Pretty impressed with new VRS TSI MPG

[Snowman89]

On 2017-09-20 at 08:02, juan27 said:

 

Early days but my 245 seems to like a drink. Its official figures are worse than the 230 so there is absolutely no reason to expect it to match the 230. Not sure why you would expect it to be "even better". 

 

As I say early days but all the evidence so far suggests it uses more petrol than the 2010 80K O2 VRS it has replaced, which is a bit disappointing.

Simpy because it is a "newer" engine, which in theory would equal lower fuel consumption..

Then you can also add the 7-speed gearbox VS the old 6-speed, which also should hopefully be worth something..

 

Even my M135 with around 400-450hp manages 0,72liter/10km if driven fairly gently on highways.

Edited 21 September, 2017 by Snowman89

[jefalad]

On ‎9‎/‎20‎/‎2017 at 09:36, Headinawayoffski said:

The 245ps makes no difference really does it,  at 70 mph are you even using 115bhp?

30 years later is the Average Speed over that journey with 245ps any quicker than it was with 120ps & 35 mpg.

 

And the cars 30 years ago, or even 10 with 145 ps could still do double the 60 mph NSL speed limit. (non Dual / Motorway)

Going off topic but for information, 115bhp will get a typical modern family car to well beyond 70mph. On a level road and in still air (no headwind/tailwind) the car will need 13bhp to cruise at 50mph, 26bhp for 70mph, 47bhp for 90mph, 79bhp for 110mph, 150bhp for 140mph. An Octavia 1.0Tsi with 116bhp is quoted as having a max. speed of 126mph.     

[Ootohere]

Good info there,

the UK National Speed Limit is 60mph so that will be more than double it. 

Have you worked that required bhp at sea level and what ambient temps might it be at?

How many journeys can you do using a tank of fuel with no head winds, tail winds, cross winds or ascents or descents?

[juan27]

15 hours ago, Snowman89 said:

Simpy because it is a "newer" engine, which in theory would equal lower fuel consumption..

Then you can also add the 7-speed gearbox VS the old 6-speed, which also should hopefully be worth something.

 

Ah I see you are talking about the earlier "performance pack" 230 rather than the current FL standard TSi VRS. That makes more sense now,

 

The seven speed DSG does have a beneficial effect but my 245 is a manual and an estate (kombi). So pretty much as thirsty as a 245 gets I guess?

 

The official figures aren't that bad, this table makes interesting reading:

 

Edited 22 September, 2017 by juan27

[juan27]

Its just occurred to me that my MPG readout could be configured in miles per US gallon. That would make my 27mpg average figure so far a much more respectable 32.

 

Whilst I appreciate the official tests are don't reflect real life motoring they are supposed to facilitate comparison, and I should therefore be getting better figures than my old 2010 car (see table above).

 

First thing to check when I get back to the 245.   

[Redboy]

I have to laugh, having grown up being driven around in old 60's 3.8 S Types and 70's Triumph 2.5 PI and 4.2 Jags doing 16 or so to the gallon , it makes you realise how much cars have come on and that stonking good performance and decent mpg from a family hatch is possible. 

[Ootohere]

^^^ You can still buy cars that do under 20mpg if you want, they are just more powerful now than then.

I towed with a Triumph 2.5 PI and still did not get as low as 16mpg, which was why i towed using it.

(cars from the 60's are 5 decades ago, and the 70's 4 decades.)

Edited 22 September, 2017 by Headinawayoffski

[marko]

7 minutes ago, Redboy said:

I have to laugh, having grown up being driven around in old 60's 3.8 S Types and 70's Triumph 2.5 PI and 4.2 Jags doing 16 or so to the gallon , it makes you realise how much cars have come on and that stonking good performance and decent mpg from a family hatch is possible. 

 

too right, I sometimes moan at 30mpg commuting but it's still a lot quicker than my old Audi A4 2.5TDi and that only did 25mpg commuting!

 

overall it ticks so many boxes and not a lot to moan about!

[Ootohere]

Odd memories some have, back in the days of Cortinas, Granadas, Sierras etc people would go over to diesels to get a better economy from the petrols which were not exactly gas guzzlers.  

Not much improvements over the past 3 decades in the economy of lots of petrols and diesels it seems other than they have higher power output available.

[stever750]

Only 12 years ago I had a brand new mk2 accord 2.4 VTEC that only managed 27-28 at best when you weren't in driver mode, ie in 2nd or 3rd gear waiting to use the last 50bhp of the total 197 available at 6k rpm! 

[Snowman89]

14 hours ago, juan27 said:

 

Ah I see you are talking about the earlier "performance pack" 230 rather than the current FL standard TSi VRS. That makes more sense now,

 

The seven speed DSG does have a beneficial effect but my 245 is a manual and an estate (kombi). So pretty much as thirsty as a 245 gets I guess?

 

The official figures aren't that bad, this table makes interesting reading:

 

Sorry but have no idea what you are talking about.

If i would buy a brand new Octavia RS TSI today, in Sweden, i would only be able to get the 245.

There are no other RS TSI available in Sweden.

Before the 245 launch we had the 220 version, no 230 version have been available in Sweden to my knowledge.

 

I was also just talking about actual figures in general, not looking at the exact specs.

I find that newer cars very seldomly get worse fuel economy, as long as they use the same or similar engine.
If that would always be the case, why are they spending money on updating and improving the car (except for emissions..)?

 

But i do find it interesting that the new 245 engine likes fuel as much as it does..

I took a Golf GTI 245 for a test drive with the DSG.

The GTI consumed about 9liter/100km on my test run, my current Octavia Mk 2 1.8 TSI tuned to 210hk makes the same run with just about 7,5-8liters/100km..

[stever750]

Who buys a petrol car caring about emissions, well until recently anyway 

Edited 23 September, 2017 by stever750

[juan27]

10 hours ago, Snowman89 said:

Sorry but have no idea what you are talking about.

If i would buy a brand new Octavia RS TSI today, in Sweden, i would only be able to get the 245.

There are no other RS TSI available in Sweden.

Before the 245 launch we had the 220 version, no 230 version have been available in Sweden to my knowledge.

 

I was also just talking about actual figures in general, not looking at the exact specs.

I find that newer cars very seldomly get worse fuel economy, as long as they use the same or similar engine.
If that would always be the case, why are they spending money on updating and improving the car (except for emissions..)

 

The OP is referring to a 2017 facelift 230 which is now the standard TSi RS in the UK, available in many colours. The 245 is priced above that with additional standard equipment, but limited colour choice.

 

Before the facelift in the UK the standard TSi was a 220 with the 230 being analogous to the new 245.

 

These model distinctions are along the lines of the Golf GTi with or without Performance Pack (at least as sold in the UK)

 

Funny how different markets don't sell some models. In the UK we don't have the 1.8TSi models.

 

With regard to the "newer" cars bit its clearly not the case within the life cycle of the O3 as the older 220 is more economical than the rest. As its very much exactly the same engine just producing more power it's not really so surprising. 

 

However there is quite a step in the official figures from my old 2010 VRS TSi which doesn't seem to be reflected in the real world. I would guess this is down to stop/start which probably has more impact in the tests than in my real world urban driving.

[juan27]

6 hours ago, stever750 said:

Who buys a petrol car caring about emissions, well until recently anyway 

 

We probably care less recently in the UK as from this year a new 1.0 Citigo that previously cost £20/year to tax now costs £140...same as an Octavia VTS 245!

[Ootohere]

It looks like the VW Group think there are plenty that want some degree of economy from a petrol engine and not just by driving a city car.

Funnily even with 80ps or even 95ps less than a warm Octavia their journeys will take no longer in the UK.

Not everyone lives in a parallel universe were they think every journey is a race on some private road ot race track & they are pushing their vehicle to the limit at as much as 80 mph.

 

[stever750]

The 1.4 has ACT, so that's a misleading video. 

[juan27]

1 hour ago, Headinawayoffski said:

It looks like the VW Group think there are plenty that want some degree of economy from a petrol engine and not just by driving a city car.

Funnily even with 80ps or even 95ps less than a warm Octavia their journeys will take no longer in the UK.

Not everyone lives in a parallel universe were they think every journey is a race on some private road ot race track & they are pushing their vehicle to the limit at as much as 80 mph.

 

 

As much as 80mph? ROFL. 

[Ootohere]

As fast as that, or even taking it over 100 mph and able to notice that extra 10ps.

Their day ruined if they can not show other plebs in lesser cars how fast they can accelerate from 50-70 and get 3 cars ahead.

[dunc69]

On 22/09/2017 at 06:31, juan27 said:

 

Ah I see you are talking about the earlier "performance pack" 230 rather than the current FL standard TSi VRS. That makes more sense now,

 

The seven speed DSG does have a beneficial effect but my 245 is a manual and an estate (kombi). So pretty much as thirsty as a 245 gets I guess?

 

The official figures aren't that bad, this table makes interesting reading:

 

Interesting that the pre-FL 230 is more fuel-efficient than the FL230. 

 

Is that due to drag caused by the new lights? 

Edited 23 September, 2017 by dunc69

[juan27]

9 hours ago, dunc69 said:

Interesting that the pre-FL 230 is more fuel-efficient than the FL230. 

 

Is that due to drag caused by the new lights? 

 

New lights look more streamlined to me. More likely the software cheats have been removed maybe?

[dunc69]

1 hour ago, juan27 said:

 

New lights look more streamlined to me. More likely the software cheats have been removed maybe?

Nah, surely that's only diseasal!