1 minute ago, Alex-W said:

Is your work at the top of a hill?

No, it's a tongue in cheek way of saying I floor it on the way home because I'm keener to get home than I am to get to work

Invite the mother in law round for dinner.  I bet you'll get a more consistent and gentle drive on the way home.

3 hours ago, RobGy said:

 I can't figure this out for the life of me.

Given your location, where is your house relative to work? It's not impossible that the trip home is up hill!

23 hours ago, KenONeill said:

Given your location, where is your house relative to work? It's not impossible that the trip home is up hill!

Lol, no, it is nothing to do with that, it was a bad joke about having a heavy foot when there is beer to be had at the other end of the journey!

 

As it happens, the commute is a real mix of up and down hills.  First part of the journey there is mostly uphill 40mph dual carriageway, second half is mostly downhill 70mph dual carriageway, and the reverse on the way back.  Obviously a bit of 30mpg either side too.

Refilled today.  Very expensive Shell V power at £1.42.  Maxidot said 57.3, an improvement on last tanks readout by a small amount.  However I did not have my head screwed on when I refuelled.  Having switched from a petrol car, where brimming the tank can easily damage the vapour canister by flooding it with liquid, I did the squeeze til stop, wait 5 seconds, squeeze still stop, finish there.

 

Am I right in thinking this is not a problem with diesel cars, and it is actually ok to *brim* them?

 

There are so many factors in the fuel supply cut off, how fast it's delivering being the main one as it causes air to back up and once the fuel has settled you can squeeze more in.

 

Therefore my brim to brim calculation is almost completely useless, but not entirely.  I did 519 miles and filled up 43.8 litres.  Even if I had remembered to brim the tank, this shows that the actual consumption was at the very least 3.3mpg less than the maxidot, and almost certainly even further out than that.

Furthermore, although I wasn't expecting any miracles from the first tank of premium, so far if there have been any deliverable benefits they are a long way off compensating for the extra cost of the premium fuel.

3.3mpg under maxidot reading is not unheard of. So, 54mpg? That's not bad if you've not been trying to get the most from it. Keep going with your testing.

 

I am trying out eco mode with my dsg and running ac in eco mode. ⅓ of a tank left so we'll see how it's gone. Slightly concerned that it's not running hard enough to make proper use of the dpf but I'll work out if it's worth the saving in fuel.

10 hours ago, MarkyG82 said:

3.3mpg under maxidot reading is not unheard of. So, 54mpg? That's not bad if you've not been trying to get the most from it. Keep going with your testing.

 

I am trying out eco mode with my dsg and running ac in eco mode. ⅓ of a tank left so we'll see how it's gone. Slightly concerned that it's not running hard enough to make proper use of the dpf but I'll work out if it's worth the saving in fuel.

 

Yeah the discrepancy doesn't seem bad, but bearing in mind that I failed to completely fill the tank, the real figure is worse.  Still, as the title suggests, this isn't a "fill one tank and give up" test.  I haven't yet committed to exactly how long I will keep going, but I'm definitely continuing!

 

54mpg for the type of driving I've been doing is not bad at all.  Some might whine that it's a lot less than the claimed mileage of 70 or whatever it is, but I'm not that naive.  54mpg from a near 2 ton beast of a car, mostly urban driving, carefully driven but in sport mode, with the very occasional bit of spirited driving.

 

My understanding is that the manual and DSG boxes are very different with how the react to the different driving modes.  Thankfully there is virtually no difference in the manual if I chuck it in sport mode, it's all down to how I drive it.  Gives me extra throttle response which is a safety factor.

 

On a side note related to this, the jury is still out as far as I'm concerned as to whether it's better to accelerate briskly to cruising speed (where you can see ahead that you won't have to brake before you get there) then cruise, rather than slowly accelerate to the sweet spot.  I have tried both in numerous cars on the same journey over the last few years and noticed barely any difference - the only difference is when I'm not concentrating far ahead enough and end up stuck in stop start traffic or at lights.  I don't rag it when it's still cold, but once it's up to temp I let her rip. It's quite fun.

Hi

I have not concentrated on any type of fuel (though usually cheaper supermarket stuff mostly across the EU).  Over 4+ years (74,000 km) I have used 3,800 litres getting either 5.38 l/100 km or 52.47 mpg (English miles and Imperial gallons).  All on brim to brim, each test ending after about 2,000 km or before/after a long trip.  I note the figures in an Excel table.

The long cruise controlled trips on the near empty continental roads reduced the consumption to ~ 58 to 62 mpg (running at, or less than 130 kph).

Edited 25 October, 20196 yr by johnbkidd

I've finished a tank trying out eco mode and can confirm that it does offer a benefit. 50.5mpg over my average 46.3. I believe the benefit is realised due to the characteristics forcing you to drive in a more economical way. I also believe that I could get similar results driving more carefully in normal mode. Not possible in S due to gear holding.

 

For everyday driving I will return to normal as I enjoy the added throttle response and the fact it's always in gear. After all I got it mapped and added a pedal box for a reason 😝 

I also think there would be an issue with the dpf if I left it in eco the whole time. Driving locally I prefer to push the exhaust system a bit to help matters.