i bet it was over 60 mpg though which ain't bad these days. Comparable with some lpg conversions corrected?

If you are going to have an information point on a car, or anything for that matter, then surely it has to attempt to be accurate otherwise what is the point of it. If the margin of error is so great that it is very much hit and miss, and 10% is in that territory for me, then it is better not to have it then have something that is giving out poor quality information. If it was my company I would tell the engineers to remove that aspect of the display until they could get the margin down to 5% at worst. (The issue of the margin of error for speedo readings is a different issue as there are legal complications concerning a driver speeding when the reading tells them otherwise). Before anyone barks at me, yes I have removed it from my display as the information is wrong so it is pointless being there. Every so often I will tick the box and check how it is reading but it is consistently wrong so I turn it off again.

Is this a big deal, absolutely not, more an irritation.

If you are going to have an information point on a car, or anything for that matter, then surely it has to attempt to be accurate otherwise what is the point of it. If the margin of error is so great that it is very much hit and miss, and 10% is in that territory for me, then it is better not to have it then have something that is giving out poor quality information. If it was my company I would tell the engineers to remove that aspect of the display until they could get the margin down to 5% at worst. (The issue of the margin of error for speedo readings is a different issue as there are legal complications concerning a driver speeding when the reading tells them otherwise). Before anyone barks at me, yes I have removed it from my display as the information is wrong so it is pointless being there. Every so often I will tick the box and check how it is reading but it is consistently wrong so I turn it off again.

Is this a big deal, absolutely not, more an irritation.

Seeking complete (or even near) accuracy on these pieces of car equipment is probably like the search for the philosopher's stone: and in the end, what difference does it actually make if you're using a bit less or a bit more fuel than it says on a single run, or if the temperature is a bit higher or lower than the readout says?

To my mind, the important thing is that the readouts are consistent, even if inaccurate: you can then COMPARE the results of different types of journey, different people's driving styles (or even differences in your own driving style), and you can tell if the temperature is rising or falling significantly and respond appropriately.

Harry Potter found the Philosopher's Stone, after a fine piece of magical chess from Ron, so it is achievable.

You are quite right though that in some ways this is a pointless argument as it could go on and on without resolve. We are better to return to the original point of the thread rather than is it annoying or not that the Maxidot, is/is not accurate.

Ignoring the Maxidot figues, and being a sad old git, I've just checked my figures.

Since last July I've done 13612 miles, and used 1341 litres of fuel, which gives me an overall fuel consumption of:

46.08 mpg.

Can't complain at that!! :thumbup:

I have just filled up for the first time since having the maxidot figure adjusted.

Firstly, my range was 450 miles after being filled up. Not very good, but seeing as my average speed was 18mph over 390 miles, to be expected.

My actual fuel consumption was 33.5mpg, the maxidot said 33.8mpg. that is less than 1% out. That will do for me. I wonder what a petrol would have done in the same conditions. All but about 50 miles were in South London.

Mike

I have now completed 400 miles in my SM and overall consumption according to maxidot is 46.1. I reckon it's no worse than 45 from top-up quantities. My return drive to the south of France commences tomorrow so when I'm back in mid-April I'll post what the consumption has been. It will probably dip, as I shall be pushing on on autoroutes a fair bit of the time - but looking forward to that!

Quick questions on MPG:

1. On standard 17" wheels my speedometer over-reads by approximately 6% (i.e. reads 74mph when travelling at 70mph). Does this mean that the odometer will also over-state distance travelled by the same %age and therefore that the MPG (both Maxidot and your own manual calcs) will be over-optimistic?

2. Also when my Winter tyres were fitted (on 16" wheels) this added another 3% to the over-read on both odometer and speedometer, which I guess would add to the over-estimate of MPG?

Any thoughts?

Cheers

Derek

PS Maxidot indicates I'm getting 37 MPG overall on my 1.2 DSG on mixed driving

Quick questions on MPG:

1. On standard 17" wheels my speedometer over-reads by approximately 6% (i.e. reads 74mph when travelling at 70mph). Does this mean that the odometer will also over-state distance travelled by the same %age and therefore that the MPG (both Maxidot and your own manual calcs) will be over-optimistic?

Interestingley my car also reads 74 when travelling at 70 confirmed by the Tom Tom. However the predicted distance for a long trip from the Tom Tom is virtually identical to the distance recorded on the trip meter.

Perhaps the Speedo error is to protect against Skoda claims from those caught speeding, and is not applied to the trip recorder? There would be some logic to this as actual distances covered are easily confirmed by the motorist from maps etc. This could mean that those that have altered the speedo recording to be more accurate are now uder recording distance travelled.

Your readings are comparable with mine, and seem normal for most vehicles, according to friends.