What are you guys getting?

[gldgti]

1.6 turbo diesel.... INDIRECT injection, not TDI - Turbocharged Direct Injection...

just for clarification for when someone goes looking for a 1.6TDI and finds that they dont exist....

[sTeeDi]

For the life of the Car I've been getting 6.5L/100km through mainly city driving, I hope it begins to drop now that I've passed the first two stages of the long run in period for TDIs. I envy you guys getting less than 6.0L/100kms, hope it's just because of my running in of the engine (and maybe my heavy foot) that is causing the high fuel consumption.

I'm still running in my MY07 Comfortline DSG Golf. After finally getting the Dealer to flash the ECU because of my starting problems, what i find is after the flash the car drives a little more smoothly (not sure if its coz of the running in done so far), and i don't have problems crankin' the car anymore.

Will be heading down to Canberra this long weekend with the Olds, and it will be the first time for me to use the Cruise control after getting 7,500km on the clock, of course I'll have to be careful flogging the car due to the double demerits

[brackie]

Don't hit yourself over the head with your fuel consumption figures. I've notice that you don't have to do much driving in the city to greatly elevate the thirst. I can go to town (46km round trip) on 4.7L/100km driving on our windy, hilly Tassie country roads as long as I don't drive around while in town. If I have to do some shopping or deliveries that involve a lot of stop-start, then the consumption goes way up. Often it gets to the 5.5L/100km mark. And also it isn't consistent. Today I did a "there-and back" and I got 5.0L/100km.

My old Mk1 uses less fuel in town than it does on the highway!!

[BeigeJet]

Don't hit yourself over the head with your fuel consumption figures.

Hi Brackie,

Don't get me wrong, I know that consumption can vary and be quite different between city and urban cycles.
The thing that really amazes me is how low the consumption can be especially when compared to my other vehicle (2003 Camry V6) that doesn't have the same level of performance. 4.7l/100 for the Jetta vs 8.9l/100 for the Camry on the same round trip to SA and back.
I only use the MFD display as a guide and rely on actual litres at fill against odometer reading. This is done on an EXCEL spreadsheet (Yeah, I know I'm anally retentive!)
I find that the MFD display can be optimistic by up to 0.5l/100 when compared to my spreadsheet.
Around Melbourne the last fortnight the wife got 5.8 on a tank for 864 k but typically she gets about 6.2 l/100. I get 13.8 from the Camry to and from work.
All the figures I quote are from my you beaut spreadsheet. I use this also to keep the leasing company hones with fuel charges and manage my mileage for FBT purposes so that don't go under 25,000k pa and have to pay extra FBT.

Cheers!

[OvaltoJetta]

2.0 TDi DSG
Currently on the 5th tank. It has been a mixture of freeway and urban driving. The Jetta now 350k on trip & computer says 680k to go. Have 3500k on clock and comsumption seems to be getting better with each fill.

City driving

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Don't hit yourself over the head with your fuel consumption figures.

I also noticed that the road surface makes quite a difference. The smooth bitumen gives a 1L/100klm better return than the rougher blue metal surface (approx 6 v 5), but that would go without saying as the rougher surface would enable better grip and stopping ability.

[dammfool]

Ive got 23thou on my polo,Recently i did a country trip and did 690ks on 31 litres

[Macca]

I was listening to the radio the other day and Will Hagen said that when the fuel usage readout is 0.0 it really is zero. I always thought it would be pretty low - just enough to keep the engine alive while it was engine braking ie less than idle.

When at idle my 2.0TDI ranges between 0.5 to 0.7 L/100k

What do you guys think? Is the fuel usage really zero when engine braking - I always thought some of the "idle" fuel would still be required.

cheers Macca

[OvaltoJetta]

A friend has been keeping stats since day 1 - May 2006 - when he bought his Polo TDi. Note: consumption really improves after 30,000klm. The first line is the overall average for the 51849 klm to date. The blank lines is where a service was done. Sorry about the allignment. Hope you can work it out.

Kilometres l/100km $/100km km/l $/l mi/gal Odometer

51848.8 4.87 $6.19 20.5 $1.27 58 51859

759.0 5.2 $7.36 19.3 $1.42 55 769
837.0 4.7 $6.90 21.3 $1.47 60 1606
778.1 4.7 $6.67 21.1 $1.41 60 2384
816.7 5.0 $6.99 20.0 $1.40 57 3201
833.2 4.8 $6.66 21.0 $1.40 60 4034
789.0 4.7 $6.59 21.2 $1.40 60 4823
732.0 5.1 $7.14 19.4 $1.39 55 5555
752.2 5.0 $7.13 19.9 $1.42 57 6307
805.0 4.8 $6.64 20.8 $1.38 59 7112
804.8 5.0 $6.77 20.1 $1.36 57 7917
7917
757.8 5.0 $6.92 19.9 $1.38 57 8675
777.7 5.0 $6.83 19.9 $1.36 57 9452
798.7 5.2 $6.97 19.4 $1.35 55 10251
802.2 5.2 $6.96 19.4 $1.35 55 11053
784.8 5.2 $6.99 19.3 $1.35 55 11838
724.1 5.0 $6.78 19.9 $1.35 57 12562
765.3 5.3 $7.04 19.0 $1.34 54 13328
783.7 5.0 $6.52 20.0 $1.30 57 14111
827.7 4.9 $6.19 20.3 $1.26 58 14939
771.0 5.1 $6.50 19.5 $1.27 55 15710
817.0 4.8 $5.93 20.9 $1.24 59 16527
16527
783.9 5.2 $6.36 19.3 $1.23 55 17311
794.7 5.0 $6.12 20.1 $1.23 57 18106
809.2 5.0 $5.92 20.1 $1.19 57 18915
846.6 4.9 $5.82 20.6 $1.20 58 19761
830.5 4.9 $6.04 20.5 $1.24 58 20592
805.5 5.1 $6.12 19.6 $1.20 56 21397
814.9 5.1 $5.96 19.8 $1.18 56 22212
805.7 5.0 $5.93 19.9 $1.18 57 23018
23018
819.3 5.2 $6.03 19.4 $1.17 55 23837
853.2 4.6 $5.64 21.6 $1.22 61 24690
848.3 4.7 $5.56 21.3 $1.19 61 25539
796.8 5.1 $5.92 19.7 $1.17 56 26336
821.6 4.8 $5.57 20.8 $1.16 59 27157
716.3 4.9 $5.62 20.4 $1.14 58 27873
769.3 5.3 $6.14 18.7 $1.15 53 28643
780.7 5.1 $5.83 19.7 $1.14 56 29423
780.9 5.3 $6.20 19.0 $1.18 54 30204
753.5 5.3 $6.39 18.8 $1.20 53 30958
882.5 4.6 $5.60 21.6 $1.21 61 31840
763.3 5.0 $6.18 20.0 $1.24 57 32604
871.2 4.7 $5.81 21.5 $1.25 61 33475
834.6 4.9 $5.98 20.4 $1.22 58 34309
873.7 4.6 $5.60 21.8 $1.22 62 35183
804.0 4.7 $5.75 21.2 $1.22 60 35987
841.9 4.6 $5.81 21.7 $1.26 62 36829
820.3 4.7 $5.85 21.4 $1.25 61 37649
835.2 4.7 $5.99 21.1 $1.26 60 38485
843.3 4.7 $6.20 21.3 $1.32 60 39328
855.8 4.8 $5.99 20.8 $1.25 59 40184
821.8 4.8 $5.78 21.0 $1.21 60 41005
798.9 4.7 $5.84 21.2 $1.23 60 41804
839.6 4.6 $6.15 21.7 $1.33 62 42644
851.5 4.6 $5.73 21.5 $1.24 61 43495
834.0 4.7 $5.90 21.3 $1.26 61 44329
782.9 4.7 $6.34 21.3 $1.35 60 45112
834.3 4.8 $5.91 20.9 $1.24 59 45947
835.8 4.5 $5.66 22.1 $1.25 63 46782
842.4 4.7 $5.84 21.2 $1.24 60 47625
879.8 4.5 $5.59 22.1 $1.24 63 48505
831.4 4.6 $5.75 21.8 $1.26 62 49336
848.7 4.6 $5.88 21.9 $1.29 62 50185
833.7 4.6 $6.17 21.8 $1.35 62 51018
840.3 4.6 $5.97 21.9 $1.31 62 51859

[neil]

I was listening to the radio the other day and Will Hagen said that when the fuel usage readout is 0.0 it really is zero. I always thought it would be pretty low - just enough to keep the engine alive while it was engine braking ie less than idle.

When at idle my 2.0TDI ranges between 0.5 to 0.7 L/100k

What do you guys think? Is the fuel usage really zero when engine braking - I always thought some of the "idle" fuel would still be required.

cheers Macca

Just thought I would bump this back to the top to see if someone can answer this.

[gldgti]

Just thought I would bump this back to the top to see if someone can answer this.

and you shall have your answer - albeit an engineering educated diesel head guess.

there is no need for a diesel engine to use any fuel during an engine braking scenario whatsoever. i used to have a manual switch for the fuel solenoid on my old mk1 gld which cut off fuel completely, and not surprisingly, the engine works just the same without any fuel in that situation as if it has idle fuel.

it is very likely that the ecu mappings on the new tdi's allow no fuel though during no load operation/above idle speed because this is a sensible way to reduce fuel consumption. there is no engineering reason why this could not be done.