best performance diesel >6k?

I have gotten this out of my Octavia vRS which is a 2.0t petrol. This was doing 70mph with cruise control on from Swansea to Gatwick Airport, hitting some quite heavy traffic at one point along the way (rush hour). It isn't to outrageous to think since he has a slightly more economical/less powerful engine, being lucky with traffic and driving a little bit slower (65mph) he could get 50mpg.

2013-12-17%2009.32.38-2.jpg
 
But so what if he *can* get 50MPG, as opposed to 35MPG?

As has already been pointed out by Fox, this saving over 1k miles means saving £20 a month! Factor in that diesel is more expensive than petrol, and it'll need an oil and filter change every 6 months instead of 12, and bang goes half your savings already, especially if it has to go into a garage for a service.

Get a fun, reliable petrol engined car for £3k, and save the rest for repairs, tyres, exhaust, brake pads, and all the other little surprises that any car will throw at you.
 
[TW]Fox;26144172 said:
So it won't do 50mpg at all.
Click to expand...

I never said it would. ;)

"Low pressure turbo tuned for almost 50mpg"

Skoda's claim is 48 mpg that's almost in my book.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
mccarf said:
I have gotten this out of my Octavia vRS which is a 2.0t petrol. This was doing 70mph with cruise control on from Swansea to Gatwick Airport, hitting some quite heavy traffic at one point along the way (rush hour). It isn't to outrageous to think since he has a slightly more economical/less powerful engine, being lucky with traffic and driving a little bit slower (65mph) he could get 50mpg.

2013-12-17%2009.32.38-2.jpg
Click to expand...

Thanks.

I have the same engine, but smaller version, the 1.8 TSi we are talking about.

I have got 44 MPG out of mine on a run, which isn't Skodas 48 MPG figure admittedly, but as Fox points out the savings at the pump aren't that massive on 12k a year anyhow.
 
SkodaMart said:
I never said it would. ;)

"Low pressure turbo tuned for almost 50mpg"

Skoda's claim is 48 mpg that's almost in my book.
Click to expand...

It won't hit 48mpg though, it's all smoke and mirrors with newer cars. According to BMW a 3 litre petrol 5 series will also do almost 50mpg which of course it won't.
 
[TW]Fox;26144400 said:
It won't hit 48mpg though, it's all smoke and mirrors with newer cars. According to BMW a 3 litre petrol 5 series will also do almost 50mpg which of course it won't.
Click to expand...

True.

I was fooled by the claims of my MK1 vRS.

That had a max figure of around 42 MPG, despite this I once achieved 47 MPG on a run.

I 'assumed' that this 48 MPG figure on the 1.8 TSi would be achievable with careful driving.

The reality is it isn't. The best I have managed is 44 mpg, which is still respectable.
 
I once had a 1.9tdi Audi A3 that did almost 50mpg, but it was pretty boring to drive and the turbo exploded after around 90k miles. It was also overly expensive to service :/

If your doing lots of short journeys I would definitely get a petrol. Doing constant short trips can ruin diesel engines.
 
This has been an interesting but confusing read as I have been considering these 2l petrol or diesel Passat sized cars for my 20k pa motorway and A road commute and business use with a similar budget but with more expendable income pcm. However in order to beat the train (financially) I need to do 32mpg in real life so I'm not after 45mpg+.

So I should be avoiding the 1.8t but the newer FSI or TFSI units are good? Would the newer unit be the 2006 and later Passat?
 
Pfft!, that's nothing! was doing this coming back from London in my Mk4 GTTDi 130 but admit, wasn't breaking the motorway speed limit of 70mph! LOL :p

SP_A0035.jpg
 
almoststew1990 said:
This has been an interesting but confusing read as I have been considering these 2l petrol or diesel Passat sized cars for my 20k pa motorway and A road commute and business use with a similar budget but with more expendable income pcm. However in order to beat the train (financially) I need to do 32mpg in real life so I'm not after 45mpg+.

So I should be avoiding the 1.8t but the newer FSI or TFSI units are good? Would the newer unit be the 2006 and later Passat?
Click to expand...

The Passat has always felt a little underpowered with the old 1.8 20vt engine IMO.

My MK1 Octavia vRS felt lively and was also economical, with the same engine 180 bhp.

The new 1.8 TFSi (TSi) is no better than the old 20vt in my opinion, however the new engine has less power it is more torquey and this is noticeable.

I think the main reason for the new engine was reduced production costs, its a cast iron block and 16v head as opposed to all aluminium with 20 valve head.
 
almoststew1990 said:
This has been an interesting but confusing read as I have been considering these 2l petrol or diesel Passat sized cars for my 20k pa motorway and A road commute and business use with a similar budget but with more expendable income pcm. However in order to beat the train (financially) I need to do 32mpg in real life so I'm not after 45mpg+.

So I should be avoiding the 1.8t but the newer FSI or TFSI units are good? Would the newer unit be the 2006 and later Passat?
Click to expand...

I love my 1.9 TDI Passat as a pure mile muncher on the motorways. I bought it for that sole reason. But I got the S model, so very basic on spec, 5 speed box, but with 130 BHP. I just added a few extras, retrospectively, to make it better on long runs, like the armrest, cruise control, comfort indicators, Golf GTI steering wheel and nightbreaker bulbs. Then a remap, and you kicking out decent enough power for the commute. Certainly as much as you realistically need for motorway and fast a-roads.

But then again, I can get all my toys, more power and comfort from my 5 series if I want it. But I'm averaging around 48 mpg in the Passat to 38 mpg in the BMW. A saving of £670 over a 20k year, so not nothing. Then again, if your comparing it to a 1.8T averaging 33 or thereabouts (which I think is optimistic for a LOT of motorway / fast A road driving), there is a £977 saving per year (accounting for 6p difference between petrol and diesel, as it is here just now), which is the same as I paid for the Passat in the first place, lol.
 
Last edited:
SkodaMart said:
The new 1.8 TFSi (TSi) is no better than the old 20vt in my opinion, however the new engine has less power it is more torquey and this is noticeable.
Click to expand...

You say it is no better than you go on to say it has more torque? So surely it is better?

Not to mention it has 10hp more, and earlier in the power range.

Can I have some of what you are smoking?

The 2.0t FSI is the one to have - unfortunatly I found a 28k 1.8 example for £9999 as apposed to 60k older 2.0t's for the same price.

S-Tronic is more economical than manual in every day driving - people will stay in a lower gear than they need to.

I don't even bother with S or M mode any more and just leave it in D, it is pretty good at predicting what I need and it has kickdown for any overtakes.

I came from a tdi 140 DSG a3 to a 1.8t FSI DSGmk2 A3 and honestly I am getting about 5mpg less on journeys than the other car, and I save around 10p per litre doing so!

I am about to drill out my precat too which apparently does it the world of good - gains 5mpg, decreases turbo lag etc, and is not required for UK emissions.
 
SkodaMart said:
Read the thread.

Problem is, Skoda are a little 'optimistic' in their offical MPG claims.

I reality the 1.8 TSi is very similar to the 1.8 20 vt (however newer versions may be better).

3JPQEwn.jpg.png
Click to expand...
Autotrader lies. Manu's get those figures in lab spec conditions with no traffic on the road.

Ironically Autotrader also lies about distance to seller.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom