Well fill my cavity!! NO WAY! IMPOSSIBLE!!

[Saint Steve]

Said it before and I will say it again.... "cheaper to run than an ED30" you can quote me on that

But then again, if you drive a ED30 with a very light foot, like you have with your R32, wouldnt you achieve even better fuel consumption with the ED30 as well?

Yup, correct.  OK, here are the official figures for the Ed30 and the R32 (manual first, and DSG second), in mpg:

                                    Ed30 (man)                    R32 (man)
Urban:                          24.8                                18.8
Extra-urban:                 44.1                                33.6
Combined:                    34.0                                26.2

                                    Ed30 (DSG)                    R32 (DSG)
Urban:                          26.2                                21.4
Extra-urban:                 44.8                                36.2
Combined:                    35.3                                28.8

So, going by these figures - who can notice the important traits and differences between the two types of engine?

We should get a ED30 owner to test and see what they can achieve - in theory, it should be better then the R32 obviously - but wow, you get some good MPG in your car R32UK!

He must be seriously skint to drive like that.  I bet he's having Tesco Value beans on toast every night for his tea (oh, sorry, that is actually standard nosh for students!        )

lol, just goes to show, you didnt read what i said R32uk, an R32 from cold start , on an 8 miles journey will not show 36mpg on your cars Trip log, which was the whole point of my post. As usual, youve misread my wording. I can do 36mpg in an r32 but only will get the trip meter to show that after a 30 mile run!!! doh!!!.

you posted , i do 8 miles a day or what ever and return 36mpg. Your photo's mean nothing, and im sure after a long journey those photos are correct
.
T_T, you really are a work of art.

Go back and READ my 1st post 

[Saint Steve]

R32uk's car is the only R that returns more then the VW handbook specifys. From a cold start , and 8 mile journey, theres NO WAY your car will accurately return that figure, especially from cold as it runs a third richer and would use more then on a long run giving then a good mpg reading on the mfd.
From Brim to Brim  that  is the only way to correctly work out whether your R32 is giving you that figure.At 36mpg, thats 432 mile range!. IMPOSSIBLE!!

A 2.0lt TFSi cannot return that figure even driven with kid gloves, and your saying a V6 is more efficient!!

Done from a cold start (5.5 degrees not garaged) With traffic, and stopping briefly at 2 sets of lights. I think that answers your questions for you Phil

Sigh . . .

That type of comment by Phil Mcavity is just one of the reasons why I often can't be arsed to post on this forum! 

As usual, Phil repeatedly posts utter, UTTER bollox.  tries to disagree with him, he gets all arsey, or even deletes the thread.

Me personally, ive deleted 6 threads since being a moderator, Majority are done by admin 

[Saint Steve]

Said it before and I will say it again.... "cheaper to run than an ED30" you can quote me on that

Hmmmmmmm.  If an R32 and an Ed30 are both driven in identical manners, then I would still have to say that the Ed30 would still be more economical - not only on fuel, but also because the R32 is a higher insurance group, higher road tax, and costs more to service and maintain (Haldex oil and filter change, 6 spark plugs instead of 4, a more difficult timing belt with an extra idler roller, larger brake components [which will naturally cost more at the stealers  ]).

Ok ok... maybe went a little too far with that one!

who the hell wants to drive slowly anyway??? I only did it to prove a point.... I think that has clearly been done!! I wouldnt expect Phil to answer to any of this (he will probably just delete it anyway)

ROTFLMAO
[/quote]

LOL yes right T_T, thats what you'd like me to do  ,

[Saint Steve]

does no one watch top gear these days, jesus 

they did a run, ALL 3 cars blew away the book figures.

All 3 cars showed 0 miles left and yet went on to do over 100 miles more and STILL had fuel left proving the onboard computers where crap.

just all meet up and have a cock waving competition and be done cos lets face it - IS IT THAT FCUKING IMPORTANT 

 

PS.  nice comments TT 

 

[R32UK]

lol, just goes to show, you didnt read what i said R32uk, an R32 from cold start , on an 8 miles journey will not show 36mpg on your cars Trip log, which was the whole point of my post. As usual, youve misread my wording. I can do 36mpg in an r32 but only will get the trip meter to show that after a 30 mile run!!! doh!!!.

you posted , i do 8 miles a day or what ever and return 36mpg. Your photo's mean nothing, and im sure after a long journey those photos are correct
.
T_T, you really are a work of art.

Go back and READ my 1st post 

What planet are you from??? This was done at just after 6 this morning (my clock is 15mins fast) The car was from a cold start (not garaged like in my previous post).... and involved stops unlike my post on another thread.

Do you really think I would get out of bed earlier just to get my mpg up?? If you look at the time it took and the distance you can clearly see that its correct. Im with T_T on this one mate... you dont half talk some SH1T!

[Saint Steve]

Top effort for driving just to get your mfd to show 36.whatever mpg!. Wouldnt have wasted my fuel personally!!!, but etto  

[topher]

Now now. There are better ways to say "I disagree with you". Not picking on you R32UK this applies to all - a little consideration costs nothing

[Rhyso]

Said it before and I will say it again.... "cheaper to run than an ED30" you can quote me on that

But then again, if you drive a ED30 with a very light foot, like you have with your R32, wouldnt you achieve even better fuel consumption with the ED30 as well?

Yup, correct.  OK, here are the official figures for the Ed30 and the R32 (manual first, and DSG second), in mpg:

                                    Ed30 (man)                    R32 (man)
Urban:                          24.8                                18.8
Extra-urban:                 44.1                                33.6
Combined:                    34.0                                26.2

                                    Ed30 (DSG)                    R32 (DSG)
Urban:                          26.2                                21.4
Extra-urban:                 44.8                                36.2
Combined:                    35.3                                28.8

So, going by these figures - who can notice the important traits and differences between the two types of engine?

We should get a ED30 owner to test and see what they can achieve - in theory, it should be better then the R32 obviously - but wow, you get some good MPG in your car R32UK!

He must be seriously skint to drive like that.  I bet he's having Tesco Value beans on toast every night for his tea (oh, sorry, that is actually standard nosh for students!        )

lol, just goes to show, you didnt read what i said R32uk, an R32 from cold start , on an 8 miles journey will not show 36mpg on your cars Trip log, which was the whole point of my post. As usual, youve misread my wording. I can do 36mpg in an r32 but only will get the trip meter to show that after a 30 mile run!!! doh!!!.

you posted , i do 8 miles a day or what ever and return 36mpg. Your photo's mean nothing, and im sure after a long journey those photos are correct
.
T_T, you really are a work of art.

Go back and READ my 1st post 

how can his photos mean nothing as he' is clearly showing you that his trip computer has recorded 36mpg over an 8 mile journey?  

what you should have said was there's no way his LONG TERM average trip computer (the one that resets after 99 hours 59 minutes) can show that sort of figure

should be a bit more clearer on which trip log you are on about

my journey trip computer regularly shows 55+mpg but my LONG TERM trip computer shows approx 50mpg

[Saint Steve]

oh jesus, why go to such lenght mate!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!, what are you trying to proove???. your journey must be undisturbed, no traffic cue, no stop starts in 8 miles, good on you but no need to be anti .

[Saint Steve]

Said it before and I will say it again.... "cheaper to run than an ED30" you can quote me on that

But then again, if you drive a ED30 with a very light foot, like you have with your R32, wouldnt you achieve even better fuel consumption with the ED30 as well?

Yup, correct.  OK, here are the official figures for the Ed30 and the R32 (manual first, and DSG second), in mpg:

                                    Ed30 (man)                    R32 (man)
Urban:                          24.8                                18.8
Extra-urban:                 44.1                                33.6
Combined:                    34.0                                26.2

                                    Ed30 (DSG)                    R32 (DSG)
Urban:                          26.2                                21.4
Extra-urban:                 44.8                                36.2
Combined:                    35.3                                28.8

So, going by these figures - who can notice the important traits and differences between the two types of engine?

We should get a ED30 owner to test and see what they can achieve - in theory, it should be better then the R32 obviously - but wow, you get some good MPG in your car R32UK!

He must be seriously skint to drive like that.  I bet he's having Tesco Value beans on toast every night for his tea (oh, sorry, that is actually standard nosh for students!        )

lol, just goes to show, you didnt read what i said R32uk, an R32 from cold start , on an 8 miles journey will not show 36mpg on your cars Trip log, which was the whole point of my post. As usual, youve misread my wording. I can do 36mpg in an r32 but only will get the trip meter to show that after a 30 mile run!!! doh!!!.

you posted , i do 8 miles a day or what ever and return 36mpg. Your photo's mean nothing, and im sure after a long journey those photos are correct
.
T_T, you really are a work of art.

Go back and READ my 1st post 

how can his photos mean nothing as he' is clearly showing you that his trip computer has recorded 36mpg over an 8 mile journey?  

what you should have said was there's no way his LONG TERM average trip computer (the one that resets after 99 hours 59 minutes) can show that sort of figure

should be a bit more clearer on which trip log you are on about

my journey trip computer regularly shows 55+mpg but my LONG TERM trip computer shows approx 50mpg

EXACTLY !!!!!!!!!, should of worded better , but that was all my initial responce was about. cheers Rhyso