Hi,

I was just looking at the C02/emissions and fuel consumption figures for the Tdi VRS with DSG estate. I'm nearly there with a purchase but one thing I'm unsure about are these figures as they don't look very good.... 47mpg and CO2 159g for the 2.0 CR.

This isn't particularly good compared to VW/Audi even Alfa equivalents!?

Can someone who owns one tell me what the real world figures are...if you're happy/or not and what kind of economy you're getting. On paper the figures look OK....I thought DSG was supposed to be more fuel efficent than manual, don't know where I got that from!?

Any help much appreciated.

I've just over 6k miles on mine and have an overall average of 45.6. It's only going to get better with more miles on the car and, after 10 years of Subaru ownership with a best of 23mpg I'm delighted.

I encounter mixed driving conditions and would say I do about 30% motorway, 30% B roads, 20% town driving and the remaining 20% on A roads.

High 50's on a good run but real world town driving/motorway stuff it's averaging 45 ish. Seen 60 at one point on our way from Lancashire to the Dordogne which surprised me. Car's done just over 30k.

yes, normal VRS driving gives me about 45 mpg but if i drive much more sensibly then i can achieve 64mpg.

mine as done 4,500 miles normally get around 43-46 urban and on long runs about 54

Done 46k miles now in our Octy with DSG, including 8000 miles towing caravan the consumption is average 42 mpg, however I do get get regular 60 mpg on runs of around 90 odd miles, couple of times got 70 mpg. I do not go by the computor readout much as I have kept a log since new on every gallon put in so that 42 mpg is what I have so far.Oh bye the way whilst towing I get around 30 mpg towing 1380klg.

Don't forget many of the Audi/VW have start-stop technology to 'fudge' the MPG figures, the vRS does not.

Was recently comparing MPG with a Q5 fitted with the same 170 CR TDi engine and the vRS was 10mpg better for extra urban, but the urban was similar just because the Q5 had start stop, which also helped its combined, even though the Q5 is heavier.

The DSG fitted to the Octy vRS diesel is the older wet clutch design that isn't as efficient as the newer dry clutch dsg's that can better the manuals economy.

I have a 2010 Passat 2.0CR DSG with the same engine and gearbox and the same quoted economy 47.9mpg combined.

I've also driven the 2011 Passat that quote amazing economy figures of over 10mpg better.

My commute is 7.5 mile A road, 17 miles motorway, 3.5 miles 30/40mph town centre. A 5am drive to work with Cruise set at 75mph on the motorway I'll get 55mpg unless the weather is really cold or windy. This will drop to 50mpg on the way home.

On a steady drive back from the coast at 50-60mph over 80 miles then I can scrape 60mpg.

Around town I'm looking at low 40's mpg.

So I can easily better the manufacturers figures with the 2.0CR and DSG.

When I had one of the newer manual models that quote over 60mpg combined for a week I managed 2mpg better than my Passat even though the claimed figure is 14mpg better. The stop/start cut in once in my trip to work, in the Euro tests there are long periods of idleing when the engine would be turned off.

Same goes for our TSi Fabia, It has economy figure of 5mpg better than my 2.0CR but it reality it's about 5mpg less.

My wife's HTP Fabia has better figures than my Passat but on the motorway at 70-80mph it does 10mpg less than the Passat. On the run back from the coast I mentioned above my wife travelled behind me, 51mpg from the HTP and 58mpg from the Passat.

So what can we gain from all this?

1. The 2.0CR with DSG can better it's quoted figures.

2. Many newer cars are engineered to produce outstanding results in the Euro test but can't achieve these results on the road.

3. If you do longer drives and higher speed drives then a big lazy diesel is going to be more economical.

4. Although the wet clutch DSG is down on the manuals mpg figures in reality it's more likely to achieve it's figures than a manual car with a driver that isn't constantly thinking about the most economical change point.

edited to add one more.

A work mate has just purchased an Octavia 1.6TDi Manual Elegance, a car with 15mpg more on the combined figure than mine. He does roughly the same commute as me and is currently 4 to 5mpg better although the engine is new and may loosen up.

Cheers

Lee

Edited 23 October, 201114 yr by logiclee

The DSG fitted to the Octy vRS diesel is the older wet clutch design that isn't as efficient as the newer dry clutch dsg's that can better the manuals economy.

I have a 2010 Passat 2.0CR DSG with the same engine and gearbox and the same quoted economy 47.9mpg combined.

I've also driven the 2011 Passat that quote amazing economy figures of over 10mpg better.

My commute is 7.5 mile A road, 17 miles motorway, 3.5 miles 30/40mph town centre. A 5am drive to work with Cruise set at 75mph on the motorway I'll get 55mpg unless the weather is really cold or windy. This will drop to 50mpg on the way home.

On a steady drive back from the coast at 50-60mph over 80 miles then I can scrape 60mpg.

Around town I'm looking at low 40's mpg.

So I can easily better the manufacturers figures with the 2.0CR and DSG.

When I had one of the newer manual models that quote over 60mpg combined for a week I managed 2mpg better than my Passat even though the claimed figure is 14mpg better. The stop/start cut in once in my trip to work, in the Euro tests there are long periods of idleing when the engine would be turned off.

Same goes for our TSi Fabia, It has economy figure of 5mpg better than my 2.0CR but it reality it's about 5mpg less.

My wife's HTP Fabia has better figures than my Passat but on the motorway at 70-80mph it does 10mpg less than the Passat. On the run back from the coast I mentioned above my wife travelled behind me, 51mpg from the HTP and 58mpg from the Passat.

So what can we gain from all this?

1. The 2.0CR with DSG can better it's quoted figures.

2. Many newer cars are engineered to produce outstanding results in the Euro test but can't achieve these results on the road.

3. If you do longer drives and higher speed drives then a big lazy diesel is going to be more economical.

4. Although the wet clutch DSG is down on the manuals mpg figures in reality it's more likely to achieve it's figures than a manual car with a driver that isn't constantly thinking about the most economical change point.

Cheers

Lee

+1

can easily achieve 60mpg now on a run now its done 21k. If you search my username on fuelly you will see my average which is about 47mpg but I do a fair bit of town driving which kills it. Not bad for a car that can do 0-60 in 6.98sec. Not much that can match that power to mpg ratio I reckon.

But undoubtedly lol will be along soon telling us all to buy a 1.8tsi with his outrageous mpg claims.

mine as done 4,500 miles normally get around 43-46 urban and on long runs about 54

My car has done 5k. Exactly same mpg figures as greatdane. I expect it to improve as the engine loosens. (its still good though surely for such a vehicle)

Done 24000 miles now and have averaged 48.1mpg since new. Mainly 50 mile commute on motorway but with some town stuff on days off.

It has improved slightly since day 1

JRW

Where did you get that 0-60 time of 6.98sec. Your car or internet info

Done 24000 miles now and have averaged 48.1mpg since new. Mainly 50 mile commute on motorway but with some town stuff on days off.

It has improved slightly since day 1

JRW

Where did you get that 0-60 time of 6.98sec. Your car or internet info

My car at GTI International this year on the sprint. Launch control helps!