GTD Fuel Tank Capacity?

[mike_f]

Did the garage have anything constructive to say?  Any assertion that it's okay surely must be bullsh!t when there are others who are consistently getting a lot better.  I run everything set to Sport mode, except ADC and A/C which are on Eco, if that's any help.

Not really, they just claimed they could not find any fault logged with the car. I didnt expect them to.

I have a manual as well and my testing route is 140 miles between Aberdeen and Glasgow, apart from a few miles at the start and a few miles going through Dundee in the middle it is consistently dual carriage way. I set the cruise to 70 or 75 and just leave it at that.

I do use the heated seats etc from time to time but I generally drive with just myself and one bag in the boot.

I really don't thrash it at all - quite the opposite, I have been trying everything I can to get 50+ mpg on that run.

[monkeyhanger]

There have been plenty of people getting 40mpg ave, 45mpg ave and 50+mpg ave. People's driving styles and commutes are different. I have found with mine that with journeys under 15 miles, the mpg suffers.

If I were to do a 15 mile commute, I would see 50mpg with my driving style, 12 mile commute (my actual) is about 46mpg with no regens and 41mpg when it is regenning (44mpg total combined). I would expect a 10 mile commute would see me dip to 40mpg average and more regens than I currently get.

One thing for sure with the GTD is that 55mpg + is extraordinary for the average jouney. The official figures are fantasy, inflated by 20% over the previous generation because the testing regime has changed, not because VAG engines have come on in leaps and bounds. Every other marque out there (Ford/Mazda/Vauxhall/BMW etc) has also seen 20% increases in their published economy over the last 12 months or so on new models - that is no coincidence or simultaneous engineering improvement.

[mike_f]

One thing for sure with the GTD is that 55mpg + is extraordinary for the average jouney. The official figures are fantasy, inflated by 20% over the previous generation because the testing regime has changed, not because VAG engines have come on in leaps and bounds.

Nowhere did I ever read that the testing regime had changed. Surely if they are advertising cars with these fuel economy claims as a "comparison" they surely also have a responsibility to clearly point out that the goal posts have changed... Else there is no comparison.

It would appear that most consumers trust these figures and all apart from those that have done their own research realise the significance...

Otherwise they are just meaningless numbers...

Im going to be taking it up with VW.

[monkeyhanger]

The inclusion of stop-start plays a massive part getting better results in the current EU tests with 24% of the cycle at a standstill. A previous gen car with no stop-start that spends 24% of an 11 minute testing cycle idling is going to spend a lot more fuel in the test cycle than one with stop-start and switches off at standstill. In the real world, who spends 24% of their commute at a standstill? If you have very little stop time on your journey then you will not realise the "benefit" of stop-start tech and difference between MK6 GTD and MK7 GTD economy will be marginal.

[noobmonkey]

Probably mentioned a few times in here, but got the 40miles left warning this morning, and filled up to the brim. Managed to fit 40.5 Litres in, so it must have quite a bit left in it to run when it gets to 0!!

[mike_f]

If you have very little stop time on your journey then you will not realise the "benefit" of stop-start tech and difference between MK6 GTD and MK7 GTD economy will be marginal.

I have virtually no start stop time on an 140mile journey I do between Aberdeen and Glasgow every few weeks. Cruising about 70-75 mph.

I still cant reach 50mpg whilst Mk6 owners are claiming an easy 55mpg+ for this type of journey.

You are correct, the start stop should show little difference in real driving figures, perhaps in the tests.

In real life the Mk7 seems a good 10% worse than the MK6 for 95% of drivers who dont drive on a rolling road. That is the bit I cant get my head round....

[monkeyhanger]

mike_f: A large part of that 10% could be down to Bridgestones (if you have them) with their very poor rolling resistance vs something like Pirelli P7s commonly fitted to the Scirocco. The Scirocco should be a little more aerodynamic than the Golf too.

I'm shocked though that you cannot crack 50mpg on a 140 mile trip cruising at 70-75mph. I can do 37 miles down to Hartlepool cruising at 80mph and see 51mpg. It's almost all dual carriageway with a couple of miles at 30-40mph at the end of the trip.

[dippy_x]

Another thing to remember is that the average mpg reading seems to be a lot more accurate on the mk7.  Weren't the old models about 10% out?

[Mark V GTD]

I just put 47 litres in after driving ten miles beyond zero!

[itavaltalainen]

I put 52.74 liters in mine yesterday, driven 10 miles after it went to 0 MTE.
Wanted to see how far I could go - 713mi in 19h10' @ 37mph avg. yielding a neat 64.9mpg according to car