Your car's range?
Discussion
Blown2CV said:
daemon said:
Pan Pan said:
I could regularly achieve over 1000 miles of mixed motorway, and town driving, on a tankful, in my previous Passat 2.0 ltr bluemotion (if I brimmed the tank) But with the current one (a 1.6 Bluemotion) about 800 miles is the best I have ever seen.
The problem with the 1.6, is that it is `just' adequate for regular driving (it is a fairly big car, for a 1.6 litre engine in any case) but it is found wanting, in both performance, and fuel consumption, when there is the need to press on, or when I have a car full of passengers, and their luggage.
Interesting... The problem with the 1.6, is that it is `just' adequate for regular driving (it is a fairly big car, for a 1.6 litre engine in any case) but it is found wanting, in both performance, and fuel consumption, when there is the need to press on, or when I have a car full of passengers, and their luggage.
The 2.0TDI bluemotion was 110BHP, the 1.6TDI bluemotion is 105, so it shouldnt make that much of a difference.
I'd a 2.0TDI bluemotion and could get around 1000 miles to a tank.
I've a late 2012 Golf 1.6 TDI and have been averaging 66mpg over the last 11000 miles, filled brim to brim though theres normally only me in it and its long steady runs all the time.
The 1.6 TDI BlueMotion is 105 PS. The 2.0 TDI in the Passat is available with 140 or 177 PS.
The 2.0 TDI in the current Mk7 Golf is 150 PS so I expect that will become available in the Passat imminently.
Blown2CV said:
daemon said:
Pan Pan said:
I could regularly achieve over 1000 miles of mixed motorway, and town driving, on a tankful, in my previous Passat 2.0 ltr bluemotion (if I brimmed the tank) But with the current one (a 1.6 Bluemotion) about 800 miles is the best I have ever seen.
The problem with the 1.6, is that it is `just' adequate for regular driving (it is a fairly big car, for a 1.6 litre engine in any case) but it is found wanting, in both performance, and fuel consumption, when there is the need to press on, or when I have a car full of passengers, and their luggage.
Interesting... The problem with the 1.6, is that it is `just' adequate for regular driving (it is a fairly big car, for a 1.6 litre engine in any case) but it is found wanting, in both performance, and fuel consumption, when there is the need to press on, or when I have a car full of passengers, and their luggage.
The 2.0TDI bluemotion was 110BHP, the 1.6TDI bluemotion is 105, so it shouldnt make that much of a difference.
I'd a 2.0TDI bluemotion and could get around 1000 miles to a tank.
I've a late 2012 Golf 1.6 TDI and have been averaging 66mpg over the last 11000 miles, filled brim to brim though theres normally only me in it and its long steady runs all the time.
I stand corrected if the very latest Passat Bluemotions are 1.6 TDI 110BHP. My current Golf is a non Bluemotion 1.6 TDI 105BHP.
I'm using BHP there but it may be PS.
Edited by daemon on Wednesday 12th February 21:55
340600 said:
Blown2CV said:
daemon said:
Pan Pan said:
I could regularly achieve over 1000 miles of mixed motorway, and town driving, on a tankful, in my previous Passat 2.0 ltr bluemotion (if I brimmed the tank) But with the current one (a 1.6 Bluemotion) about 800 miles is the best I have ever seen.
The problem with the 1.6, is that it is `just' adequate for regular driving (it is a fairly big car, for a 1.6 litre engine in any case) but it is found wanting, in both performance, and fuel consumption, when there is the need to press on, or when I have a car full of passengers, and their luggage.
Interesting... The problem with the 1.6, is that it is `just' adequate for regular driving (it is a fairly big car, for a 1.6 litre engine in any case) but it is found wanting, in both performance, and fuel consumption, when there is the need to press on, or when I have a car full of passengers, and their luggage.
The 2.0TDI bluemotion was 110BHP, the 1.6TDI bluemotion is 105, so it shouldnt make that much of a difference.
I'd a 2.0TDI bluemotion and could get around 1000 miles to a tank.
I've a late 2012 Golf 1.6 TDI and have been averaging 66mpg over the last 11000 miles, filled brim to brim though theres normally only me in it and its long steady runs all the time.
The 1.6 TDI BlueMotion is 105 PS. The 2.0 TDI in the Passat is available with 140 or 177 PS.
The 2.0 TDI in the current Mk7 Golf is 150 PS so I expect that will become available in the Passat imminently.
340600 said:
Blown2CV said:
daemon said:
Pan Pan said:
I could regularly achieve over 1000 miles of mixed motorway, and town driving, on a tankful, in my previous Passat 2.0 ltr bluemotion (if I brimmed the tank) But with the current one (a 1.6 Bluemotion) about 800 miles is the best I have ever seen.
The problem with the 1.6, is that it is `just' adequate for regular driving (it is a fairly big car, for a 1.6 litre engine in any case) but it is found wanting, in both performance, and fuel consumption, when there is the need to press on, or when I have a car full of passengers, and their luggage.
Interesting... The problem with the 1.6, is that it is `just' adequate for regular driving (it is a fairly big car, for a 1.6 litre engine in any case) but it is found wanting, in both performance, and fuel consumption, when there is the need to press on, or when I have a car full of passengers, and their luggage.
The 2.0TDI bluemotion was 110BHP, the 1.6TDI bluemotion is 105, so it shouldnt make that much of a difference.
I'd a 2.0TDI bluemotion and could get around 1000 miles to a tank.
I've a late 2012 Golf 1.6 TDI and have been averaging 66mpg over the last 11000 miles, filled brim to brim though theres normally only me in it and its long steady runs all the time.
The 1.6 TDI BlueMotion is 105 PS. The 2.0 TDI in the Passat is available with 140 or 177 PS.
The 2.0 TDI in the current Mk7 Golf is 150 PS so I expect that will become available in the Passat imminently.
VW Golf 1.6TDi Bluemotion is 110PS
VW Golf 1.6TDi Bluemotion Technology SE is 105PS
both current models - it's VW that's being confusing by using the word 'Bluemotion' to both refer to a set of principles (the 'technology' thing) and separately a spec level. The former is used liberally, and sprinkled all over all sorts of models over VW portfolio. The latter is only used for one give variant within some models e.g. polo, golf, passat. I guess 'Bluemotion Technology' kind of means something like "inspired by Bluemotion" because it doesn't refer to the full economy geek-fest that the Bluemotion spec level is.
Blown2CV said:
340600 said:
Blown2CV said:
daemon said:
Pan Pan said:
I could regularly achieve over 1000 miles of mixed motorway, and town driving, on a tankful, in my previous Passat 2.0 ltr bluemotion (if I brimmed the tank) But with the current one (a 1.6 Bluemotion) about 800 miles is the best I have ever seen.
The problem with the 1.6, is that it is `just' adequate for regular driving (it is a fairly big car, for a 1.6 litre engine in any case) but it is found wanting, in both performance, and fuel consumption, when there is the need to press on, or when I have a car full of passengers, and their luggage.
Interesting... The problem with the 1.6, is that it is `just' adequate for regular driving (it is a fairly big car, for a 1.6 litre engine in any case) but it is found wanting, in both performance, and fuel consumption, when there is the need to press on, or when I have a car full of passengers, and their luggage.
The 2.0TDI bluemotion was 110BHP, the 1.6TDI bluemotion is 105, so it shouldnt make that much of a difference.
I'd a 2.0TDI bluemotion and could get around 1000 miles to a tank.
I can only comment on what my current car is actually doing, compared to what was achieved with the previous Passat (over one hundred and twenty thousand miles) To be fair the current car has not got much mileage on it yet, so could still be a bit `tight' but currently there has been a large increase in fuel consumption (down from circa 1000 miles per tankful to around 800 at best)and there is for me at least, a marked decrease in performance over the previous 2.0 litre.
This is generally not noticed during normal chuntering around, but definitely noticeable when trying to press on, or when I have a car full of passengers and their gear. As Scotty once said "Ye canna cheat the laws of physics Jim" Any smaller engined car is going to have to work harder, to match the overall performance of a bigger engined car in the same (heavy) chassis.
I've a late 2012 Golf 1.6 TDI and have been averaging 66mpg over the last 11000 miles, filled brim to brim though theres normally only me in it and its long steady runs all the time.
The 1.6 TDI BlueMotion is 105 PS. The 2.0 TDI in the Passat is available with 140 or 177 PS.
The 2.0 TDI in the current Mk7 Golf is 150 PS so I expect that will become available in the Passat imminently.
VW Golf 1.6TDi Bluemotion is 110PS
VW Golf 1.6TDi Bluemotion Technology SE is 105PS
both current models - it's VW that's being confusing by using the word 'Bluemotion' to both refer to a set of principles (the 'technology' thing) and separately a spec level. The former is used liberally, and sprinkled all over all sorts of models over VW portfolio. The latter is only used for one give variant within some models e.g. polo, golf, passat. I guess 'Bluemotion Technology' kind of means something like "inspired by Bluemotion" because it doesn't refer to the full economy geek-fest that the Bluemotion spec level is.
Blown2CV said:
340600 said:
Blown2CV said:
daemon said:
Pan Pan said:
I could regularly achieve over 1000 miles of mixed motorway, and town driving, on a tankful, in my previous Passat 2.0 ltr bluemotion (if I brimmed the tank) But with the current one (a 1.6 Bluemotion) about 800 miles is the best I have ever seen.
The problem with the 1.6, is that it is `just' adequate for regular driving (it is a fairly big car, for a 1.6 litre engine in any case) but it is found wanting, in both performance, and fuel consumption, when there is the need to press on, or when I have a car full of passengers, and their luggage.
Interesting... The problem with the 1.6, is that it is `just' adequate for regular driving (it is a fairly big car, for a 1.6 litre engine in any case) but it is found wanting, in both performance, and fuel consumption, when there is the need to press on, or when I have a car full of passengers, and their luggage.
The 2.0TDI bluemotion was 110BHP, the 1.6TDI bluemotion is 105, so it shouldnt make that much of a difference.
I'd a 2.0TDI bluemotion and could get around 1000 miles to a tank.
I've a late 2012 Golf 1.6 TDI and have been averaging 66mpg over the last 11000 miles, filled brim to brim though theres normally only me in it and its long steady runs all the time.
The 1.6 TDI BlueMotion is 105 PS. The 2.0 TDI in the Passat is available with 140 or 177 PS.
The 2.0 TDI in the current Mk7 Golf is 150 PS so I expect that will become available in the Passat imminently.
VW Golf 1.6TDi Bluemotion is 110PS
VW Golf 1.6TDi Bluemotion Technology SE is 105PS
both current models - it's VW that's being confusing by using the word 'Bluemotion' to both refer to a set of principles (the 'technology' thing) and separately a spec level. The former is used liberally, and sprinkled all over all sorts of models over VW portfolio. The latter is only used for one give variant within some models e.g. polo, golf, passat. I guess 'Bluemotion Technology' kind of means something like "inspired by Bluemotion" because it doesn't refer to the full economy geek-fest that the Bluemotion spec level is.
Pan Pan said:
I can only comment on what my current car is actually doing, compared to what was achieved with the previous Passat (over one hundred and twenty thousand miles) To be fair the current car has not got much mileage on it yet, so could still be a bit `tight' but currently there has been a large increase in fuel consumption (down from circa 1000 miles per tankful to around 800 at best)and there is for me at least, a marked decrease in performance over the previous 2.0 litre.
This is generally not noticed during normal chuntering around, but definitely noticeable when trying to press on, or when I have a car full of passengers and their gear. As Scotty once said "Ye canna cheat the laws of physics Jim" Any smaller engined car is going to have to work harder, to match the overall performance of a bigger engined car in the same (heavy) chassis.
Yes i agree - and it wasnt a criticism by the way - merely an observation of what i'm seeing. I thought the Passat 2.0TDI Bluemotion was a fantastic car.This is generally not noticed during normal chuntering around, but definitely noticeable when trying to press on, or when I have a car full of passengers and their gear. As Scotty once said "Ye canna cheat the laws of physics Jim" Any smaller engined car is going to have to work harder, to match the overall performance of a bigger engined car in the same (heavy) chassis.
Couldnt get a Golf Bluemotion in budget or i'd have had one of those this time.
Daemon - The Passat was not the most reliable car I ever had (in fact it was possibly the most unreliable) but for some reason I just liked it enough to get another one. Thats the thing with VW`s
on paper, they don't seem much different to most other cars, but there is something about them when used on an everyday basis that makes me kind of like them just that bit more.
on paper, they don't seem much different to most other cars, but there is something about them when used on an everyday basis that makes me kind of like them just that bit more.
Pan Pan said:
Daemon - The Passat was not the most reliable car I ever had (in fact it was possibly the most unreliable) but for some reason I just liked it enough to get another one. Thats the thing with VW`s
on paper, they don't seem much different to most other cars, but there is something about them when used on an everyday basis that makes me kind of like them just that bit more.
Yes i would agree. In fairness i only hand mine for about a year so it went before i might have otherwise been seeing problems.on paper, they don't seem much different to most other cars, but there is something about them when used on an everyday basis that makes me kind of like them just that bit more.
When i got the passat i always sort of thought maybe i should have got a golf, so this time i got a golf, and now i'm thinking i should maybe have got a passat!
Mind you, if consumption is that much worse with the 1.6TDI passat, its maybe best i had avoided it.
What are you getting overall in terms of MPG?
daemon said:
Pan Pan said:
Daemon - The Passat was not the most reliable car I ever had (in fact it was possibly the most unreliable) but for some reason I just liked it enough to get another one. Thats the thing with VW`s
on paper, they don't seem much different to most other cars, but there is something about them when used on an everyday basis that makes me kind of like them just that bit more.
Yes i would agree. In fairness i only hand mine for about a year so it went before i might have otherwise been seeing problems.on paper, they don't seem much different to most other cars, but there is something about them when used on an everyday basis that makes me kind of like them just that bit more.
When i got the passat i always sort of thought maybe i should have got a golf, so this time i got a golf, and now i'm thinking i should maybe have got a passat!
Mind you, if consumption is that much worse with the 1.6TDI Passat, its maybe best i had avoided it.
What are you getting overall in terms of MPG?
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff