Fuel economy - less than 50 mpg and more than 50 mpg

I think there should be separate categories TDI drivers.
Those who drive always on highway, always with no more than 65-70 miles/hour, and probaly one more optional - those over 40 . Those people can compete in the >50 mpg category.
For the rest of us , we should make another category where we could compare mileage. For those driving in mixed conditions, for those who do use all the power that this engine has, and for those who always look to get more power and still keep using it. I don't think that if one drives on average with 80 m/h one could get even closer to thos 50.
Any thoughts
Milen

I think you'd need many more categories than two to get meaningful comparisons. Plus, your own exact driving habits vary from tank to tank. Plus, your fuel may vary, even if you purchase from the same place every time.

Just my thoughts.

PS I'm well under 40 and I rarely drive over 65-70, except to pass on the highway.

Originally posted by MilenP:
Those who drive always on highway, always with no more than 65-70 miles/hour,

Click to expand...

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I have noticed that all-highway runs on rural freeways actually return worse fuel economy than my usual 70% highway, 30% city driving (49mpg vs. 50-52mpg). But rural freeways involve higher speeds -- must be the aerodynamic drag.

Milen,
I'm 46 and actually do both depending on my mood. Sometimes i'm all out black smoke bellowing out the back as i work all the horses under the hood 90mph runs on I-95 getting right around 40mpg, and other times (twice so far) I hyper-mile shifting at 2k and not going over 65mph which got me 48mpg. Either way i'm still in the under 50mpg group. But still keep hoping to find the answer how to get that 50+mpg!! Think the Jetta's and Golf's got the advantage here.

Meh, doesn't matter to me since I'm not in competition. If I drive it loaded and spirited, I'm in the low 40's, but on the highway around 60 - 65 mph, I'll do over 50. But that can get very boring. I like spirited and fun.

MilenP said:

I think there should be separate categories TDI drivers.
Those who drive always on highway, always with no more than 65-70 miles/hour, and probaly one more optional - those over 40

. Those people can compete in the >50 mpg category.
For the rest of us

, we should make another category where we could compare mileage. For those driving in mixed conditions, for those who do use all the power that this engine has, and for those who always look to get more power and still keep using it. I don't think that if one drives on average with 80 m/h one could get even closer to thos 50.
Any thoughts

Milen

Click to expand...

I am a tad confused about your post. One of the neat things about the TDI is the ability to pretty much "call" dial in, get, etc. what mpg you want to post, given your environment and how you choose to or have to drive.

The word "economy" and the phrase "use all the power that this engine has" just don't seem to go together.

Lightflyer1 said:

The word "economy" and the phrase "use all the power that this engine has" just don't seem to go together.

Click to expand...

That is the funny part, they actually do.

So for example on a 03 (Jetta) TDI, MAXIMUM torque (155 ft #'s) is given @ 1,900 rpm. If you do a long freeway trip @ this or close to this rpm, you will probably be surprised @ the mpg.

For me, I just question whether would be happy with the speed that converts to.

Most of us live in the real world though.

I would hate to climb the hill you would need to use maximum torque and maintain the speed limit at the same time. Probably pass all the gas cars though.

Lightflyer1 said:

Most of us live in the real world though.

I would hate to climb the hill you would need to use maximum torque and maintain the speed limit at the same time. Probably pass all the gas cars though.

Click to expand...

I am not sure if that is a put down or just an expression that YOU would not want to go the speeds @ 1,900 rpm.

Not a put down at all.

Change the gearing with taller tires and you will have little trouble crossing the 50 mpg mark . 205-215 75s should give enough gearing to cross that mark if you keep your foot out of it .

Lightflyer1 said:

Not a put down at all.

Click to expand...

Well then in light of the original post: Under 50 mpg, I am ok with 48-49 mpg, so I keep it under 95 mph. If I want 50 mpg and more I keep it under 85 mph. I am normally just fine with 48-52 mpg. Either extreme is either too much effort; too slow or too fast.

I'd be happy if I could get 40mpg. Not sure that the new 2.0's are capable of what the older ones were.

manual transmission

jku72 said:

I'd be happy if I could get 40mpg. Not sure that the new 2.0's are capable of what the older ones were.

Click to expand...

My 2010 JSW with a 6 speed manual routinely exceeds 50mpg on trips - over the course of a 600 mile tank, I'm down to 45 - 47 depending on seasonal variations.

I live at an elevation 300' above where I work. Traffic allowing, I get over 50mpg on the way to work, and 45 on the way home.

You should easily get to 40mpg with an auto tranny... just remember that every single time you touch the brake you're wasting the fuel that got you up to speed. Slow and steady wins the mpg race.

My commute is approx 90 miles round-trip, with half of it consisting of 6-7, 0-70mph stop and go's because of traffic lights on the "highway" it is also hilly the whole way with maybe 20 miles of city driving in the round-trip. I love to drive spirited so that doesn't help the mpg's, with all of this I'm averaging 41mpg on a 2011 Golf DSG. Oh, I also get up to 80mph on a few stretches too I notice on the short flat sections that my mpg's are showing above 50mpg's at 67-70mph mph so I'd love to be able to drive this thing on a Florida highway and see what kind of mpg's I get. No matter where I drive this car it gets 40+ mpg's, got to love that!! I've been able to get 45mpg on several long road trips where my speed was mostly below 60mph, just some country cruises, not flat terrain either so I was impressed with that. And yes, I calculate miles traveled by gallons replaced and my car computer gizmo is very accurate.