Poor fuel economy 2017 1.2 TSi DSG

[Rooted]

There are threads and posts on Briskoda on it.

Learn might not be the correct word, but they adapt, read the owners manual on 'Dynamic Driving' if that is still in a Yeti Owners manual.

 

Plenty will have a car they drive that they know well and lend to others and then when they drive again have the DSG adapting back to how they use it, 

or have borrowed or road tested a demonstrator, or a used car that drives as 'Car Reviwers' might describe how a  'Media car' / loaner drives, 

but another driver can have it behave totally different.

[PeterKn]

11 hours ago, Headinawayoffski said:

There are threads and posts on Briskoda on it.

Learn might not be the correct word, but they adapt, read the owners manual on 'Dynamic Driving' if that is still in a Yeti Owners manual.

 

Plenty will have a car they drive that they know well and lend to others and then when they drive again have the DSG adapting back to how they use it, 

or have borrowed or road tested a demonstrator, or a used car that drives as 'Car Reviwers' might describe how a  'Media car' / loaner drives, 

but another driver can have it behave totally different.

Hello Headinawayoffski. Yes, I have done more research and must agree with you.

"The automatic transmission automatically adapts to your driving style at any given time" 

I have the Instruction Manual on my phone and yes, Dynamic is still there. 

I know just what you mean about different drivers completely changing the feel of a car.  They can even temporarily change the bite point on a manual clutch, no idea how. 

[grajay]

I too have a 1.2 SEL DSG Yeti and the fuel consumption is fairly consistently averaging about 43-44mpg.

 

Sad to say but I think the problem may well be the driver.  My dear wife, when she uses the car always gets a poorer fuel consumption than I do.

Edited 4 December, 2017 by grajay

[kenfowler3966]

On 16/11/2017 at 10:26, PeterKn said:

Hello Headinawayoffski. Yes, I have done more research and must agree with you.

"The automatic transmission automatically adapts to your driving style at any given time" 

I have the Instruction Manual on my phone and yes, Dynamic is still there. 

I know just what you mean about different drivers completely changing the feel of a car.  They can even temporarily change the bite point on a manual clutch, no idea how. 

I read that differently in that the car notes how you are driving “at that time” and adjusts itself.

Driving gently and it changes sooner. Driving hard and it holds the gears longer. All within the same journey changing parameters as required. I am sure I read elsewhere that it is not adapting to a driver as such, just changing to suit current use depending on sensors etc.

eg I have just noticed that If starting off down a hill, it knows this and pulls away in second.

[PeterKn]

On 15/11/2017 at 17:28, PeterKn said:

I have just done my first fill-to-fill fuel calculation in a two - week old 1.2 se drive dsg. I returned 38.4 over 309 miles. The car has done just  over 600 miles so isn't fully run in yet. The miles were a mixture of longer runs on country roads with lots of hills and bends, dual carriageway,  and short runs to the shops. I am happy with that, be interesting to see what I get once I have a few thousand miles up. 

I find the dsg to be very smooth, but I can induce a clunk if I pull away too sharply when stone cold. It is just like the dsg Golf I had before in that respect. I feel that the dsg performs very well, no complaints. 

I haven't really used cruise yet, just checked to see how it works. 

Hope you can resolve your problems, greenstripe. 

Update on fuel consumption in 17 plate 1.2tsi dsg with 5000 miles. Lifetime average is 39.5, most recent fill to fill was 41, and mfd shows 41.5. As a lot of my journeys are 5 miles in and out to the shops, I am happy with that. No problems with the car as yet. 

[Sad555]

I think the 1,2 is a bit of old tech and many manufactures have spent a lot developing  the new breed of 1.0L turbo/3cylinder etc which have improved power, performance and economy,and I think I read somewhere that the new honda jazz with 1.3 and 1.5 only use them because their new 1.0L turbo wont fit.

Edited 19 July, 2018 by Sad555

[Tedshred]

We average 37 but. still more than happy with that after garage bought car back after dpf issues and we opted to going unleaded 

[camelspyyder]

1 hour ago, Sad555 said:

I think the 1,2 is a bit of old tech and many manufactures have spent a lot developing  the new breed of 1.0L turbo/3cylinder etc which have improved power, performance and economy,and I think I read somewhere that the new honda jazz with 1.3 and 1.5 only use them because their new 1.0L turbo wont fit.

 

Please go and drive a 1.0 after a 1.2.

You will find the 1.0 has improved power Yes, but performance No and economy No.

It's torque band is so narrow that it's way too easy to be in the wrong gear. The off boost performance is minimal as a result - many on SEATCupra (including myself) notice it stalls in traffic at low speeds in second gear because there is absolutely zero torque, and it doesn't matter if you have a manual or a DSG -  they both do it. The 1.0 has to be caned, relatively speaking, to get anywhere - resulting in worse mpg than the preceding 1.2, unless you are bimbling along A-roads at about 40-50 mph when it sips fuel. That must be it's sweet spot.

 

I wouldnt have another 1.0TSI but I'd happily take a 1.2.

[Sad555]

that's interesting to hear, is it VAG 1.0L or are they all like it.i did have my doubts when you look at the size of a karrot /5 /4 adults and baggage and a little 1.0L and I couldn't really get it.

[camelspyyder]

Yeah. Mine is a VAG 1.0 TSI 110.

 

The very worst bit is the shocking distance from reality to the EU combined figure.  I know that is a theoretical number but my experience is that small turbo engines are the very worst for decent mpg , being adversely effected badly by hills, headwinds and other external factors you meet in real life.

 

Here are the numbers I've averaged v's the EU tests - generally over A/B road commutes of 20-30 miles.

 

2001 Proton  2.0D        EU combined 37 mpg reality 46     difference +9

2002 FIAT       1.2           EU                    49                     49                          0

2003 FIAT       1.9D        EU                    44                      44                          0

2013 VW       1.2TSI       EU                    55                      50                          -5

2017 VW      1.0TSI        EU                    61                      49                          -11

 

You can see I always use about the same amount of fuel - the difference is I never had to concentrate so hard on saving fuel till I bought a TSi.

 

Driving a 1.0 (or even a 1.2) without constant thought of saving drops them down to about 40.

 

 

Edited 19 July, 2018 by camelspyyder

[Ryeman]

I’m a hypermiler type.

My BMW/PSA engined 1.6 turbo C4 Picasso (5 seat) 6 Spd auto is a big vehicle......(similar to the Yeti in intelligent use of minimal road space) but quite light for its size.

Over the last 15,000 kms the average consumption has come down and stabilised at 5.2/100 .....around 55 mpg ....and using ‘crap’ E10/95 fuel.......it’s phenomenal !......it simply shouldn’t be this good.

The similar 1.4 turbo 6A Astra is significantly smaller in frontal area, a bit lighter but won’t equal the Picasso.....odd!

Our smaller old 308 1.2 turbo 6A using PULP95 was barely any better than the Picasso.

They all cruise around at 90 kph.

I see the small turbo petrol as simply a quiet diesel......love it!

[Stubod]

I have had my 1.4 tsi (150hp 4*4), for about 6 months and taking it steady I am averaging 43mpg actual overall, (tank to tank). The trip computer shows a consistent error of 8% (better).

 

Ironically we changed from a 1.4 tsi Octavia (122hp which averaged about 45 mpg overall) as we intended towing a larger caravan, but we have since had a change of heart and don't intend towing anytime soon. I had thought about changing the 1.4 Yeti for a 1.2 for better economy, (and always fancied an auto), but looking at the above mpg's I am not so sure now?!

[Ryeman]

1 minute ago, Stubod said:

I have had my 1.4 tsi (150hp 4*4), for about 6 months and taking it steady I am averaging 43mpg actual overall, (tank to tank). The trip computer shows a consistent error of 8% (better).

 

Ironically we changed from a 1.4 tsi Octavia (122hp which averaged about 45 mpg overall) as we intended towing a larger caravan, but we have since had a change of heart and don't intend towing anytime soon. I had thought about changing the 1.4 Yeti for a 1.2 for better economy, (and always fancied an auto), but looking at the above mpg's I am not so sure now?!

For its weight I would expect the 1.4 to be at least as good and with stop/start you aren’t penalised by red light idling.

[Stubod]

..the stop start never seems to work? (Not that bothered as I think its more of a hindrance, and a bit of a waste of time for the roads around these parts).

My work commute is about 20 miles each way and all rural which I guess helps with the economy.

[Ryeman]

The technology is constantly improving in areas like time to reach operating temperature....the quicker the better, so the latest series of engine means less emission/consumption.  The porky Yeti isn’t suited to small capacity engines like the 1.2 in constant stop start traffic.....at its best in medium constant speed driving.

[Stubod]

18 minutes ago, Ryeman said:

The technology is constantly improving in areas like time to reach operating temperature....the quicker the better, so the latest series of engine means less emission/consumption.  The porky Yeti isn’t suited to small capacity engines like the 1.2 in constant stop start traffic.....at its best in medium constant speed driving.

 

..out of all the cars I have owned to date this one definitely "heats up" the fastest. Normally after a lot less than a mile the temp gauge hits "normal". Also noticed that in the hotter weather the mpg indicator "peaks" a lot earlier in the journey.

When I do change cars I had thought about a Karoq? (....wash my mouth out). Wonder what the real world mpg is like on those, (1.0 ltr v 1.5ltr). As mentioned above, big car little engine and the larger engine may not be a lot worse (or even better?) re actual mpg...

Edited 20 July, 2018 by Stubod

[Ryeman]

Aerodynamic efficiency and kerb weight are fundamental in achieving good economy.

[kenfowler3966]

Its hardly ever better to change a car for a few mpg better. Saving in fuel costs are minute compared to the costs to change a car.

 

Only real reasons to change are:

Don't like it

Uncomfortable to drive (I had to get rid of a 1 year old Citroen BX as I found the seats so uncomfortable after about 30 miles, not noticed on test drive!)

Doesn't have a feature I need

Like to drive a newer car

likely maintenance costs are going to be uneconomic, eg foreseeable repairs are exceeding value.

 

For my wifes car, it is the last item which determines when to get rid, typically when down to around £1k in value after 6 to 8 years of ownership and a lot of expensive repairs suddenly coming up in the next year or so.

 

EG the rush from diesel to petrol makes no sense to me as you are selling a diesel so someone else will get a bargain and continue to use it; it is not being scrapped so emissions continue. You have paid a lot of money to get a petrol as they command a premium, running costs will be much higher!

[Ryeman]

To me the emissions ancillaries of the modern diesel on top of increased initial cost makes the long term cost per mile questionable at best.

At the moment GFPs aren’t required on the small turbo petrol and the EGR cooler valve isn’t applicable.

Either way depreciation is the big killer IMO.

[Sad555]

Vag dieselgate caused the diesel depreciation (not to mention the FIX with added future reliability problems )and putting motorist OFF diesel and onto petrol,thanks again VAG

Edited 20 July, 2018 by Sad555

[Rooted]

Ryeman, At the moment GPF's are not required on the small petrol turbos, but from just a few weeks away that is what you will be getting on VW Groups small petrol turbos that have the WLTP results, and they will not be producing and selling any new cars later this year without a Gasoline Particulate Filter.

[camelspyyder]

8 hours ago, Stubod said:

..the stop start never seems to work? (Not that bothered as I think its more of a hindrance, and a bit of a waste of time for the roads around these parts).

My work commute is about 20 miles each way and all rural which I guess helps with the economy.

 

There are so many criteria which kill stop start. 

 

My last car wouldn't do it if the AC was set to screen. The current one (this hot summer) wont do it if AC is on in any mode. Low battery state. Not achieving minimum speed in the traffic crawl since the last stop. Etc. Etc. There should be a list in your manual...I know, I know, we never read them.

[Sad555]

2 hours ago, Offski said:

Ryeman, At the moment GPF's are not required on the small petrol turbos, but from just a few weeks away that is what you will be getting on VW Groups small petrol turbos that have the WLTP results, and they will not be producing and selling any new cars later this year without a Gasoline Particulate Filter.

Not until they have a FIX for it.oh no here we go ,not again .

[Ryeman]

7 hours ago, Offski said:

Ryeman, At the moment GPF's are not required on the small petrol turbos, but from just a few weeks away that is what you will be getting on VW Groups small petrol turbos that have the WLTP results, and they will not be producing and selling any new cars later this year without a Gasoline Particulate Filter.

Yes George, that’s why I was saying earlier to get in before they become standard.

[Ryeman]

7 hours ago, camelspyyder said:

 

There are so many criteria which kill stop start. 

 

My last car wouldn't do it if the AC was set to screen. The current one (this hot summer) wont do it if AC is on in any mode. Low battery state. Not achieving minimum speed in the traffic crawl since the last stop. Etc. Etc. There should be a list in your manual...I know, I know, we never read them.

I still think it was mainly employed to benefit test cell emission results.

Coasting is another complication for the same intent.