Nope I was stationary as I don't take pictures whilst moving.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

 

Well that's why your mpg's rubbish

 

I find that when my car moves, it goes further on a given amount of petrol.

 

I also find it goes further on Shell (but the cheap one, not their V-power Nitro+ which costs a lot).

Edited 3 July, 201510 yr by camelspyyder

We were at the Henley Regatta today, a very interesting car learning experience on several levels.

1) The weight of carrying 2 pop-up gazebos, 8 camping chairs, 3 camping tables, 16kg of ice, various food and drink, and 1 girlfriend really did a number on my fuel economy. Will leave girlfriend at home next year or replace with a lighter model, purely on fuel saving grounds of course

2) The Spaceback is not the versatile load-lugger I hoped it would be. The fact the rear seats do not fold properly means you lose a great deal of space and end up with a less than useful load space area. The Logan would have been great today.

3) Stop/start traffic getting out of Henley on steep hills only destroyed my fuel economy further.

Started today on 52mpg average for the tank. Finished on 48.7mpg (all Maxidot data, so minus 3-5mpg for actual tank average.

Well that's why your mpg's rubbish

I find that when my car moves, it goes further on a given amount of petrol.

I also find it goes further on Shell (but the cheap one, not their V-power Nitro+ which costs a lot).

I know but what a big leap on the gauge for a total of 11 miles [emoji15]

I was taking photos of this every time I stopped and the last one was when I parked up hence the door open [emoji6]

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

We were at the Henley Regatta today, a very interesting car learning experience on several levels.

1) The weight of carrying 2 pop-up gazebos, 8 camping chairs, 3 camping tables, 16kg of ice, various food and drink, and 1 girlfriend really did a number on my fuel economy. Will leave girlfriend at home next year or replace with a lighter model, purely on fuel saving grounds of course

2) The Spaceback is not the versatile load-lugger I hoped it would be. The fact the rear seats do not fold properly means you lose a great deal of space and end up with a less than useful load space area. The Logan would have been great today.

3) Stop/start traffic getting out of Henley on steep hills only destroyed my fuel economy further.

Started today on 52mpg average for the tank. Finished on 48.7mpg (all Maxidot data, so minus 3-5mpg for actual tank average.

 

Been driving all round SE England in the Logan this week, Enfield, Heathrow, Gatwick/Crawley, Worthing and both the traffic and the high temperatures meaning the aircon meant higher than usual consumption.   Did not need the enormous 575 litre boot the Logan has but it is useful on the weekends for the rucksacks, cricket stuff etc.  Only 50 mpg showing but as well ass the traffic there was some bits of 80 mph indicated cruising too.

 

Using the Eco button half the time which helps the economy by a couple of mpg but needs switching off when best possible getting to motorway speeds etc is need.  Shame it is not on the steering wheel like the cruise, media etc controls are but hey ho.  On-board computer probably also optimistic by about 5% like the speedo but overall very please on fuel consumption (showed 70 mpg for a hundred miles on a extra urban speed cruise to Liverpool) as well as acceleration, seat comfort and of course cost.

 

Spoke to the ex-Skoda garage that now do Dacia-Renault and one of the guys went for the diesel and is not so happy.  Despite same HP the 90hp diesel, which is a second slower than the petrol, similar to the Skoda situation, he says is almost undrivable with the Eco button pressed ie gutless and he is only getting 55 mpg from the 1.5D but then he does shorter journeys.  Doing the long ie 100-200 miles journeys certainly help the average big time as it is the first 5 that kills an average figures expected to get close to Manufacturers ie they ignore the warm up currently, law changes soon on that.

 

Done 6K miles in 3 months (only got a 20K/pa lease but have a long sea voyage coming up) so will need to switch with other family cars to balance the miles, always the pain with leases.

 

Having the lighter girlfriend/fiasco/strife was always more important on the motorbikes than the cars I felt, especiallly when the shifted their weight to pick their own lines round corners!      

This looks more promising since the last one.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Filed up on Tuesday - down to 44mpg from the last tank. Fuel consumption was hit hard by last week's Henley Regatta trip. Combo of bad traffic both ways and carrying a very heavy load.

So so [emoji57]

Averaging

Lots of mixed driving with a lot of it very hard [emoji4]

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Just noticed in the 2nd photo how my gauge has moved just taking that shot in less than a minute :(

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You'd think with your OCD you'd actually notice the different angle you took the second shot from.

 

The needle probably hasn't moved.

 

BTW have they sorted out the front springs yet?  

 

I wondered if insurance is valid with incorrect modifications done?

Edited 15 July, 201510 yr by camelspyyder

No they haven't "bothered" yet.

It's going for its 1st service on 1st September so I'll add that to the list of faults for them to sort out.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Back on track with my last fill-up yesterday evening. 555 miles of driving, delivering 51.5mpg from 49 litres of petrol used.

You must barely touch the throttle. I only got 389 out my last.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You must barely touch the throttle. I only got 389 out my last.

Far from it - there was quite a lot of spirited driving in that, and a lot of cargo humping (at least four round trips to the old office to collect boxes and IT equipment for the move) and a lot of aircon use. The key thing was not much stop-start traffic, that's what really seems to kill mpg on the 1.2TSI.

Also - I'm on 185/50/15 wheels (whereas you are on lower profile wheels IIRC - shouldn't make a big difference, but it will contribute).

Also, are you driving it like you stole it? Are you carrying a lot of gear around in the boot on a regular basis?

Other than your knackered fuel gauge, I can't really explain the disparity between the fuel economy of our two cars.

When thinking about efficiency, one should really have lost energy in mind. For a car, energy is lost primarily on heat, be it engine/gearbox heat, aerodynamic losses or brake pads heat. Engine/gearbox heat decreases as the engine warms up and the oil reaches its normal temp. Air friction becomes important at high speeds (>40mpg) and increases with speed squared. The last factor (brakes) depends on driving style and constant start/stop traffic generates so much heat that makes the other two factors irrelevant. Regenerative brakes is the only technology that can greatly reduce energy losses but only at some extent. Also, heat losses on brake pads depend strongly on the car's weight hence a light car can achieve high mpg in city traffic. Our Rapid will certainly suffer under these conditions.

Edited 19 July, 201510 yr by eyegr

Far from it - there was quite a lot of spirited driving in that, and a lot of cargo humping (at least four round trips to the old office to collect boxes and IT equipment for the move) and a lot of aircon use. The key thing was not much stop-start traffic, that's what really seems to kill mpg on the 1.2TSI.

Also - I'm on 185/50/15 wheels (whereas you are on lower profile wheels IIRC - shouldn't make a big difference, but it will contribute).

Also, are you driving it like you stole it? Are you carrying a lot of gear around in the boot on a regular basis?

Other than your knackered fuel gauge, I can't really explain the disparity between the fuel economy of our two cars.

My boot is always empty.

I've noticed that since its been lowered its not good on mpg as it was prior to this.

Also the way I drive it. The answer is yes to your question. It gets lots of heavy braking too. I've found that granny it around gives terrible mpg more than a good old hoofin down the road. Strange but true with this car like all other things in it.

Also I'm definitely sure those 17.s don't help the Rapid in any guise on fuel economy.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I've noticed that since its been lowered its not good on mpg as it was prior to this.

Actually, lowering shouldn't have any effect on mpg when driving in the city. However at highway speeds lowering should result in a slightly lower consumprion due to improved aerodynamic resistance.

 

If hoewever after lowering the car you enjoy more driving it like you stole it, that explains it...

Edited 20 July, 201510 yr by harisma23

True but it's hard to tell what this thing does anyway. It just seems poorer. I've given up with it anyway. It's just a short term loan car to me albeit expensive one :(

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Actually, lowering shouldn't have any effect on mpg when driving in the city. However at highway speeds lowering should result in a slightly lower consumprion due to improved aerodynamic resistance.

 

If hoewever after lowering the car you enjoy more driving it like you stole it, that explains it...

 

However if you lower the back more than the front and mess up the aerodynamics, then it may well be more draggy and burn more fuel.

 

I would be less inclined to thrash it now it has bodged suspension too.

 

If that car is so bad the dealers should have taken it back, not taken Stormchaser for a ride as they have. I would have parked it across the dealers' front door while he was out and filled it with concrete.

 

(that gag certainly stopped us getting into the office for a few days in 2001 - until we obtained a crane to remove said car.)

Edited 20 July, 201510 yr by camelspyyder

I drove it earlier at 120mph on an old closed airstrip now that is frightening. Thought it was going to flip over. Very unstable at anything above 80mph. The n/s/f wheel is mullered now and the contis are well scrubbed haha.

Dealer is having it on September 1st for its 1st service then I'll start the ball rolling again with a long list of problems.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

^^^^ I thought you said somewhere that they read these forums^^^^

Yes that's right.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I drove it earlier at 120mph on an old closed airstrip now that is frightening. Thought it was going to flip over. Very unstable at anything above 80mph. The n/s/f wheel is mullered now and the contis are well scrubbed haha.

Dealer is having it on September 1st for its 1st service then I'll start the ball rolling again with a long list of problems.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Was this with the new springs messing up the aero?  If its nose in the air it must drive as if dragging a caravan.

 

I suspect the instability is aerodynamic, Mine was sweet last time it had 100 on the dial, and the nurburgring video car must have hit 115/120 on the longest bits too.

Was this with the new springs messing up the aero? If its nose in the air it must drive as if dragging a caravan.

I suspect the instability is aerodynamic, Mine was sweet last time it had 100 on the dial, and the nurburgring video car must have hit 115/120 on the longest bits too.

Probably was messing it as it was all over the place.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Did a 100 mile run from West London to Coventry yesterday - not particularly good in terms of dinosaur juice consumption. After a week of city driving I was down to 44mpg, up to just 45mpg after yesterday's decent motorway run - still have half a tank to go, but think my recent run of 50+mpg tanks it be about to end.

Sent from my iPad Mini with Retina using Tapatalk, please excuse any typos.

I'm now getting a massive 42 mpg, whoopie!!!! That's nowhere near the claimed mpg Skoda told me! There should be a law against being allowed to pluck figures out of the air and then sell cars to people based on these lies.