VW Golf Estate 2011 1.6ltr 105 bhp Bluemotion

[Vdubbman]

I have recently bought a used Bluemotion Estate (68,000 miles). I bought it after having read reviews and owner testimonials and thought that, after 7-8 years of diesel development, it would be more economical than my trusted and beloved 2001 Mk4 Golf Estate. Yes, it only costs £20.00 pa in tax and yes it is supposed to be cleaner but, it costs me £60.00 pa more in insurance and the mpg fuel economy is negligible. I did a 550 mile run last week to the North of England and back and averaged 58mpg and that was entirely motorway driving as the car was not used whilst I was there. I drive very sedately never exceeding the speed limit and, as often as not, averaging around 60mph. My 2001 Mk4 with a 1.9 PD TDi always gave me 55mpg. To say I feel conned and thoroughly disappointed is an understatement. The car feels and drives almost exactly the same, even though it is more sluggish. The handling is really not much better, despite being the Sportline version with supposed stiffer suspension. I'm not inclined to think that fuel additives etc will make much difference.

Whilst this post is part venting, I am also keen to hear from other owners of this vehicle model and their real time experiences.

[PaddyPadsPat]

I had a '11 plate 1.6 TDI 105 BM Golf but in hatchback. I found the car and engine very "Meh". It felt very underpowered even for the hatch so can only imagine how terrible it would be in an estate. Which, like you, you could live with if the MPGs were better but it's not. I subbed it for a MK6 Golf 140ps 2.0 TDI and found the drive much much better. The startling thing was that the MPGs were identical if not slightly better on the 2,0TDI non-BM. I concluded that the smaller engine in a mid size car had to pull harder therefore negated the benefit of a small "green" engine.

TL:DR - 1.6 BM is a crap engine for such a big car and needs to pull harder.

[steve-5snwi]

Make sure you change the oil every 10k, don't use supermarket fuel and prey when you overtake.

[tallpaul26]

My brother recently swapped his Citroen Xsara Picasso diesel for a new C4 Picasso.

He was moaning that it did not yield any better economy than the 9 year old car it replaced. I asked him why he thought it should! The only real improvements with diesel engines in recent years has been in emissions.

[pixelatedJH]

I have a 1.9 PD105 Fabia. My mate a 1.6d Golf. The Golf runs a little quieter and is a bit more refined in general but gets worse MPG.

The PD has no DPF and mine has a single mass flywheel from the factory (probably part of why the Golf is more refined). It's a shame to see regression, but I know which I'd prefer to run.

[Darkslider]

Was this model affected by the emissions scandal? If it's been back to the dealer for a vw software update I'd expect the performance and economy to be terrible to get the emissions down.

Before you get too disheartened and punt the car on, try a £250 economy biased remap from any of the reputable tuners that specialise in vag vehicles. You might be pleasantly surprised.

[Jag_NE]

Vdubbman said:

I have recently bought a used Bluemotion Estate (68,000 miles). I bought it after having read reviews and owner testimonials and thought that, after 7-8 years of diesel development, it would be more economical than my trusted and beloved 2001 Mk4 Golf Estate. Yes, it only costs £20.00 pa in tax and yes it is supposed to be cleaner but, it costs me £60.00 pa more in insurance and the mpg fuel economy is negligible. I did a 550 mile run last week to the North of England and back and averaged 58mpg and that was entirely motorway driving as the car was not used whilst I was there. I drive very sedately never exceeding the speed limit and, as often as not, averaging around 60mph. My 2001 Mk4 with a 1.9 PD TDi always gave me 55mpg. To say I feel conned and thoroughly disappointed is an understatement. The car feels and drives almost exactly the same, even though it is more sluggish. The handling is really not much better, despite being the Sportline version with supposed stiffer suspension. I'm not inclined to think that fuel additives etc will make much difference.

Whilst this post is part venting, I am also keen to hear from other owners of this vehicle model and their real time experiences.

if you were thoroughly disappointed with 58mpg, what would have satisfied you? i wouldn't have thought that the combined figure would be much above 60mpg and the extra urban number is complete pie in the sky.

assuming you aren't doing insane mileages 58mpg versus 65mpg will be pretty trivial financially.

[Vdubbman]

Thanks for all your replies.

Darkslider, I believe the emissions scandal came in 2015, but you touch in the idea of remapping, which I've read about and which can have surprising results, so I'll def look into doing this. What is confusing is reading drivers reviews who consistently achieve over 65mpg and some over 70 on long runs.

[Vdubbman]

Hi Jag_NE I'm disappointed and a little confused as all the reports lead to a pretty decent return on fuel economy, not as you say these paltry, marginal gains, which in no way replace the loss of performance and driving enjoyment. When it comes down to it economy is the crux, as motoring costs rise every year however we drive.

[Vdubbman]

PaddyPadsPat's you're right and I will def consider replacing it with the 2.0ltr which, as you say comes with better reviews. There is no substitute for experience!

[Ructions]

You are driving an estate Golf which is going to be heavier than a standard Golf coupled with the smaller engine with a 5 speed gearbox, so it’s working harder at motorway speeds.

[Richard-390a0]

Vdubbman said:

Thanks for all your replies.

Darkslider, I believe the emissions scandal came in 2015, but you touch in the idea of remapping, which I've read about and which can have surprising results, so I'll def look into doing this. What is confusing is reading drivers reviews who consistently achieve over 65mpg and some over 70 on long runs.

I had a 2011 A1 1.6 tdi & never got over approx 53mpg & had a letter from Audi that it was due the emissions update / modification so i expect a 2011 Golf 1.6 tdi would require it too.

[Vdubbman]

Thank you Richard. Yes you may have a point there. I will enquire about that.

[Super Slo Mo]

Vdubbman said:

Thanks for all your replies.

Darkslider, I believe the emissions scandal came in 2015, but you touch in the idea of remapping, which I've read about and which can have surprising results, so I'll def look into doing this. What is confusing is reading drivers reviews who consistently achieve over 65mpg and some over 70 on long runs.

Unfortunately experience has taught me not to take much notice of what other people claim they get.
It seems to me that a lot of people either exaggerate their fuel consumption figures, or look at the instant readout and claim it will do that.
Either that or they are slipstreaming lorries at 56 mph.
My wife had a polo with the 1.6 diesel, it averaged 55 mpg on a 500 mile round trip I did in it, so I doubt you will get much better. That was at 70 mph on cruise, and was calculated from tank to tank fill ups not the OBC.

[BuzzBravado]

Vdubbman said:

My 2001 Mk4 with a 1.9 PD TDi always gave me 55mpg. To say I feel conned and thoroughly disappointed is an understatement.

A bizzarre way of looking at things. Who conned you?

[Vdubbman]

Well, here's an update to the issue with my Golf Bluemotion for anyone who might be interested. The car went back to the dealer from whom I bought it and it went through a series of diagnostics. One of the injectors was changed, this made matters worse, before they admitted defeat and handed it over to a VW specialist Diagnostics garage. Eventually all 4 injectors were changed and some specialist tuning was done. I was told the car was now ok and ready for collection. I collected it yesterday.
The positives:
The fuel economy is now in line with expectations and VW's claims. For the 100 mile drive back from the garage, the car was averaging 69 MPG and that was without being particularly feather footed, so that is excellent.
The acceleration and drive are much more sure footed and clean, not spongy as before (apologies but it's the only way I can describe it!).
The one negative: the idle can now only be described as rough or lumpy. I don't think I can upload video here so I can't really enlarge on that, suffice to say it wasn't like this before, it isn't normal and is very noticeable. I've contacted the garage and I suspect the car will now have to go back to them again. I will say the garage has been exemplary in it's efforts to resolve the issues. The only frustration is the distance between us.
So, I will update again when I have more news, being presumptuous and imagining people are interested

[Vdubbman]

BuzzBravado said:

A bizzarre way of looking at things. Who conned you?

I felt conned because of the claims made by VW over its MPG figures. My car hasn't been achieving any where near what it was supposed to. But having had new injectors, it now is.

[Vdubbman]

Super Slo Mo said:

Unfortunately experience has taught me not to take much notice of what other people claim they get.
It seems to me that a lot of people either exaggerate their fuel consumption figures, or look at the instant readout and claim it will do that.
Either that or they are slipstreaming lorries at 56 mph.
My wife had a polo with the 1.6 diesel, it averaged 55 mpg on a 500 mile round trip I did in it, so I doubt you will get much better. That was at 70 mph on cruise, and was calculated from tank to tank fill ups not the OBC.

Thanks for your comments. i appreciate what you mean. With the return of the car and new injectors plus a week's worth of work by the VW specialist gone into getting the car working properly, I feel vindicated that my disappointment was justified.

[Nickbrapp]

I had one of those, limited to 70mph, mostly motorways and I only averaged 47mpg over 35,000 miles

It was a truly hateful car and only having 5 gears was awful.

It was replaced by a focus mk3 1.5tdci and that managed 53-55 over the 13k I had it

I’ve just been given a Astra k ecoflex and That seems to average 54 over my new commute which is mainly B roads. I’ve only done 500 miles in it though.