2009 Jetta TDI Fuel Economy

RangerRick · May 20th, 2008, 10:54

I just saw the fuel economy results for the 2009 VW Jetta TDI from the
EPA. They are pretty disappointing. The manual 6 speed is rated 30/41
(34 mpg combined) and the duel-clutch (DSG) auto is 29/40 (33 mpg combined). These are the new "realistic" EPA mileage ratings instituted
in 2008, so don't compare them with 2007 or earlier model year ratings.

This is pretty disappointing, apparently to meet emissions requirements
they had to tune it such that this was the best they could do. This
vehicle will not be the game changer in North America that some had
led us to believe. It probably will never deliver 50 mpg on the highway under any conditions. Sorry to deliver the disappointing news.

Lightflyer1 · May 20th, 2008, 11:07

This is already posted in the new forum. The car will probably do better than this anyway. Under the new mine is rated at less than this and I easily get better than 40/50 city/highway. I would bet it gets 45/55 city/highway in the real world.

DrewD · May 20th, 2008, 11:56

My last TDI was rated at 42mpg on highway and could easily get 46mpg at highway speeds without even trying.

dr61 · May 20th, 2008, 13:33

2006 Jetta TDI manual: 30 city/37 highway
2009 Jetta TDI manual: 30 city/41 highway

Plus increased BHP and torque. Sounds like progress to me.

But why do the TDI's not do as well in these tests as owners do in normal driving? Does it have something to do with warmup time compared to a gasoline engine?

tditom · May 20th, 2008, 13:42

Quote:

Originally Posted by dr61

...But why do the TDI's not do as well in these tests as owners do in normal driving? Does it have something to do with warmup time compared to a gasoline engine?

the same will apply to all cars- gassers too. the new EPA rating system is purposefully pessimistic, in part because of the uproar from the hybrid owners who weren't getting the estimated numbers in the real world.

what it means is that most people will be able to beat the new EPA numbers if they really try

mrGutWrench · May 20th, 2008, 13:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by tditom

the same will apply to all cars- gassers too. the new EPA rating system is purposefully pessimistic, in part because of the uproar from the hybrid owners who weren't getting the estimated numbers in the real world.

__. We went through the same thing in the early 80's (yeah, I know, before a lot of you were born but I was working with these issues then). There were a lot of new cars (things like front-wheel-drive GM, Ford, and Crysler cars, plus developed technology from Europe and Japan like electronic fuel injection) that were getting a lot better fuel economy on-road than cars from 6-8 years before but were really kickin' butt on EPA numbers. So people complained to their Congressmen who put the heat on EPA to "do something". So, rather than telling the truth, EPA discounted the lab number by 10% on the city and 22% highway.

Quote:

what it means is that most people will be able to beat the new EPA numbers if they really try

__. I'd rephrase that "the few Americans who have the technical sophistication and care enough to accurately figure out their actual fuel economy will be able to beat the new EPA numbers pretty easily".

__. Once again, rather than telling the truth, EPA just lowered the bar to placate the stupid.

(PS My next to last VW was rated 48 MPG Highway - I often got 60 - 62 MPG tanks/950 to 1000 miles per tank. My "last VW" (and you can believe that it will be my last VW) is a little heavier and doesn't do as well but we're getting better.

velociT · May 20th, 2008, 15:52

The 06 was obviously underrated. If it follows the trend, it should get at least the same or better mileage as 05.5 and 06's.

Nocky · May 20th, 2008, 19:59

The average Joe will not know that most VW diesels get more than the sticker shows.

They will see the average of only 33mpg while the Prius average is 46mpg and diesel is 50c to $1 more. That is what will hurt VW sales.

tditom · May 21st, 2008, 06:20

joe will also notice that the other cars he is considering will be much lower than the tdi.

Spdmini · May 21st, 2008, 08:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nocky

The average Joe will not know that most VW diesels get more than the sticker shows.

They will see the average of only 33mpg while the Prius average is 46mpg and diesel is 50c to $1 more. That is what will hurt VW sales.

This is true, people don't get invovled enough in the purchase of a car, they gather some info, but rarely any of about mileage or range.
The other part of it is the price per gallon v. the miles per tank way of thinking. So many people I talk with say "OMG, I bet you are getting killed by diesel prices!" I say no, I fill up, travel 600 miles then repeat. Then I ask them how far they travel per tank, they have no idea.
I hope that the EPA has grossly understated the mileage, so when those and me that do get the '09 will all be laughing for even longer between fill-ups.

tditom · May 21st, 2008, 08:13

correct! we should concentrate on miles-per-$

jfer1270 · May 21st, 2008, 13:24

Do you think this will have any impact on pricing? On the tax credit (which they should've qualified for but....)

njkayaker · May 21st, 2008, 14:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by tditom

the new EPA rating system is purposefully pessimistic

The EPA highway test includes much more stop-and-go driving than people imagine.

The test (old and new) are pessimistic and they should be (the pessimism is intentional). The purpose of the numbers is to be able to compare differences between cars using the same standard.

Quote:

Originally Posted by dr61

But why do the TDI's not do as well in these tests as owners do in normal driving?

The reasons probably include (not limited to):

1) TDI drivers tend to be much more concerned about MPG and drive differently than normal drivers.
2) The EPA highway test is not "highway" driving the way people understand it.

Note that the Prius too can be driven to maximize mpg and, thus, get better than the EPA numbers.

Quote:

Originally Posted by mrGutWrench

So people complained to their Congressmen who put the heat on EPA to "do something". So, rather than telling the truth, EPA discounted the lab number by 10% on the city and 22% highway.

It sure would be nice to see a reference for this. The EPA recently changed the test (making the numbers "worse" and also applied an adjustment to the old data. Thus, results for older and newer cars are comparable.

AmericanMuscleDubbn' · May 21st, 2008, 15:18

Quote:

Originally Posted by drwho

This does not look good. Those numbers are nothing to brag on. Probably only a 4 mpg deviation at the most.

Is VW looking to sell these cars by word of mouth?

njkayaker · May 21st, 2008, 16:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by AmericanMuscleDubbn'

Is VW looking to sell these cars by word of mouth?

It worked for the prior TDIs. I suppose it depends on how many they plan/expect to sell.

Quote:

Originally Posted by dr61

2006 Jetta TDI manual: 30 city/37 highway
2009 Jetta TDI manual: 30 city/41 highway

Note that the old EPA numbers for the 2006 where 36 city/41 highway. I guess the old numbers for the 2009 might have been 36 city/45 highway.

It is a bit disappointing. All the prior "guesses" seemed to indicate that the expected EPA numbers would be "fantastic" (>50 mpg highway). We have had similar guesses made for the Accord diesel.

A 4 mpg increase (10%) for an engine with 40 more hp is kind of realistic.

I wonder what the mpg numbers would have been be for a 100hp engine (of the new type)? It's not like the Jetta needs 140hp. I'd much rather have higher mpg than hp.

Is there a European equivalent to the EPA numbers? If so, I wonder what those are for the PD and CR Jetta.

Quote:

Originally Posted by drwho

If they EPA has tampered with these numbers they should be discredited. We all know how much those clowns hate diesels.

People sure do like conspiracies! I haven't seen any creditable indication that the EPAs have "tampered" with any numbers.