New Fabia 1.6 cr fuel consumption dropping

[Mick 50]

Hi i just got a nearly new fabia elegance 1.6 tdi the car has 4100 miles on her and the fuel consumption is dropping .

The first fill up i averaged 44.75, 44.60 and lastly 38.76,most of my journeys are short trips to customers houses.

I took the car down M1 for 2 junctions and the display was reading 61 to the gallon,which i thought was good but on fill up it was no where near that,so after reading some of the treads on here i have filled with Shell v power to see if there is any difference.

This is my first skoda with a dpf and after having an octavia 1.9 tdi, fabia 1.4 tdi pd and octavia 105pd 1.9 tdi and they all gave better consumption than this one.

so any input would be great help.Thanks

[raisbeck]

Hi i just got a nearly new fabia elegance 1.6 tdi the car has 4100 miles on her and the fuel consumption is dropping .

The first fill up i averaged 44.75, 44.60 and lastly 38.76,most of my journeys are short trips to customers houses.

I took the car down M1 for 2 junctions and the display was reading 61 to the gallon,which i thought was good but on fill up it was no where near that,so after reading some of the treads on here i have filled with Shell v power to see if there is any difference.

This is my first skoda with a dpf and after having an octavia 1.9 tdi, fabia 1.4 tdi pd and octavia 105pd 1.9 tdi and they all gave better consumption than this one.

so any input would be great help.Thanks

This thread has been done to death previously. This is the link

Edited 10 December, 2011 by raisbeck

[Mick 50]

This thread has been done to death previously. This is the link

Well thanks for the response i read that tread before posting,I thought my circumstances were different.

[Guest]

Mick, yes it's all been covered as Raisbeck says, but in your case it is most likely you just need to get used to the new car's engine characteristics. The new diesels require a slighty different driving technique to get the best out of them. It's the more experienced diesel drivers that seem to have had the most problems getting good mpg's as they buy them and drive them like their old diesels. The 1.6cr is a revvier engine, due to a shorter piston conrod stroke. It doesn't like to be driven like the PD engines at lower revs under load. At least not until it's covered lots and lots of miles. Short trips at low revs kills the fuel economy on these. Ignore the gear change indicator and don't use 5th gear until at least 60mph and don't use fourth gear in urban areas until 40mph and you will be fine. You should see you mpg improve but we are all on winter diesel now and using our electrics a lot so that knocks it too. Keep the tyre pressures up as they fluctuate a bit at this time of year. Hope I don't sound as if I'm trying to teach you to suck eggs, but you did ask and these seem to be the things that affect the 1.6cr alot.

[raisbeck]

FYI My economy is down about 10 percent from what I get in summer.

As Estate man says. Winter diesel, more electrics, longer warm up time.(my economy is poor until the engine is fully warm). Cold air is denser so drag increases...

I sort of assumed thats why my economy drops about that much in winter.

I chatted to the dealer when my car was in for service. He has a lot of people say that the new CR isnt as efficient as the older PD's like mine. Seems a quieter, smoother engine comes at a slight price which is economy loss. Or euro 5 emissions regs do nothing to help with economy. I wonder if other manufacturers new diesels are suffering similar economy losses.

[lemonvrs]

Ive had my Roomster for a few months and 5000 miles now. Im finding exactly the opposite of everyone else. If I drive it at lower revs I can get fantastic economy, if I drive it at 2000rpm or more it drops significantly! But, driving at the lower revs makes the Dpf regen more frequently and the economy then drops. Basically, fuel consumption varies so much on these due to regens and weather that its impossible to guage its overall economy. However, whatever way you look at it the 1.6 is way better economy wise than the only alternative, the Tsi petrol.

Essentially, its a lovely engine that delivers reasonable economy but nothing fantastic.

[Guest]

FYI My economy is down about 10 percent from what I get in summer.

I wonder if other manufacturers new diesels are suffering similar economy losses.

Raisbeck, I'm currently doing the rounds at the dealers trying different cars before I almost certainly buy a new 1.6cr Fabia Estate. At the moment I've tried Hyundia (i30 Hatch 1.6TDI, a JD Power class leader with the Octavia), Ford (new Focus world car 1.6TDI), Vauxhall (Astra 2ltr TDI Hatch), VW (Golf 1.6TDI & 1.4TSI 122ps petrol). They all seem to be saying customers are complaining they cannot hit the figures published in the book. I know several of the dealers quite well and have worked with some of their technicians over the years. If you want to know about a car, don't talk to the salesmen, go see the technicians who work on them. They can tell you anything you want to know about how good or bad they are, but be discreet as some dealers don't like you speaking to technician in case you are put off buying a car. They can normally tell you about any fuel economy problems as they are the one's who usually have to check the cars over looking for faults, but usually there aren't any. However, it's interesting that several of my old tech colleagues are saying both petrol and the new diesels are getting lots of complaints. They put this down to Euro 5 and the way engines are being designed now with much shorter engine strokes making the engine near square. In diesels this means you cannot drive them in the conventional lazy way without wasting fuel, especially in the first few thousand miles as the frictional forces in the engines consumes a lot of power.

But hey ho, I'm having fun driving them all. I'm actually impressed with the new World Focus car. It's big and powerful with a very quiet diesel engine giving upto 88mpg. It'll probably take 5k or more to get there though! And no road tax on virtually all new diesels unless it's a 2ltr engine.

[seboni121]

As its been said several times, winter fuel will drop economy a fair bit also geared totally different to all that's gone before, let it rev much higher before changing, it also prefers A roads to B roads I regularly get high 50 to low 60 mpg and once over 65 it swallows fuel so I set crusie at 60 on motorways

[Guest]

That's just what I found Seb in my sisters motor which is the same as yours.

[seboni121]

Aye and don't drive like an old foggie

[Mick 50]

Hi all thanks for feedback i note all comments and i think that my problem lies with the dpf and that it is my first skoda with one on.

This morning i noticed for the first time the smell and the car seemed hotter so i took to the motorway again let it regen i think, because on mfd it was reading 52.1mpg by the time i got home, so thats an improvement.

Estateman i have not been using 5 th gear much as you mentioned on the other tread ,so i will try not using 4th till 40 and see how i get on.

So by the sound of it the mfd is common through the range and not altered for the cr engine?

Ps i tried driving like an old foggie Boring

[raisbeck]

Hi all thanks for feedback i note all comments and i think that my problem lies with the dpf and that it is my first skoda with one on.

This morning i noticed for the first time the smell and the car seemed hotter so i took to the motorway again let it regen i think, because on mfd it was reading 52.1mpg by the time i got home, so thats an improvement.

Estateman i have not been using 5 th gear much as you mentioned on the other tread ,so i will try not using 4th till 40 and see how i get on.

So by the sound of it the mfd is common through the range and not altered for the cr engine?

Ps i tried driving like an old foggie Boring

PD is the same. Forget 5th until your over 55ish. 3rd gear anything up to just below 40. PD is like a lumpy vibrating monster if you try to lug it at low rpm so you tend to keep it on boost. My regens just dont factor with economy, makes no measurable difference but then my regens a lot more frequently than the CR. Regens every 110 miles ish. This extends to about 150 if you sit at 80 or more.

Estate man. When I wasnt sure my car was going to be written off I considered the KIA Rio diesel. On paper its economy for the diesel looks impressive. Never got round to trying one though. I did consider a small petrol car but after driving a few small capacity petrols while mine was fixed. I soon went off that idea. Gutless with crap economy when driven at non hippie speeds. Hated having to fill up twice a week with fuel, Greenline goes over a week without filling up, much to the annoyance of the exchequer

Like Mick I have gotten bored with foggie driving. I can be on the dual cariageway for 35 miles every day at a speed with an '8' in the number. Still gives me low sixties mpg even in winter. I dont know how much better than a standard PD or CR this is. I hope there is some difference otherwise buying a Greenline over a standard TDI wasnt worth it.

[fabia55]

sorry what is 'winter diesel', is the diesel in winter different to the diesel you get during the summer? does the same apply to unleaded.

[raisbeck]

sorry what is 'winter diesel', is the diesel in winter different to the diesel you get during the summer? does the same apply to unleaded.

I think its benzin they add to raise the gelpoint. Supposedly lowers the calorific value a little so less energy per volume than summer diesel.

On shaky ground here but I think they do the same with petrol except they use a more volatile Hydrocarbon ADDITION to improve vaporisation for cold starting. Its the element of fuel that 'goes off' like a lawnmower stored all winter that wont start in summer. The lighter more volatile components have vapoured off over time. I think......not really sure.

[R22JGB]

Raisbeck, I'm currently doing the rounds at the dealers trying different cars before I almost certainly buy a new 1.6cr Fabia Estate. At the moment I've tried Hyundia (i30 Hatch 1.6TDI, a JD Power class leader with the Octavia), Ford (new Focus world car 1.6TDI), Vauxhall (Astra 2ltr TDI Hatch), VW (Golf 1.6TDI & 1.4TSI 122ps petrol). They all seem to be saying customers are complaining they cannot hit the figures published in the book. I know several of the dealers quite well and have worked with some of their technicians over the years. If you want to know about a car, don't talk to the salesmen, go see the technicians who work on them. They can tell you anything you want to know about how good or bad they are, but be discreet as some dealers don't like you speaking to technician in case you are put off buying a car. They can normally tell you about any fuel economy problems as they are the one's who usually have to check the cars over looking for faults, but usually there aren't any. However, it's interesting that several of my old tech colleagues are saying both petrol and the new diesels are getting lots of complaints. They put this down to Euro 5 and the way engines are being designed now with much shorter engine strokes making the engine near square. In diesels this means you cannot drive them in the conventional lazy way without wasting fuel, especially in the first few thousand miles as the frictional forces in the engines consumes a lot of power.

But hey ho, I'm having fun driving them all. I'm actually impressed with the new World Focus car. It's big and powerful with a very quiet diesel engine giving upto 88mpg. It'll probably take 5k or more to get there though! And no road tax on virtually all new diesels unless it's a 2ltr engine.

What a load of Tish!!!

The VAG 1.6 TDI CR engine does has fuel economy problems!!! Estateman does not yet own a one, he should be thankful

Yes the Ford/ Citroen/Peugeot 1.6 is more economical. I have had one an covered almost 60K so feel qualified to state that,

88MPG in a Focus! Balderdash I'm afraid Estateman is taking too much notice of advertised figures, the only figure that is anywhere near achievable is the combined figure. I can achieve this in a Ford, but cannot get anywhere near it in an Ibiza 1.6 TDi CR!

[paulemillar]

Well I regularly and over long periods exceed my cars combined claimed mpg figure, same engine, but my car is a fair bit heavier than yours. VW caddy maxi life 1.6 tdi cr bluemotion technology, 7k on clock now.

Interesting. For the sake of balance.

Edited 11 December, 2011 by paulemillar

[Brimma]

This morning I drove Lincoln to the east coast, not an economy drive, and got 63.7 mpg on the trip computer

Monte 105bhp CRTDi

[Guest]

What a load of Tish!!!

The VAG 1.6 TDI CR engine does has fuel economy problems!!! Estateman does not yet own a one, he should be thankful

Yes the Ford/ Citroen/Peugeot 1.6 is more economical. I have had one an covered almost 60K so feel qualified to state that,

88MPG in a Focus! Balderdash I'm afraid Estateman is taking too much notice of advertised figures, the only figure that is anywhere near achievable is the combined figure. I can achieve this in a Ford, but cannot get anywhere near it in an Ibiza 1.6 TDi CR!

Hi TSID, I think you have misunderstood my post. I'm not claiming 88mpg from the Focus, those are the official figures for the extra urban (the one that show what the maximum figure is for the car under the rules imposed by the EEC). I only had the Focus for a day and it was brilliant and very very economical over the 50 odd miles that I covered (64mpg). As for the VAG CR1.6TDI, we've had one in the family (my lil sis's) for over a year now. I drive it regularly and it does not have any fuel economy problems, neither do any of my numerous friends who have them, whether 90ps or 105ps. They all hit regular 60+mpg in their normal use. Note I say THEIR normal use, for where they live, in their terrain, their routes and traffic conditions, and their driving style. It MAY be different for others as with ALL cars, if you live in the Highlands of Scotland for example or in Devon with a few big hills. And it's often driving style that is one of the biggest influences on mpg. Many who claim bad mpg's often don't realise how bad their driving is (sorry, not having a go at you TSID) and don't realise they can save huge amounts of fuel with just a very small adjustment of their driving style, but often in my experience, they need to be shown as they usually think they are brilliant drivers.

If you go on any or the forums for Ford, Peugeot, Citreon or the various VAG cars, the topics are all the same regarding fuel economy of the NEWER car on the market. There are those that claim good and bad economy. But mostly it's all good. Many of the people even on our site here that claimed bad mpg's initially when they bought their new CR1.6's are now very happy with them regarding fuel economy. I know because I kept in touch with quite a few of them. Mostly it was a driving style thing (learning how to drive the new engine for best economy) combined with letting the car 'run in' properly over time. I'm guessing your Ford/Peugeot/Citreon experience was on older cars not euro 5 enabled. You would have to try harder now to get the best mpg's if you bought one now.

[seboni121]

What tosh?? I regularly get 60+ easy so that's from a 4 k on the clock so when it's done a few more k I'll get even more mpg

[BossFox]

This morning I drove Lincoln to the east coast, not an economy drive, and got 63.7 mpg on the trip computer

Monte 105bhp CRTDi

So in reality that's probably somewhere between 50mpg and 70mpg?

My Fabia was telling me 91mpg when a few months old. It was really doing 72mpg. And yet the Yeti is only 1% out.

[seboni121]

So in reality that's probably somewhere between 50mpg and 70mpg?

My Fabia was telling me 91mpg when a few months old. It was really doing 72mpg. And yet the Yeti is only 1% out.

91 and 72 hell of a difference why so much ?

[BossFox]

91 and 72 hell of a difference why so much ?

Because on some cars the display for mpg is accurate, but on many it's way out. Usually optimistic too.

It is better now the engine has been run in with 16,000 miles on it. Now it's only about 5% optimistic instead of over 10%.

This is why what the car claims is completely pointless for comparison, work it out on a tank to tank fill.

The only way to be sure.

[Guest]

Boss, I've never had a car that's had an inaccurate trip of that nature, it isn't really the norm and you should get it checked out if it's that inaccurate. It is normal for it to be out a little in some types of driving where the software won't keep up, but in general use, most people should find only a small deviation not 72-91mpg difference. Mine is usually very accurate and out by less than 1% on the several occassions I've checked it. It's never been out by more than that. My sis has about the same deviation on her 1.6cr too. Are you sure you actually did brim the car properly each time from the same pump. Don't forget the diesel foams quite a bit and takes time to settle and then you need to get more in. If you didn't then that accounts for your massive difference which is unacceptable in my view and would not be tolerated by any of the motor manufacturers I've teched for.

[BossFox]

Hi Estate Man,

Yes, I always fill from the same pump in my local shell garage, wait for the foam to settle and then top it up so I can just see the top of the diesel level. At this stage it's about 2 or 3 inches down from the top of the filler pipe.

When the GL2 was new it was doing about 70mpg and showing 90mpg+, but as the engine has worn in the miles per gallon has gone up... and the display mpg has come down. Now they are not that far out and as I always fill and record on fuelly it doesn't bother me really. It's a hell of a lot more accurate than it was!

It's the range per tank I'm most interested in, which is pretty good.

Our Yeti is only 0.1mpg out, so as you say, they can be quite accurate.

Richard

And it'll be going in March, so it'll do until then.

[seboni121]

Hi Estate Man,

Yes, I always fill from the same pump in my local shell garage, wait for the foam to settle and then top it up so I can just see the top of the diesel level. At this stage it's about 2 or 3 inches down from the top of the filler pipe.

When the GL2 was new it was doing about 70mpg and showing 90mpg+, but as the engine has worn in the miles per gallon has gone up... and the display mpg has come down. Now they are not that far out and as I always fill and record on fuelly it doesn't bother me really. It's a hell of a lot more accurate than it was!

It's the range per tank I'm most interested in, which is pretty good.

Our Yeti is only 0.1mpg out, so as you say, they can be quite accurate.

Richard

And it'll be going in March, so it'll do until then.

Why are you getting rid ??