New car - MPG not great
Discussion
I bought a brand new VW Tiguan 2.0 TDI 4 motion, with DSG and bluemotion, about 3 weeks ago, and so far I have covered about 800 miles. I have reset the overall mpg function on a number of occasions, and the average seems to level out at about 33mpg, even if I drive it like an old granny. VW have told me that it needs to do about 2000 miles before the engine will loosen up and return better mpg (I was told it should do about 60mpg on the motorway). Are they bulls
tting me, or is it to be expected that the mpg won't be as good on a new engine?
This is my first ever new car, and first ever diesel, so any help appreciated.
tting me, or is it to be expected that the mpg won't be as good on a new engine?This is my first ever new car, and first ever diesel, so any help appreciated.
I am finding the area of claimed MPG more and more interesting. It seems that some people are buying cars based on the manufacturer's figures, and are then finding out that they don't seem to be true. I suppose this is something that historically hasn't been a problem, but with the focus now on mpg it could well be.
How do the manufacturers gain their figures? Is it in some controlled environment on rollers that doesn't really simulate real driving conditions?
Also, how long will it be before someone challenges a manufacturer because they can't reach the claimed fuel consumption? I guess people can rightly complain if they buy a car that is different from the one sold to them, but mpg may be a minefield?
As for your predicament OP, i'd wait until you've done a few thousand miles before taking the figures to heart. If that's is what you have been told, just see how you get on.
If you don't mind me asking, did you have a car before this one, and why did you get rid of it if you did?
How do the manufacturers gain their figures? Is it in some controlled environment on rollers that doesn't really simulate real driving conditions?
Also, how long will it be before someone challenges a manufacturer because they can't reach the claimed fuel consumption? I guess people can rightly complain if they buy a car that is different from the one sold to them, but mpg may be a minefield?
As for your predicament OP, i'd wait until you've done a few thousand miles before taking the figures to heart. If that's is what you have been told, just see how you get on.
If you don't mind me asking, did you have a car before this one, and why did you get rid of it if you did?
I've owned twenty something cars before this, but never new, and never diesel. We sold 2 cars and replaced them with the Tiguan. One was an old Honda CRX vtec that I just used for commuting, and the other was a P38 Range Rover 4.0 on LPG. The P38 was a beautiful car, but I worked out with everything I spent on it in my 18 months of ownership, I could have been running a new car.
What speed are you doing whilst driving like a granny on the motorway? I believe cars are tested at 56mph, so if you're going faster than that you wont get the same figure. They are right about running it in too.
EDIT: Carpages says the official figure is 51mpg for extra urban driving, 47mpg combined.
EDIT: Carpages says the official figure is 51mpg for extra urban driving, 47mpg combined.
jbi said:
Not the only one...
My mate has a new ford fiesta 1.2 and apart from being utterly gutless (needs 2nd gear on some hills with 4 of us), it is only managing an average of 36mpg after putting 10,000 miles on it.
I have a new Fiesta too, 1.6 petrol though and I get 45mpg combined driving. Going up hills in second gear and overloading it with 4 people suggests your friend should have got a larger engine. The 1.6 engine gives the best fuel consumption despite also being the fastest.My mate has a new ford fiesta 1.2 and apart from being utterly gutless (needs 2nd gear on some hills with 4 of us), it is only managing an average of 36mpg after putting 10,000 miles on it.
Edited by PumpkinSteve on Tuesday 7th February 08:25
I tested it at about 65 mph on the motorway, with cruise control set.
I have a friend who has a 2003 Skoda Superb 1.9TDI. We drove though France in it with nearly 200 bottles of wine in the back, and 2 bikes on a rack on the boot, and it still managed about 55mpg. Surely a newer engine should at least be capable of matching that?
I have a friend who has a 2003 Skoda Superb 1.9TDI. We drove though France in it with nearly 200 bottles of wine in the back, and 2 bikes on a rack on the boot, and it still managed about 55mpg. Surely a newer engine should at least be capable of matching that?
Firstly, the combined mpg for that car is 47mpg. So whoever mentioned 60mpg was talked bks. Secondly, you will need to wait a few thousand miles before the engine is loosened up. And finally, this cold weather will sap the fuel economy. I'm 5mpg down on my daily commute compared to the same in summer.
ks. Secondly, you will need to wait a few thousand miles before the engine is loosened up. And finally, this cold weather will sap the fuel economy. I'm 5mpg down on my daily commute compared to the same in summer. Amateurish said:
Firstly, the combined mpg for that car is 47mpg. So whoever mentioned 60mpg was talked bks. Secondly, you will need to wait a few thousand miles before the engine is loosened up. And finally, this cold weather will sap the fuel economy. I'm 5mpg down on my daily commute compared to the same in summer.
This.ks. Secondly, you will need to wait a few thousand miles before the engine is loosened up. And finally, this cold weather will sap the fuel economy. I'm 5mpg down on my daily commute compared to the same in summer. 
NotDave said:
cold weather sapping MPG?
explain please.
I've always found cold air, engine ran better and MPG was greater.
Not sure why, only speaking from experience here. Thinking back to the days when I had a Mini with a choke, in colder weather you'd have to have the choke out for longer so could it be to do with richer fueling? Also, modern diesels take an age to get up to efficient temperature, even more so in sub zero. explain please.
I've always found cold air, engine ran better and MPG was greater.
The trouble with official mpg figures is that they're based on simple tests designed to be easily replicated and relatively inexpensive to perform. They ignore many of the factors that affect real world fuel economy.
The urban test is a cold start followed by 2.5 miles of stop start driving with an average speed of 12mph and a maximum of 30mph. The "cold" start is actually at a rather balmy 20 to 25 C inside the test labs and the engine is warmed up beforehand, which is going to help fuel economy a lot compared with -3 C at 6am on a Monday morning in winter when the car hasn't been used since Saturday morning for the shopping run. For a slow to warm diesel that'll make a big difference.
The extra urban test is a 4.3 mile run at speeds up to 75mph and an average of 39mph. Given that the car is "travelling" at 75mph on a set of rollers, where's the wind resistance? Is it calculated in from the wind tunnel testing? What about gradients, are they replicated somehow?
The combined cycle is an average of the urban and extra urban cycles, adjusted for mileage. This clearly favours the hybrid cars that perform well in the urban test. The combined cycle is often seen as the cars official mpg, but clearly that leaves a lot of room for accuracy when it comes to real world mpg.
The effect of strong winds; running the air conditioning, headlights, stereo; having a window open; frequent braking; etc are all ignored.
The urban test is a cold start followed by 2.5 miles of stop start driving with an average speed of 12mph and a maximum of 30mph. The "cold" start is actually at a rather balmy 20 to 25 C inside the test labs and the engine is warmed up beforehand, which is going to help fuel economy a lot compared with -3 C at 6am on a Monday morning in winter when the car hasn't been used since Saturday morning for the shopping run. For a slow to warm diesel that'll make a big difference.
The extra urban test is a 4.3 mile run at speeds up to 75mph and an average of 39mph. Given that the car is "travelling" at 75mph on a set of rollers, where's the wind resistance? Is it calculated in from the wind tunnel testing? What about gradients, are they replicated somehow?
The combined cycle is an average of the urban and extra urban cycles, adjusted for mileage. This clearly favours the hybrid cars that perform well in the urban test. The combined cycle is often seen as the cars official mpg, but clearly that leaves a lot of room for accuracy when it comes to real world mpg.
The effect of strong winds; running the air conditioning, headlights, stereo; having a window open; frequent braking; etc are all ignored.
Amateurish said:
Not sure why, only speaking from experience here. Thinking back to the days when I had a Mini with a choke, in colder weather you'd have to have the choke out for longer so could it be to do with richer fueling? Also, modern diesels take an age to get up to efficient temperature, even more so in sub zero.
Ahh touche on the diesel thing. I used to to a 20mile commute in a Focai TDCI and in deepest winter, it'd never get off the bottom of the temp guage.With regards petrol cars, ESPECIALLY modified stuff, I've always found cold weather means better MPG.
I.e. the 200SX would do 37mpg on a motorway run, even tuned. But that was with temps below 10degrees C. Now when I did the same run, at same speeds (65mph) in summmer, pushing 30degrees, we were down to 32mpg.
The current snotter, even when thrashed within an inch of it's poor Itallian life, is returning 20mpg when minus 4....... 40mpg when driven nicely
PumpkinSteve said:
I have a new Fiesta too, 1.6 petrol though and I get 45mpg combined driving. Going up hills in second gear and overloading it with 4 people suggests your friend should have got a larger engine. The 1.6 engine gives the best fuel consumption despite also being the fastest.
Tried to tell him that before he bought it, but he fell for the salesmans patter.Edited by PumpkinSteve on Tuesday 7th February 08:25
He just shrugs his shoulders when I point out the mpg and says the bigger engines must be worse.
Ignorance is bliss eh?
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff