Has anyone else noticed a difference between what the car's computer is telling you and the actual fuel consumption calculated by noting the mileage on filling up?

I reckon I am getting about 6 mpg worse than indicated by the computer (monitored over 8,600 miles), and some 10 mpg worse than what the published figures say.

If I was actually getting what the computer said, I would be reasonably happy, but I'm not.

My last comparable car was a 1992 Subaru Legacy 2.2 estate, and that never failed to return 35mpg. I thought the super-modern 2.0 FSi in a smaller and lighter car would do better, but I find my average about 30mpg. I live in the country and rarely do any "urban driving".

It was a marginal decision to buy the petrol (2.0 FSi) as opposed to a diesel version, but I figured the relative quietness was worth it. I was wrong, and am now quite hacked off.

Tis just a rough guide, not to be taken literally.

But the MPG does get better with more miles as the car loosens up.

my computer says 42mpg average in a 2.0TDI with mainly town driving. In reality I think it's about 40mpg but even at that i'm happy enough.

Had my Superb's computer upto 60 mpg but only managed 52 mpg on a run:D

On my second tank full in a 2.0TDI I had an indicated 48mpg and about 46.5mpg based on how much fuel I put in.

It's showing an improvement since the first tank and I'm hoping I'll get it up to 50 when it's fully run in

Ooops , duplicate post

Well, all I could read in 2.0 FSI tests was about the high fuel consumption of that engine.

My computer shows fuel consumption 0.3 litre less than I can calculate by the simple full refill method. This seems to be constant.

Lummox says right, we spent our holiday in Italy last year and this year too. Last year my car needed 7.4 litre/100 km (computer said 7.1) and this year 7.1 (computer said 6.8).

This year we take a child with us, that means more weight in passengers and bags too. We used climate when It was needed at both trips.

My trip computer is 0.6mpg out over the past 7k miles of driving. I have complete faith in the computer and cant be bothered to keep a spreadsheet anymore!

I drive fairly briskly in a remapped vRS Fabia, and get around 48mpg average (well, 47.7mpg to be exact!)

My furball nearly got scraped today 19MPG!! WHAT!?!? I know i can be on the loud pedal. All bumper to bumper start-stop driving with Air con on. i thought i was in a EVO when i saw that.

If it was all stop-start stuff in town, with AC on, be grateful you weren't in an Evo or it probably would have been in single figures or something! :eek:

Steve

My furball nearly got scraped today 19MPG!! WHAT!?!? I know i can be on the loud pedal. All bumper to bumper start-stop driving with Air con on. i thought i was in a EVO when i saw that.

Thats shocking!:eek:

I had a Dodge Ram 4.7 V8 petrol pickup truck last week and I was getting 16 US MPG in that which is about 19 UK MPG!!!! Aircon on permanently this time of year.

I can deal with it at

Was that start-stop round town John, or a trip average? I had similar figures on occasion in the Fabia. Low 20s round town on a cold engine. It then soon headed towards the 40s once you got moving. I'm sure the same happened to gtjunior's average once he got out of 1st and 2nd gear.

Steve

Hehe, actually it was over a weeks commute, most of which is at 60mph constant (empty country road no traffic lights). The round town MPG was more like 12!

On that same commute in the S2000 I got 30MPG!

Good fun though, in my last 2 weeks in Texas it'd have been rude not to rent a 'truck. This week I am in a Saturn Ion (google pics if you dare) which is a 2.0 or 2.2 auto 4 cylinder. Saturn is GMs cheapy brand. This costs me half as much as the truck to rent!

Sorry for the OT BTW

trip computer on my 1.9tdi runs at aroung 53mpg, but I "trip" the milage at every fill an usually put in around 1lt per 10 mls = about 45mpg

My furball nearly got scraped today 19MPG!! WHAT!?!? I know i can be on the loud pedal. All bumper to bumper start-stop driving with Air con on.

All the time you're sat stationary with the engine running, you'll be doing "0MPG" - which will seriously skew any journey averages.

Rob.

When I did the spreadsheet thing for about five tanks (got bored after that), I worked out I got 53mpg vs 58.5 computer reported average for the same period.

I can't be bothered doing the spreadsheet thing again. As long as I'm getting about 55mpg indicated average, I'm happy.

On a side note, has anyone else noticed how MPG has become the new BHP in terms of penis size substitute bragging?

Its my normal drive home, but the 19mpg Average, Its never been that low before. I only do about 2miles if that go to and from work, But Now the good weather has come out i thinks its time to ride to work and back.

We're more than happy with our 1.9Tdi Octy 2 which has given us 53.8 mpg since brand new, now indicating 1689 miles

Take a look at these two threads which may give you some useful information.

http://www.briskoda.net/forums/general-car-chat/fuel-economy-units-trip-counter-discrepancy/53562/

http://www.briskoda.net/forums/new-octavia/458-5-miles-one-tank-fuel-octavia-vrs-mark-ii/53950/

My 9 month old 2.0 TDI Hatchback has given me a calculated average of 44mpg since new - I've found that the trip is about 10% overly optimistic. Most of my travelling is stop-start morning and evening rush hour. Two recent trips to the coast with 4 people, baby and air-con on have averaged 50mpg. Better than the 28mpg in my old Seat Leon Cupra.