10 years of 2.0 diesel Passats: the MPG truth
Discussion
I have kept a daily log of mileage and diesel purchases for my work cars for the past 15 years. Sadly I no longer have the data for the first 5 years on my computer, but I do still have the last 10 and a half years' worth.
As I have just this week swapped my last car for a new one, I thought it would be interesting to see what the actual MPG values for each car turned out to be. None of this dash computer display guesswork, which so many people seem to swallow as gospel. All cars were bought new and replaced after 3 years.
So here we go:
2005 saloon (140 BHP manual): 41.6 MPG
2008 estate (140 BHP manual): 44.8 MPG
2011 estate (140 BHP manual): 47.1 MPG
2014 estate 4WD All-Track (170 BHP DSG auto): 37.3 MPG
All cars have led a similar life (same rural home and job) and been primarily used for long journeys for work or holiday (no commuting at all), so I doubt that any real-world owner would achieve more MPG than this.
I have now gone back to a 2WD manual estate with the latest car, albeit 190 bhp, so am hoping to get back into the mid 40s MPG. I certainly don't think the 170 BHP 4WD DSG auto was worth the extra 20% fuel consumption over its predecessor. Unless you really need the traction of 4WD, I don't think it makes much sense to specify it.
As I have just this week swapped my last car for a new one, I thought it would be interesting to see what the actual MPG values for each car turned out to be. None of this dash computer display guesswork, which so many people seem to swallow as gospel. All cars were bought new and replaced after 3 years.
So here we go:
2005 saloon (140 BHP manual): 41.6 MPG
2008 estate (140 BHP manual): 44.8 MPG
2011 estate (140 BHP manual): 47.1 MPG
2014 estate 4WD All-Track (170 BHP DSG auto): 37.3 MPG
All cars have led a similar life (same rural home and job) and been primarily used for long journeys for work or holiday (no commuting at all), so I doubt that any real-world owner would achieve more MPG than this.
I have now gone back to a 2WD manual estate with the latest car, albeit 190 bhp, so am hoping to get back into the mid 40s MPG. I certainly don't think the 170 BHP 4WD DSG auto was worth the extra 20% fuel consumption over its predecessor. Unless you really need the traction of 4WD, I don't think it makes much sense to specify it.
Great post, thank you. Very useful to get real world information - would be interesting to see what the total cost of ownership looks like for each of the years. With people commonly saying modern diesels are expensive and complicated with DPFs etc. (Of course if you only ran them three years, you may not have suffered any negative consequences.)
Interesting, I have similar for my last 4 diesels too, over a period of 12 years :
VW BORA ..................1.9 /150......180K miles..........55mpg
SEAT LEON................2.0/ 140.......147K miles.........57mpg
SEAT TOLEDO...........1.6/105........130K miles.........60mpg
SEAT LEON................1.6/105.........46K miles..........62mpg currently
mainly rural/town driving, several big euro trips to the alps......'sympathetic' driving style where appropriate.
VW BORA ..................1.9 /150......180K miles..........55mpg
SEAT LEON................2.0/ 140.......147K miles.........57mpg
SEAT TOLEDO...........1.6/105........130K miles.........60mpg
SEAT LEON................1.6/105.........46K miles..........62mpg currently
mainly rural/town driving, several big euro trips to the alps......'sympathetic' driving style where appropriate.
icepop said:
Interesting, I have similar for my last 4 diesels too, over a period of 12 years :
VW BORA ..................1.9 /150......180K miles..........55mpg
SEAT LEON................2.0/ 140.......147K miles.........57mpg
SEAT TOLEDO...........1.6/105........130K miles.........60mpg
SEAT LEON................1.6/105.........46K miles..........62mpg currently
mainly rural/town driving, several big euro trips to the alps......'sympathetic' driving style where appropriate.
Very interesting as well, shows how economical the 1.9 engine was considering the power output. Not sure how "dirty" it is though...VW BORA ..................1.9 /150......180K miles..........55mpg
SEAT LEON................2.0/ 140.......147K miles.........57mpg
SEAT TOLEDO...........1.6/105........130K miles.........60mpg
SEAT LEON................1.6/105.........46K miles..........62mpg currently
mainly rural/town driving, several big euro trips to the alps......'sympathetic' driving style where appropriate.
Not diesel but maybe shows how petrols have come on?
2006 Honda Civic 1.8 = 36 MPG average (but you can actually coax mid-40's from it on a long run)
2015 Mazda 3 2.0 = 39.8 MPG average
The Mazda is a bigger engine, but less power (20 hp less, but you wouldn't know it). Both naturally aspirated. But averaging nearly 40 from normal driving with no thought paid to getting the best out of it. On a cruise down to Cornwall, you can see the heady heights of 50 mpg.
2006 Honda Civic 1.8 = 36 MPG average (but you can actually coax mid-40's from it on a long run)
2015 Mazda 3 2.0 = 39.8 MPG average
The Mazda is a bigger engine, but less power (20 hp less, but you wouldn't know it). Both naturally aspirated. But averaging nearly 40 from normal driving with no thought paid to getting the best out of it. On a cruise down to Cornwall, you can see the heady heights of 50 mpg.
Calmchap said:
Very interesting as well, shows how economical the 1.9 engine was considering the power output. Not sure how "dirty" it is though...
Here is the real world data for a 2009 skoda 1.9:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-sh/how_tox...
Seems they are much cleaner in the real world than some new engines that pass the stricter tests.
icepop said:
Interesting, I have similar for my last 4 diesels too, over a period of 12 years :
VW BORA ..................1.9 /150......180K miles..........55mpg
SEAT LEON................2.0/ 140.......147K miles.........57mpg
SEAT TOLEDO...........1.6/105........130K miles.........60mpg
SEAT LEON................1.6/105.........46K miles..........62mpg currently
mainly rural/town driving, several big euro trips to the alps......'sympathetic' driving style where appropriate.
these look a lot more like trip computer numbers?VW BORA ..................1.9 /150......180K miles..........55mpg
SEAT LEON................2.0/ 140.......147K miles.........57mpg
SEAT TOLEDO...........1.6/105........130K miles.........60mpg
SEAT LEON................1.6/105.........46K miles..........62mpg currently
mainly rural/town driving, several big euro trips to the alps......'sympathetic' driving style where appropriate.
LotusOmega375D said:
2005 saloon (140 BHP manual): 41.6 MPG
2008 estate (140 BHP manual): 44.8 MPG
2011 estate (140 BHP manual): 47.1 MPG
2014 estate 4WD All-Track (170 BHP DSG auto): 37.3 MPG
My guess is that you were driving them 'petrol style' rather than 'diesel style'.2008 estate (140 BHP manual): 44.8 MPG
2011 estate (140 BHP manual): 47.1 MPG
2014 estate 4WD All-Track (170 BHP DSG auto): 37.3 MPG
My new 2008 Skoda Octavia Scout (4wd) TDi (PD) returned 44.1 mpg over 18K miles, my 2010 Scout CR (140) returned 49.6 mpg and my 2011 Scout CR (140) returned 52.3 mpg.
Drive diesel style and you should get much closer to the official figures.
Very interesting. Back in the day I used to commute back and forth from work in a 1.9TDI 90ps VW Vento, 100 miles each way, two trips per week. It was 75% motorway and A-roads, mostly late evening or early hours of the morning, so usually driven at around 120kmh. This was in Ireland, on a route with virtually no police presence and only one speed camera. On the odd occasion and when conditions permitted, (nice clear, dry night and if I'd seen the sole police car early on) in the last 30 miles of Motorway I'd sit with the pedal hard to the floor with the speedo at full deflection, only stopping for the toll both before rocketing off again. No matter how I drove this car it always seemed to manage at least 46 mpg. When I was behaving myself and sticking to the speed limits give or take, it was usual to return 56mpg between fills. Such an amazing engine, all packaged in a spacious, yet dull and rust prone clunker. I loved it.
Otispunkmeyer said:
Not diesel but maybe shows how petrols have come on?
2006 Honda Civic 1.8 = 36 MPG average (but you can actually coax mid-40's from it on a long run)
2015 Mazda 3 2.0 = 39.8 MPG average
The Mazda is a bigger engine, but less power (20 hp less, but you wouldn't know it). Both naturally aspirated. But averaging nearly 40 from normal driving with no thought paid to getting the best out of it. On a cruise down to Cornwall, you can see the heady heights of 50 mpg.
Very similar to my MX5. 41 average day to driving to work. 51 on a trip from Manchester to Southampton a few weeks ago. Interesting how much drag a fabric roof adds. 2006 Honda Civic 1.8 = 36 MPG average (but you can actually coax mid-40's from it on a long run)
2015 Mazda 3 2.0 = 39.8 MPG average
The Mazda is a bigger engine, but less power (20 hp less, but you wouldn't know it). Both naturally aspirated. But averaging nearly 40 from normal driving with no thought paid to getting the best out of it. On a cruise down to Cornwall, you can see the heady heights of 50 mpg.
KevinCamaroSS said:
My guess is that you were driving them 'petrol style' rather than 'diesel style'.
My new 2008 Skoda Octavia Scout (4wd) TDi (PD) returned 44.1 mpg over 18K miles, my 2010 Scout CR (140) returned 49.6 mpg and my 2011 Scout CR (140) returned 52.3 mpg.
Drive diesel style and you should get much closer to the official figures.
Describe driving 'diesel style' if you will, I'm interested.My new 2008 Skoda Octavia Scout (4wd) TDi (PD) returned 44.1 mpg over 18K miles, my 2010 Scout CR (140) returned 49.6 mpg and my 2011 Scout CR (140) returned 52.3 mpg.
Drive diesel style and you should get much closer to the official figures.
Otispunkmeyer said:
Not diesel but maybe shows how petrols have come on?
2006 Honda Civic 1.8 = 36 MPG average (but you can actually coax mid-40's from it on a long run)
2015 Mazda 3 2.0 = 39.8 MPG average
The Mazda is a bigger engine, but less power (20 hp less, but you wouldn't know it). Both naturally aspirated. But averaging nearly 40 from normal driving with no thought paid to getting the best out of it. On a cruise down to Cornwall, you can see the heady heights of 50 mpg.
Interesting - I managed ~39mpg average from my 2014 Honda Civic 1.8 (coaxing anything from 45-52 on a long, gentle run). I drove it quite hard on occasion too, so I think a sympathetic driver would average ~41/42.2006 Honda Civic 1.8 = 36 MPG average (but you can actually coax mid-40's from it on a long run)
2015 Mazda 3 2.0 = 39.8 MPG average
The Mazda is a bigger engine, but less power (20 hp less, but you wouldn't know it). Both naturally aspirated. But averaging nearly 40 from normal driving with no thought paid to getting the best out of it. On a cruise down to Cornwall, you can see the heady heights of 50 mpg.
I track my 335d (10k miles in, 8 months in), get 42 to 44 mph. Usually I just go by range, and look to get 500 miles between fill ups. I try to get towards 10 miles per litre. So at 500 miles, should be 50 litres (about 45.4 mpg), usually get 9.6 mplitre.
Driving is either rural for 10 miles, or A/M roads for 100 - 380 miles. Style is diesel-ish, which I assume to mean below 50% max revs, usually settles at 1250 rpm, with occasional bursts when overtaking, joining m-ways etc.
My E36 I6 2.5 petrol gave 34 to 36 mpg on Shell nitro. Worst I got was when commuting 5 miles to work in depths of winter, that was 27mpg. That was with no long journeys in between. Way back, I never used to measure mpg, neither on bikes or cars, so had little idea. Are we obsessed now, is it because of fuel prices or the general economics? I had less spare money then.
Driving is either rural for 10 miles, or A/M roads for 100 - 380 miles. Style is diesel-ish, which I assume to mean below 50% max revs, usually settles at 1250 rpm, with occasional bursts when overtaking, joining m-ways etc.
My E36 I6 2.5 petrol gave 34 to 36 mpg on Shell nitro. Worst I got was when commuting 5 miles to work in depths of winter, that was 27mpg. That was with no long journeys in between. Way back, I never used to measure mpg, neither on bikes or cars, so had little idea. Are we obsessed now, is it because of fuel prices or the general economics? I had less spare money then.
Fastchas said:
Describe driving 'diesel style' if you will, I'm interested.
Wild guess is that it's about being 1 gear higher than in an equivalent petrol engined car, and short-shifting when accelerating.Peak power in my diesel is apparently at 4000rpm but it's probably 90% there at 2000 rpm and the MPG display is much kinder.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff