2.0T FSI Engine??

[Housey]

last night i drove flat out and got 9mpg at around 90 average.

 

[mjt]

haha, brilliant!

 

[Matt82]

i did north denmark - brussels in a day and averaged 80mph and i got slightly better consumption than 9mpg

yup, i did cheshire to essex (all places in germany...), 220 miles on christmas eve last year and averaged a shade over 80mph

thats an average of 80mph, over 220 miles, including roundabouts, traffic lights, residential roads, the lot... i did some big big speeds to get that average, hence ill say that 90mph average in a car where vmax isnt much higher than 90mph, just didnt happen

on my run (in germany..) i think i got low 30s haha

 

[Dr Who]

In older cars, sure. I certainly didn't drive the 118d like I had just stolen it. I deliberately tried to be as efficient as possible. The 120d spent its entire 300 miles with me on the Motorway with the cruise set to 70mph as Muffin on here will testify. It still barely cracked 50mpg let alone the 67mpg its supposed to manage..

That is because you are driving it way over the spec for an extra urban fuel consumption figure. I am sure there are many drivers of the 118D who manage to achieve more than 67mpg. I am fairly confident your definition of efficient is a way off what an extra urban consumption test would use, you would be amazed how little throttle you would need to use.

70 is a very inefficent speed to sit at with cruise control, try it closer to 55 and I would bet you can exceed the 67mpg. I can exceed the 67 quoted for our A3 fairly regularly, and I cannot imagine for one minute the Audi is significantly better than the BMW.

Like high speed driving, economical driving is an art, who would believe a 308 HDI could achieve 90 mpg in a real world drive? What about a Seat Ibiza 97mpg?

The only difference is the driver and style, the cars are the same as those getting 40+ mpg everyday.

 

[Howard]

People should not be encouraged to sit on the motorway at 55 in order to achieve 90MPG imho.

 

[Dr Who]

But not 30-40k miles.

Agreed, unlikely, but in theory, no reason why not, with a learning ECU one may actually do better if it has been in the hands of the right driver and the rest of the vehicle has freed up nicely. Fairly confident even the sports models will have a low rolling resistance tyre somewhere in their catalogue for the test as well.

 

[Jonnycoupe]

None of the NEDC tests go above an average of 40mph and 70mph is only achieved for 4 seconds.

Whether you do 55 or 70mph, you are still way in excess of the test speeds hence the big deviation between manufacturers figures and real world. Constant 55mph still subjects the car to big aero drag.

The NEDC test isnt even a real world test, so the fact its on a dyno doesnt really make much difference compared to the same test on a flat section of road.

 

[Jonnycoupe]

People should not be encouraged to sit on the motorway at 55 in order to achieve 90MPG imho.

But its so addictive

 

[Janesy B]

twocracklines at it again.

 

[Dr Who]

People should not be encouraged to sit on the motorway at 55 in order to achieve 90MPG imho.

Better than sitting in lane 2-3 doing 75-80mph to save 5 minutes journey time, unless you have lost the ability to overtake on a motorway?

Articulated vehicles are restricted to 60mph, so no reason why they cant do a smidge over 55 in reality and they will cause less issues than people sitting in the middle lane at 70mph

 

[Dr Who]

But its so addictive

I agree with this,(even if it was sarcastic) once you have a decent MPG meter, trying to nudge up the numbers becomes a real challenge of skill, with todays overcrowded roads, it is one of the few driving challenges you can undertake on the roads.

 

[Dangerous Dave]

People should not be encouraged to sit on the motorway at 55 in order to achieve 90MPG imho.

Going by the slow lane on the M8 a lot of drivers sit around this speed these days.

 

[clv101]

People should not be encouraged to sit on the motorway at 55 in order to achieve 90MPG imho.

Why not? Sitting in the inside lane, at the same speed as the trucks is probably the safest way to use a motorway.

 

[Matt82]

safest... when lorries love to tailgate and have massive stopping distances compared to cars?

id rather not TBH

also, youd have to have the patience of a saint to drive at that speed. i wouldnt be able to

 

[Dr Who]

Why not? Sitting in the inside lane, at the same speed as the trucks is probably the safest way to use a motorway.

Not only is it safe, it is way more relaxing as well!

 

[Dr Who]

safest... when lorries love to tailgate

I see way more cars and vans tailgating in lanes 2-3 than lorries in lane 1, and at the speeds they use they are at least as dangerous, probably more so.

 

[iaind]

twocracklines at it again.

I was just thinking that - with every post I facepalm more and more. I've been looking for an excuse to sell up and move out of Devon, sharing a county with him might be just enough of a reason

 

[Matt82]

i take it you didnt read my bit about stopping distances. i dont think youll convince many people that mingling with lorries at 55mph on the motorway was smart, just to gain a few mpg points

 

[mjt]

But its so addictive

i find slipstreaming a lorry easier. probably cheating though, and you get überstonechipping

 

[The Mad Rapper]

I've had numerous new and nearly new 2 litre diesel BMW's and despite driving some of them very carefully on exclusive motorway trips only managed to acheive the URBAN quoted mpg figure on a Motorway trip! The extra urban figure was a pipe dream I was, in one car, a staggering 20mpg away from.

Do you really go to the effort of noting what MPG you get? I just fill my car up when it's empty, I don't really ever consider what MPG it gives me.