My 2.0 TDI Scout 4x4 which has clocked 1200 miles so far seems to be distinctly lacking in Skoda`s fuel consumption claims, the Honest John real average figure is 45.8 mpg I`m begining  to think something is wrong somewhere as 33 mpg is really low for a Diesel in my opinion I am not the slowest of drivers but my previous 2.0 TDI 180 bhp Kuga 4x4 would easily return 40 mpg no matter how hard it was driven.

Has anyone else had fuel consumption that bad on their Karoq?

Skoda do not make fuel consumption claims, that would be stupid as with the old system they said they were not real world and with the WLTP they can just publish test results.

That real world test will not be how you drive.

 

WLTP & RDE, now RDE2 will not have the trst vehicle doing regens.

 

How long are your trips and does the car have people in it and stuff and a driver more than 60 kg or whatever, so different from WLTP driving ?

 

 

Edited 4 February, 20206 yr by Roottootemblowinootsoot

33mpg means nothing without knowing where the car has been for those 1200 miles, also bearing in mind that its winter, and a karoq is as streamlined as a house brick and its a 4x4

Also - the engine is tight and new..

 

You wont see good fuel economy for a while

 

My Karoq and Kodiaq are still bad...

 

Best saw on Karoq is 46 on a long run... but averages around 30 local 

 

My Kodiaq was also real bad for the first 1000 miles - <35 - even with a run... now have seen 41 / 42 on 130 mile runs to and from airports.

 

My last Yeti - was similar less than 40 for 3000 miles

 

Then about 45 up to first service

 

Then after service was seeing close to 50 mpg on the airport runs..

 

All 2.0TDi 4x4 DSG - 150 bhp.

 

 

The engine is not tight.

All metal parts are lubricated by oil and move without grinding and there is crappy VW508 / 509 0w 20 FS IV in there.

 

Brakes can be tight or causing a bit of friction when running / driving in, tyre pressures might be a bit low and basically to get the cars through the WLTP / RDE Skoda had them suitable for the test and not really caring about how ones performed once someone buys one.

20mph av over 1175 miles !! Most in town ?

Ours is about the same at the moment.  Hoping as everything losses up it will improve. 

Common for cars to do about 15% better mileage after about 3000 miles compared to first 1000 miles

 

I think it is tight engines combined with longlife oil, and other parts of drivetrain being tight

Of course if the engine loosens up, then those microscopic metal shavings must be somewhere (hopefully the oil filter), but some of smallest probably still in oil until first oil change

 

 

Irrespective of what HJ says or WLTP or whether it's town driving or driving around a race course,  if the type of driving is similar to that of the previous Kuga then I'd be really disappointed.

 

You don't say how old the Kuga is, but in my experience newer generations of cars, especially Fords, have seen an increase if fuel consumption. I used to have a mk2.5 Focus, some years later replaced by a mk3 with a similar 1.6tdi engine. The mk3 was more aerodynamic, had stop/start, and a whole host of economy saving devices yet I lost about 7mpg on average with the newer car. I found the new diesel Kuga's ( as well as Mondeo's ) to be quite thirsty beasts.

 

So if your comparison is with an older type Kuga then your 33mpg might be what to expect. If it's with the newer type Kugas then I'd be worried. No matter how you drive a car, 33mpg from a diesel ( even if it is winter time ), is crap. I'd be disappointed with that from a petrol.

 

P.S.  for the avarage motorist, I've found HJ realmpg to be more accurate that any government test figure.

Firstly take it out of eco mode, I found this wasn't that eco I just use normal mode, the winter probably isnt the best time to look at MPG and only done 1200 miles 

I'm getting around 44 mpg at the moment, I have urned down the heated screen and miror timer so only on for 5 minuits cant realy say if this has had an effect but I' m getting around 44 mpg and we use the heated seats screen and we dont dordal around

Edited 5 February, 20206 yr by patrolman

http://honestjohn.co.uk/carbycar/skoda/karoq-2017

 

 

 

Edited 5 February, 20206 yr by Roottootemblowinootsoot

Root - Is there any particular reason you've published those figures from HJ ?

Yes.

The OP's thread and mention of HJ and 45.8.   

So as well that anyone looks at what 45.8 appears against and is it a 2019 model.

Averages are achieved with lows and highs.  Somebody must log the lows.

 

If the OP logs their MPG figures that might well change the average, as if someone logs a very good mpg figure they are getting.

 

 @gomez drew attention to '20 mph over 1175 miles' 

That is a pretty low speed over those miles or lots of sitting with the engine running maybe.

Edited 5 February, 20206 yr by Roottootemblowinootsoot

I don`t get the 20 mph average speed reading that doesn`t reflect my driving at all which is a mixture of everyday 30 - 60 mph I don`t sit in traffic much that is partly why something doesn`t seem right unless it is just the system is incorrect for both average speed and fuel consumption I have only been driving in normal mode and had just changed to ECO mode on the last outing to see if it made any difference.

 

My Kuga was 3 years old on 25K miles and fuel consumption always remained round about 40 mpg and I am not driving the Karoq any different that I used to drive that although I find the Karoq is quite high geared in 5th and 6th gear in town driving compared to the Kuga so I never seem to get out of 4th much unless @ 35-40 mph.

 

I appreciate it has only clocked 1200 miles but it has been a mild winter in the Midlands so far and I do expect the consumption to improve with more mileage etc but 33 mpg to start seems quite low and it will have to go some to achieve the claimed Honest John average of nearly 46 mpg.

Edited 5 February, 20206 yr by Delanor

@Delanor  Have you not done brim to brims and seen what the actual MPG is or miles covered and how many litres needed to brim again?

@Delanor what is your typical daily commute, distance and time it takes?

 

 

 

 

I don't for one moment think the little green leaf number (see OP) is an accurate measure of anything in particular, but I generally get a figure in the 90s rather than 72. It might be worth looking into this number to try and find out why it is low (I think it depends on style of driving and power consumers such as aircon/heated seats/heated screen etc.) I know you can get a 'live' bar chart displayed as you drive which might help you understand what is affecting your fuel economy.

I do not have the green leaf on my car but judging by the many posts from those who do.....well it probably the most useless and perplexing item evr put on a vehicle.

Ignore it

I  have a 2018 2.0 TDI 4x4 manual and was regularly getting 49 - 50 on mine, on a 33 mile each way daily commute mostly on dual carriageway. I now get low 40s on a 45 mile each way mix of motorway A and B roads.

 

I've done 34,000 miles now and from memory the economy improved after the first 10,000.

As already mentioned, if you can't trust the 20mph average speed on the display, why are you therefore taking the 33mpg as gospel?

 

Brim the tank, reset the odometer drive the car normally until it requires refuelling. Note the mileage and number of litres needed to re-brim the tank and calculate your fuel economy manually....

 

https://www.mpg-calculator.co.uk/

This my best consumption with my 2.0 TDI DSG. 26000 km so far.

On 14/02/2020 at 09:06, silver1011 said:

As already mentioned, if you can't trust the 20mph average speed on the display, why are you therefore taking the 33mpg as gospel?

 

Brim the tank, reset the odometer drive the car normally until it requires refuelling. Note the mileage and number of litres needed to re-brim the tank and calculate your fuel economy manually....

 

https://www.mpg-calculator.co.uk/

I actually said "I don`t get the 20 mph average speed"  that is not saying I don`t trust it! and when I say "I`m begining  to think something is wrong somewhere as 33 mpg is really low for a Diesel" that does not mean I am taking 33 mpg as gospel but merely that it is a low fuel consumption figure for a Diesel!

I have no inclination to drive around with 12 gallon of Diesel at a cost of £72 in the tank to establish the accuracy of economy readings on a vehicle that I have just paid in excess of £25K for IMO that is up to a Skoda dealer to establish.

When my Skoda has covered  a more substantial mileage if the readings have not improved considerably then would that not indicate a fault somewhere either with the economy readings or the actual fuel consumption something that I have still yet to establish.

4 minutes ago, Delanor said:

I have no inclination to drive around with 12 gallon of Diesel at a cost of £72 in the tank to establish the accuracy of economy readings on a vehicle that I have just paid in excess of £25K for IMO that is up to a Skoda dealer to establish.

 

Eh, you've spent £25,000 on a car and begrudge sticking £70 quids worth of fuel in it?

 

There is nothing wrong with your car. At an average speed of 20mph, 33mpg is about as good as you're going to get.

 

If you want to squeeze a few extra pence per mile out of your car, chop it in for a Scala or anything that isn't the shape of a house brick.

 

 

13 minutes ago, Delanor said:

I actually said "I don`t get the 20 mph average speed"  that is not saying I don`t trust it! and when I say "I`m begining  to think something is wrong somewhere as 33 mpg is really low for a Diesel" that does not mean I am taking 33 mpg as gospel but merely that it is a low fuel consumption figure for a Diesel!

I have no inclination to drive around with 12 gallon of Diesel at a cost of £72 in the tank to establish the accuracy of economy readings on a vehicle that I have just paid in excess of £25K for IMO that is up to a Skoda dealer to establish.

 

 

So why ask on here if people have had such (in your opinion) poor fuel economy if you are not prepared to start off with a verified figure?

 

Good luck with getting Skoda to do brim to brim testing for you.

26 minutes ago, silver1011 said:

 

Eh, you've spent £25,000 on a car and begrudge sticking £70 quids worth of fuel in it?

 

Correct!