Topic: Real-world fuel consumption

[quadzilla]

I'm also guessing that many haven't spent much time driving quiet back roads of SW Ontario.  There are towns every 20 km, odd stop signs or even traffic lights at cross highways. 90% of the people that pass me I catch up in the next town or stop sign/light. You really don't save much if any time by driving fast.

[PJungnitsch]

Port Rowan to St Catherine's (140 km of back roads) and back. Had a tail wind going and head wind (although slightly less by time I returned) coming back.

4.8 L/100 going and 5.2 L/100 return. Cruise set at 90 kph, a lot of random OPP hiding in this area.

Honestly, would be curious to know what your driving could get a 1.4T Jetta down to. These 2019+ things are insanely efficient. My normal driving has newer ‘Rollas in the mid 7s combined and the Jetta in the high 5s. You’d be into the low-mid 4s easy.

My Civic Si's lifetime fuel economy on the dash states 6.1L/100kms, and that's at least 60% city driving.  I think that's pretty decent.  Can't see it being worth going down to a 1.4T Jetta to get half a liter less per 100kms.

That's all pretty amazing mileage when you think about it, especially considering regular non hybrid drivetrains

[Gurgie]

I'm also guessing that many haven't spent much time driving quiet back roads of SW Ontario.  There are towns every 20 km, odd stop signs or even traffic lights at cross highways. 90% of the people that pass me I catch up in the next town or stop sign/light. You really don't save much if any time by driving fast.

Grew up on a lot of those back roads... a lot of my misguided youth was spent in Sauble Beach, Grand Bend, Windsor, London, etc... dated a girl for a while in Chatham 

[JohnnyMac]

Port Rowan to St Catherine's (140 km of back roads) and back. Had a tail wind going and head wind (although slightly less by time I returned) coming back.

4.8 L/100 going and 5.2 L/100 return. Cruise set at 90 kph, a lot of random OPP hiding in this area.

Honestly, would be curious to know what your driving could get a 1.4T Jetta down to. These 2019+ things are insanely efficient. My normal driving has newer ‘Rollas in the mid 7s combined and the Jetta in the high 5s. You’d be into the low-mid 4s easy.

My Civic Si's lifetime fuel economy on the dash states 6.1L/100kms, and that's at least 60% city driving.  I think that's pretty decent.  Can't see it being worth going down to a 1.4T Jetta to get half a liter less per 100kms.

That's all pretty amazing mileage when you think about it, especially considering regular non hybrid drivetrains

Yeah and it's not some CVT or 8+speed transmission either.

[Blueprint]

Port Rowan to St Catherine's (140 km of back roads) and back. Had a tail wind going and head wind (although slightly less by time I returned) coming back.

4.8 L/100 going and 5.2 L/100 return. Cruise set at 90 kph, a lot of random OPP hiding in this area.

Honestly, would be curious to know what your driving could get a 1.4T Jetta down to. These 2019+ things are insanely efficient. My normal driving has newer ‘Rollas in the mid 7s combined and the Jetta in the high 5s. You’d be into the low-mid 4s easy.

My Civic Si's lifetime fuel economy on the dash states 6.1L/100kms, and that's at least 60% city driving.  I think that's pretty decent.  Can't see it being worth going down to a 1.4T Jetta to get half a liter less per 100kms.

That's all pretty amazing mileage when you think about it, especially considering regular non hybrid drivetrains

I was nearer 10 l/100 km with the Civic Touring, but that was 100% city and urban highways.

[quadzilla]

Yeah and it's not some CVT or 8+speed transmission either.

Not sure what that has to do with hwy mileage?

Aerodynamics, terrain, and final gear ratio would be the biggest factors IMO.

[quadzilla]

I'm also guessing that many haven't spent much time driving quiet back roads of SW Ontario.  There are towns every 20 km, odd stop signs or even traffic lights at cross highways. 90% of the people that pass me I catch up in the next town or stop sign/light. You really don't save much if any time by driving fast.

Grew up on a lot of those back roads... a lot of my misguided youth was spent in Sauble Beach, Grand Bend, Windsor, London, etc... dated a girl for a while in Chatham 

But things were different in those days. You could get pulled over for speeding and just get a stern lecture and warning then be on your way. No more free passes anymore. I use to do 100-130 kph driving up to Tobermory in my younger days, wouldn't even think of it now.

[JohnnyMac]

Port Rowan to St Catherine's (140 km of back roads) and back. Had a tail wind going and head wind (although slightly less by time I returned) coming back.

4.8 L/100 going and 5.2 L/100 return. Cruise set at 90 kph, a lot of random OPP hiding in this area.

Honestly, would be curious to know what your driving could get a 1.4T Jetta down to. These 2019+ things are insanely efficient. My normal driving has newer ‘Rollas in the mid 7s combined and the Jetta in the high 5s. You’d be into the low-mid 4s easy.

My Civic Si's lifetime fuel economy on the dash states 6.1L/100kms, and that's at least 60% city driving.  I think that's pretty decent.  Can't see it being worth going down to a 1.4T Jetta to get half a liter less per 100kms.

That's all pretty amazing mileage when you think about it, especially considering regular non hybrid drivetrains

I was nearer 10 l/100 km with the Civic Touring, but that was 100% city and urban highways.

And you rarely hit the manufacturers estimates for fuel economy.

[JohnnyMac]

Yeah and it's not some CVT or 8+speed transmission either.

Not sure what that has to do with hwy mileage?

Aerodynamics, terrain, and final gear ratio would be the biggest factors IMO.

CVT's and high amount of gears is almost 100% done in order to improve fuel economy.  The final gear ratio is not overly high in my Civic either, at around 110km/hr it's up around 2,700rpms or more, wher as a lot of CVT/8+speed cars the revs would be closer to 2,000rpms.

Our terrain in NB isn't exactly flat, not like the prairies or even PEI for that matter.

[quadzilla]

Yeah and it's not some CVT or 8+speed transmission either.

Not sure what that has to do with hwy mileage?

Aerodynamics, terrain, and final gear ratio would be the biggest factors IMO.

CVT's and high amount of gears is almost 100% done in order to improve fuel economy.  The final gear ratio is not overly high in my Civic either, at around 110km/hr it's up around 2,700rpms or more, wher as a lot of CVT/8+speed cars the revs would be closer to 2,000rpms.

Our terrain in NB isn't exactly flat, not like the prairies or even PEI for that matter.

You are missing my point. The number of gears mostly makes no difference while cruising on the hwy. You can get a 2 speed to have the same f/e on the highway as a 20 speed.

[tortoise]

And I've always thought that manual transmissions are more efficient on the highway than automatics.  I know this is the case with the manual in the TDI vs the DSG.

[quadzilla]

I remember reading similar on the GTI forum and if I remember correctly, they had different gear ratios.

[Blueprint]

Port Rowan to St Catherine's (140 km of back roads) and back. Had a tail wind going and head wind (although slightly less by time I returned) coming back.

4.8 L/100 going and 5.2 L/100 return. Cruise set at 90 kph, a lot of random OPP hiding in this area.

Honestly, would be curious to know what your driving could get a 1.4T Jetta down to. These 2019+ things are insanely efficient. My normal driving has newer ‘Rollas in the mid 7s combined and the Jetta in the high 5s. You’d be into the low-mid 4s easy.

My Civic Si's lifetime fuel economy on the dash states 6.1L/100kms, and that's at least 60% city driving.  I think that's pretty decent.  Can't see it being worth going down to a 1.4T Jetta to get half a liter less per 100kms.

That's all pretty amazing mileage when you think about it, especially considering regular non hybrid drivetrains

I was nearer 10 l/100 km with the Civic Touring, but that was 100% city and urban highways.

And you rarely hit the manufacturers estimates for fuel economy.

No because real world suburbia/city, but all of my reviews compare well to one another as use is quite similar. My most impressive score with a 100% gas car was the Forte5, in the 6's.

[Dante]

Man, you are brave to endure constant low speed for so long. I can't....
And it's not the slow speed necessarily, it's the monotony that kills me.
Believe it or not, it would take me a bit of thinking setting up the cruise control.
I tried it in the Outlander and GTI over the years out of curiosity and boredom, but never in the BMW in more than 2 years I had it. I think BMW made it difficult to use it on purpose.

I don't even know how to reply to this. This isn't brain surgery. 

Don't need to.
Point#1 is that I personally can't stand driving on cruise control hence I never use it to the point that I'd have to look at the buttons to set it up (not that it's difficult to figure out).
Point #2 is that in BMW, I can't even see the stalk as it's hidden behind the steering wheel rather than buttons on the steering wheel and probably it would take few trial and error attempts to do it by feel alone.

[Blueprint]

Man, you are brave to endure constant low speed for so long. I can't....
And it's not the slow speed necessarily, it's the monotony that kills me.
Believe it or not, it would take me a bit of thinking setting up the cruise control.
I tried it in the Outlander and GTI over the years out of curiosity and boredom, but never in the BMW in more than 2 years I had it. I think BMW made it difficult to use it on purpose.

I don't even know how to reply to this. This isn't brain surgery. 

Don't need to.
Point#1 is that I personally can't stand driving on cruise control hence I never use it to the point that I'd have to look at the buttons to set it up (not that it's difficult to figure out).
Point #2 is that in BMW, I can't even see the stalk as it's hidden behind the steering wheel rather than buttons on the steering wheel and probably it would take few trial and error attempts to do it by feel alone.

#2 - My A3 was the same. You have to study the hidden stalk while parked before using it the first time. You can't see it while driving.

As for #1, I use the cc on long highway jaunts, and even while commuting at times to hold a steady speed. Sometimes you pass and get passed by the same car 6 or 7 times on the highway because they're not holding a steady speed. CC is better for fuel economy. Twisty 2-laners, full manual control though.

[Gurgie]

I'm also guessing that many haven't spent much time driving quiet back roads of SW Ontario.  There are towns every 20 km, odd stop signs or even traffic lights at cross highways. 90% of the people that pass me I catch up in the next town or stop sign/light. You really don't save much if any time by driving fast.

Grew up on a lot of those back roads... a lot of my misguided youth was spent in Sauble Beach, Grand Bend, Windsor, London, etc... dated a girl for a while in Chatham 

But things were different in those days. You could get pulled over for speeding and just get a stern lecture and warning then be on your way. No more free passes anymore. I use to do 100-130 kph driving up to Tobermory in my younger days, wouldn't even think of it now.

Thankfully hwy 7 between Ottawa & Peterborough is hassle free still 

[Blueprint]

I'm also guessing that many haven't spent much time driving quiet back roads of SW Ontario.  There are towns every 20 km, odd stop signs or even traffic lights at cross highways. 90% of the people that pass me I catch up in the next town or stop sign/light. You really don't save much if any time by driving fast.

Grew up on a lot of those back roads... a lot of my misguided youth was spent in Sauble Beach, Grand Bend, Windsor, London, etc... dated a girl for a while in Chatham 

But things were different in those days. You could get pulled over for speeding and just get a stern lecture and warning then be on your way. No more free passes anymore. I use to do 100-130 kph driving up to Tobermory in my younger days, wouldn't even think of it now.

Thankfully hwy 7 between Ottawa & Peterborough is hassle free still 

[HeliDriver]

Have had the Crosstrek for a year now and the average over 54 tanks is 8.9 L/100km. Not that great, especially since 90% of our driving is highway at 100-110 km/h. Best ever tank was 7.3 last summer. Worst was an 11.2 just recently in the cold snap.

The roof bars and ski box have been on the car pretty much the whole time, though. Took them off for a month in the summer and the average did drop down to 8.0 for those seven tanks.

I'd like to take the bars/box off in May and not put them back on again until November, but my wife likes having them for stuff in the summer (hiking gear and whatnot when she's got a dog and three friends in the car.) The car is kind of small, so I agree it's often handy to have the box, even in summer. I suppose I could take it off and put it back on only when we need it, but I'm too lazy. 

[Blueprint]

Have had the Crosstrek for a year now and the average over 54 tanks is 8.9 L/100km. Not that great, especially since 90% of our driving is highway at 100-110 km/h. Best ever tank was 7.3 last summer. Worst was an 11.2 just recently in the cold snap.

The roof bars and ski box have been on the car pretty much the whole time, though. Took them off for a month in the summer and the average did drop down to 8.0 for those seven tanks.

I'd like to take the bars/box off in May and not put them back on again until November, but my wife likes having them for stuff in the summer (hiking gear and whatnot when she's got a dog and three friends in the car.) The car is kind of small, so I agree it's often handy to have the box, even in summer. I suppose I could take it off and put it back on only when we need it, but I'm too lazy. 

Mine is at 10.3 lifetime, nothing on the roof but almost exclusively short trips.

[HeliDriver]

Have had the Crosstrek for a year now and the average over 54 tanks is 8.9 L/100km. Not that great, especially since 90% of our driving is highway at 100-110 km/h. Best ever tank was 7.3 last summer. Worst was an 11.2 just recently in the cold snap.

The roof bars and ski box have been on the car pretty much the whole time, though. Took them off for a month in the summer and the average did drop down to 8.0 for those seven tanks.

I'd like to take the bars/box off in May and not put them back on again until November, but my wife likes having them for stuff in the summer (hiking gear and whatnot when she's got a dog and three friends in the car.) The car is kind of small, so I agree it's often handy to have the box, even in summer. I suppose I could take it off and put it back on only when we need it, but I'm too lazy. 

Mine is at 10.3 lifetime, nothing on the roof but almost exclusively short trips.

That doesn't sound too bad for city use.

Is that calculated, or off the car's computer? Mine are calculated, as the car's computer is consistently optimistic by about 5%, which seems to be common. Apparently the dealer can go into the settings and adjust it, but I don't think I care enough to bother.