Hi all as above my tfsi is getting poor mpg figures compared to others I am reading about... mine is 29-30 mpg even on a run to Cornwall recently I only saw 31? There are no faults on my torque app but could this be pcv or dv? I know they are prone to failure although skoda never mentioned it on my very recent service....are there any simple checks I can do?

Check your tyre pressures to start with and it would be worth having your alignment checked.

I replaced both failing pcv and dv last year and it didn't have a perceptible effect on mpg.

Checked your oil? My mpg drops when the oil level is lower.

 

Sticking brakes? Check for a hot wheel.

That average MPG isn't that bad really. The most I've had was 36mpg over a 220 mile journey up & down the M40. My average over the last 12000 miles is 28mpg. In my experience You have to drive like a saint to average anything over 30mpg.

Good advice guys...have had allignment done and tyres are all ok...oil is fine and has just been changed perhaps this is just normal

Checked your oil? My mpg drops when the oil level is lower.

How does that work?  The opposite can be true if the oil is overfilled, because the crank webs dip into the oil and/or windage is increased.

 

I suppose running with a low oil level stresses the oil more because it gets less time to cool down in the sump before being circulated again, but that would generally just make it thinner.  In extreme circumstances it could get so thin that there is no longer enough film strength to prevent metal-metal contact but that shouldn't happen.

With a stage 1 map; intake and exhaust, my car averaged 43.4 mpg to Cardiff (from Reading), about 41 mpg on the way back.

On my day to day work runs I see about 34-39 mpg's (over 8 miles of backroads, 50mph limits, 30 mph limits etc).

Over an entire tank between 28 and 31 mpg's depending on driving.

Car is a vRS TFSI.

...on a run to Cornwall recently I only saw 31?

At what speed were you driving? The faster you go the lower the mpg be due to increased air resistance.

 

Factors like tyre pressure and wheel alignment will make much smaller differences than slowing down by say 10 mph.

Edited 26 October, 201312 yr by Ultrasonic

I pro stayed at about 75-80 I am nir overly fussed about a few mpg I am more concerned that something is not quite right but it seems that 30-35 accross a tank is about right

At 70-72 on my Tom Tom I get 37-38 usually and have twice got 40Mpg Lincoln to Edinburgh and back cruising at 70, with a few squirts to get past stuff. Yours will do less in cold weather. I live in a rural area so I don't sit in too much traffic. It all depends if you boot it or not.

How does that work?  The opposite can be true if the oil is overfilled, because the crank webs dip into the oil and/or windage is increased.

 

I suppose running with a low oil level stresses the oil more because it gets less time to cool down in the sump before being circulated again, but that would generally just make it thinner.  In extreme circumstances it could get so thin that there is no longer enough film strength to prevent metal-metal contact but that shouldn't happen.

 

No idea but it is true for me.

 

Back OT do you have poor efficiency tyres. I changed mine recently and it made quite a significant difference (+3 mpg everywhere).

It's on its second set of the dunlops they come with but will be getting refreshed after winter

I put on Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance on the front only to get that drop. I thought eco tyres were snake oil but I'll be putting them on the back too when it's time.

 

Not as sporty feeling as other tyres but grippy enough.

I put on Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance on the front only to get that drop. I thought eco tyres were snake oil but I'll be putting them on the back too when it's time.

 

Not as sporty feeling as other tyres but grippy enough.

 

I have been reading lots of reviews on different tyres and also using http://www.tyrereviews.co.uk/Tyre-Size/18-Inch-Tyres/

 

I quite like the look of the hankook V12's or Vredsteins as both get good reviews in terms of grip but I will also now take into account the efficiency level too when choosing

Turbo cars use vast amouts of fuel on boost, which is why they do comparatively well in the standard mpg tests, which only involve GENTLE acceleration.  In contrast, a normally-aspirated engine has higher efficiency when it's being worked rather hard, near wide open throttle, because then the pumping losses are reduced and the gases flow better in and out of the cylinder.

 

Typically NA engines can meet or exceed the claimed NEDC mpg in real life but turbo cars rarely, if ever, manage it.

 

What this means is that (for mpg) you should drive a turbo car gently and a NA car hard in terms of getting up to cruising speed.  Also avoid short trips, using the engine hard until it has warmed up (again, it drinks fuel during cold start so you should drive it gently for the first few miles, not straight onto the motorway) and any congestion.

Turbo cars use vast amouts of fuel on boost, which is why they do comparatively well in the standard mpg tests, which only involve GENTLE acceleration.  In contrast, a normally-aspirated engine has higher efficiency when it's being worked rather hard, near wide open throttle, because then the pumping losses are reduced and the gases flow better in and out of the cylinder.

 

Typically NA engines can meet or exceed the claimed NEDC mpg in real life but turbo cars rarely, if ever, manage it.

 

What this means is that (for mpg) you should drive a turbo car gently and a NA car hard in terms of getting up to cruising speed.  Also avoid short trips, using the engine hard until it has warmed up (again, it drinks fuel during cold start so you should drive it gently for the first few miles, not straight onto the motorway) and any congestion.

 

This makes sense and I guess driving at 75-80 + would be on boost even if only a little bit so its just drinking up the fuel...oh well you dont buy a 200bhp car for fuel economy

For a ~200hp decent sized car the VRS is really pretty good on fuel. I remember looking at the stats for other cars when I bought and often they had poorer mpg with much lower hp.

 

It's all relative.

For a ~200hp decent sized car the VRS is really pretty good on fuel. I remember looking at the stats for other cars when I bought and often they had poorer mpg with much lower hp.

 

It's all relative.

 

I am thinking a remap will put things into perspective :-)

I put on Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance on the front only to get that drop. I thought eco tyres were snake oil but I'll be putting them on the back too when it's time.

 

Not as sporty feeling as other tyres but grippy enough.

 

I agree with Aspman, i not 2 weeks ago fitted some of these to the front of my car and have had lower roadnoise and Increased Mpg as a result. They also grip really well in the rain, but can seem wallowy if you push them hard on bends, but then again that may be because either the soft side wall of the tyres, or the fact that i dont drive a Vrs..   

Edited 1 November, 201312 yr by Gazman

In my tfsi I used to get 40mpg on a run to cornwall most years, highest was a 44mpg average at night. However to work and back (7mile) I get 30mpg unless im late and then it can be 18mpg  . The blackline on the other hand i can give it full beans and still gives 35mpg+. 62mpg is the best average on a run to lincoln. On the whole very impressed with diesel and petrol VRS fuel economy.

For a ~200hp decent sized car the VRS is really pretty good on fuel. I remember looking at the stats for other cars when I bought and often they had poorer mpg with much lower hp.

 

It's all relative.

 

I'd agree. It was one of the reasons I chose the vRS over other cars with similar power

yes having a look around other similar cars are rubbish on fuel such as the E46 325 I owned previous to the VRS....30mpg was just a pipe dream in that thing

yes having a look around other similar cars are rubbish on fuel such as the E46 325 I owned previous to the VRS....30mpg was just a pipe dream in that thing

 

To be honest, my mates E46 330i is pretty good on fuel. In fact, you could argue that it's more economical given that it uses a 3ltr engine compared with the vRS' 2ltr.

 

On a long trip, he will still get mid 30's for example

yea as soon as I brought the 325 I realised I should have got the 330...the 325 needs to be driven hard and as such you get poo economy

Our 2.0 FSI averaged 36mpg so doing better than we did