golf fuel economy

**HOS** · 15-10-2008,01:39 PM

Just re- calculated the mpg, combined (at very steady speeds) is 40mpg computer says 36.9.
I took it back to the dealer (second time) only to be told by someone from the garage side that this is about right for the 1.9 105bhp tdi, B*** ***t.
Have agreed to let them have the car so they can see what it is getting and then stick it back on their diagnostics machine, no dought to be told there is no problem.
If this happens the next step will be VW or Trading Standards. Any suggestions would be appreciated.
Ps. Have noticed that when the car is cold it is very very easy to stall shifting from first to second (stops with an almighty thud)

**glenk** · 15-10-2008,02:19 PM

I drive my mkv 1.9 pretty hard on the motorway every day and get 44mpg minimum.

As for the noise. the 1.9 is a noisy engine, a lot noisier than the astra diesel i replaced for the golf. Think you may just have to get used to that one.

**hongkongstuey** · 15-10-2008,09:10 PM

Originally Posted by Crasher

I don’t pay much attention to the instantaneous consumption; I tend to go by the average.

my 77.9 WAS average, i take no notice of the instant mpg, it changes to often to be of any use to anyone. guess my run was a good one thats all, see 55+ on my journey every morning, ironbridge, leave at 6.20, arrive at mc d's at 7am in stafford, thats about 28.5 miles, that aint hanging about, a road all the way.

**zollaf** · 16-10-2008,08:44 AM

just because theres no fault codes does not mean there isnt a problem. technicians are trained to plug the computer in and if it says no fault codes then the cars ok. something like a maf reading slightly out wont always give a code but can knock your fuel right down. you need someone who knows how to use a diagnostic computer to check all your sensor readings, i bet something isnt right.

**HOS** · 16-10-2008,10:51 AM

Thanks Hongkong, Zollaf, more proof that their is something wrong. Have looked all over the net and everyone is averaging 50+ combined. cheers

**hongkongstuey** · 16-10-2008,07:38 PM

when mine had faulty maf, faulty coolant sensor and faulty fuel temp sensor it struggled to get 50 mpg before it was sorted and chipped, more torque=less time acclerating/less gear changes which equals more mpg in my car, not everyone will get the figures i get from my car though

**HOS** · 23-10-2008,12:07 PM

Well, the cars been back to the garage for them to check mpg, guess what they managed 51.2mpg combined. Yeh what ever, I made two mistakes though, 1, I did not check the milage, 2, I did not sit in the car for the test drive. So do not know how he was driving it or even if he took it out at all (no thats being to distrustful isnt it). So now I will ckeck it again.
The guy in the garage said "oh by the way your trip computer is along way out (never been above 37 mpg), he recons about 10 mpg but never goes off them anyway. So that will be another thing to fix I recon. Obviously going to get no joy with garage, so a call to trading standards if my figures are right ?
Friend of mine has exactly the same motor (105-5speed) and his trip is 44mpg and thats ONLY town driving

**HOS** · 27-10-2008,09:35 AM

Had good run out yesterday, 414 miles 95% motorway, cruise set at 72mph, ticking over at about 2400 rpm, driver only. Mpg? 49.6. Please tell me I should be getting more than this.

**peteo** · 27-10-2008,12:06 PM

Definitely. I am getting just over 50 mpg with mixed driving including a lot of very short trips to the supermarket and shops.

I would expect between 55 and 60 for that sort of trip. Are you relying on the car's computer or have you done the brim to brim method?

**HOS** · 27-10-2008,01:31 PM

Originally Posted by peteo

Definitely. I am getting just over 50 mpg with mixed driving including a lot of very short trips to the supermarket and shops.

I would expect between 55 and 60 for that sort of trip. Are you relying on the car's computer or have you done the brim to brim method?

thats brim to brim