Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 27

Thread: 9L/100Km is this normal for Auto 1.6L Petrol?

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Melbun
    Posts
    2,374

    for starters why arent you using premium?
    2x Caddy, 1x Ducato

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    South Coast N.S.W.
    Posts
    838
    As I said in my first post, what's the service history like, has it been properly maintained ( air, fuel filter changes etc...) depending on the k's travelled maybe an injector service might be in order, it's worth consideration anyway. Some more details of the vehicle in question would be helpful in determining if the car is using excessive fuel or not (driving style, city / hwy ? how many k's has it travelled, Auto or DSG, brief service history) It came out with DSG as well as normal auto transmission or at least it did according to the Drive.com.au specs

    http://www.drive.com.au/used/search/...t=1&mode=Specs


    Russ
    Russ

    2005 Subaru Outback 3.0 R Premium

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    3,553
    Quote Originally Posted by Russ59 View Post
    It came out with DSG as well as normal auto transmission or at least it did according to the Drive.com.au specs
    They only came out with the auto, DSG was only an option on the GTI and GT Sport petrol and on the Diesels.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Canberra
    Posts
    2,396
    Firstly, how did you calculate your economy ? The MFD is usually a bit optimistic (tells you you used less fuel than actual). The best way is to fill up completely, record the Km, drive until at least 1/2 a tank has been used, fill up completely again, then divide the litres you put in by how many 100Kms you did between the two fills. This method gets more accurate if you do it over at least 3 fills, as that adjusts for any under/over fills.

    If (and that is a very big IF) you normally drive gently, anticipate stops and move away from stopped pretty slowly then I would expect you should be getting better economy than that.

    As everyone has said, put at least 95 octane petrol into it. Driving style is the biggest factor affecting fuel economy, then traffic conditions and journey type (short is bad, as your engine uses extra fuel to warm up). Next is air con, tyre pressure and carrying around heavy stuff all the time.

    There is lots of info around the web on how to improve your fuel economy, but please don't go all drastic hyper-miler, some of their techniques they suggest are downright dangerous, and others are very inconsiderate towards other traffic.

    It is possible that your car has a minor tuning problem, so it might be worth getting it checked out, especially if it runs a bit rough at times or doesn't respond to the accelerator as you'd expect (but don't look for miracles, the 1.6 engine is no powerhouse, and it is pushing a heavy car around). I had a loaner auto 1.6 golf a while back, I thought the engine and auto combo didn't seem to work very well together.

    Please let us know how you get on, as it adds to the collective wisdom so we can offer better advice to the next person who has the same issue.
    Last edited by gregozedobe; 03-03-2009 at 10:25 AM.
    2017 MY18 Golf R 7.5 Wolfsburg wagon (boring white) delivered 21 Sep 2017, 2008 Octavia vRS wagon 2.0 TFSI 6M (bright yellow), 2006 T5 Transporter van 2.5 TDI 6M (gone but not forgotten).

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    South Coast N.S.W.
    Posts
    838
    Quote Originally Posted by Maverick View Post
    They only came out with the auto, DSG was only an option on the GTI and GT Sport petrol and on the Diesels.
    So what's in the one that I posted the link for then ? It says it's a 1.6 petrol and states in the specs a DSG and in the pic it shows what looks like a DSG transmission


    Russ
    Russ

    2005 Subaru Outback 3.0 R Premium

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    3,553
    Quote Originally Posted by Russ59 View Post
    So what's in the one that I posted the link for then ? It says it's a 1.6 petrol and states in the specs a DSG and in the pic it shows what looks like a DSG transmission
    Maybe the first of them had the option of DSG?

    Here's the price list from January (and it was the same back 2 years) and it shows only autos on the petrols below the GT.

    http://www.volkswagen.com.au/etc/med....0016.File.pdf

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    South Coast N.S.W.
    Posts
    838
    Quote Originally Posted by Maverick View Post
    Maybe the first of them had the option of DSG?

    Here's the price list from January (and it was the same back 2 years) and it shows only autos on the petrols below the GT.

    http://www.volkswagen.com.au/etc/med....0016.File.pdf
    This one is a 2005 model, so as you say maybe it was an option on the earlier models. Maybe it didn't work to well with the 1.6 engine Personally I'd think with the power to weight ratio it wouldn't be much more economical than it's 2.0 litre big brother, but it would have to be under more stress.

    Russ
    Russ

    2005 Subaru Outback 3.0 R Premium

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    33
    Quote Originally Posted by Russ59 View Post
    This one is a 2005 model, so as you say maybe it was an option on the earlier models. Maybe it didn't work to well with the 1.6 engine Personally I'd think with the power to weight ratio it wouldn't be much more economical than it's 2.0 litre big brother, but it would have to be under more stress.

    Russ
    8-9L/100km with aircon on seems normal in city run, I can't tell much difference in mileage between 95 RON & 98 petrol, but feel more powerful in acceleration while added 98 RON.

    1.6L engine is conventional EFI and might be similar to the one used in MK IV too, IMO the newly developed 2.0 FSI engine would have higher efficient output and close mileage comparing with the 1.6L EFI engine.

    Secondly, 2005 model is 4-year old and expecting to renew the air filter for the FIRST time in vw schedule, which will make a great improvement. I personally would change the air filter in every 2 years.

    Cheers, James
    Last edited by JP2; 03-03-2009 at 07:27 PM. Reason: correction of words

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    South Coast N.S.W.
    Posts
    838
    Quote Originally Posted by JP2 View Post
    8-9L/100km with aircon on seems normal in city run, I can't tell much differnce in useage between 95 RON & 98 petol, but feel more powerful in accerration for the higher RON.

    1.6L engine is conventional EFI and might be similar to the one used in MK IV too, IMO the newly developped 2.0 FSI engine would have very little differnece in usage of petol while comparing with the 1.6L EFI engine.

    Secondly, 2005 model is 4-year old and expecting to renew the air filter for the FIRSTtime in schedule, which will make a great improvement. I personally would change the air filter in every 2 years.

    Cheers, James
    Depending on the conditions where the car is used (how dusty) I would be replacing the element or giving it a good clean at least every 12 months. I'm sure if it hasn't been done in 4 years it should make a huge difference to economy and performance when it's changed.

    Russ
    Russ

    2005 Subaru Outback 3.0 R Premium

  10. #20

    Thanks everyone for the replies. I learn a lot. I realise the way you drive makes a lot of the fuel economy. I'm not the kind who accelerates hard and brakes hard. Occasionally when needed I push a little but under normal driving condition, I consider myself a pretty frugal driver in that sense. Maybe I will try higher octane fuel and also look to replace the air filter. Can I do this myself or should I bring it to the dealer? Thanks

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

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