I'd welcome anyones thoughts on the mpg I'm getting from my Octavia III 4x4 2.0 150 elegance - at present after 5000 miles it's retruning around 39-47mpg, once on a long journey it hit 50 mpg, but that's not been repeated.

 

When I comapred it to the Octaiva II Scout 2.0 140 it replaced, which returned 50+mpg on most journeys it seems pretty poor.

 

What experiences have other Octavia III 4x4 drivers had?

My long term average is establishing at around 46mpg now (trip computer) after 17,000 miles on the clock.

 

This is much better than my previous Scout at the same mileage. However, I live near lots of twisty B-Roads, I have a fast 4wd car, and I enjoy driving.......

 

......long trips 'constrained' by flowing traffic sees a 50-52mpg average without too much trouble.

 

Niall

I'm glad to provide my average (7.3l/100Km i.e. 39mpg, uk), with just 2000Km of jammed city driving and "spirited" highways

 

It is anyway just a hair better than I'm averaging in city driving with my petrol 2007 Jazz 1.2 i-Dsi... , although typically full of children and with a lot of short trips.

Interesting post, changing my 150 Mk 3 next year which I love. I’m considering a vrs, however, would also consider a 150 4x4 simply for the better traction in wet weather.

 

So very interested in real life mpg for the 150 4x4

I've been tracking mine in Fuelly, you can see below in my signature. I find on motorways that doing 60mph returns about 55ish MPG but do 70mph and it drops like a rock to around 45MPG

Looking on Fuelly there are only a few 4x4's.

The average seems to be mid/high-40's with the highest in the low-50's.

 

Compared with the Mk2 I'd expect the Mk3 is a fair bit quicker?

Is the difference you experience perhaps down to the pedal mapping of the Mk3 which "encourages progress".?

I have accurately recorded fuel consumption over 14,000 miles since my 2.0TDi 4x4 was new just after the beginning of the year. The overall average is 43mpg, and this is for a wide range of driving. The majority is windy country roads, some urban and some motorway. I often tow trailers and have a roofrack on the car, both of which do knock the MPG a lot, so I think 43mpg is likely to be quite a bit worse than for people who don't tow or use a roofrack.

 

I do find the overall characteristics of the car encourage sporty driving (great grip, beautifully responsive engine), and this will also have influenced what I have achieved! I have no problem getting 50mpg on long distance motorway trips at normal motorway speeds. I definitely do not see the mpg plummet to 45mpg at 70mph on the motorway like Shermo.

 

All in all I am extremely pleased with the fuel economy of the car, particularly when you bear in mind the performance that is available and the excellent grip from its very well sorted 4x4 chassis.

 

The figures I quote are totally genuine figures achieved brim-to-brim and I am not padding them in any way at all. I also have to say that I find the maxidot average journey figures to be extremely accurate.

 

Finally we also have a 2007 Scout TDi 2.0 and I find it very hard to believe that you could achieve true 50+mpg with it. For exactly the same type of driving and accurate recording of fuel use as with the Mk 3 we have achieved 37mpg overall from it. It is certainly possible to see 50+mpg on the maxidot display, but these indications are incredibly optimistic. The only way to measure real fuel consumption on the Mk 2 is through brim-to-brim measurements. You can recalibrate the maxidot display using VCDS but I have never bothered to do this, and even then I wonder how accurate it will be.

 

If you have achieved 50+mpg real world accurately measured fuel consumption in a Mk 2 then I would imagine you should be able to get nearly to the 60+mpg bracket with the Mk3 4x4!!! But in order to do this you would presumably never make any use of the performance, so you might as well get a 1.6 TDi...

I use mine mine mainly for work, short stop/start journeys. I struggle to get over 41mpg.