S3 2.0 TDI 150bhp MPG Thread

[Bluefleet321]

I've just read through this thread and have gone through multiple cycles of panic and then relief  

 

Just ordered my first Skoda - a Superb Sportline Hatch - 150BHP with my first DSG box and worried that I'm giving up a decent chunk of fuel economy for the sake of going for DSG. I do relatively high miles - 45k a year - and fuel economy makes a big difference. Then again, so does the car itself as I practically live in it and I'm just trying to get the balance right.

 

The target is to get a true 50mph across the month on a regular basis. Ahh well, I'll just have see what mine does. Will report back when I collect. 

 

Thanks for for the info everyone.

[teebs]

I'm getting a true 56mpg long term (manual), so I would say you'll be Ok! 

[Whaty]

Bluefleet 321, hopefully I can put your mind at rest a little…

 

My driving style is such that I ‘get on with it’ but I don’t drive the car hard, I don’t race away from the lights or slam the brakes on at the last minute, and I’m not on and off the accelerator pedal all the time. I do try to use the ACC when I’m on the motorway and I find it to be very effective..

 

I’ve found that short journeys and around town my MPG drops to mid 40’s but generally (and overall), I’m getting low to mid 50’s. I have occasionally seen high 50’s / low 60’s on the ‘since start’  reading.

 

These figures are based on the on-board computer so I don’t know how accurate they really are. However, I can say with confidence that I’m doing 600 miles quite easily on 50 litres of fuel and if my sums are right, this suggests the on-board computer is fairly accurate (50 litres = 11 gallons, 600 / 11 = 54mpg)

 

My previous car was a Toyota Avensis 1.8VVTI with the CVT box and I could just about squeeze 425miles out of the same amount of petrol. I’m only quoting the Toyota as a real world comparison, same driver, same route, same times of the day, etc.

 

Given your annual mileage (which is 3 times more than mine) I’m guessing you do quite a bit of motorway driving and therefore, based on my usage/experience, I’d be very surprised if you didn’t achieve 50mpg plus.

 

Really hope you enjoy your car when you get it..

 

Terry

[Sagalout]

@Bluefleet321

 

Don't worry. I have averaged about 50-51 mpg over 18 months of mostly rural driving with the occasional long journeys. On those longer motorway journeys with the engine at ca 2000-2200 rpm (which equals about 70mph to more than enough) I have seen consistent results in the high 50's and low 60's. Local journeys during the colder weather the average drops to around 46-48 mpg - now the weather has warmed up a bit that has risen to 52mpg.

 

That is with 'relaxed' but positive driving; not slow to overtake when the opportunity presents but with loads of forward anticipation.   

[Bluefleet321]

Thanks Sagalout/Whaty/teebs that makes me feel better. The thing that puzzled me is the difference between official quoted consumption figures. On the Sportline 150bhp, the Extra Urban figure goes from 76.4mpg for the manual box down to 68.9 for the DSG. Weird when 'in theory' if on on the motorway you are cruising at 70-80, surely there would be little difference other than weight. 

 

The other thing is the wheels. I know on my current A5 Sportback I changed the wheels from 17" to 19" BBS (2255017 up to 2553519) and the consumption did suffer. Have put the originals back on to sell the BBS wheels in anticipation of the car change and noticed a good 2-3 mpg better. 

 

Even so, with what you guys are reporting, I should be alright. Can't wait to get the DSG box now, should be good. 

[Rooted]

'Official quoted consumption figures' from manufacturers & from EU testing are not 'Official Consumption figures for driving a car out on a road'.

No place do they claim they are.

http://skoda.co.uk/pages/fuel-consumption-statement.aspx 

 

When you changed the 17" to 19" wheels were the tyres the same brand / compound / width or the road and total circumference.?

because different 17" tyres can get different MPG results, even if exactly the same size but different brands.

(New Skoda Superb exactly the same in every way including wheels & other than tyre Brand can give different MPG's.)

http://kouki.co.uk/utilities/visual-tyre-size-calculator 

Edited 23 April, 2017 by Awayoffski

[Gerrycan]

10 minutes ago, Bluefleet321 said:

Thanks Sagalout/Whaty/teebs that makes me feel better. The thing that puzzled me is the difference between official quoted consumption figures. On the Sportline 150bhp, the Extra Urban figure goes from 76.4mpg for the manual box down to 68.9 for the DSG. Weird when 'in theory' if on on the motorway you are cruising at 70-80, surely there would be little difference other than weight. 

 

The 'wet' 6 speed DSG is less efficient than a manual.

The extra-urban cycle is conducted at relatively slow speeds but includes a short acceleration to 120kph during which the manual is restricted to using the 5th gear but the auto is not limited.

Despite this, and as you noted, the manual still gets better figures.

 

The dry DSG box used in the lower powered engines has better efficiency, but the 6 speed is much more durable.

[Rooted]

Any actual proof of this in the real world as in comparing a Manual vs a DSG from Brochures or such?

Have you compared both?

Some drivers get bad MPG with manuals where a DSG can make getting good MPG rather easy.

 

OT from the 150PS TDI's & 6 speed DSG or Manuals,

but 7 Speed Dry DSG are used in the 2015 on VW Polo GTI 1.8TSI /192 PS, 320Nm Manual & 250Nm DSG and really what VW Group needs to do is 

give their usual fiction 'Official Figures', because the 250Nm DSG car is no less efficient than the 320Nm Manual.

ie, not slower or thirstier.

 

PS

I have a big heavy car with 150PS 2.0TDI SCR 6 Speed DSG and if a manual can do better MPG then it must be pretty amazing, 

but then the 'Coasting Function', Stop / Start & Auto Hold / Electric Handbrake with the Euro 6 Engine / DSG is very good.

Edited 23 April, 2017 by Awayoffski

[Bluefleet321]

Hey, I know I'm not the sharpest tool in the bag but even I know that official figures are in no way to be compared to realistic real world figures

 

Ref tyres, I'm in the tyre trade and have been since.....well.....puberty so fully aware of the differences in compound etc. Tyre labels are a world of fun when you dig a little deeper. Something to be taken into consideration but definitely not to be fully relied on as a true comparison! I went from Conti Sport Contact 3 to Pirelli PZero - in no way a like for like compound or size. 

 

Interesting ref ref the wet/dry clutch stuff though. Also, I did find it interesting when looking at different cars that for some the auto box would murder CO2 and MPG figs whereas others it would improve things. 

 

[Rooted]

DSG are Automated Manuals,

small difference to some but quite a big difference really and i have only driven Auto's, CVT's. Servo Clutches or Automated Manuals for 40 years.

[Bluefleet321]

I get the feeling that once I do this, I won't wish to go back to manual. 

[Rooted]

VW got the 6 speed wet clutch to a good place, the new 7 Speed wet clutch is nice but nothing special really other than when with more power. IMO.

I have driven all the various VW Group DSG's in petrols, diesels and with LPG from them being introduced right up to in the Kodiaq.

[Gerrycan]

1 hour ago, Awayoffski said:

Any actual proof of this in the real world as in comparing a Manual vs a DSG from Brochures or such?

Have you compared both?

Some drivers get bad MPG with manuals where a DSG can make getting good MPG rather easy.

 

PS

I have a big heavy car with 150PS 2.0TDI SCR 6 Speed DSG and if a manual can do better MPG then it must be pretty amazing, 

but then the 'Coasting Function', Stop / Start & Auto Hold / Electric Handbrake with the Euro 6 Engine / DSG is very good.

The 'proof' is derived from comparison of the Official consumption figures for manual and auto boxes

 

However I was wrong in saying that the official test does not allow the manual to use a higher gear than 5th for the high speed section as I misread a paragraph from VW's 'Background Information for Expert Fuel Savers' document.

Quote:

Why does the same model have different NEDC fuel consumption figures with different gearboxes?
The prescribed NEDC test cycle doesn't really do justice to a 6-speed gearbox. A 6-speed gearbox
is generally lower-geared from 1st through 5th gear than a 5-speed gearbox. Since the gearshift
points in the NEDC test are fixed, however, a vehicle with 6-speed gearbox will tend to run at
higher rpm during the test. This generally results in a higher standard fuel consumption than
when the identical engine is tested with a five-speed gearbox, despite the fact that, in real-world
driving, a 6-speed gearbox can often be more economical

 

Now bear in mind that gearshift points are stated as fixed and that this would only apply to manuals.

An auto box that has an 'eco' mode can be optimised to ace the consumption test which should give it an advantage over a manual, but according to VW's official figures, it doesn't.

It does explain why 'super-eco' models from VAG are usually fitted with 5 speed gearboxes. Not because they are necessarily better in real life but because they do better in the test.

 

By the way how do the official figures for the auto and manual figures for your 'big heavy car' compare?

[Rooted]

So no On the road 'Official Tests' as we keep discussing.

Just the discredited EU Tests that do not take anything into account even for Euro 6 Emissions with the Coasting Function or Stop Start, 

or if they do many driver do not do stop / start journeys on Motorway Runs.

Or operate in temperature controlled building on rolling roads, with no spare wheel, a 60% full fuel tank and no optional extras or passengers or luggage.

 

There are no 'Official Figures' for my model being used out of doors on ashpalt, the EU Test Official Figures are 

Urban 47.9 mpg

Extra Urban 60.1 mpg

Combined 54.3 MPG

(Kerb weight with driver 1,843 kg, but i weigh twice the EU Test drivers, fill the tank then empty it driving,

so journeys start with 71 litres plus in, and then i fill up again at about 650 miles covered and 65 litres brims it for the past few fills,

 and i carry stuff and people sometimes & get near the 2,540kg)  Max Gross weight

 

All those are achievable if driving for MPG and not in the way i do which is going someplace, then someplace else, not doing a static drive on a rolling road.

So my Heavy Alhambra gets 10 miles to the litre when doing runs that use half a tank or so at a time, 

and can use more than a gallon (imperial 4.5462 litres) for less than 20 miles if doing a few miles each day for a few days.

It takes over 15 miles to get the oil to a efficient operating temperature.

Weather dependent and this morning that was 2*oC, tomorrow might be colder. Last week was longer journeys in the teens degrees.

(No storage done in a temperature controlled building with the tyres over inflated and diesel in the engine oil... eg, VW stylee.)

Edited 23 April, 2017 by Awayoffski

[Gerrycan]

19 hours ago, Awayoffski said:

So no On the road 'Official Tests' as we keep discussing.

 

Actually this whole thread is about real on-road experiences.

Some really good results from DSG users here but the really, REALLY, good results are from manual drivers.

[Coops]

Took a very steady run from home to Hopwood Services (M42) - very light traffic, so stuck the ACC at 60mph and cruised along. These are the results:

 

[penguin17]

12 minutes ago, Coops said:

Took a very steady run from home to Hopwood Services (M42) - very light traffic, so stuck the ACC at 60mph and cruised along. These are the results:

 

What range do you get from a full tank, Coops? 

[Coops]

2 minutes ago, penguin17 said:

What range do you get from a full tank, Coops? 

 

Depends what mood I'm in when driving!!!

 

Typically though I'm getting around 600 miles from a tank. If I take it steady that increases to 650/700.

 

 

[Whaty]

I've now done a little over 1,800 miles, the car's settled down nicely, I'm probably not driving it like a new car, and so I thought this would be a good time to take a more accurate mpg reading.

 

At my last fill up I waited until the pump clicked off, by pure luck I was able to fill up at exactly the same pump this morning and once again I waited until it clicked off.

 

564.5 miles - 51.64ltrs V-Nitro. If my calculations are correct this equates to 49.74mpg. The on-board 'since refuel' said I was doing 51.8mpg, so it appears to be about 2mpg optimistic.

[Mattster]

Did rather well today from Exeter to bristol with one bit of slow traffic but otherwise clear run.

 

[dg360]

Wow that is good! I once had an Alfa v6 that wouldn't have done that if I'd pushed it from Exeter to Bristol!

[Bud]

3 hours ago, Mattster said:

Did rather well today from Exeter to bristol with one bit of slow traffic but otherwise clear run.

 

 

So you were the cause of the traffic jam on the M5 

[Mattster]

12 minutes ago, Bud said:

 

So you were the cause of the traffic jam on the M5 

Acc and sat behind a lorry  I stoped at the services too would have managed low 80s otherwise. Love this car

[Gerrycan]

3 hours ago, Mattster said:

Acc and sat behind a lorry  I stoped at the services too would have managed low 80s otherwise. Love this car

And yet you only got a 70 green leaf rating, whatever that indicates.

[ncpierce]

On a run back from East London to the top of the M23 @ Hooley - via the A13, M25, M23 managed to get 80.3mpg - I was in no particular hurry and set the ACC at 56mph!  Really impressed with the economy (when I want to play games).

 

46miles

1:07h

41mph

80.3mpg