Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 11

Thread: 1.5 Fuel consumption

  1. #1
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    12
    Post Thanks / Like

    1.5 Fuel consumption

    3 year term on my 1.4 GT DSG (150hp) came up last September so I swapped for a 1.5 R-Line DSG.

    I was under the impression the 1.5 fuel consumption would be around 10% better than the 1.4.

    Over 47,000 miles the 1.4 averaged 46mpg.
    Done 4,500 miles in the 1.5 and the average is less than 43mpg.

    Neither VW or the garage are interested.

    Has anyone else done a similar swap and had the same experience?
    2017 Golf R-Line 1.5, DSG

  2. #2
    Senior Member SpikyBob's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    1,007
    Post Thanks / Like
    Can only back you up with my current 1.4 tsi 150 DSG similar 46mpg average. You would hope the newer engine would be more efficient. Have you given it chance to do a few miles and settle in? My 1.4 was a bit thirsty when very new maybe 4.5 k is in enough of a run in distance though!
    2016 Golf R-Line Edition 1.4 TSI 150 ACT BMT. Urano Grey. Pan Roof. Rear View Camera. Winter Pack. Car-Net. Serron Alloys.
    2014 Polo SE 1.2 90ps TSI​ Flame Red. Sat Nav.

  3. #3
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    12
    Post Thanks / Like
    I would have thought 4,500 should be enough mileage SpikyBob (although the old car did take a while to loosen up I admit), the driving pattern is identical; 100 mile daily commute on mixed non motorway roads.
    In fact I'd say I'm driving this one with a lighter foot just to see if it will get near the 1.4.
    All the road tests comment on the new engine efficiency, I just don't get it.
    Other than that the car is superb its just more expensive to fuel, tax and insure.
    2017 Golf R-Line 1.5, DSG

  4. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Buckinghamshire
    Posts
    223
    Post Thanks / Like
    Tyres could be the reason, different brand, different pressures. For my Touran, although 99% of the usage is driver only, and driver and 1 passenger the remainder of the time, having the tyres at the full load pressures instead of the partial load pressures is worth 3-4 mpg. We run our Fabia in the higher Eco tyre pressures and again get 3-4 mpg better consumption. Regarding tyre brand the original Michelin Primacy tyres were 1-2 mpg better than the current Michelin Cross-Climates.
    2013 Touran 2.0 TDI (CFHC - D91) SE DSG (PBF -G1A) Acapulco Blue Metallic, Retro Fit Front Fog lights, Westfalia Detachable Towbar
    2015 Skoda Fabia (Mk3) 1.2 TSI(110) SE DSG Silver. ( I was previously posting as thamestrader)

  5. #5
    Administrator Crasher's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Nottingham, England
    Posts
    19,920
    Post Thanks / Like
    Up to now ALL the figures have been impossible to achieve in real life, that is why VW have showed no interest as you see it, for them it is a toe curling embarrassment that they can do nothing about as we have all been lied to for decades, the new RDE figures will prove both enlightening and embarrassing for owners and manufactures respectively. Perhaps these RDE figures will see the demise of these stupid downsized engines, VW have already admitted they are going no further as it does not work in the real world. These new standards could also see the EU's planned standards being impossible to achieve and the whole rotten house of cards will come tumbling down
    2003 Skoda Octavia VRS Estate. APR 98RON remap, APR R1 diverter valve, Jetex exhaust, K&N panel filter, 8x18 Wolfrace Pro-Lite eco 2.0 wheels with 225/40 18 Uniroyal Rainsport 3 tyres.
    2006 Polo GTI 1.8T, APR 95RON remap
    1988 Golf 2 GTI 16 valve, 2.2 with Weber Alpha injection
    1983 Golf 1 GTI 8 valve, 2 litre with Eurospec racing 42/36 head
    1972 1302LS auto 1641cc conversion

    Vile Invention

    Dark was that day when Diesel conceived his grim engine that begot you, vile invention, more vicious, more criminal than the camera even, metallic monstrosity, bale and bane of our culture, chief woe of our Commonweal. How dare the Law prohibit hashish and heroin yet license your use, who inflate all weak inferior egos? Their addicts only do harm to their own lives: you poison the lungs of the innocent, your din dithers the peaceful, and on choked roads hundreds must daily die by chance-medley. Nimble technicians, surely you should hang your heads in shame. Your wit works mighty wonders, has landed men on the Moon, replaced brains by computers, and can smithy a "smart" bomb. It is a crying scandal that you cannot take the time or be bothered to build us, what sanity knows we need, an odorless and noiseless staid little electric brougham.

    W.H. Auden (1907-1973), A Curse:

  6. #6
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    12
    Post Thanks / Like
    I accept your point Crasher, but on a like for like basis this engine was heralded as more efficient than the 1.4.
    In my experience to date it's almost 10% worse than the 1.4 not better.
    As to tyres the old car ran on Dunlop with Michelin replacements on the front. This one is on Bridgestone's but I cannot believe they will make an 8mpg difference.

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Location
    Oxfordshire
    Posts
    223
    Post Thanks / Like
    Maybe meeting the latest emission standards has a fuel efficiency penalty. Ironically, that seems to often happen.
    My car: 2003 Polo 1.4 BBY, Petrol
    Good Lady's: 2005 Mk1 Skoda Fabia 1.2, AZQ

  8. Likes Benjamin Frost liked this post
  9. #8
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Location
    Woking, Surrey
    Posts
    40
    Post Thanks / Like
    Does your 1.5 engine have the active cylinder technology? I think this only came in recently and that's probably how they managed to get better mpg figures. However your route and driving style may not allow two of your cylinders to switch off.
    Jan 2017 Golf GTI 2.0 TSI DSG Performance Pack. 5Dr Carbon Grey.
    Previous: 2010 Golf mk6 GT 2.0 TDI DSG

  10. #9
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    57
    Post Thanks / Like
    There are many reasons for the discrepancy;

    If you are using the trip computer for the running total average:

    You are comparing 4500 miles average against 47k miles - a large proportion of the 4.5k miles would have contained the 1-2k miles running in period where mpg will be down.
    All those miles will also be primarily cold weather - where mpg is going to be down.

    In order to compare fairly against your last car's running average, you need to do more than a years worth - and that's presuming this winter isn't much colder than the last.

    It's hard to accurately compare one MPG with another unless the conditions are all the same, you simply have not done enough miles on this new car and for long enough to be comparing against 3 years and 47k miles worth of average MPG.

    You can only really compare average trip MPG's, where you have noted them down and noted the weather conditions at the time along with any other factors like 'traffic' that day.

    There's also the fact that the trip computer is not entirely accurate and can be as much as 10% out from one car model to another.
    My mk5 golf 2.0TDI used to be massively optimistic and actual fuel fill up and odometer readings showed that.
    My mk6 1.4 TSI is actually under reading (fuel measurements show its a few percent better than what it reports)
    2010 Golf 1.4 TSI, CAVD

  11. Likes Benjamin Frost liked this post
  12. #10
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    12
    Post Thanks / Like
    Its been a while to post as I have been using the train rather than car.
    I took blows comments on board and checked against the trip computer.

    Mileage since refuel 428
    Gallons (42.42 litres) 10.09
    MPG 42.42

    Trip mpg since last fill 42.80
    Trip mpg longterm 42.60 (5000 miles)

    The trip readings are amazingly accurate against actual (as I found with the previous car).
    Checking the long term average the handbook states this resets after 10,000km so I can appreciate there will be slightly higher readings with the older car.
    2017 Golf R-Line 1.5, DSG

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •