For your car, the revised NRCAN Fuel consumption ratings are as follows:
Why does the Jetta TDI 2000 fuel consumption is less than the newer 2014 TDI model? That makes no sense to me, didnt they improved nothing in terms of fuel economy in 15 years??
They make 140hp instead of 90hp, that is what they improved. And it make 236 ft lbs of torque vs 155 ft lbs.
Yep, it's a bigger and more powerful engine in a bigger and heavier car. Not all "improvements" are made to mileage. Power takes fuel and more power takes more fuel. There is no magic and no conspiracy here, just simple physics. The good news is that the 2015 engines have more power (a little) and better mileage than the 2014 VWs because of changes in the emissions control system.
Yeah, and steadily more restrictive emissions controls.
The fact that the fuel efficiency has not changed significantly is a real testament to today's technology. The efficiency has not changed, but the cars have changed a lot. Today's VWs are bigger, heavier, cleaner, quieter, and much safer. I am amazed that they could do all of this without taking a hit on mileage. It is all about how you view the data. The mileage staying the same could be good or bad depending on point of view.
I have a 2004 Passat wagon (probably a heavier car) with a five speed manual transmission. On a mix 50/50 (hyw/city) driving, it is averaging 36 to 37 MPG (US). On the highway, going 70 MPH with four passengers and luggage, I get around 40 MPG (and it is very comfortable too). With a cargo of almost 40 cubic feet it is lights year ahead in terms of performance to efficiency ratio of many other similarly sized SUVs/vehicles in the US.
If you hover the cursor over the red + sign it says that 41 highway is the manufacturers estimate and YMMV..
Isn't it 41imperial/1.2 = 34.2 us mpg?
no. The 41 mpg claim was from the US site:
But the OP link was for Canada:
Here's a nifty conversion chart:On their website, Dodge says the Dodge Dart 1.4L turbo 2014 does 59MPG...
http://www.dodge.ca/en/2014/dart/DART_AERO
Do you think this can be for real or is this a scam?
Probably should have read the whole thread... I know the conversion, my bad
But you also referenced the Canadian estimate of 59mpg in the OP, no?
Edit: I just realized that the OP showed 59, not 49 mpg. This additional difference is likely due to Canada using a different fuel economy test method.
My TDI's consumption is "as low as" 0.9 L...when I am idling.
Most likely as EPA and NRCAN numbers for the same car do not match.
What does that little "2" at the end of "highway" in the above refer to.
A TDI's consumption is "as low as" 0.0L/100km... when going down a hill
The 1.4 Dart runs fine with regular and can still hit 39-40 mpg on the highway.