.

Edited 25 August, 201411 yr by Sheldon.Cooper

You won't let this go will you?

 

Can you please explain why both manual and DSG owners (diesel at least) get exactly the same revs in 6th gear at 70mph?

 

Have a look here:

 

https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CCEQFjAA&url=https%3A%2F%2Fmedia.skoda-auto.com%2Fen%2FDocuments%2FOctavia_History%2Ftechnical_data_new_octavia_diesel_en.pdf&ei=Jp77U-b9POKw7AbYgIG4DA&usg=AFQjCNHKcFZv3jV0U_ePZiGNXZkjmJZmcg&sig2=kNRzHqQIV6JNPpsuZAz7NA&bvm=bv.73612305,d.ZGU&cad=rja

 

Thanks for your reply regarding the multilink. I think that 1.8 tsi get the multi link suspension aswell. I am not too fussed about that.

I was more interested in the 1.4tsi dsg being the older engine. because the manual 1.4tsi is euro 5 and the 1.4tsi DSG is euro 2(implying that it is in fact the older engine?)

http://www.briskoda.net/forums/index.php?app=core&module=attach&section=attach&attach_id=33980

maybe that is why the 1.4 dsg is fuel thirsty?

 

It is for sure a typo.

You cannot sell an engine conforming to Euro2 standard since the last 10 years.

Just managed over 61mpg on a 275 mile drive to London, with quite a lot of stop start traffic on the M6 and M25. And that is in a DSG.

Sent from my HTC One_M8 using Tapatalk

As others have said, I doubt there's much in it. My octy 1.6 dsg manages a consistent 63mpg on the way to work and back (60 miles each way).

My previous manual fabia with the same engine varied between 55 and 65 despite being a lighter car.

Suspect my own inability to find optimum revs comes into it. So when you factor the dumb driver into the equation, I reckon in real terms a DSG is a win for economy... At least, it is for me.

As others have said, I doubt there's much in it. My octy 1.6 dsg manages a consistent 63mpg on the way to work and back (60 miles each way).

My previous manual fabia with the same engine varied between 55 and 65 despite being a lighter car.

Suspect my own inability to find optimum revs comes into it. So when you factor the dumb driver into the equation, I reckon in real terms a DSG is a win for economy... At least, it is for me.

So a 7 speed DSG is more economic when copmpared to a different car with a manual gearbox that has the same badge on the bonnet?

 

Not exactly a like for like comparisson (except that the engine uses the same type of fuel and is the same capacity).

 

With the 2.0TDI the DSG has slippage when pulling away, more losses through the gearbox, different ratios and is not as efficient as a manual gearbox (this is backed up with the higher Co2 emissions).  In a petrol car the DSG is a great thing, especially the 2.0TFSI.

7spd dsg is also more efficient due to more gears, dry clutch and lower losses in the transmission. Not in anyway comparable to the 6spd wet unit. If Skoda brought out a 7spd manual you might be able to compare it to that.

As others have said, I doubt there's much in it. My octy 1.6 dsg manages a consistent 63mpg on the way to work and back (60 miles each way).

My previous manual fabia with the same engine varied between 55 and 65 despite being a lighter car.

Suspect my own inability to find optimum revs comes into it. So when you factor the dumb driver into the equation, I reckon in real terms a DSG is a win for economy... At least, it is for me.

Actually the 1.6 TDI is a completely new unit (EA288) for the MQB platform.

 

http://blog.caranddriver.com/detailed-vw%E2%80%99s-new-2-0-liter-ea288-four-cylinder-tdi-diesel/

 

So the Fabia would have been an older generation engine which was less efficient

7spd dsg is also more efficient due to more gears, dry clutch and lower losses in the transmission. Not in anyway comparable to the 6spd wet unit. If Skoda brought out a 7spd manual you might be able to compare it to that.

So long as the clutch pack hasn't eaten itself

Actually the 1.6 TDI is a completely new unit (EA288) for the MQB platform.

http://blog.caranddriver.com/detailed-vw%E2%80%99s-new-2-0-liter-ea288-four-cylinder-tdi-diesel/

So the Fabia would have been an older generation engine which was less efficient

I did not know this. Explains why it sounds different at least!

So a 7 speed DSG is more economic when copmpared to a different car with a manual gearbox that has the same badge on the bonnet?

Not exactly a like for like comparisson (except that the engine uses the same type of fuel and is the same capacity).

With the 2.0TDI the DSG has slippage when pulling away, more losses through the gearbox, different ratios and is not as efficient as a manual gearbox (this is backed up with the higher Co2 emissions). In a petrol car the DSG is a great thing, especially the 2.0TFSI.

I wasn't trying to make a direct comparison exactly. My point was more about the efficiency if the person at the helm, and that in all likelihood in real every day driving, there's not much in it.

There's no way to make a direct comparison, as there's no 7 speed manual, as you say...

Only reason id go DSG with a diesel would be if I were doing shed loads of miles. IMHO a diesel DSG looses a little something compared to the manual car in the driveability stakes but no denying that DSG makes for a much more relaxing drive over long distances.

Im faced with an interesting challenge in that v shortly my commuting mileage is going to go through the roof and associated costs likely to force me back to a company car in time.

I have the choice of a Golf GT 2.0 TDi DSG, a GTD manual or if I want to contribute £50/month towards it a GTD DSG. I'd rather have a GTD to a GT but the DSG mixed with ACC and factory nav is compelling and it wont be a great deal slower, yet a GTD DSG would be v nice but not worth £50/month outlay. My company have a bit of an annoying scheme where you have a list of cars, nice cars but standard spec apart from metallic.

I think i'd probably still take the GTD manual overall though as its cheaper on CC tax than the GT DSG and bound to be more fun to drive.

DSG is excellent with a petrol and wouldnt hesitate to recommend it, the only real downsides still being lesser efficiency (DQ250 not 200) and the cost of specifying it.

Edited 28 August, 201411 yr by pipsyp

Just managed over 61mpg on a 275 mile drive to London, with quite a lot of stop start traffic on the M6 and M25. And that is in a DSG.

Sent from my HTC One_M8 using Tapatalk

Make that 615 miles out of 45 litres at 61.5 mpg across the tank. Still had 20 miles range on the trip computer. Not bad for a DSG.

Sent from my HTC One_M8 using Tapatalk

Just out of interest what was the average speed?

44mph or thereabouts, it was about 500 mile motorway, which included some pretty heavy traffic and some stop start, and the rest a mixture as I drove in to Bromley from the M25.

Sent from my HTC One_M8 using Tapatalk

For some reason I find the best mpg figures are on an average speed of 40-50mph