I've got a new 1.6TDi with about 1,500 miles on the clock now.

I drive extremely economically but somehow I've only achieved 51.5 mpg real mpg on fill ups, which has been about 54.5mpg on the trip computer.

This is hardly better than my old PD TDi vRS which averaged 48.5 mpg on trip computer driving faster than I am now with the 1.6TDi.

A couple of things, what do others achieve, and how come the official figure is 60mpg plus and the only time I can see anything approaching it is trundling along at steady 60 mph on a flat dual carriageway? Is the official testing too far removed from what can be really acheived? The 2.0 PD TDi would get nearly the same under 60mph steady conditions as well (well indicated average 55mpg anyway)

Same thing goes for the Prius, figures said 65mpg, but in real life 49mpg was all that could be acheived even driving gently and using loads of regen braking. Just makes me think the official tests don't bear any resemblance to real life these days. Have the manufacturers found how to 'beat' the tests or are they sending 'specials' for the tests?

I've got a new 1.6TDi with about 1,500 miles on the clock now.

I drive extremely economically but somehow I've only achieved 51.5 mpg real mpg on fill ups, which has been about 54.5mpg on the trip computer.

This is hardly better than my old PD TDi vRS which averaged 48.5 mpg on trip computer driving faster than I am now with the 1.6TDi.

A couple of things, what do others achieve, and how come the official figure is 60mpg plus and the only time I can see anything approaching it is trundling along at steady 60 mph on a flat dual carriageway? Is the official testing too far removed from what can be really acheived? The 2.0 PD TDi would get nearly the same under 60mph steady conditions as well (well indicated average 55mpg anyway)

Same thing goes for the Prius, figures said 65mpg, but in real life 49mpg was all that could be acheived even driving gently and using loads of regen braking. Just makes me think the official tests don't bear any resemblance to real life these days. Have the manufacturers found how to 'beat' the tests or are they sending 'specials' for the tests?

I kept a spreadsheet for the first 20,000 miles in mine and I averaged around 55mpg. This was measured and not using the trip computer. I've now done nearly 60,000 and it's still around the same, although I've not been keeping accurate records just allowing for the trip computer over-reading by about 2mpg.

I still love the car. I had a 2.0 PD before and, even though it's not as powerful on paper, the 1.6CR a much nicer car to drive as it's so much smoother and quieter.

I think it's fair to say that manufacturers can tweak cars to do well on official tests and that this won't necessarily be an accurate reflection of real world driving.

My 2.0 PD140 would get an indicated 51-52 mpg on a typical tankfull which was about 48 when calculated - very close to the claimed figure.

I've now got a Fiat Bravo with a 1.6 TDI that claims 62 mpg but the long term calculated figure is only about 54 mpg - relatively speaking that's not brilliant, although I now do less long distance journeys.

There's a very long thread in the Fabia II forum on the 1.6 TDI engine's fuel economy which may be worth a read.

John

Just makes me think the official tests don't bear any resemblance to real life these days. Have the manufacturers found how to 'beat' the tests or are they sending 'specials' for the tests?

The official figures were never meant to represent real life.

It is simply a standard set of testing conditions to enable comparisons to be made between cars. So you know that Mercedes, Skoda, Ford etc all test their cars in the same way so you can say that car A will most likely have better economy than car B. NOT that Car A will do 41.8mpg and car B will do 37.4.

Unfortunately Joe Public spurred on by ignorant media has come to expect these figures to be a guarantee of performance, but even a brief moment of logical thought will tell you that the figures can never represent real life because we all drive differently, on different roads, with different loads, in different weather conditions, with cars in different states of maintenance, with different tyre pressures...

Your own economy figures will show how much variation you get from tank to tank and that is just with you driving the same car in what you think is the same way.

The EU has set manufacturers economy targets - they must achieve an average of something or other across the range. The idea behind the target is to improve the economy but in the way that such targets always work, the focus of attention shifts not to improving economy but to getting the best results in the test.

So manufacturers tune the ECU to give maximum results in the official economy tests which may completely bu$$er up real life motoring and explain why remaps can have such a benefit on fuel economy.

Edited 18 February, 201115 yr by eccleshill

I read somewhere that ecomomy figures are derived from rolling road tests, rather than actual road driving

I read somewhere that ecomomy figures are derived from rolling road tests, rather than actual road driving

They are indeed done on a rolling road so that all vehicles get exactly the same conditions.

http://www.dieselnet.com/standards/cycles/ece_eudc.html

Their´s people here in Portugal saying that they do 5.0L but myself who just completed 15000km have an average of 6.0L.

Normal 50/50 city/highway driving.

I have tried and did good values, even though it is winter which makes the average go up somewhat, but I drove like "an old lady" no ofence to anyone.

I know that normal highway 100km/h driving it will do 5.0L or lower.

A collegue who has a 1.6CR Fabia gets a far worse consumption than his old Tdi Octavia. When the car does a dpf regeneration (no light) the economy is much worse and the engine shakes on idle.

Edited 19 February, 201115 yr by mark999

A collegue who has a 1.6CR Fabia gets a far worse consumption than his old Tdi Octavia. When the car does a dpf regeneration (no light) the economy is much worse and the engine shakes on idle.

just got 62.8mpg on last tank full brim to brim

I must update this thread, got an indicated 69.8mpg this morning on a legal run of 135 miles, and on another 200 miles later in day got 64mpg again at legal speeds.

This is more like what I expected, engines now got 2,500 miles on it so that maybe helped.

Hope to see much more of this :yes: