Real time mpg on a 1.2 DSG?

[RickW]

I've had my 1.2 DSG for 5 weeks and am  averaging 42 mpg.

 

I've done about 1300 miles and I know the engine will still be tight and driving style can have an impact.

 

Just wondering does this improve over time?

 

Anyone out there with 1.2 DSG that's done a lot higher miles getting a better MPG?

[Ootohere]

Does that Average 42 mpg mean that if you use 9 Gallons (41 litres) you have travelled only 378 miles.

Or is the computer showing an average 42 mpg?

 

What sort of driving, town, out of town, long or short journeys?

[RickW]

Computer is showing 42 mpg average long term.

 

I do two regular 40 mile round trip journeys a week on straight roads (not much stopping and starting),the rest is mainly local but we do go out for days at the weekend.

[13TSI]

To compare, I now have a Seat Ibiza 1.0 EcoTSI (110) DSG. so far my average is showing 36mpg.

I HOPE this improves! Although, it does only have 200 miles on the clock but I didn't know if things can vary that much?

[SurreyJohn]

It varies a lot depending on driving conditions, and gradually improves after a few thousand miles.

I have had it as low as 26mpg in London crawling from traffic light queue to next queue (no start stop) but creeping forward at about walking pace with short hard acceleration bursts as London traffic does at times. At other extreme about 48mpg on deserted roads keeping up about 50-55 mph

If you are seeing 42mpg then getting much better than I do living on edge of London where it's rare to get a constant speed road.

I would say should get an increase from 42 to about 45 mpg once car has fully loosened up. Might be that your journeys have kept bottom of oil sump quite cool, only after you have been stuck in traffic, so engine gets really hot, with no cold winter air breeze cooling it, does the oil fully circulate (imagine there are some bits in the corners that haven't yet got hot enough to flow easily). Oil behaves differently in summer and winter as viscosity depends on temperature (even multi grades to some extent)

Edited 8 April, 2016 by SurreyJohn

[Ootohere]

The Oil that goes in at the first service, 5w 30 Full Synthetic Long Life (VW504 00) often sees an improvement in economy,

even though the factory fill might have been 5w 30 Full Synthetic Long Life (VW504 00).

[Amartha]

There are a number of threads on this topic on this forum, so you may want to check what has been discussed (in fair detail) previously. I have a 1.2tsi, 110bhp, six speed manual estate. After 13,000 miles, and having been doing most of my driving on 50 mile open A road commutes and the usual weekend around town work, my long term average is now (ie today) 48.7mpg - this has dropped a bit from previous, probably as a result of the cold conditions and the management system richening the running to cope with the conditions. My summer 'long term average' usually creeps up to just on or over 50mpg for the same usage. Early posts suggest that there is not much difference between the DSG and manual 'box fuel consumption, what makes a big difference is your right foot! Lots of hard acceleration from any speed will kill the consumption.

Edited 8 April, 2016 by Amartha

[threadbear]

I had a Polo 1.0TSi SEL 7spd DSG as a courtesy car a couple of months ago which had done 4000 odd miles. I drove it exactly like my diesel Polo and there was no denying the refinement, however I struggled to get 49mpg going from Kent to Cheltenham and return.

 

However the low profile tyres on the concrete of the M25 round Reigate made it no quieter than my own Polo! Was it worth the near 20 grand I costed it up at? No!

Edited 8 April, 2016 by threadbear

[Skid]

I've now filled up my tank and drained it twice now. The engine now has just under 2000 miles on it. The computer readout States that I'm getting an average of 42mpg. If only.............

I've worked it out with miles done against litres to brim it back up again both times. The first tank gave me 35mpg. The second gave me 37mpg. Mine is the 1.2TSi DSG 110bhp. My old Fabia VRS 1.9pd tdi was giving me at least 46mpg and that was, more often than not, driven enthusiastically on the same roads / routes.

The new one is driven more sedately, so I'm a little disappointed if I'm honest. I'm planning a longer drive down to Devon soon, so will be interested to see if it improves at all.

[RickW]

Keep us posted please,thanks.

[SuperbTWM]

I would be very 

 

I've now filled up my tank and drained it twice now. The engine now has just under 2000 miles on it. The computer readout States that I'm getting an average of 42mpg. If only.............

I've worked it out with miles done against litres to brim it back up again both times. The first tank gave me 35mpg. The second gave me 37mpg. Mine is the 1.2TSi DSG 110bhp. My old Fabia VRS 1.9pd tdi was giving me at least 46mpg and that was, more often than not, driven enthusiastically on the same roads / routes.

The new one is driven more sedately, so I'm a little disappointed if I'm honest. I'm planning a longer drive down to Devon soon, so will be interested to see if it improves at all.

 I would be a bit disappointed as well TBH but you are a fool to think it would ever be as good as the legendary 1.9PD lump 

 

Our Qashqai, however much I dislike its horrible cheap interior, it really does put shame on modern economical turbo engines and its 1.6 engine probably doesn't differ much from one you find in a 15 year old Nissan. I can easily get 50mpg out of it when driven with care and even the missus can average 43 MPG and its hardly aerodynamic either and the gearing is so short its unbearable on the motorway.

[Skid]

Well, I've driven down to Devon, travelling back tomorrow. Thus far, I'm not expecting great things from a long run.

The fuel gauge has done its usual thing............full down to 3/4 of a tank after 250 odd miles and then sinks like a stone in the next 50-75 miles. All of my motorcycles have had / got more accurate fuel gauges on them and that's saying something, because they're far from brilliant.

Not expecting a significant improvement at the next fill up either to be honest, which, unlike my old VRS will be tomorrow, before my drive back. VRS would do down and back again with plenty to spare.

Oh how I wish I'd kept my money in the bank and kept the VRS. I now worry about where I park the new car, car park dings, kids not allowed food in the car, muddy football boots etc etc and boy, do I miss the performance.

Im really hoping that the consumption will improve considerably in the coming months / miles. If it doesn't, I may have to reconsider. That will not make me popular.

[Ootohere]

Did you expect to get that much better MPG from a 108bhp petrol Euro 6 emission engine.

Your vRS was Euro 4 emissions & 130 bhp and a dirty diesel so 46 mph could be expected with one.

 

?

What MPG are people getting on a run with a 1.4 TDI Fabia?

[Defenderben]

Maybe I will stop thinking to myself 30mpg on my Golf R ain't so bad after all.

35mpg from a 1.2! That is poor, my Fiesta ST 1.6 was better than that and I drove it mostly like I stole it.

Hope it improves but my Golf hasn't from day 1 it has been about the same and now at 7k miles.

[Gazbull17]

I get low to mid 40s round town and low 50s on a run with 3500mls on the clock so I can't understand how Skid is only getting mid 30s, even my old Monte 105 TSI was only slightly worse.

It may have something to with driving style, you do have to drive the TSI different to a diesel, maybe that's where the problem lies.

[Skid]

Okay, so after a long run down to Devon and back, the car has returned a real 50mpg each way. That's driving at a steady 75 with cruise on, traffic permitting, but to be fair, I had a good run there and back with no hold ups. 

 

You're right GoneOffSki, perhaps I was a little unrealistic with my expectations. I never believe the manufacturers quoted mpg figures and always subtract 10 -15% from them to get a more real world figure. My initial figures are still some way off of that though. 

 

Anyway, I promise I won't drag this thread on endlessly, I'm REALLY not that obsessed with economy.   Useful to know what sort of figures others are getting though, I was beginning to wonder if I had a problem with the car.

 

My fuel gauge is truly awful though and is something I will be taking up with the dealer in due course.

 

Thanks for the comments and advice one and all. 

[martinjell]

Okay, so after a long run down to Devon and back, the car has returned a real 50mpg each way. That's driving at a steady 75 with cruise on, traffic permitting, but to be fair, I had a good run there and back with no hold ups. 

 

You're right GoneOffSki, perhaps I was a little unrealistic with my expectations. I never believe the manufacturers quoted mpg figures and always subtract 10 -15% from them to get a more real world figure. My initial figures are still some way off of that though. 

 

Anyway, I promise I won't drag this thread on endlessly, I'm REALLY not that obsessed with economy.   Useful to know what sort of figures others are getting though, I was beginning to wonder if I had a problem with the car.

 

My fuel gauge is truly awful though and is something I will be taking up with the dealer in due course.

 

Thanks for the comments and advice one and all. 

Hi 

 

I have found that i get better MPG's when not using the cruise control! Do you use the cruise control normally ? 

[SuperbTWM]

Okay, so after a long run down to Devon and back, the car has returned a real 50mpg each way. That's driving at a steady 75 with cruise on, traffic permitting, but to be fair, I had a good run there and back with no hold ups. 

 

You're right GoneOffSki, perhaps I was a little unrealistic with my expectations. I never believe the manufacturers quoted mpg figures and always subtract 10 -15% from them to get a more real world figure. My initial figures are still some way off of that though. 

 

Anyway, I promise I won't drag this thread on endlessly, I'm REALLY not that obsessed with economy.   Useful to know what sort of figures others are getting though, I was beginning to wonder if I had a problem with the car.

 

My fuel gauge is truly awful though and is something I will be taking up with the dealer in due course.

 

Thanks for the comments and advice one and all. 

Cruise control does seem to use a bit more fuel.

 

I went down to the Birmingham NEC last month in the SUperb and on the way down (about a 2 hour trip) the motoways were empty and I had the cruise set to 70MPH max and averaged about 53MPG plodding away. On the way back up in the traffic I didn't use CC and just followed the traffic doing lots of speeding up and then slowing back down using my right foot a bit more and doing about 80 where the traffic allowed, lots of instances of having to pull out of the slow lane and middle lane to pass cars and generally not driving very smooth. Decided to check my average when i was nearly home and it was 73 MPG which totally baffled me.

 

I don't know whether it was less wind resistance that did it following other cars on the way back up VS. open road (not that I was tailgating) or the cruise control, or maybe its all downhill from Birmingham to west yorkshire? It just goes to show what can happen if the conditions are right and I think you have to bear this in mind when discussing MPG figures.

Edited 11 April, 2016 by SuperbTWM

[Jcb05]

on the last 2000 miles i have averaged 39.2mpg... 

 

I do a lot of traffic and round town driving so not too bad overall. 

 

And agreed that using the cruise control uses a little more fuel, but when it comes to saving my calfs on a 200mile journey, Ill take the 1-2mpg difference. 

[Skid]

Hi 

 

I have found that i get better MPG's when not using the cruise control! Do you use the cruise control normally ?

I tend to on a long run yes. Also in the lower speed limits, as I can't afford to get points on my licence as I drive for a living. In general day to day driving though, to and from work, no.

[Skid]

on the last 2000 miles i have averaged 39.2mpg... 

 

I do a lot of traffic and round town driving so not too bad overall. 

 

And agreed that using the cruise control uses a little more fuel, but when it comes to saving my calfs on a 200mile journey, Ill take the 1-2mpg difference.

Thanks for that JCB. I'd agree, 39 with that sort of useage, in and around London, I'd be pretty happy with that.

Maybe next time I'll make less use of the cruise control then and see where the figures go.

Thanks for the input.

[BikerBob]

I've posted on other threads; with a 110ps 1.2 non-DSG I'm regularly seeing 50-55mpg and have done about 6k miles now. I'm sure on a longer run the mpg would creep-up.

Interestingly as the fuel level drops in the car and if I'm without a passenger the (since-start) mpg seems to undergo an improvement; not sure if the reduced weight has a bearing or it's coincedental!

Regards Bob

[RickW]

I've posted on other threads; with a 110ps 1.2 non-DSG I'm regularly seeing 50-55mpg and have done about 6k miles now. I'm sure on a longer run the mpg would creep-up.

Interestingly as the fuel level drops in the car and if I'm without a passenger the (since-start) mpg seems to undergo an improvement; not sure if the reduced weight has a bearing or it's coincedental!

Regards Bob

Less weight does save fuel,as does correct tyre inflation I believe.

 

Some people say that always filling a tank to the full can decrease fuel economy due to weight.

 

I just generally try to drive sensibly and keep the revs to a minimum.

[alltorque]

My last two tank fill-ups have given calculated actuals of 44.2 and 46.5mpg. Driving a mix of Lincoln to Northumberland coast via A1, touring round the county incl some town work, on and off the A1 and Coastal Route then drive home yesterday. None of this was pussyfooting about, but not foot to the boards either...well, not often. Not at all unhappy with those numbers as car still only has 6000 miles on it.

General around-home economy is between 35 and 38mpg, again, calculated on fuel used, not computer averages. Not really sure what the worth of the average readings is, other than novelty value on a cruise with trailing throtte to see how long you can hold close to the 300mpg figure before the display cuts out or how low you can get when accelerating in a spirited fashion...9mpg is an interesting number. Range to empty is the really interesting one. The others are entertainment.

[Skid]

My last two tank fill-ups have given calculated actuals of 44.2 and 46.5mpg. Driving a mix of Lincoln to Northumberland coast via A1, touring round the county incl some town work, on and off the A1 and Coastal Route then drive home yesterday. None of this was pussyfooting about, but not foot to the boards either...well, not often. Not at all unhappy with those numbers as car still only has 6000 miles on it.

General around-home economy is between 35 and 38mpg, again, calculated on fuel used, not computer averages. Not really sure what the worth of the average readings is, other than novelty value on a cruise with trailing throtte to see how long you can hold close to the 300mpg figure before the display cuts out or how low you can get when accelerating in a spirited fashion...9mpg is an interesting number. Range to empty is the really interesting one. The others are entertainment.

Thanks "all torque", it seems that my general around-home mpg is fairly consistent with yours then. Hopefully it will improve a bit with some more miles under its belt. Thanks for the response.