Golf R Observations and Questions

[stephen8512]

hey guys

what sort of fuel consumption are you getting on ur cars?

I do a combination of highway and stop start and I experimented a little. I drove in D mode from when the car was full (only use BP ultimate) to when the car was empty. Driving very sedately and normally. Only putting my foot down to gently overtake someone, not scream past them....and the most I got was 480km out of a tank....

I know it all comes to ur driving style too but it seems to also say it on the MFD that it was telling me i'd get 480 from a tank, which is bang on what I got when I was driving normally. However, after that sedate drive from full tank to near empty (had 5L in the tank before I had to fill up again), the range it gave me was 550km? I know the computer must average it out but does 480 seem a bit low? Again, it comes to drivers driving style and what have you, but just curiously, if fuel consumption is down, what possible reasons could there be?

[Corey_R]

480 per tank is about what I'm getting. I'm filling up about the same as you are, with about 5L left... i.e. putting about 52 to 55L in the thank on average. So I'm getting around 11L/100km. If I drive in M mode and/or with some enthusiasm, that can drop to 420. The only time I've broken 500 is when I've got at least 1 decent trip on the freeway.... but even when it's been 100% freeway, I've never hit the 8.7L/100km "combined" rating that they claimed. And that's a first for me with a Volkswagen (manual or DSG) to not be able to meet that, let alone exceed it.

Hell, I've had this engine before with the DSG in the MKV GTI and was still able to meet the specs...

The tests claim that the R should do 6.8L/100km in extra urban... maybe if you were doing 60km/h on a completely flat freeway maybe... lol. Not likely in reality.


Anyway... as they're saying over in the fuel consumption thread, if you can't afford the fuel, you can't afford the car. And I can afford the fuel. I'm just disappointed that this is the first VW I've owned where the reality doesn't come anywhere near the claim - and as I said, previously I'd always beat the claim! Just not with the K04/AWD/Porky version which is the R

[Glennb]

my day to day consumption is about 500 to 550kms a tank (putting about 52-55 lts per tank) which is Melb freeway / traffic driving.
I have to be doing a lot of LC and lead foot driving to get below 500. However, i also did a run up to Mildura (from Melb) the other week and got 600kms from tank 1, and a bit over this on the return, with spending most of the time sitting on 110 km/hr.

So to get the claimed VW consumption even in the country you'd have to be sitting on 80-90 km/h or similar.

[Ideo]

480 per tank is about what I'm getting. I'm filling up about the same as you are, with about 5L left... i.e. putting about 52 to 55L in the thank on average. So I'm getting around 11L/100km. If I drive in M mode and/or with some enthusiasm, that can drop to 420. The only time I've broken 500 is when I've got at least 1 decent trip on the freeway.... but even when it's been 100% freeway, I've never hit the 8.7L/100km "combined" rating that they claimed. And that's a first for me with a Volkswagen (manual or DSG) to not be able to meet that, let alone exceed it.

Hell, I've had this engine before with the DSG in the MKV GTI and was still able to meet the specs...

The tests claim that the R should do 6.8L/100km in extra urban... maybe if you were doing 60km/h on a completely flat freeway maybe... lol. Not likely in reality.


Anyway... as they're saying over in the fuel consumption thread, if you can't afford the fuel, you can't afford the car. And I can afford the fuel. I'm just disappointed that this is the first VW I've owned where the reality doesn't come anywhere near the claim - and as I said, previously I'd always beat the claim! Just not with the K04/AWD/Porky version which is the R

I'm nearly always over 500km a tank. The only time I haven't been is on track or a full on cross country blast.

I think you are doing it wrong.

[Corey_R]

Well... I've lived and worked in the same location, thus the same commute with all 3 cars. Plus, getting "over 500km" from the tank is still pretty rubbish when the combined cycle is meant to be 8.7L/100km. For those who can't do (or haven' done) the math, that's 690km from the tank... So if people did fill up with 5L left, that's still 632km at fill up.

480km, 550km, still quite a way from 630 to 690km. That's not even considering that they're meant to get 810 to 880km per tank extra urban.

An APR employee did Brisbane to Wakefield Park on the 1 tank in their Stage 3 MK6 GTI. That's 1173km from a 55L tank! That's 4.69L/100km. I'm fully aware of the differences between the EA888 and EA113 and the GTI and R etc, but the difference in fuel consumption between the MKV GTI's and the R, and especially the MK6 GTI's in the R, just seem excessive.

I always knew that AWD meant additional wasted fuel, 1 or 2L etc. We all seem to be using 3 to 4L more! (Per 100km, not per tank!)

[Ideo]

But that's the thing. I've done Lakes Entrance to Sydney on a single tank, and the low fuel light didn't come on until the following day.

It's around 730kms.

Yeah, sure I was running it in, and driving a bit gently but even so it's not too bad.

I've seen similar driving back down from Coffs Harbour.

Haven't got above 800 but then I get bored and accelerate instead. I didn't buy it for fuel consumption, but I haven't been impressed or unimpressed by it.

[Corey_R]

Yeah - compared to Commodores and Fords and Subaru's etc, there is nothing wrong with the fuel consumption. I think that most of the people who are complaining are the people who have owned other VW's... I mean, as I said, I've owned this engine and gearbox (with K03 turbo) in a Stage 2 GTI and it was ~3L per 100km better... with my driving style and on the same daily route. It's just an unexpected negative.

Whilst on a single tank that is no big deal, over a 15000km year, that's an extra $675. Whilst I have no problems affording that, I can think of other things I'd rather be spending it on

[mfl]

Yeah - compared to Commodores and Fords and Subaru's etc, there is nothing wrong with the fuel consumption.

Agree with that, my usual inner city driving I get about, 12l/100km, a recent drive down the south coast, the trip computer showed 6.9l/100km.

In the same city driving , my ex-Subaru Liberty (non-turbo and no performance) was 12.5 -14l/100km and my old commodore v8s were about 20l/100 in inner city driving. A recently swapped the GTI for a 6.0l VE Calais (temporarily) and its consumption was 25l/100km over the same inner city circuit.

Comparing performance and consumption, its very good compared to my previous non-VW vehicles.

[Glennb]

All things are relative.
Coming from an Alfa 159 (2.2 lt 4 cyl) i'm getting pretty much the exact same mileage (10 -11 lts/100km) but having at least 3 times as much fun doing it
And i know that the ADR test for fuel usage is stupid (done over 400m if i recall?) and completely useless for real world driving and never expect to get anywhere near what they state. Although it's good to see that some VW models can do it, the Golf R isn't one of them.

[stephen8512]

Personally, one of the reasons why I got the R was because of fuel economy compared to the MK5 R32. I do hit about 8.9/100km SOMETIMES on highway driving...but thats possibly one in 10 i'd say.

If I had known the R got this sort of fuel economy, I would have just bought an R32 because the thing I was factoring in when purchasing the R was the fuel economy. Plus it sounds 10x nicer than the R. Don't care what you say. no amount of DSG farting can replicate that glorious engine and exhaust note.

but I digress...so what could potentially be another reason for fuel consumption being poor (as a general question I'm putting out there to pple, not specifically on the R)? If the car was bone stock, no mods etc and if fuel consumption is lower than average (say the average is 450km per tank) and you were getting something ridonculous like 280km per tank normal day to day driving....