CTH & gti 2 week thoughts

[Melon Head]

Fuel consumption has improved slightly to 8.2L/100km. I can't see how anyone could get below 7L/100km though.
1500kms not a drop of oil used

[AC74]

Fuel consumption has improved slightly to 8.2L/100km. I can't see how anyone could get below 7L/100km though.
1500kms not a drop of oil used

Interesting... Mine's a CTH and just ticked over 3000km with an average of 6.9L/100km. Also no movement on the dipstick so far. Probably the biggest factor is that my commute involves very little idling time sitting at lights or in stationary traffic and a lot of cruising at ~80km/h in 7th (A/C on, D mode). I regularly get ~5.6L/100km on the way to work and ~6.5-7.0L/100km on the way home so I gets that offsets the hard, full throttle driving outside the daily commute.

I guess if you spend a lot of time in stop-start traffic and prefer S mode or manual it's understandable that consumption would be in the 8.2L/100km range.

[Melon Head]

Forget what the computer tells you, tell me what you get from a tank. Measure km and litres and manually calculate it.
I got 8.2L/100 with 350km of cruise control on freeway and 150km of driving around locally using S but no traffic.
If I drove it in City traffic I reckon it could easily jump to 12l/100km

[AC74]

Forget what the computer tells you, tell me what you get from a tank. Measure km and litres and manually calculate it.
I got 8.2L/100 with 350km of cruise control on freeway and 150km of driving around locally using S but no traffic.
If I drove it in City traffic I reckon it could easily jump to 12l/100km

Yeah, I might do that just to see how it compares. I reckon driving in S mode makes a big difference to fuel economy, shifting later and holding lower gears. The flip side is whether driving in D mode is too hard on the transmission short-shifting all the time for the sake of economy. My driving style is flowy in traffic and one of things I love about the GTI is it's flexibility. With smooth throttle applications is pulls very nicely in taller gears, feeling like a much bigger engine.

Like a few others have mentioned, fuel economy wasn't the reason I bought the GTI, but it's a nice bonus and I do enjoy looking at the bowser after it clicks off and seeing ~$60 rather than $80++ which is what I would spend on a fill up for our 2.5L Outback (62L tank) for pretty much the same kilometres.

[Melon Head]

Like a few others have mentioned, fuel economy wasn't the reason I bought the GTI, but it's a nice bonus and I do enjoy looking at the bowser after it clicks off and seeing ~$60 rather than $80++ which is what I would spend on a fill up for our 2.5L Outback (62L tank) for pretty much the same kilometres.

I definitely didn't buy the car for fuel economy.
It has however opened my eyes to the fact that:
1. There are large discrepancies between different manufactures specs.
2. Reviewers often don't do actual measurements, and rely on what the manufacture tells them.

[AC74]

I definitely didn't buy the car for fuel economy.
It has however opened my eyes to the fact that:
1. There are large discrepancies between different manufactures specs.
2. Reviewers often don't do actual measurements, and rely on what the manufacture tells them.

Yep, manufacturers specs are always best case scenario and don't even start me on product reviews. Most reviews are re-hashed press releases and/or puff pieces from a writer who has usually been the beneficiary of some corporate hospitality from the supplier and a publication that accepts significant advertising spend.

From my own business experience I know how it goes - if you want 'editorial' in a publication it starts with a negotiation around how big and how expensive your ad is going to be. In most cases, they even ask you to write your own piece and unless you are a terrible writer they generally won't even edit it.

Was it on this forum I recently read about a manufacturer being ordered to compensate owners (in the UK?) because vehicles were getting nowhere near the manufacturers fuel economy claims?