Jump to content

poor fuel economy 1.0 TSI 3 clylinder


Recommended Posts

what sort of mpg are people getting out of there 1.0 tsi's?

 

today I gave up driving it like miss dasy and switched to driving it like my old mk1 Leon TDI (which managed 43mpg round town). average mpg 32!!!

 

what gives? is it because its only got 450 miles on it?

 

I tell you I'm that close to getting rid due to this and other issues with the gear change. if I do I'm going back to a non DPF TDI or electric.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

After 450 miles from it being brimmed when you picked it up how many litres did it take to brim again?,

just to give an idea how poor the MPG really is if it is bad.

 

Did you brim it and then do 32 miles and it took 4.546 litres or did the car say you got 32mpg?

 

 

450 miles has obviously got a car with brakes yet to wear off the newness .

/ tightness and tyres that need the greeness off them, 

have you checked and adjusted the tyre pressures yet?, (and reset the TPMS.)

Edited by Headinawayoffski
Link to comment
Share on other sites

to be honest looking at the 215/40 R17 tyres on blackcircles this wasn't the best choice for economy. the Leon had 205/60 R16's which I could use Mitchellin cross climates on.

 

the mk2 Toledo we have had 195/65 R15's which could take Mitchellin energies.

 

the Leon wheels are on the mk2 Toledo now but it hasn't affected the economy a huge amount maybe 2-3mpg round town.

Edited by cypher007
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@cypher007 drives short journeys around town. Doesn't want DPF issues, hence he traded in for a brand new petrol rather than a modern diesel.

 

Unfortunately, he is finding the modern mpg claims by manufacturers just get ever further from the truth.

 

I can compare mpg claimed and my real figure for my last few cars:

 

1980's Mitsubishi 2.0 Diesel maker claimed  38 achieved 48    +10

1990's Fiat 1.2 Petrol             maker claimed  47 achieved 50    +3

2000's Fiat 1.9 Diesel             maker claimed  44 achieved 44    +0

2000's VW 1.2 Petrol              maker claimed 56 achieved 49     -7

2010s  VW 1.0 Petrol              maker claimed 61 achieved 49     -12

 

There's a clear trend - you can trust official figures less and less each year - right now they are utter lies.

Edited by camelspyyder
Link to comment
Share on other sites

They never claimed that you could get that if you took your vehicle out of an Authorised Test centre and used it on the road rather than on a rolling road in a temperature controlled building.  So best not think of them as confidence tricksters just pith takers.

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

 

Now they have new Real World Testing since 1st September, outside, just maybe not where we drive, when we drive or sit in traffic and not with passengers carried, 

so the kiddology continues.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, cypher007 said:

to be honest looking at the 215/40 R17 tyres on blackcircles this wasn't the best choice for economy. the Leon had 205/60 R16's which I could use Mitchellin cross climates on.

 

the mk2 Toledo we have had 195/65 R15's which could take Mitchellin energies.

 

the Leon wheels are on the mk2 Toledo now but it hasn't affected the economy a huge amount maybe 2-3mpg round town.

I found this with my earlier Rapid's, both of which had 215/45/16 tyres. 

 

My solution was a set of 15" steel wheels, along with 185/60/15 winter tyres (Continental Wintercontact), supplied by Jonathan at Rainwoth Skoda. I ran these on both Rapid's and plan to run them November - March on my new Toledo. A set of 4 steels wheels / winter tyres cost less than "all season" tyres (not Michelin Cross Climates) in 215/45/16.

 

This contrasts with previous Octavia's and Yeti's, which happily are compatible with the excellent Michelin Cross Climates.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, camelspyyder said:

@cypher007 drives short journeys around town. Doesn't want DPF issues, hence he traded in for a brand new petrol rather than a modern diesel.

 

Unfortunately, he is finding the modern mpg claims by manufacturers just get ever further from the truth.

 

I can compare mpg claimed and my real figure for my last few cars:

 

1980's Mitsubishi 2.0 Diesel maker claimed  38 achieved 48    +10

1990's Fiat 1.2 Petrol             maker claimed  47 achieved 50    +3

2000's Fiat 1.9 Diesel             maker claimed  44 achieved 44    +0

2000's VW 1.2 Petrol              maker claimed 56 achieved 49     -7

2010s  VW 1.0 Petrol              maker claimed 61 achieved 49     -12

 

There's a clear trend - you can trust official figures less and less each year - right now they are utter lies.

My observations match this - the closest I've ever come to manufacturers claimed fuel economy figures is a remapped 2002 (207 BHP) Octavia 1.8T 4x4 Combi. This returned an urban MPG within 1-2 MPG of the manufacterers claimed figures.

 

The worst was a new (in 2012) 1.6 CR TDi Roomster which returned low to mid 40's, against a predicted return of 55-65 MPG. The engine was dreadful (it replaced a 1.9 TDi) and never came close to it's claimed MPG.

 

I found It is easy to become fascinated by MPG returns. I'm certainly guilty of this (see Fuelly link(s) below;)), but am informed enough to research real world MPG returns (Fuelly / HJ Real MPG etc) in advance of any purchase.  

 

I recall considering a Lexus CT200 some years ago. I'd read it could achieve 60-70 MPG, but the salesman eventually admitted mid 40's was the norm. Similar story at Toyota. I test drove a Prius and the saleman said "easy 70 MPG". The extended road-test returned mid 40's and, after speaking to a salesman who ran one as his company car, it quickly became apparent this was the norm.

 

My 1.0 TSi Toledo is currently returning 10-15% better MPG than the car it replaced (1.2 TSi Rapid) and is currently bettering my TDi Yeti, so happy with that.

 

Edited by pinkpanther
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Headinawayoffski said:

They never claimed that you could get that if you took your vehicle out of an Authorised Test centre and used it on the road rather than on a rolling road in a temperature controlled building.  So best not think of them as confidence tricksters just pith takers.

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

 

Now they have new Real World Testing since 1st September, outside, just maybe not where we drive, when we drive or sit in traffic and not with passengers carried, 

so the kiddology continues.

 

Whilst I understand that the manufacturers do nt claim that these mpgs are reproduceable by humans, I think I clearly illustrated that they are stretching the truth (at the very least) so much further these days. It's now blatant, and I've posted before how my American cars almost all hit their Government tested mpgs, US consumers just wouldnt put up with these EU approved lies.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes we have to forgive the Mericans that had no idea that they bought less fuel when getting a gallon than Europeans for looking at EU test figures then thinking holy sh!t they are lying barstewards and going on to making a stink. 

but then as it is they were lying cheating barstewards, but then Kia / Hyundai were made to pay up because they published EU Test Figures.

 

The testing they did in North America even though not Real World was nearer to giving figures somewhere closer to the truth.

Took their time catching VW Group out though, and then the US Corporations as well.

 

Edited by Headinawayoffski
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I understand this isn't a diesel. I understand some margin on the EU BS figures.

 

what I don't understand is why a 14 year old mostly mechanical low injection pressure (compared to CR) 1.9L TDI laughs in the face of all these new engines with all there technology, I'm including modern 1.6 TDI's in this group as they don't seem to fair much better.

 

I thought we as a planet were trying to produce less CO2? well if I'm burning more fuel I must be producing more CO2 and the EU figure of say 106g/km against our mk2 Toledo's 135g/km is utter crap.

 

if this logic follows I wonder if I'm not owed a road tax refund?

 

is it that in 2003 the testing was more indicative of actual driving? as I can get within a few mpg of the figures on that car.

 

it makes me also wonder why modern diesel and petrols are using more fuel?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2003 was pre Euro 4 emissions, and Euro 5 was not till 2009.

Your SEAT did not have a DPF did it, having to burn fuel just to keep it from being choked?

 

As to the Euro 5 & even some petrol & diesels, VW, SEAT, Audi had to admit that some Implausible / Irregular Co2 g/km figures were 'mistakes' or as commonly known, the result of Test Cheating and false figures.

 

Time will tell with the Euro 6 figures up till now. 

Edited by Headinawayoffski
Link to comment
Share on other sites

so it sounds like ive been paying £135 per year when I should have been paying £20, like the Audi A5 2.0 TDI 175BHP 2012 DPF that I was going to buy before I was told by the owners it would choke on my daily commute.

 

if the Gov has based its road tax on this BS and the CO2 targets the Gov and EU set of I think it was CO2 from a car not exceeding 140g/km has not been achieved. and my wifes mk2 is probably emitting less CO2 than the Audi paying £20.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No 'if' about it is there?

And then the VW Group were caught out, and so are others, so it is just tough titty is it not because lots were getting Zero Road Tax or £20/£30 tax and that was crap as well.

 

VW / Audi had lower Co2 g/km figures on cars with the same engine and drivetrain as a Skoda or Seat, and the VW / Audi could be heavier but then the Manufacturer submits the test figures and that is how things have been allowed to be.

http://autocar.co.uk/car-news/industry/volkswagen-updates-carbon-dioxide-emissions-ratings 

VW, AUDI & SEAT had to halt some sales after the Implausible / Irregular test results of Euro 6 engines in some petrol & diesels, 

and all that was supposedly Test Errors, nothing to do with the Defeat Device Scandal, according to them, oddly Skoda never made the same errors where their testing was done.

http://autocar.co.uk/car-news/industry/vw-emissions-scandal-nine-vw-vehicles-have-false-co2-ratings 

They had to buy back some cars even in the UK since the higher Co2 figures meant some lease deals were void, that never got much coverage.

http://autocar.co.uk/car-news/new-cars/audi-s4-and-s5-sales-halted-new-engine-software-tested 

 

Edited by Headinawayoffski
Link to comment
Share on other sites

i think this is probably only going to make me more determined to start a petition to get road tax put on fuel. then there can be no avoiding/fiddling of CO2. if the car uses more fuel it pays more tax.

 

all this GOV gigery pokery with the tax bands has been dropped now anyway and they've gone back to a flat system, as they weren't getting enough from the cars paying £20. funnily enough new car sales have dropped off a cliff since.

 

also think of the GOV savings if they can close a large section of the DVLA. they keep saying they need to reduce the deficit. age of austerity and all that. I should know I'm in the public sector and all ive seen is chopping at the bottom no, or very small 0.5%, pay rises for nearly 10 years and told to run round my hamster wheel faster.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So with a few more miles on the car it is time to check your oil level at Operating Temperature & also when stone cold, 

check where the coolant is sitting,  brim the tank, zero the maxidot and see how many litres it takes to brim it once you have done a few hundred miles.

 

Remembering that Winter Spec Petrol & Diesel starts be delivered to filling stations in the UK in the next weeks, 

starting in Scotland / North of England earliest and later in Southern areas.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

funnily I checked it last night and both the oil and coolant haven't moved. the block was still warm/hot though as it had been standing for about 2hrs only. when I checked them last week cold it was the same.

 

a mechanic I use for our older cars said to me I would probably find it would use some oil in the beginning, like his new Merc 4x4 diesel, but I haven't found that yet.

 

I thought only diesel changed during winter due to the cold making it thicken.

 

I'm putting off brimming it as the price of petrol has crept up and I'm waiting for it to fall again.

Edited by cypher007
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes diesel to stop it 'Waxing', 

but the petrol formulation is changed to make it less absorbent to H2o.  (hygroscopic)

'Not a lot of people know that, or believe it, or care.'

http://platts.com/latest-news/oil/london/uk-still-buying-winter-gasoline-as-european-refiners-8114744 

 

Maybe once you know your range from a tank of fuel spend £2.25 extra over 95 ron and buy a tank of Tesco Momentum 99 (99 ron minimum),

or even just Sainsburys or others 97 ron superunleaded.

Edited by Headinawayoffski
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm using ESSO 95ron at the moment and that's about 3-4p per L more than my local Tesco 95ron.

 

when running my Volvo 850 T5R I found supermarket fuel including momentum made it run like $hit.

 

when running our diesel's I found supermarket stuff just doesn't give the same economy. though that was Shell against Tesco not Esso against Tesco.

 

unfortunately our Shell closed shortly after the economic crash. I guess where I live people can just about afford a car let alone fuel. seen many an old reg still being driven round here. when I travel to other UK areas I see lots more newer cars. apparently we generally come in the bottom 5 for pay here.

 

there is a BP not far from me, but I think that's even more expensive than the Esso.

 

sometimes the Esso unleaded is the same price as there diesel WTF.

Edited by cypher007
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So you are buying Esso 95 ron which is highly likely sourced and supplied by GREENERGY that delivers ESSO in the most of the UK,

that is Greenergy that is part owned by TESCO and delivers Tesco Fuels and produces Tesco Momentum 99, and supplies other supermarket and independent filling stations.

http://greenergy.com/uk/independent 

 

 

Then there is Royal Dutch Shell who have Shell V-Power Nitro+, 

they are partners with GREENERGY in Importation Facilities, Refineries, Depots etc, importing the same base fuels.

http://petrolprices.com/news/super-unleaded-cheaper-than-unleaded 

http://petrolprices.com/news/superunleaded-cheaper-than-unleaded 

 

Small world among Fuel Importers, Producers, Wholesalers & Retailers..

  Extra Detergents might not be important to new engines, or the advertising campaigns & extra profits to the wholesaler.

but the higher octane can make a big difference even to a 3 cylinder turbocharged engine.

Even a small difference in efficient, smooth running and the 5 pence a litre extra for 99 octane over 95 octane might be worth it.

Only drivers will know if they monitor fuel use closely and can feel a difference.

http://volkswagen.co.uk/need-help/owners/Fuel 

No retailers sell 98 Super Unleaded in the UK, it is 95, 97 or 99 ron 'minimum' at filling station pumps.

 

Edited by Headinawayoffski
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not sure who supplies our Esso all I know is that on diesel and 95ron petrol our cars run better on Esso and proabably best on Shell.

 

Shell V-power used to be 98ron.

 

this could turn into a war of whos petrol is better, but if you google I'm not the only one who has noticed a difference between standard fuels at least.

 

also Tesco don't have a very good track record on fuel as regards causing problems for cars:

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_United_Kingdom_petrol_contamination

 

and more recently:

 

https://www.thesun.co.uk/motors/3860920/tesco-to-foot-the-bill-for-repair-bills-after-its-dodgy-diesel-causes-widespread-engine-failure/

 

the problem is our Esso doesn't do 97ron, as they couldn't sell it due to the higher cost. they do sell premium diesel though.

 

I might try BP as its not far and see how that fairs.

 

my Volvo recommends 98ron but I fitted water injection so haven't needed super since.

 

might have a look at water injection in the future for the Tolly to see if that improves the performance on 95ron.

Edited by cypher007
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No need for a war, there are super unleaded threads all around this forum.

Google or a Briskoda search will bring up Briskoda members experiences and opinions easily enough.

It is amazing how many do not know how fuels are sourced or delivered and when the additive packages are go into the base fuels, 

the base fuels delivered in bulk from refineries or storage from around the world, sometimes in storage at sea waiting for movements in prices.  European Fuels had to go off to the USA recently because of storm damage and US shortages hence a European Price rise.

 

Shell V-Power was 98 ron min, then Shell changed it to Shell V-Power Nitro+

and BP Ultimate used to be 98 ron but not now it is 97 and usually the most expensive Super Unleaded next to Gulf or Esso & Tesco Express filling stations,

 

 

I have a T5 S60 Volvo until 9 months ago and ran it on Tesco Momentum & sometiimes Hyperflo 250 102 for a treat,  (£75 for 25 litres)

i never used Shell since 'Formula Shell' killed my engine when it was introduced, 

and more recently i had to, & my greedy local Shell Filling Station bumped the fuel 10 pence a litre during a fuel shortage and i bought Super Unleaded V-Power Nitro + and they had filled their ranks from Grangemouth with 95 ron,

doing the customer a favour getting the fuel, and then committing fraud. (they can try to sue me for defamation if they dare.)

I noticeable almost immediately as my car had a Stage 2 Switchable map and ran like a bag of nails till i switched the map.

 

2007 was so much a decade ago.

If you want to look at Depots sending wrong fuels, or contamination and be it Tesco, Morrisons or others then there are plenty more recent examples, EDIT, i see you linked one.

and plenty that get compensated when it is spotted quickly because many might be affected,

as to small independents with water in tanks and the likes, less common now as most are new tanks / stations,. 

but it still does happen.

 

Fuels are traceable, and that is how i know the barstewards sold 95 ron from the Super unleaded pump and charged the Super Unleaded price

Then there is the tanker driver to ask.

 

A recent Shell contaminated Fuel article, it can happen at any station from any deliveries or filling station tank cleaning /maintenance failings.

Shell investigates after claims Aberdeen petrol station sold contaminated fuel - Evening Express.mhtml

Edited by Headinawayoffski
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Community Partner

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Welcome to BRISKODA. Please note the following important links Terms of Use. We have a comprehensive Privacy Policy. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.