 50mpg with decent motorway runs.

I did one run from Derby to Manchester and back to South Wales, think I averaged around 70-75mph steady driving and averaged 53.0mpg at the end. I was impressed

Very good thread. I used to own a CR 2.0 TDI VRS Octavia, and while the economy on that was pretty good for what it was (170bhp, massive car compared to the Fabia) the economy was poor to begin with. I unfortunately wasn't worried enough to take tank to tank readings, but when new, the car computer read low to mid 40's, and once I'd bedded it in properly, I was easily seeing low 50mpg with decent motorway runs.

I did one run from Derby to Manchester and back to South Wales, think I averaged around 70-75mph steady driving and averaged 53.0mpg at the end. I was impressed

I have now covered 2000 miles and using amount of diesel to refill tank on 1.6 tdi 90bhp have calculated getting 56 mpg, this compares with getting 48 mpg at 1000 miles and 53 at 1500 miles, this time i have done more mixed driving with many short trips of less than 1 mile but also 50 mles round trip commute daily so mpg improving. I have so far never been aware of a regen occurring yet. Hopefully mpg will still improve and for a 90bhp I find the fabia has good power and acceleration as on commute there is three of us probally weighing a total of nearly 50 stones, so certainly not underpowered.

Yep same for the Octavia, I never once saw the DPF light on, but sometimes when parked up it would regen then - fans remain on for up to 10 minutes once ignition is off, burning smell and heat coming from the exhausts is the perfectly normal behaviour (in case you have it happen and you aren't sure what it is)

Was very rare for me as I travelled 60 miles daily (except weekends)

Yep same for the Octavia, I never once saw the DPF light on, but sometimes when parked up it would regen then - fans remain on for up to 10 minutes once ignition is off, burning smell and heat coming from the exhausts is the perfectly normal behaviour (in case you have it happen and you aren't sure what it is)

Was very rare for me as I travelled 60 miles daily (except weekends)

I have the same engine as yours in my Passat, the first time I parked up during a regen and the fans stayed on I was convinced the car was going to burst into flames. Lifted the bonnet and the heat haze was pouring out from behind the engine and the smell of burning filled the air.

I do 60 miles a day too.

My economy is same as yours 50mpg with cruise set at 75mph. I don't know what it would do at 60mph on the motroway as others have suggested as I just can't bring myself to sit with HGV's and my times more valueable than getting another 5mpg. :yes:

Cheers

Lee

Edited 27 April, 201115 yr by logiclee

Hello everyone,

Haven't contributed for some time, but as I started this thread, thought I'd provide an update. My 90bhp Fabia has now done 13,000 miles and the mpg has increased some, but still pretty poor (in my opinion). At 70mph, I can just scrape 50mpg, but it's tight. Drop to 55mph and drive really, really carefully and I can get a bit over 60mpg. In other words, the mpg has gone up about 5 at 70mph. I find this pretty damn disappointing. Add to this the recent failure of a temperature sensor in the DPF, which resulted in a warning light and continuous regen, I'm not very happy. The dealership were appalling and Skoda central (their help line) are absolutely useless. I might as well shouted at the wall.

Not sure where to go from here. Either the car is faulty (I suspect this, but they can't find anything), or the performance is so far from their figures, I feel it is total misrepresentation. However, as they're a car company, they can sell rubbish and seem immune to everything the rest of the world has to abide by. I have a mind to write to the British MD, but if the rest of the 'help' they offer is anything to go by, I suspect I won't even get a response.

I'm really disappointed by the car. It has proven to not do anything like the mpg they claim, has been unreliable and their service is rubbish. Wish I had my old Toyota Yaris back and if I could, I would go back and pay for a new head gasket. That was 60mpg all day every day no matter how I drove. I could do 70-80mph and it would return 60mpg.

Are others (I recall others from before) still as disappointed? Not sure what the resale value is now, but considering chopping the heap in.

Mike

I have a Roomster with the 105hp TDi, its covered around 700 miles so far and in the last 450 miles its averaged 52mpg, thats about 54 showing on the computer. Ive had it show 73mpg once on a 13 mile trip from work one night. I can easily get figures in the high 50s so at the moment Im a happy bunny.

Mine is the 105 but official figures are the same as for the 90 so if not just the ECU map there can't be much difference. I now have done about 3200 miles.

I normally set the maxi-dot to show the single journey average MPG.

Last month on my 180 mile trip to my holiday destination mostly on motorway at around 70mph I got a recorded 61mpg.

I did use the cruise a few times on quiet stretches but tried to vary my cruising speed by a few mph so the engine was not continually at exactly the same revs.

In comparison journeys on slow A roads & B roads even if 30 miles or so will record about 50mpg and sometimes less. A similar 30-40 mile run on mainly faster A roads at 50-60mph but 30-40mph passing through towns & villages plus slowing for roundabouts will typically record mid-50's mpg.

I must calculate my average mpg since new and over the last few tankfulls to compare with the computer average.

I've never had the DPF light on but without any longer trips my regular commute of 11 miles each way seems to trigger a regen every 300ish miles. I can't tell when driving but know as when I get home ( so far I have not noticed a regen when arriving at work I guess because the faster part of my journey is nearer home ) there is the very noticeable heat and sometimes the fan running. The first few times the very distinctive eau de DPF too but this is now wearing off.

What I have noticed is after a regen for a few days or the first part of a long run the mpg is down by about 10%. Can anyone explain why this is? I don't get the heat again so seemingly not the regen running again due to not completing.

Hello Mike...nice to hear from you. But still not happy eh! Don't know what to suggest I'm afraid. Maybe a dyno test might be helpful to see what she is putting out. It could also help decide if your engine ecu fueling map is driving the engine ok and fueling it correctly. I'd love to have you car in my work shop for a day but I'm afraid that isn't practical for me currently.

However, since you started this important post I began contacting individuals who had purchased your model car, although most were the 105ps version. Some were estate cars, some hatchbacks. One of two of the people I contacted use this site. Some had complained of the same thing as you with poor fuel consumption. I also contacted owners of some VW cars through there website and a VW dealer who also had some individuals who had complained about poor fuel consumption. The purpose of this was to conduct a non scientific survey of how the cars performed over a period of 6 months as the miles went on the cars and in particular, in relation to the amount of fuel they consumed. I only recently finished following these individuals. In total I followed 13 cars all from new. I lost contact at last count with two owners, who hopefully will still come back to me. 5 owners of these cars with the CR1.6 engines were not at all happy with the fuel consumption. The remaining individuals were happy enough but hoped for more after running in.

My reasons for doing this were purely self centred and focused upon a paper I am writing for one of my college projects (I teach a part time motor engineering class).

I have extrapolated large amounts of data about the owners and their cars and it has indeed been very interesting to do this. However, to cut a long story very very short, and relating to fuel consumption only, the guys who were very unhappy about their fuel consumption to start with, are now very pleased indeed. The individuals who hoped for more are indeed getting more, lots more. With regard to the owners themselves, it seems the guys who were mostly not very happy at all with their fuel consumption were driving their cars like they did their previous diesel cars, not allowing the engine to rev freely, slogging it up hills etc, and straight from new too. This it seems had a very detrimental affect on the engine and fuel consumption. I visited in total 4 of the individuals who lived not too far away from my location and it was self evident that it was driving style that was causing their poor fuel consumption. Too few revs and too higher gears being used whilst the engine was particularly tight in the first couple of thousand miles. After having a chat and revising their driving styles the mpg improved a lot in all cases. My own sister who took part in this survey was also one of the individuals who complained of poor fuel consumption on her new CR1.6. She was driving it like she drove her old Octavia estate 1.9PD engined car. The shorter stroke 1.6CR doesn't like being slogged around when new as it cannot easily overcome the extra friction/inertia created by the tight engine. It uses more fuel, much more to achieve the performance if driven in that manner. Once run in (3-5k miles at least) it's a different story. It potters nicely at any revs.

I'm not suggesting this is or has been your problem Mike. I cannot say.

However, the people who seems to have been the happiest with their new 1.6Cr's from new are people who have never owned a diesel before and have come from driving petrol engines. I think this is down to the fact they are used to revving the engine, which the CR loves when new...it's how to drive it. These individuals obtained good mpg from new and it's improved alot as the miles have gone on the car. Even the VW car drivers are very happy with the 1.6CR engined cars now. Although it is two VW owners I have lost contact with so that's not conclusively the case until I have contact again.

I'm still pulling out loads of other information which is important to me, but I thought I would mention this thus far as I think it is a main reason for quite a few people having poor fuel consumption when they initially got their new cars. It's just a case for many of learning to drive it as it is a bit different to the older style diesels to begin with. I don't suppose this will make you feel any better Mike but it may go some way to answering your question. Good luck. :yes:

Thanks Estate Man & others.

My 1.6 CR105 estate is now a year old with 8000 miles on the clock. I have recorded every fill of diesel since new & the average mpg is only 48.02.

I have not noticed any significant improvement as the engine loosens. See below.

New to 2000 miles - 48.09 mpg

2001 to 4000 miles - 45.23 mpg (possibly the effect of the bad winter & winter diesel)

4001 to 6000 miles - 49.40 mpg

6001 to 8000 miles - 49.37 mpg

It is possible to get nearer 60mpg if I drive like my Aunty Mabel, at 55mph on level ground, but that's not real life is it?

Investigations by Skoda UK & the dealer have found nothing wrong & I am told no updates to the ECU, injectors etc are available. Following advice here & elsewhere, the gear change suggestions on the dash are ignored & plenty of revs have been use since new. Fifth gear is seldom used until about 55mph upwards.

The engine is quiet, runs as sweet as a nut & has masses of power if needed. The DPF regenerations were frequent early on, but much rarer & less noticeable in the last 6 months.

I am very happy with the car apart from the consumption. Previously I had a Fabia 1.9 Tdi PD for 8 years, which turned in an average of 56 mpg, month after month, with a similar pattern of journeys to the present.

My own observations are that

1. The engine is choosy about fuel. Only two local garages nearby, Texaco & Morrisons. Definitely not as smooth on the supermarket fuel & my detailed records indicate 3 mpg worse off as well. So it pretty much lives on Texaco.

2. The car is very sensitive to accelerator pressure. The instant MPG computer read out often shows an improvement, by just backing off the loud pedal whilst maintaining the same road speed. Don't drive in walking boots! Unfortunately, If you are watching the dash this avidly, you're not watching the road. Shouldn't be necessary to go to these lengths though, should it.

3. MPG is badly affected by hilly terrain & short trips. I live in West Devon & my local trips really hit the consumption. However, the rest of my normal driving (about 75%), on A roads & dual carriageways at 60 mph, don't boost the mpg enough to offset the local journeys.

Until recently, I found it hard to accept, that some users regularly report 60 mpg plus being easily achieved, on new cars out of the showroom. However, last month, I drove a dealer supplied, brand new courtesy car, the same model as mine, on a 60 mile round trip. On the same day, in the same conditions, weather & traffic, I made the same trip in my own car. The mpg was 12 mpg better in the new courtesy car!

I can't believe this is due to variations in factory build quality. Much easier to suspect, that factory tweaks have been made to newer cars, which are not available, under warranty, for cost reasons, to us early adopters.

As usual, dealers seem to be in the dark as much as the users. The advice I have been given, yet again, is that it will loosen up & improve with a few thousand more miles on the clock.

Oh, and I do check the tyre pressures regularly.

Mitre...that's such good information you have recorded. Well done. You are indeed correct about the terrain thing, that really makes a difference if you live in an area where you have uneven terrain. I believe you will find your car continues to improve as the garage is saying but it's somewhat annoying that your car didn't equal the courtesy car. I'm puzzled. :wonder:

Just want to add some info on an ongoing situation re Skoda fuel consumption. We splashed out on an Octavia 2.0TDiCR estate DSG (L&K spec) last July. The car was registered in Nov 2010 and had done 9000 miles, owned previously by a ‘senior manager’ at Skoda UK, said the dealer. It’s now done over 16,000 miles and the very best mpg I can get is 45mpg, at a steady 70mph on the motorway, over a regular 130mile run that I do, with no air con on. I have complained about this to the dealer as the official Skoda extra urban figure is 61mpg. The dealer has had the car back twice - the last time for 8 days - checked everything and it is in order. And they have driven the car to check it too, only to get the same 45mpg over along run! So, if nothing is wrong with car, and 'driving styles' have been largely eliminated by a steady 70mpg on the motorway in good weather conditions, by two different drivers, where does this leave me? I can accept that 61mpg is a theoretical figure obtained on the rolling road test, but 45mpg is so low by comparison it seems like misrepresentation to me. This is our first Skoda, and our first diesel, and it leaves us very unhappy.

Edited 1 February, 201214 yr by engineertk

Just want to add some info on an ongoing situation re Skoda fuel consumption. We splashed out on an Octavia 2.0TDiCR estate DSG (L&K spec) last July. The car was registered in Nov 2010 and had done 9000 miles, owned previously by a ‘senior manager’ at Skoda UK, said the dealer. It’s now done over 16,000 miles and the very best mpg I can get is 45mpg, at a steady 70mph on the motorway, over a regular 130mile run that I do, with no air con on. I have complained about this to the dealer as the official Skoda extra urban figure is 61mpg. The dealer has had the car back twice - the last time for 8 days - checked everything and it is in order. And they have driven the car to check it too, only to get the same 45mpg over along run! So, if nothing is wrong with car, and 'driving styles' have been largely eliminated by a steady 70mpg on the motorway in good weather conditions, by two different drivers, where does this leave me? I can accept that 61mpg is a theoretical figure obtained on the rolling road test, but 45mpg is so low by comparison it seems like misrepresentation to me. This is our first Skoda, and our first diesel, and it leaves us very unhappy.

Yes, the CR engines seem to vary with people reporting very different mpg. Some of us have undoubtedly got 'bad' ones. Ours has now done 10000 miles and is a real disappointment from an mpg point of view, otherwise a great car so resigned to it now. Second car is an 09 BMW 320D Efficient Dynamics which returns 52-53 on the motorway/autobahn at an indicated 80 and sometimes actually improves mpg at an indicated 90. Very hard to match with our 1.6 CR 105 Fabia under these and most other conditions save low speed running in flat country. Moral - if economy is important check with Honest John mpg figures before you buy and assume that you might get the lower figure stated.