10 minutes ago, Dr Zoidberg said:

 

What size Gallons do you have down there? Are they the "full fat" 4.54 litres or do you use 4 like America?

Metric Litres and kilometres since 1976, so it will depend on what he selected to convert for UK readers.

My kids would not have a clue that there are different gallons used around the world, which reminds me I should update my daughter about that as she is about to embark on a 'world' tour including the UK.

It will be amusing watching her glaze over after 1 minute about different imperial weights and measures, so I'll start off with the important one that the British pint of beer is bigger than the South Australian pint of beer.

The UK has speeds in MPH,  distance signs in Miles,   

Fuel sold in Litres, not sold in gallons for many years, and cars show MPG. 

 

The UK was EU Light. 

14 minutes ago, ZacDaMan72 said:

Not sure. Just got those figures using an online converter from l/100km to mpg(UK)

 

That'll have used 4.54 then.
Thanks

40 minutes ago, AwaoffSki said:

What were the Official Figures you were speaking about, was this EU testing or in Australia?

 

 

They could easily publish the results at full Revenue / Max Gross weight. That is if Car Manufacturers did not have EU Governments in their pockets.

Then you can publish the just above Kerb Weight results as well.     

 

No need to have an Harry Potter special magic and effects. 

 The Manufacturers have the while testing results pre production as well, the Test Authorities do not need to publish, 

just compare. They have super dooper comuters now, smart people, IT / Software.

 

 Just give the results, as heavy as the car  might be out on the road.

Have the figures with a trailer on as well if the vehicles has tow weights approved.

The Australian tests copy the EU ones, so the results should be little different.

 

Of course I agree that the existing consumption tests have their limitations, even more so since they have been gamed by the manufacturers both by cheating (and many manufacturers have cheated consumption tests not just VW) and interpretation of the rules.

The authorities are to blame for placing huge importance on a flawed testing regime which has resulted in many vehicles designed for the test and not for road. 

 

The only reason I mentioned Harry Potter was your statement about vehicles going  "Against all science & rules of the universe" and the only one I could think of was the Ford Anglia in the HP film. I've never had a car in real life that was not compliant with the laws of nature, and neither have you.

Edited 11 February, 20188 yr by Gerrycan
Poor gramma

Yes Ford Anglia's were interesting, i had one with a 1600E engine. 

It defied all the sciences.

 

The Weight of cars, official figures and what engine is fitted is interesting then the official Co2 g/km.

Looking forward to studying a VW Up! GTI 115ps 4 seater compared to a Rapid or Octavia 1.0TSI 115ps 5 seater.

Or the Face Lift Fabia 1.0 TSI 110ps 5 seater with Gasoline Particulate Filter.

 

Lots of vehicles will be getting new Official Co2 g/km test results after September this year & the new testing, or the model discontinued, 

like the 1.4 TDI 3 Cylinders. 

 

15 minutes ago, AwaoffSki said:

Yes Ford Anglia's were interesting, i had one with a 1600E engine. 

It defied all the sciences.

 

All the sciences?

I'm thinking you may not have read Harry Potter books with your kids.

So many philosophers and rocket scientists here, like a miniature house of commons.

 

a900ss asked a simple question and instead of answering it, you are re-inventing hot water.

 

Experience with my teddy so far:

 

2.0 TDI 140kW DSG 4x4, about 600km (400 miles) on the clock

 

- Type of driving: 140-160 km/h motorways, 50km/h city relaxed, 100km/h A and B roads active driving (neither sporty nor slow)

- Total avg.consumption : 7,4L/100km (38 MPG)

- City driving, A and B roads and motorways up to 110km/h: 6,6L/100km (43 MPG) -> rev range between 1500-2000 RPM, plenty of power, never passed 3000 RPM even when overtaking up a hill at 100km/h, didn't need to

- Motorway driving 140km/h-160km/h (this represents about 60-70% of my driving): fuel consumption goes up but never pass 7.4L/100km (38 MPG), at 140km/h revs are 2300 RPM, about 2700RPM at 160km/h, very brisk up to 180km/h, didn't go to 200 km/h due to snow

- very quiet car, you get some wind noise at higher speeds but stays constant (doesn't get louder) from 130km/h-160km/h, still at reasonable levels at higher speeds

- very comfortable car (no DCC, 18" alloys)

- DSG is superb, downshifts when braking (automatics generaly don't engine-break so very pleased), very smooth shifts, very smooth driving from a start (almost as smooth as a slushbox)

- i do have one problem with the DSG and that's i lets the revs drop bellow 1500 RPM, still plenty of torque there but you can feel vibrations from the engine (usualy when travelling 50km/h in 5th gear up a hill with minimum throttle applied, little increase of the throttle forces a downshift to 4th and problem solved)

- diesel engine very very quiet up to 2000 RPM, you can barely hear it, if you are talking or listening to radion on normal volume you can forget the car is running, gets louder above that, but when travelling above 100km/h you don't hear it at all (predomanat road and wind noise)

 

Don't have extensive experience with petrol variants.

 

Hope this helps with your decision.