Yikes... look in my signature at the current average! Just over 20mpg!!! Is that correct for a tight new TDI DSG? Or did I mess up what I have put into that website?!

Oh I miss my A2's consumption! That gave me 45mpg and I drove it hard everywhere. If I tried a tiny bit harder I got 55 and if I really tried it easily gave me over 60mpg... But then the Yeti is made of steel instead of aluminium and weighs over half a ton more than the little A2...

Thats not looking very good at the moment, but, it has been bad weather since you collected it mostly, what type of journey's have you been doing? short - less than 10miles or longer ones?

These new diesels take an age to warm up apparently.

Yes it's tight and its an auto.

I did notice your signature before you posted this and my heart sank

Mike

I hope you put the wrong figures in. 20mpg? I get a minimum of 28mpg in the Rangie!

Thats not looking very good at the moment, but, it has been bad weather since you collected it mostly, what type of journey's have you been doing? short - less than 10miles or longer ones?

These new diesels take an age to warm up apparently.

Yes it's tight and its an auto.

I did notice your signature before you posted this and my heart sank

Mike

It has been a mix to be honest. And on the the 300mile return trip to Nottingham to buy the Golf the trip computer did say 43mpg average. Hmmm... Hence me wondering what I've put in wrong into that website... Most trips have been longer than 10 miles as well.

Does the Yeti have an electric heater like the A2 (or the old Webasto)? If not, then the engine won't get warm quickly at all as there will be heat being taken for the cabin. Diesel engines are often quite uneconomical for the first few thousand miles as they are very tight, even so I'd expect low-mid 30's out of the Yeti at this point.

I'm also fairly convinced DSG cars get decent economy/ emissions on the fixed-cycles as they are programmed to be in top gear by about 25mph...but this just means you end up holding a lower gear (or getting kick-down) to go anywhere - I've driven two flavours of DSG, 6-speed in an A3 2.0T and 7-speed in an A3 1.4T and they were both the same in this respect - cruising they are probably pretty good but in normal driving not as efficient as a manual.

I'll keep my eye on what the stats tend to be for petrol v diesel as the TDI 110 is a good £1300 more than the 1.2TSI, and £800 more than the 1.4TSI...

Glad to hear somebody is honest about their economy - quite often people claim to get rather fantastical figures!

Yikes... look in my signature at the current average! Just over 20mpg!!! Is that correct for a tight new TDI DSG? Or did I mess up what I have put into that website?!

Oh I miss my A2's consumption! That gave me 45mpg and I drove it hard everywhere. If I tried a tiny bit harder I got 55 and if I really tried it easily gave me over 60mpg... But then the Yeti is made of steel instead of aluminium and weighs over half a ton more than the little A2...

You didn't buy a diesel for running around London did you? Oh well. And an auto box!!!!!!!

My 140 took 15 minutes and 10 miles to warm up this morning. Fortunately (depending on how you look at it) we need to travel at least 10 to get anywhere useful so, at least, the diesel gets a chance to warm up. No DPF problems either.

It has been a mix to be honest. And on the the 300mile return trip to Nottingham to buy the Golf the trip computer did say 43mpg average. Hmmm... Hence me wondering what I've put in wrong into that website... Most trips have been longer than 10 miles as well.

As remarked elsewhere cold weather does reduce mpg and having to go more slowly doesn't help either. The mpg on my 140PS TDI PD DSG Octavia estate is typically 45-50 or more in summer, but its difficult to get over 50 in winter, and in recent difficult road conditions I've been lucky to get to 40. Add idling while scraping off ice, running the air con to keep the windows demisted and use of the heater on full blast to keep the wife warm and its down below 30 mpg on short runs - and the engine doesn't reach working temperature for 5-6 miles.

Thats on a 2WD car that weighs less and is a bit more aerodynamic, and its just about run in at 36,000 miles. So my mpg is down by 25% or more. When I bought it my Octy had done 8,000 miles and its economy has steadily improved. Your CR engine should be even better than the PD version eventually.

Your long run mpg suggests there is nothing wrong given that the engine hasn't loosened up yet.

I've searched unsucessfully for a comment I read that said the ECU runs in a different, less fuel efficient mode for the first few thousand miles to help with the running in process. Without the citation we can't assess the validity of the comment.

No doubt better informed members than I will advise you.

Regards

You didn't buy a diesel for running around London did you? Oh well. And an auto box!!!!!!!

Hehehe. Nope. I've got the London Underground for that Terfyn! The Yeti will not be used much in London as I don't drive it to work. It is going to mainly be a summer car for when I camp, kayak and walk all over the UK. But for the times I do use it in congested London the DSG is a fantastic luxury. I don't think I will ever get a manual car again! Well not as my main car. The MX-5 is of course a manual. But truth be told I have not set foot in it since I got the Yeti.

I'm a bit perplexed with the figures since that big trip did give me 42 average and another time I saw on the main trip computer average something like 36mpg... I will stop worrying as someone else said it is still tight and have already managed a 42 on an even tighter engine (at that stage).

If it is of any help. Our manual 2 litre Yeti only has 2500miles on the clock. Over this mileage the car has averaged 43.46mpg. A mix of very local short runs in the zero temperatures, medium 15 mile runs plus a long 400mile run. The Maxidot is way over optimistic reading between 8.7 and 15.4% high. My average is taken from actual fillup calcs.

This is rather different from the 55mpg obtained on the 1.4 diesel Fabia that was traded -in! I trust it will improve!

Edited 6 December, 201015 yr by survey

Aha! I did not tick First Fueling when I put the first one in. I just ticked that (the other options are Party full and full). And that changed my average to 26 mpg. That is a bit better for a tight car.

But in saying that the website also states:

Hints:

It is important that you chose the correct type of fueling, i.e., if you filled up the entire tank of the vehicle or not.

The first fueling you enter into the database should be a full fueling and be declared as first fueling.

My first fueling was not a full one... So should I rather just fill this in from my first full fill up?

Edited 6 December, 201015 yr by 900000

The cold weather and short trips absolutely hammers the fuel consumption. I was actually surprised to average 27.3 last week for my 1.4 TSi, thought it would be less than that with the conditions weatherwise and the total gridlock that was last Tuesday.

I'm sure your car will steadily improve Johann. My last 2.0 TDi DSG did similar in the cold for short , stop/start journeys. The new engines seem much better in many ways from what I've read.

Try an experiment with the Maxidot. Start your journey and note the Av MPG - then reset it during the journey. I found that the Maxidot gave a totally different range of Av MPG the second time round. This is because it starts to average from a totally different base (starting point)

Maxidot 2 usually gives a more constant reading as it is summing over a longer range. (unless you reset it)

Incidentally my 140 gives a pretty constant 40-43 mpg. (old engine)

Edited 6 December, 201015 yr by Terfyn

Aha! I did not tick First Fueling when I put the first one in. I just ticked that (the other options are Party full and full). And that changed my average to 26 mpg. That is a bit better for a tight car.

But in saying that the website also states:

Hints:

It is important that you chose the correct type of fueling, i.e., if you filled up the entire tank of the vehicle or not.

The first fueling you enter into the database should be a full fueling and be declared as first fueling.

My first fueling was not a full one... So should I rather just fill this in from my first full fill up?

I would suggest doing from the first FULL tank of fuel.

I personally used a spreadsheet to work it out in the past, very simple as I keep a record of all trips etc for tax purposes.

miles travelled/(litres/4.55)=mpg. last time I heard 4.55 was to conversion factor for litres -> imperial UK gallons.

The biggest problem is working out when the tank is full, and then replicating it every time. I personally think that the speed of a pump has some bearing on this, the design of the tank etc, which is why we see such a variation between the maxidot and our own calculations.

Me personally will go more with the car side of things as I believe that the car knows how much fuel it is putting in the engine, if it didn't it would be running not very well etc. and the companies have spent £m's trying to make the cars run as lean as possible whilst giving decent performance. Those injectors inject just the right amount of fuel. It can't be hard for them to work out from that what the mpg is. I know there are other factors like running 205/55 R16's instead of 225/50 R17's, the tyres wearing out etc, the mileometer being out etc. You would have thought that they could by now design a car that would know how fast it was going exactly and exactly how far it had travelled. GPS/Big brother.

Anyway, as we are using the cars' odometer as the maxidot is as well, that rules out that error.

Mike

I would suggest doing from the first FULL tank of fuel.

I personally used a spreadsheet to work it out in the past, very simple as I keep a record of all trips etc for tax purposes.

miles travelled/(litres/4.55)=mpg. last time I heard 4.55 was to conversion factor for litres -> imperial UK gallons.

The biggest problem is working out when the tank is full, and then replicating it every time. I personally think that the speed of a pump has some bearing on this, the design of the tank etc, which is why we see such a variation between the maxidot and our own calculations.

Me personally will go more with the car side of things as I believe that the car knows how much fuel it is putting in the engine, if it didn't it would be running not very well etc. and the companies have spent £m's trying to make the cars run as lean as possible whilst giving decent performance. Those injectors inject just the right amount of fuel. It can't be hard for them to work out from that what the mpg is. I know there are other factors like running 205/55 R16's instead of 225/50 R17's, the tyres wearing out etc, the mileometer being out etc. You would have thought that they could by now design a car that would know how fast it was going exactly and exactly how far it had travelled. GPS/Big brother.

Anyway, as we are using the cars' odometer as the maxidot is as well, that rules out that error.

Mike

Over several tank fills, the only accurate mpg is a calc rather than using the car's computer.

You would have thought that they could by now design a car that would know how fast it was going exactly and exactly how far it had travelled.

They do!

On my last Octavia I used the Climatronic diagnostic settings, TomTom sat nav and trip computer to do a little test.

On a long empty A road I got my speed up to 60mph on the speedo as close as I could then set the cruise control and zeroed trip 1

The speed readings were as follows (as close as i remember!)

Speedo - 60mph

Climatronic - 57mph

Trip average speed - 57mph

TomTom satnav - 56mph

The only conclusion is that speedos are purposely set to be optimistic to deter speeding or to prevent legal action if it was shown that the cause of a speeding offence was down to a pessimistic speedo.

I wondered if the speedo variation translated into inaccurate odometer readings so did another test.

On a longish journey I followed the sat nav to the absolute letter. Journey distance on the sat nav was estimated at 184 miles; trip odometer read 183.6.

Over several tank fills, the only accurate mpg is a calc rather than using the car's computer.

Absolutely right - the only way to get an "accurate" figure is to use brim to brim over at least 250 litres. That way the error from the different tank fill levels is negligible.

I brim my cars so the fuel sits at the top of the filler for accuracy - however, this can take an age so don't include fill-ups when the forecourt is busy, nor the one after.

The only conclusion is that speedos are purposely set to be optimistic to deter speeding or to prevent legal action if it was shown that the cause of a speeding offence was down to a pessimistic speedo.

Spot on - they are calibrated to over-read as driving with a speedo under-reading is an offence, and obviously they are not recalibrated once made. The best way to illustrate this is drive through a 50mph SPECS camera zone with the cruise set to 50 and notice the HGV's all drift past - the truck is doing a genuine 50mph, you are likely doing 46-48mph. This is because their speedo's are calibrated acurately (and regularly) as it's connected to the Tachograph which is a legal document.

Today, driving around South London and then coming the long way home via the NCP (M25 for those who don't know it) Elsie averaged about 43mpg according to the Maxidot. Even if its about 10% out, that is OK in my book.

Mike

They'll all do much better when they are warmed up. 43 is pretty darned good

As I've said before , the cold start, short stop/start journeys are the type of use patterns that return typically poor consumption.

I've just brimmed the tank after almost 2 weeks of ice and snow.The engine rarely ran at normal temp, with some prolonged Idling in the drive to defrost the car (2 mornings were -17C / -15C) It worked out at 28 mpg. I'll take that as the lowest achievable in a new 170 TDI........ :wonder:

Well I did a few hundred miles this weekend going to St Briavels just this side of the Welch border (and in doing so crossed the border and the Yeti had its first trip of many to come going there!). The average going there was:

And the average coming back was:

I'm happy with both of these figures and the consistency.

And this was with a car fully packed up to the underside of the parcel shelf, four adults and the rear middle seat out and stuff packed there too. Filled him up and put the data into that website and as you can see below it now says average of jsut over 28mpg. Over the weekend the car did move so it was 90% motorway there and back with only a few miles of country roads, doing a cruise controlled TomTom indicated 73mph (80 on the speedo). Over time I hope this will get better of course. The car's number two average now says 39mpg.

Your trip meter has more miles on it than my car has done

Mike

Which country does the Welch border with?

Mike

Which country does the Welch border with?

Mike

England!!!

WELCH!!

WELCH!!!

WELCH!!!!

Damn saesnigs!!

It's WELSH!!