RE: PH Fleet update: Golf GTI Edition 35

RE: PH Fleet update: Golf GTI Edition 35

Monday 26th March 2012

PH Fleet update: Golf GTI Edition 35

Fuel economy niggles prompt us to try out a Golf GTD



If there's one thing that has irked those members of the PH team who have driven the PH Fleet Golf GTI Edition 35, it's been fuel economy. We know that being a keen PHer is often about not caring too much about how much fossil-juice you're getting through - you only need to look at the numbers Garlick gets from his Lexus LS400 and Chimaera to realise that - but there are some cars you just expect that bit more from.

Our Edition 35 meets its diesel cousin
Our Edition 35 meets its diesel cousin
The Edition 35 seems to be one of those. Even to us, hot hatches still have to be a little bit sensible - they are often a daily driver, after all - and the Golf just doesn't quite match up to expectations. Even tickling the throttle on longer journeys we're lucky to muster anything better than an mpg figure in the high 20s, and even the official combined economy figure suggests 34.9mpg is the best you're going to get.

Engine talk
Initially we thought that this would be because the Edition 35, like the Golf R, uses the older EA113 engine (you may recognise it from such VWs as the Mk5 Golf GTI) rather than the EA888 of the Mk6 Golf GTI. But the older engine isn't actually less efficient than its EA888 stablemate if you take into account the increase in power. When we got the (not so) trusty PH calculator out, you see, we realised that the Edition 35's extra 25hp corresponds to an additional 11.9 per cent in power, for a an increase in fuel consumption of 10.8 per cent. So you could (just about) argue that the Edition 35 is more efficient than the standard car, in terms of an economy-to-performance ratio.

White: a bugger to photograph
White: a bugger to photograph
Either way, it got us thinking about what would happen if we put our truly sensible trousers on and plumped for a Golf GTD. We knew the economy would be good, but would it be a convincing substitute for a petrol GTI?

So does GTD equal GTI?
The power delivery is certainly not the same - a great big slug of torque (in this case 258lb ft between 1,750 and 2,500rpm) and power delivery that's all done by 4,000rpm or so. But then you expect that of a moderately powerful turbodiesel. You also expect comfortably better fuel consumption, and the GTD duly delivers. Official combined figures suggest 55.4mpg and, though we only managed high 30s to mid 40s, it's certainly a fair chunk up on its petrol sibling.

But there's more to it than that. The whole GTD experience is softer and less focused than the GTI. Partly that's down to a smaller wheel and tyres package, but mostly it's down to a more relaxed suspension set-up. both have 'sports' suspension, but the Edition 35 is lowered by 22mm, while the GTD is dropped by just 15mm, and the GTD's set-up is softer accordingly.

GTD interior does without our car's leather
GTD interior does without our car's leather
Handling differences aside, what makes the Edition 35 feel like a hot hatch - probably more than anything else - is the wide, linear, power delivery. It encourages you to rev it hard, to hold onto gears that bit longer.

No, it's not the most economical way to propel yourself along, but for those rare moments when it's just you, your car and an empty road, your hot hatch really needs to be powered by unleaded and not the stuff that comes out of the black pump.

The GTD is a fine car, though, even if calling it a pukka hot hatch is pushing it a bit. Think of it as a Golf version of the 320d, however, and it holds rather a lot of appeal...


FACT SHEET
Car:
 2011 VW Golf GTI Edition 35
Run by: Riggers
On fleet since: December 2011
Mileage: 11,250 miles
List price new: £31,030 (inc. £1770 infotainment pack and £440 for parking sensors front and rear)
Last month at a glance: Low-ish fuel economy's been bugging us, so we decide to try out the GTI's diesel cousin

Previous reports:
Paris road trip proves GTI's impeccable cruising credentials
Golf GTI Edition 35 arrives, complete with wintry rubber

Winter tyres go south; the Golf proves a popular choice at PH HQ




Author
Discussion

Numeric

Original Poster:

1,396 posts

151 months

Monday 26th March 2012
quotequote all
Oddly the only car that returned over 50k miles exctly what it was supposed to for fuel economy was an Astra VXR which claimed 30.3mpg and gave 30.1mpg which I checked with actual fuel used (I had a fuel card so it was all recorded).

I thought that was pretty impressive but it does seem that where a car is designed without any attempt at being economical the chances of getting to its declared number is much higher. Clearly this is a result of the measurement method being fatally flawed.

So we have stop start because part of the test has the car stationary - when in real life you are very seldom absolutely still and then only for short periods - surely this is the ultimate on legislation creating flawed engineering.

I remember one firm I worked at slightly altering the gearing to allow the car to hit certain points and improve economy for the tests - though in the real world it actually made the car less economical.

Edited by Numeric on Monday 26th March 10:20

HebdenHedgehog

237 posts

168 months

Monday 26th March 2012
quotequote all
All that but no actual mention of the mpg difference?!

Bitzer

4,235 posts

168 months

Monday 26th March 2012
quotequote all
HebdenHedgehog said:
All that but no actual mention of the mpg difference?!
+1

FWDRacer

3,564 posts

224 months

Monday 26th March 2012
quotequote all
One has smaller wheels and softer suspension set-up. Suspect this one might be the answer to UK roads.

More like a VW advertorial. Have you actually driven the car?

Feature content is AWOL.

SturdyHSV

10,094 posts

167 months

Monday 26th March 2012
quotequote all
High 20s on a run? Really? Wow that's poor.

£31k for a 2 door, 4 seater that does under 30mpg but doesn't have a V8? :Yikes:

Ex Boy Racer

1,151 posts

192 months

Monday 26th March 2012
quotequote all
It would be interesting to work out the difference in annual fuel costs, based on say 12000 miles per annum, between the petrol and the diesel. I reckon (haven't worked it out) that it's probably less than £1000. Isn't that worth it for the extra fun you have with the car - less than a pint of beer a day? When you think how much driving a car costs in terms of depreciation etc, compromising the experience for the sake of a few hundred quid seems like madness to me. Down with diesel!!!

Garlick

40,601 posts

240 months

Monday 26th March 2012
quotequote all
FWDRacer said:
More like a VW advertorial. Have you actually driven the car?
I have http://www.pistonheads.com/news/default.asp?storyI...

And I had to steal it from Riggers to get that drive, so I know he has too.

GTiFrank

625 posts

184 months

Monday 26th March 2012
quotequote all
Bitzer said:
HebdenHedgehog said:
All that but no actual mention of the mpg difference?!
+1
yes Some Figures for the GTD wouldn't go amiss...

Riggers

1,859 posts

178 months

Monday 26th March 2012
quotequote all
FWDRacer said:
One has smaller wheels and softer suspension set-up. Suspect this one might be the answer to UK roads.

More like a VW advertorial. Have you actually driven the car?

Feature content is AWOL.
Softer suspension and smaller wheels do give it a better ride, sure, but they also make it less incisive, less keen to turn in.

The Ed 35 doesn't ride brilliantly, but it's hardly harsh, and you do find yourself less keen to hoon about in the GTD.

And for those who wanted a concrete MPG figure on the Golf - 55.4mpg combined. Reason I didn't include it originally is because AFAIC that's entirely par for the course for a moderately powerful turbodiesel, while the GTI's economy feels under par.

b14

1,061 posts

188 months

Monday 26th March 2012
quotequote all
I average 30-32 mpg in my 3 litre straight six with 306bhp, which is coming up for 6 years old.

Poor show from VW. Maybe more miles would illict more MPG as the engine loosens up?

Riggers

1,859 posts

178 months

Monday 26th March 2012
quotequote all
b14 said:
I average 30-32 mpg in my 3 litre straight six with 306bhp, which is coming up for 6 years old.

Poor show from VW. Maybe more miles would illict more MPG as the engine loosens up?
We shall see how much we can put on in the time we've got it then! biggrin

Oh, and a word or two about diesel MPG now added to the original article...

goron59

397 posts

171 months

Monday 26th March 2012
quotequote all
55mpg for the GTD is pretty good and with the double clutch box you could keep it in the power/torque sweetspot without getting RSI.


mikey k

13,011 posts

216 months

Monday 26th March 2012
quotequote all
Interesting I guess the Golf R suffers the same "issue"
But the price differential between unleaded and diesel makes less of a difference.
Based on my local fuel prices and VW's combined cycle figures there is £1,445/yr in it over 25k/yr.
I think I'd go with the petrol version for when I can find some nice clear B roads wink

The Ferret

1,147 posts

160 months

Monday 26th March 2012
quotequote all
Riggers said:
And for those who wanted a concrete MPG figure on the Golf - 55.4mpg combined. Reason I didn't include it originally is because AFAIC that's entirely par for the course for a moderately powerful turbodiesel, while the GTI's economy feels under par.
How was the split between urban/motorway - was it 50/50?

If so that is a remarkable result. Our GT TDI isn't even getting close to that. Anything other than cruising at 60mph just doesn't seem to get close. In fact tbh I'm a little disappointed with it in that respect. I had hoped it would improve with mileage, but at 25k it still won't return much more than 40mpg combined.

philmots

4,631 posts

260 months

Monday 26th March 2012
quotequote all
That is pretty poor.

My 2.8T is good for 30mpg on a run.

kambites

67,554 posts

221 months

Monday 26th March 2012
quotequote all
It didn't do 54mpg:

Article said:
Official combined figures suggest 55.4mpg and, though we only managed high 30s to mid 40s
Which seems a bit rubbish to me.

Riggers

1,859 posts

178 months

Monday 26th March 2012
quotequote all
The Ferret said:
Riggers said:
And for those who wanted a concrete MPG figure on the Golf - 55.4mpg combined. Reason I didn't include it originally is because AFAIC that's entirely par for the course for a moderately powerful turbodiesel, while the GTI's economy feels under par.
How was the split between urban/motorway - was it 50/50?

If so that is a remarkable result. Our GT TDI isn't even getting close to that. Anything other than cruising at 60mph just doesn't seem to get close. In fact tbh I'm a little disappointed with it in that respect. I had hoped it would improve with mileage, but at 25k it still won't return much more than 40mpg combined.
You misunderstand me - 55.4mpg is the official combined. My time in the car was pretty much an equal split between motorway, town and urban, and we got late 30s, early 40s, so you're pretty spot on with your GT TDI. smile

Dan Trent

1,866 posts

168 months

Monday 26th March 2012
quotequote all
The editor's tuppence worth!

These are purely trip computer figures but this morning I got 32.5 from the Edition 35 which is, I think, the best I've ever done on my commute. It's a good one for economy, being as much of it is 50-60mph trundling on the M25. But that's the absolute best case. On the same commute I was getting high 50s easily out of the GTD, including one run at 58.5. Obviously not scientific - different days, different traffic, etc - but it gives you an idea of the comparison.

Cheers!

Dan

The Ferret

1,147 posts

160 months

Monday 26th March 2012
quotequote all
Riggers said:
You misunderstand me - 55.4mpg is the official combined. My time in the car was pretty much an equal split between motorway, town and urban, and we got late 30s, early 40s, so you're pretty spot on with your GT TDI. smile
I get you now. Saying that, don't you think late 30's is a bit poor as an overall figure?


Motorrad

6,811 posts

187 months

Monday 26th March 2012
quotequote all
Presumably the ED35 is being run on SUL? If so that makes the figures even more lamentable.

Also a bit odd as I managed to average 35ish in my GTi which had a lower power (although remapped) version of the same engine run mostly on 99RON.

When I'm averaging 25mpg in a V8 it makes me wonder what exactly VW are doing wrong to get such ste economy.