Just interested in everyone's best MPG if you've attempted to drive economically.

 

We recently got a new motability Karoq & had to make a trip up north of about 250 miles, managed to get 62.6mpg according to the computer, never worked it out myself so just have to go by that. 

 

Very impressed with the new engine & gearbox so far.

 

The whole drive was in E mode & cruise on the motorway was set between 62 & 67 depending on traffic. 

 

1.5 Petrol SE L trim. 

The  displayed mpg in my 2019 1.0 DSG SE Tech with ACC, is about 4% optimistic, as is the mph reading, but mileage seems to be spot on - others seem to agree with this, so I'd say your actual mpg would have been 60mpg, but that's still impressive.  However, your car may not be fully run in yet.

 

I refer you to a previous thread and my last message in it, dated 1st Aug 2024  

Recently I got an actual 59mpg on a 150mile run on M25 & M4, my best ever, but I was trying to be economical too.

--  I had set the Cruise to 65mph (actual 63 say) rather than my usual 73mph

--  Car recently serviced + recent aircon recharge

--  Warm outside with air temp just a little higher than the 20*C set on the aircon, so it didn't have to work hard, fan on position 1 (It was much warmer on the same day return, so aircon working harder with fan now on position 3 + more hold-ups & only got 55mpg while still travelling at that lower economy speed).

 

On the other hand

--  At the service, tyres had been put up tp 35psi rather than my preferred 32  & I reset these straight away.  If I'd kept them at 35 I might just have got 60mpg on the journey out.

--  Also there were still a few hold-ups on this outward journey on the M25, so that might have cost me 1 or 2mpg in addition.

 

I note that previously, just after the aircon recharge, I got 55mpg, ACC set to 73mph - this in itself was 5mpg better than my norm before the aircon had been seen to.

 

Finally, it does seem that that 1.5 can be just as economical as the 1.0 from what several say, due no doubt to the clever engineering in that more complicated larger engine.

 

10 minutes ago, croquemonsieur said:

The  displayed mpg in my 2019 1.0 DSG SE Tech with ACC, is about 4% optimistic, as is the mph reading, but mileage seems to be spot on - others seem to agree with this, so I'd say your actual mpg would have been 60mpg, but that's still impressive.  However, your car may not be fully run in yet.

 

I refer you to a previous thread and my last message in it, dated 1st Aug 2024  

Recently I got an actual 59mpg on a 150mile run on M25 & M4, my best ever, but I was trying to be economical too.

--  I had set the Cruise to 65mph (actual 63 say) rather than my usual 73mph

--  Car recently serviced + recent aircon recharge

--  Warm outside with air temp just a little higher than the 20*C set on the aircon, so it didn't have to work hard, fan on position 1 (It was much warmer on the same day return, so aircon working harder with fan now on position 3 + more hold-ups & only got 55mpg while still travelling at that lower economy speed).

 

On the other hand

--  At the service, tyres had been put up tp 35psi rather than my preferred 32  & I reset these straight away.  If I'd kept them at 35 I might just have got 60mpg on the journey out.

--  Also there were still a few hold-ups on this outward journey on the M25, so that might have cost me 1 or 2mpg in addition.

 

I note that previously, just after the aircon recharge, I got 55mpg, ACC set to 73mph - this in itself was 5mpg better than my norm before the aircon had been seen to.

 

Finally, it does seem that that 1.5 can be just as economical as the 1.0 from what several say, due no doubt to the clever engineering in that more complicated larger engine.

 

That's some good figures for the 1L, I'd have thought with the weight it lugs about it wouldnt be very economical (maybe 40s, early 50s tops) but I'm not that mechanically literate when it comes to engines etc.

 

I noticed on motorway runs the aircon doesn't affect MPG too much unless it's full whack. Had it set to 4 on one journey & 2 on another and they both reduced my MPG reading to between 50 & 55. Still good for a petrol SUV imo.

 

I've personally looked at the 1.0L Karoq for myself when we don't have the motability car, good to hear it still pulls decent MPG. Hope that weeping shock absorber isn't a common problem? I'll be honest it sounds like an expensive job unless you're best friends with a mechanic that can do you mates rates. 

 

How do you find the car overall with that engine? Cheap enough to live with? 

Not achieved 60mpg+ from my 1.5TSi DSG Karoq yet but it's currently more economical than my diesel DSG Yeti was.

Yes, it's been reliable so far and I don't find the car underpowered, but I'm not a hairy driver - the just over 11secs to 60mph acceleration would have seemed fast 20-30yrs ago, for a much larger engined auto car, though people these days are rather more sniffy at such a figure.  The DSG box greatly aids driving pleasure (but 1.0 DSGs were stopped in 2019).

 

I do pull the shifter into S mode for overtaking, but that's because the car likes to stay in as higher gear as possible.  On the other hand, at 70 on the motorway, quickly accelerating to 90 for a bit of fun is no problem while the gearbox stays in top, so there's a fair amount of torque.  The engine is very smooth & quiet except for one or two particular situations.

 

Newer 1.0s are likely a bit more economical.  Mine is an early one with the GPF, which I think cost a bit in economy when introduced.  The engine has been worked on twice since mine, presumably to improve emissions & economy and the latest one is back up to the 115bhp that mine pushes out.

3 minutes ago, logiclee said:

Not achieved 60mpg+ from my 1.5TSi DSG Karoq yet but it's currently more economical than my diesel DSG Yeti was.

I think I was quite lucky with lack of traffic & the conditions as it was in the evening, 50-57mpg is the average during the warm days with plenty of traffic to battle through.

 

Would've thought the diesel Yeti was quite high on the economy scale. Perhaps because this engine is new it's showing bloated figures? I'm not sure how engines work in that regard. 

4 minutes ago, croquemonsieur said:

Yes, it's been reliable so far and I don't find the car underpowered, but I'm not a hairy driver - the just over 11secs to 60mph acceleration would have seemed fast 20-30yrs ago, for a much larger engined auto car, though people these days are rather more sniffy at such a figure.  The DSG box greatly aids driving pleasure (but 1.0 DSGs were stopped in 2019).

 

I do pull the shifter into S mode for overtaking, but that's because the car likes to stay in as higher gear as possible.  On the other hand, at 70 on the motorway, quickly accelerating to 90 for a bit of fun is no problem while the gearbox stays in top, so there's a fair amount of torque.  The engine is very smooth & quiet except for one or two particular situations.

 

Newer 1.0s are likely a bit more economical.  Mine is an early one with the GPF, which I think cost a bit in economy when introduced.  The engine has been worked on twice since mine, presumably to improve emissions & economy and the latest one is back up to the 115bhp that mine pushes out.

I'd assume the 1.0l would be the same you'd find in the Fabia or Octavia or Scala? Not sure they'd change much, if anything, for those cars despite them being smaller. 

 

Even the 1.5 sometimes need a kick if you want to overtake, although if you're going to be doing that then it's best to stay in D or S. Very comfortable & never had any problems with the 2020 model we had although that only covered 10k in 3 years so it barely got ran in. 

@CLB  Do a near brim to near brim when doing local driving, & then on longer trips and see how many litres are actually required for the miles covered. 

I am impressed by how effortlessly these little engines produce mid-50 Mpg economy in the summer.   Lincolnshire to Devon on a mix of Mway and A roads  around the speed limits and admittedly with no major delays produced 60 MPG indicated (Not accurate I know but a reasonable indicator).  It seems to prefer sitting around 60 mph for good mileage. My friend is irritated that his very nice new race blue  Fabia Monte Carlo 1.0 DSG  has slightly worse MPG  than his Mk4 Octavia 1.5 SE on his regular routes. 

It sometimes seems that traffic aids the mpg figure a little as long as there are no hold-ups.  I usually find that after hitting the M25 mad house, coming off the relatively peaceful M4 on the return journey, the mpg starts to improve a little - I suppose it's more difficult to maintain the 70pmph limit continuously, but I put some of it down to slip streaming.

Root, I did do that some years ago and it seemed to confirm the 4% optimistic assessment of the car's displayed figures.

49 minutes ago, Redboy said:

I am impressed by how effortlessly these little engines produce mid-50 Mpg economy in the summer.   Lincolnshire to Devon on a mix of Mway and A roads  around the speed limits and admittedly with no major delays produced 60 MPG indicated (Not accurate I know but a reasonable indicator).  It seems to prefer sitting around 60 mph for good mileage. My friend is irritated that his very nice new race blue  Fabia Monte Carlo 1.0 DSG  has slightly worse MPG  than his Mk4 Octavia 1.5 SE on his regular routes. 

Yeah I was expecting to be getting early 50s at best, just because of the size of the car compared to the engine. I know newer engines are going to be more efficient but I'm pleasantly surprised by just how good they are! 

 

Although like you said you have to sit slower than 'normal' just to hit them figures.

30 minutes ago, CLB said:

Yeah I was expecting to be getting early 50s at best, just because of the size of the car compared to the engine. I know newer engines are going to be more efficient but I'm pleasantly surprised by just how good they are! 

 

Although like you said you have to sit slower than 'normal' just to hit them figures.

It seems slow but it evens out, keeping up with traffic is best practice and looking ahead, anticipating slowing traffic, lifting off and smooth acceleration all helps and makes the journey a bit more interesting. Even if I drive quickly the mpg is still amazing compared to the cars I drove in the 80's. Given heavy traffic on most routes, if I want more engaging motoring, I leave the car on the drive and take my Kawasaki out through the Lincolnshire Wolds up to the coast. 

Edited 12 August, 20241 yr by Redboy

Skippy’s mpg record from purchase in 2020.  Almost got to 60mpg but not quite.  Mostly long trips up & down the country cruising at 60 - 65mpg on cc.  2.0 diesel, DSG & 4x4. 
 

 

12 hours ago, Redboy said:

 My friend is irritated that his very nice new race blue  Fabia Monte Carlo 1.0 DSG  has slightly worse MPG  than his Mk4 Octavia 1.5 SE on his regular routes. 

 

We have ,

1.5TSi DSG Karoq

1.2TSi Octavia

1.0TSi DSG Fabia

 

On a run the Karoq is the most economical although the Fabia is slightly better around town due to the weight advantage.

 

10 hours ago, DSL said:

Skippy’s mpg record from purchase in 2020.  Almost got to 60mpg but not quite.  Mostly long trips up & down the country cruising at 60 - 65mpg on cc.  2.0 diesel, DSG & 4x4. 
 

 

Suppose 50 is still great overall, think at the moment with mostly short 6 mile commutes & the occasional longer trip ours is averaging 38.9mpg. If it was a motorway car I'd hope it would be 45+.

 

Also, I admire your consistency on keeping track of your expenses! 

I normally just log mpg, thought it would be interesting to log absolutely everything for this car.  

Having the 2.0 TSI Sportline I'm clearly not going to get anywhere near 60mph. Best ever was 50mpg as I was doing 56mph around the M25 in roadworks with a 60 mph limit. 

 

On long journeys A Roads / Motorways I usually get ~45 mpg and around town ~30 mpg. For a fairly large car with the extra weight of the 4x4 system I'm happy with that as it is such a nice car to drive. 

 

 

2 hours ago, PedalBin said:

Having the 2.0 TSI Sportline I'm clearly not going to get anywhere near 60mph. Best ever was 50mpg as I was doing 56mph around the M25 in roadworks with a 60 mph limit. 

 

On long journeys A Roads / Motorways I usually get ~45 mpg and around town ~30 mpg. For a fairly large car with the extra weight of the 4x4 system I'm happy with that as it is such a nice car to drive. 

 

 

 

It isn't only the extra weight that requires extra fuel. There is also extra rolling resistance due to all the extra rotating parts. Many of these may well cause extra friction even in 2WD if it is possible.

29 minutes ago, Routemaster1461 said:

 

It isn't only the extra weight that requires extra fuel. There is also extra rolling resistance due to all the extra rotating parts. Many of these may well cause extra friction even in 2WD if it is possible.

 Quite possibly buy happy to pay that price for the car's performance in every other aspect. 

6 hours ago, PedalBin said:

Having the 2.0 TSI Sportline I'm clearly not going to get anywhere near 60mph. Best ever was 50mpg as I was doing 56mph around the M25 in roadworks with a 60 mph limit. 

 

On long journeys A Roads / Motorways I usually get ~45 mpg and around town ~30 mpg. For a fairly large car with the extra weight of the 4x4 system I'm happy with that as it is such a nice car to drive. 

 

 

I’m in the same boat. I’m finding mpg is improving as the overall mileage goes up, but it’s only done 3000 miles to date. I can get 50 mpg on a run, but around were I live it’s about 25-30 due to lots of roundabouts linked by 70 mph dual carriage ways. Our Fabia 1.2 110bhp DSG is better on local runs but on longer motorway journeys it’s not really any better than the Karoq. 

Best I’ve ever had from my 1.6 TDI DSG was 69.9mpg… I was so annoyed I couldn’t have squeezed that last 0.1 out before getting to the destination 😂

 

I haven’t tried sitting at 60 all the way on the motorway yet, not that I could anyway as there’s so many bloody 50mph average cameras up at the moment 😤

Not a DSG, but I did get an indicated 93mpg over about 10 miles once. Mind you, it was in Austria, and the destination was ~500metres, ~1640 feet lower than the start. 

On 13/08/2024 at 13:42, Routemaster1461 said:

 

It isn't only the extra weight that requires extra fuel. There is also extra rolling resistance due to all the extra rotating parts. Many of these may well cause extra friction even in 2WD if it is possible.

This is quite a critical factor. Brother has 64 plate Yeti manual 2.0. TDI 4x4. At the same time I had a 2,0 TDI Touran DSG. Both cars same VW 140bhp diesel- the Yeti struggled to better 50mpg -the Touran would easily do 65mpg, I did once manage 73mpg on my   50 mile commute home on the M1. Sorry not a Karoq.

14 hours ago, thamestrader said:

This is quite a critical factor. Brother has 64 plate Yeti manual 2.0. TDI 4x4. At the same time I had a 2,0 TDI Touran DSG. Both cars same VW 140bhp diesel- the Yeti struggled to better 50mpg -the Touran would easily do 65mpg, I did once manage 73mpg on my   50 mile commute home on the M1. Sorry not a Karoq.

 

Yeti is like a brick though.

 

We ran a 1.2TSi Octavia and 1.2TSi Yeti at the same time. Same platform, same drivetrain and both FWD.

 

Octavia was on average 10mpg better and at higher motorway speeds 15mpg better.

 

The aero effect can be seen on max speed as well. Yeti with 150PS is around 120mph, Karoq with 150PS around 130mph and Octavia with 150PS nearer 140mph.

Edited 15 August, 20241 yr by logiclee