My Superb is not so economic?

[rocktheroad]

I am reading various mpg reports on the forum, and I have very different experience.

I have Superb 140PS/DSG/4x4.

I am mostly driving very short relation to my work/mall, about 3km so I am aware that short trips add to consumption as motor don't even reach work temperature. But it varies from 10-11 l/100kmh, or per google converter it is 20-23 mpg.

But what is more interesting is that I had trip to Greece. Here is GPS details about trip:

Length: 698 km

Avg Speed: 76.6 km/h (47.6 mph)

Avg Driving Speed: 105 km/h (65.2 mph)

Max Speed: 168 km/h (104.3 mph)

Trip time: 9:23h

Driving time: 6:41h

Stop time: 2:42h

Min altitude: 2m

Max altitude: 478m

And the most important MFD reports: 7.9 l/100km (29.77 mpg)

Those are objective figures, from GPS device. Car was working during all stops, idling. But interesting is that idling didn't reflect on average consumption as 7.9 figure was shown trough first part of trip before any stops.

Car was fully loaded, 2 adults, 2 kids (w car seats), almost full boot, and largest Thule loaded on roof.

Interesting is that my friend has same consumption driving Honda Civic, 1.8 petrol, almost same load but without Thule.

I know that Thule roof box adds 15% to consumption , but that means my consumption would be 6.86 l/100km (34.2 mpg). Which is still much more than 45-60 mpg reports?

[BillyJim]

Mathematics not Google's strong point?

10 l/100 km = 28 mpg

7.9 l/100 km = 36 mpg

6.86 l/100 km = 41 mpg

[Farnz]

Mathematics not Google's strong point?

10 l/100 km = 28 mpg

7.9 l/100 km = 36 mpg

6.86 l/100 km = 41 mpg

Google's giving you US MPG. They use a smaller gallon than the UK, so Google's "30 MPG" is 30 miles per US gallon, or about 36 miles per UK gallon.

FWIW, I suspect the speeds you're driving at are part of the economy loss - I get around 45 MPG all the time (and drive long trips routinely), but I'm peaking at under 140kph (picking up to a bit over 80mph when overtaking on the motorway - when I'm moving out of the slowest lane, it seems reasonable to keep up with traffic until I can settle back into the slowest lane at 70mph), and cruising at 100 to 120 kph (60mph to 70mph - whichever is the legal limit for the road I'm on).

I've noticed that my 170 CR is at its most economic at about 45 mph (70-ish kph), and starts to fall off rapidly above 70 mph - I record my actual mileage and fuel use with Spritmonitor.de, so you can see what I'm getting.

[rocktheroad]

That's the trick... Gallon difference, it's another 20% difference...

I know I am not the most economical driver. That 168kmh peak was probably some overtaking. I don't like idea of having anyone in front of me. And sometimes it will take years to reach someone who is driving 5 kmh slower, that is reason why those peaks.

Anyway I am glad mystery is resolved

[Superbjoser]

That's the trick... Gallon difference, it's another 20% difference...

I know I am not the most economical driver. That 168kmh peak was probably some overtaking. I don't like idea of having anyone in front of me. And sometimes it will take years to reach someone who is driving 5 kmh slower, that is reason why those peaks.

Anyway I am glad mystery is resolved

Oh well, driving a car that was "fully loaded, 2 adults, 2 kids (w car seats), almost full boot, and largest Thule loaded on roof" with that kind of speed... will never be anything I will have the guts to do. But we are all different.

But I can confirm your short trips consumption a cold winter day

/Superbjoser

[rocktheroad]

168 was a peak speed, I am driving within limits 130-150 kmh. In Balkan countries everyone is driving 10-20% above limit. When you find yourself on highway driving within limits, you realize that everyone is overtaking you. Somehow I feel safer driving like majority, as there is less overtaking involved and I just make sure that 1km right ahead of me there is no one.

In city, I am one of the most boring drivers, sticking blindly to all limits. On roads outside city, I tend to drive even slower than limits, as my kids have car sickness. Hill roads tend to have more bends, and it bothers me as I found that driving slower is almost equally dangerous as driving faster. Driving slower your destiny is in other driver hands, driving faster at least you are in command.

[Twelvebears]

Let's just get this straight. You drive a fully loaded DSG 4x4 superb at an AVERAGE speed of 65mph, with max of over 100mph and then complain that it ONLY manages 29mpg?

If I can just refer you to the definition of the Extra Urban Cycle, I think it will be obvious:

Extra-urban fuel consumption (mpg) defined as: The extra-urban cycle is conducted immediately following the urban cycle and consists roughly half steady-speed driving and the remainder accelerations, decelerations and some idling. Maximum speed is 75mph (120 km/h), average speed is 39mph (63 km/h) and the distance covered is 4.3 miles (7 km).

Just as a reference, I do a 96 mile round-trip commute to work every day. Admittedly it's all motorway, I travel outside rush-hour and don't hurry, but I'm seeing single trip MFD consumption on the trip to or from work of up to 62mpg.

My TOTAL average consumtion brim-to-brim from Fuelly is currently 50.2mpg

As I do approx. 20k miles per year, consumption is a big factor, so I do make a concerted effort to drive economically (at least on the work commute), but it just demonstrate what a huge factor driving style and speed are to fuel consumption.

Edited 5 September, 2011 by Twelvebears

[rocktheroad]

I never paid attention, as I drive 5k miles yearly... But this figures were way above because I mistakenly use US gallons for recalculation...

But anyway I am amazed how Honda 1.8 has good efficiency... Not sure that VAG 1.8 petrol would be so efficient?

[Karpator]

The answer for your question is this in your question:)

"Car was fully loaded, 2 adults, 2 kids (w car seats), almost full boot, and largest Thule loaded on roof"

Those can add 1-2 litre with ease, esepcially if you have the large Thules boxes. Not to mentio nyou were driving 170 km/h with a box and you wonder why you do you have those figures:)

Edited 8 September, 2011 by Karpator

[Supurbia]

This is all use dependent, if you run short and don't have a warm engine it will show low figures, you don't get a true reading until you've been about for 10 miles or so on a fully warm engine, you say you have a roof box, and are fully loaded, I don't think your figures are far out tbh, acid test is get all ppl and added weight out or off of it, and head into an urban area and run around hot for around ten miles and I bet she's reading a low 30 mpg.

Just noticed you have a 4X4 model, this sups the gas as well, one good way to lose mpg is a 4X4 drivetrain.

Edited 8 September, 2011 by Supurbia

[MarkyB77]

I just drove to blackpool from home, well the petrol station I filled up from around the corner and got 68.6mpg, after over 140m

On the way back it was dark, pouring down, so had everything on stopping mist and aiding visibility got about 56mpg up, before I got bored, and then ended up with 51mpg, but this was dominating the overtaking lane.

Can say im displeased with those figures economy is there if you want it, and if you want to get somewhere fast it does that too.

Why anyone needs 4x4 unless scandinavian countries ill never know... ill never take my superb on the rough stuff, that normal tyres wouldnt cope with, as for snow if it bothers you that much winter tyres are far much safer, if you have a struggle pulling off in the snow with 2wd, think how hard it will be to stop in a 4x4 version in the snow too with summer tyres.

[stevehg]

Why anyone needs 4x4 unless scandinavian countries ill never know... ill never take my superb on the rough stuff, that normal tyres wouldnt cope with, as for snow if it bothers you that much winter tyres are far much safer, if you have a struggle pulling off in the snow with 2wd, think how hard it will be to stop in a 4x4 version in the snow too with summer tyres.

Because 4x4 is not just about driving in snow.

Cheers

Steve

[kiwi jim]

Why anyone needs 4x4 unless scandinavian countries ill never know... ill never take my superb on the rough stuff, that normal tyres wouldnt cope with, as for snow if it bothers you that much winter tyres are far much safer, if you have a struggle pulling off in the snow with 2wd, think how hard it will be to stop in a 4x4 version in the snow too with summer tyres.

I agree 4x4 is probably over-rated in snow & ice, except for going uphill.

We had some unusually heavy snowfall this winter in New Zealand, and because the winters here are usually not that harsh no-one, myself included, bothers to fit winter tyres. The OEM summer tyres fitted to my Superb (continental contisport 2) were not surprisingly very poor in the snow, and having 4x4 really didn't make a lot of difference.

For the record, my vehicle has now done 12000 km and is getting about 6 to 6.5 L/100 km on highway driving (according to MFD), or a bit more if you do a brim-brim fuel measurement.

[Scott5247]

I have a 1.8 TSI which to start with produved some silly, and I mean sill, mpg figures and used no oil, which surprised me having changed from a petrol VRS Octavia. I was told that it would get better, firstly at 3000miles (it didn't) then 60000 when it began to. Now at 8000 miles I'm getting mid 40's on a run and I'm happy with that. The improvement started after I needed to top up the oil level. Probably an indication of the engine bedding in properly

Scott

[stevehg]

I agree 4x4 is probably over-rated in snow & ice, except for going uphill.

In heavy snowfall and ice, the ability to get up steep inclines and hills is the difference between getting home or not! This is where you see most cars abandoned.

We had some unusually heavy snowfall this winter in New Zealand, and because the winters here are usually not that harsh no-one, myself included, bothers to fit winter tyres. The OEM summer tyres fitted to my Superb (continental contisport 2) were not surprisingly very poor in the snow, and having 4x4 really didn't make a lot of difference.

4x4 provides improved distribution to the wheels, improving traction in a number of situations when driving in low traction conditions like snow and ice. Not just pulling away or inclines, but also cornering etc.

In the uk with 4x4 and standard tyres, I'd be surprised if you ever have an issue with the winter conditions. this is based on 12 winters of driving 4x4's on either summer or all season tyres. Also 12+ years of driving 4x4's in harsher conditions on AT's and MT's.

Will it be better with winter tyres? Of course it will, especially when braking - but they are not necessary in UK on a vehicle with 4x4.

Steve

[philpix]

Last two winters oop norf have been severe.

I tried to drive in the snow and ice on the Contis. A waste of time.

Now run on Avon Ice Touring from November to March.

4x4 is brilliant on the Contis during the summer months.

Phil.

[MarkyB77]

After many months of ownership can honestly say 12k miles 3mm tread left, no grip whatso ever on summer tyres in deep snow slush! Got stuck on the flat!! In a FWD I was shocked, as bad as an A6 I had the pleasure to drive in the past! Still love the car wasnt hard to get going again! Lets hope it doesn't snow again for a couple of years!!! Lol

[Richf]

3mm tyres is where you went wrong there , we have had no issues with our Superb but its a manual I dont find the Fabia as easy in the snow with its dsg

[bryanp]

Why anyone needs 4x4 unless scandinavian countries ill never know... ill never take my superb on the rough stuff, that normal tyres wouldnt cope with, as for snow if it bothers you that much winter tyres are far much safer, if you have a struggle pulling off in the snow with 2wd, think how hard it will be to stop in a 4x4 version in the snow too with summer tyres.

I bought the 4x4 more for stability when towing a caravan and the extra weight also makes it a better tow car, not all 4x4's are used for green laning!

OP, I have a 2.0 170 TDi 4x4 elegance and I do on average 12 mile trips to work on A and B roads and average 45 mph so achieve about 40 mpg, I get about 400 miles from full to the fuel light coming on, with the Superb's much criticised small 60 litre tank full to light is only about 47 litres! I also get around 29 mpg when towing a 1490kg caravan, so I wouldn't worry to much about your mpg as this sounds about normal for a 4x4.

Edited 13 February, 2013 by bryanp

[wokwon]

Why anyone needs 4x4 unless scandinavian countries ill never know... ill never take my superb on the rough stuff, that normal tyres wouldnt cope with, as for snow if it bothers you that much winter tyres are far much safer, if you have a struggle pulling off in the snow with 2wd, think how hard it will be to stop in a 4x4 version in the snow too with summer tyres.

...because I'm fed up with the wheel-hop I get with my current car.

[lowedb]

As a comparison, I have the 170 4x4. 4x4 for nicer manners on the road, and less reliance on traction control when towing a van. It's also great in snow with winters.

But back to topic. I was getting average 45-47MPG until I started a new job this year. Now I'm getting significantly over 50 each day. Purely down to road conditions. Interestingly, I now spend much more time at 70 MPH than my previosu journey, but then again much less in traffic.