Fuel Consumption 125kW TDI

[passatpout]

Not sure that it is an altogether fair comparison on many levels

Is the 307 an XS 1.6lt (200kg lighter) or XSE 2.0lt (100kg lighter)? manual or Auto..

BTW the 2lt 307 auto puts out more C02 than the 125kw Passat DSG

It's a 2.0l XSE manual. Can't keep up with me leaving the lights though..

We looked at them as well, but thought that the Passat was a much better overall package for our needs (even if it was $15K more exxy).

Anyhow, just did a trip, 40km, Altona to Sunbury, normal consumption by MFD around 6.2-6.3, tonight with a full car 5.9 (was on 5.7 until the hill near Calder Park). Had a 2.0lt 103kW Golf as a loaner today on the same road, and it wasn't any better.

[richdave]

It's a 2.0l XSE manual. Can't keep up with me leaving the lights though...

that's about 150kg lighter that the Passat.. and the stated fuel consumption for the 307 HDI XSE manual is

City cycle (litres/100km) 7.3
Highway cycle (litres/100km) 4.7
Combined cycle (litres/100km) 5.6
CO2 emissions (g / km) 148

Passat 125kW TDI DSG

City cycle (litres/100km) 8.4
Highway cycle (litres/100km) 5.6
Combined cycle (litres/100km) 6.6
CO2 emissions (g / km) 175

It's no surprise that the fuel economy is better... Not a fair line up to be sure... You'll have to switch off and roll down a few hills

[passatpout]

that's about 150kg lighter that the Passat.. and the stated fuel consumption for the 307 HDI XSE manual is

City cycle (litres/100km) 7.3
Highway cycle (litres/100km) 4.7
Combined cycle (litres/100km) 5.6
CO2 emissions (g / km) 148

Passat 125kW TDI DSG

City cycle (litres/100km) 8.4
Highway cycle (litres/100km) 5.6
Combined cycle (litres/100km) 6.6
CO2 emissions (g / km) 175

It's no surprise that the fuel economy is better... Not a fair line up to be sure... You'll have to switch off and roll down a few hills

Well, after leaving his place near Springwood in the Blue Mountains, and driving to the Hume via the Northern Road, when I turned from Narellan Road to the Hume the MFD was showing an average of 4.8l/100km over about 80km. The only thing that sent it upwards was climbing into the Southern Highlands.

My real figure average so far is better than the claimed, by about 0.2-0.3l/100km - the first car I've had that's been better than the stated figures.

Oh, and we both have a pop at our old man occasionally too - he reckons his VE Calais "is pretty economical, it averages about 11-11.5"..

[nting]

Oh, and we both have a pop at our old man occasionally too - he reckons his VE Calais "is pretty economical, it averages about 11-11.5"..

Haha, yes it's crazy what some people consider acceptable fuel economy. I think the following diagram explains it all.

Passat TDI =
VE Calais =

[passatpout]

Well, I did 2 round trips yesterday, all of which had stops over 2 hours so the MFD reset.

The first was Sunbury to Donvale via Calder/Western Ring/Watsonia/Eastern/Springvale Road. Average 5.1l/100km on arrival (was on 4.5l/100km when exiting the Western Ring Road). The return trip, same route, 5.7l/100km.

Next was Sunbury to Woodend - 6.5 for the trip up, 5.4l/100km for the return.

The tank average is sitting on 5.9l/100km according to the MFD, having varied from 6.0 to 6.2 during the day.

Have done about 450km from the tank, with an estimated range of 680km to go. That also includes a peak hour escape from Melbourne over the West Gate on Friday, and another couple of trips into the city.

Today there's another 200km coming up...

[vanDub]

My consumption is getting slightly worse. Now that she is run in and freed up I am using the torque more and more (because I love it). Can't comment on highway runs as the only one we do is Townsville to the Atherton Tablelands to see the grandkids. I have too much fun up the Palmerston, a fair climb and twisty, as I actually go faster / harder than on the flat.

Whats more, the consumption on my Camry V6 has got lots worse as I put the boot in to try to get it to perform like the Passat (and it still doesn't).

[passatpout]

Next thing - does anyone know roughly what tank level the low fuel warning activates at? I've noticed some "creep" in mine, in that when I first bought the car the low fuel warning came on, I refuelled pretty much straight away and it took around 62.5l to refill. In two straight tanks, one was 62.50l, the next was 62.70l. Now when I fill up, with the tank warning on, and it's taken under 60l to refuel.

On the current tank, I'd done about 920km with the MFD stating consumption at 6.0l/100km, when the warning came on (so by that it's used roughly 55l). I know there's some inaccuracies with the MFD and it's usually a bit optimistic on the consumption level, but that works out at roughly 10% of the tank, which is about 100-120km worth of fuel. Even if true consumption has been 6.2l/100km, then total fuel used is around 57l - so still a reasonable difference from the ~62l when the car was first delivered.

I don't mind when the warning comes on (either for having used 55l or 62l), but it's a bit disconcerting if it's not consistent with the level when it activates. At least it's going into fail safe mode - telling me there's no fuel when there really is.

Could it be a calibration issue or a (slow) fuel leak? I can pretty much rule out thermal expansion/contraction - on a full tank, the difference between 20 degrees and 45 degrees works out to be about 1l, and the ambient temperature has been similar from when I refuelled to when the alarm went off.

[richdave]

IIRC, The fuel warning comes on at 80km to empty... that is based on historical fuel usage so the amount of fuel in the tank may vary depending on the driving...

That said, I had my Fuel sender replace due to erratic "full" readings....

[gregozedobe]

Next thing - does anyone know roughly what tank level the low fuel warning activates at? I've noticed some "creep" in mine, in that when I first bought the car the low fuel warning came on, I refuelled pretty much straight away and it took around 62.5l to refill. In two straight tanks, one was 62.50l, the next was 62.70l. Now when I fill up, with the tank warning on, and it's taken under 60l to refuel.

Could it be a calibration issue or a (slow) fuel leak? I can pretty much rule out thermal expansion/contraction - on a full tank, the difference between 20 degrees and 45 degrees works out to be about 1l, and the ambient temperature has been similar from when I refuelled to when the alarm went off.

I can think of some explanations :

1 Diesel bowser inaccurate (it does happen, and when it does it always seems to be in the fuel companies favour ) I try to fill up from the same bowser at the same place each time.

2 You aren't completely filling it every time. Some diesels foam more than others, and my Transporter seems to get a foam "lock" sometimes, which stops me from properly filling it. If I slow down the flow for the last 10 litres it seems to be better, and sometimes (if I feel energetic) I rock the van to "burp" it (yes, just like a baby). If it gives a gurgling sound I can usually put in another 3-4 litres (if I go slowly).

3 The low fuel light is sensitive to slope, so it may come on at different fuel levels depending on whether you are going uphill or down.

[drbass]

Hmm, mine always comes on at 100 kms left - like clockwork.

Have to say, passatpout, your economy figures are impressive. However, your driving pattern seems to consist of (mostly) long runs (yes, you mention some peakhour traffic etc.) which is absolutely where the car excels.

Long runs (>50 kms at fairly constant speed) are bad if I don't see a 5.x. As soon as I'm in my daily commute I'll have to be happy with 7.x. It's all the stop-start stuff.

Which brings me to the DSG. Yes, there's a thread for that but mine's really gotten worse over the last few weeks, at one stage seemingly going into S mode (upshifting only at high revs, even when in manual) - freaked me out. Car's booked in for 30 k service next Friday, already indicated that the box is not how it should be.

Anyway, looking forward to the GP on Sunday (will take my 11-year-old son), and almost more excited about The Who!!!

Seeya,
Michael