MPG impressions on 2015 Golf so far

[f0rum]

Overall computer reads 42 at 1300 miles, trip today 115 miles it read 56 although I know there was a drop in altitude over this drive. Hope it keeps going up during break in though.

 

[Ruso Turisto]

700 kms round trip, only averaged 7.3 liters (32.2MPG). Fully loaded with camp gear and roof box, two adults, two kids. Most of the time was going 130 km/h. Some idling at camp site to charge various electronics.

 

[JBizz]

First long run trip. Did 60-65mph and ac on number 2.

Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk

 

[D15SEL]

Hi......16,000 + or - miles on my TDI picked up Christmas week.
I am averaging 42 to 44 combined driving as I visit many Pediatric offices throughout New England.
I finally did a dedicated Hiway run of 127 miles, up in Maine. I got 54 MPG with AC on and 70 to 75 MPH. All of my numbers are of my own math. I find "my" on board computer to be 2 to 3 miles off on the average stat, too high (is there any way to adjust this?)
Great car and just love driving it......

 

[nkgagne]

700 kms round trip, only averaged 7.3 liters (32.2MPG). Fully loaded with camp gear and roof box, two adults, two kids. Most of the time was going 130 km/h. Some idling at camp site to charge various electronics.

130 km/h (!!!) and the roof box is your issue there. That causes huge aerodynamic drag exacerbated by the high cruising speed. Delete the roof box and set the cruise at 110 and I think you'll do a lot better next time.

 

[Ruso Turisto]

130 km/h (!!!) and the roof box is your issue there. That causes huge aerodynamic drag exacerbated by the high cruising speed. Delete the roof box and set the cruise at 110 and I think you'll do a lot better next time.

no kidding! I average calculated 6 to 6.5 liters in the city without the box and extra weight. But to make a point, my 06 tuned TDI averaged around 6.5 liters with the same box and extra weight and this is in 5th gear going around the same speed. I believe part of the problem is the extra long 6th and 5th gears on the GSW, it works perfectly fine on the highway and in the city, but put some extra weight and a box and they become useless, especially going up the hills and passing, so there were a lot of downshifting to 5th and 4th during my trip. To mitigate this problem, I will be installing Active CR 12 module this weekend, will report back on my MPG findings with it.

 

[ottobon100]

Amazing!

Purchased our new Golf TDI June 15th and two days later took a trip to Savannah, GA. Round trip was almost 1,000 miles and we averaged 54.1 MPG! Almost all of that was freeway driving and on cruise. Very impressed. We traded an '06 Mercedes ML350 which at its very best got 23 MPG highway and 17 MPG city. While the Golf is smaller we love it. Lots of pep and room with the back seats down.

 

[nectarguru]

First fill up after owning the car for just 5 days. 513 miles and 10.29 gallons came out to 49.85 mpg. The computer says my mpg since filling up is 48.4 with an overall of about 53. Not bad for a new car out of the box with only 538 miles on it, but I'm feeling the crunch of that 13.2 gallon tank. Good news is that mpg number will only go up!

 

[linux_author]

just finished the second leg of a trip from up north... headed south for 1,223 miles... 46.4mpg (but OK by me, especially considering 75mph+, with a three-hour 80mph stretch along I-75 from Gainesville south to Tampa - and i was *passed* by most traffic!!!)

willie
on the diesel-sipping Gulf of Mexico

 

[copperbeech]

For our '15 GSW with now about 1900 miles accumulated, most recently I filled the tank as much as possible and with mostly hwy km/mi it showed 520/323 at the "half" tank mark...the best for me so far.

The best rating I have been able to achieve is 4.6 l/100 km (51 mpg).

(I just can't envision getting the super mpgs I am seeing in this thread).

 

[TurnOne]

Sometime I just can't figure out how it gets so good of mileage. Filled up on the South side of Columbus OH (Groveport Speedway) and drove to Lebanon OH Speedway. Basically used a touch more than one gallon of diesel.


AC running the whole time. Even a few stop lights.

 

[andyrooski17]

Sometime I just can't figure out how it gets so good of mileage. Filled up on the South side of Columbus OH (Groveport Speedway) and drove to Lebanon OH Speedway. Basically used a touch more than one gallon of diesel.

AC running the whole time. Even a few stop lights.

Damn, that's good. Downhill, prevailing tailwind? Locals pushing you from 0 to 20 mph?

 

[spicy_red]

Yeah I'm not getting numbers like these but I giv'r real good.
http://www.fuelly.com/car/volkswagen/golf/2015/brow/355862

 

[nectarguru]

Any word on average mpg after engine break-in?

 

[pmoulton5018]

I didn't get a first full tank yet but on 10.8 gal I got 395 miles, 36mpg..I'm pretty happy going from a car I had to try really hard just to get 23 mpg

 

[Zut Alors!]

I use Fuelly (Obviously!), and over the course of 129 fill-ups in my old Prius, I tracked the accuracy of the computer's calculated mpg with the "actual" mpg where I divided the mileage by the number of gallons I put in the car (I always filled until I heard the click for consistency's sake). In the end the car was on average giving me 2.5% over the actual mpg from filling up in terms of data.

So anyone done a long-term accuracy check of the Golf's computer mpg versus actual mpg? I'm following the same procedure, and with only 4 fill-ups in and my GSW is giving me an mpg that's a good 9.5% over the actual mpg from filling up. It seems that the biggest difference are my 2 outliers thus far, and if you look at the 2 fill ups with similar mpg, it's about 8% over.

 

[Borsig]

My first fill up today - I am unimpressed so far. Then again, my route to work has been packed with people and stoplights this past tank.

Also had to spend some time in city areas and gave the wife a driving lesson which was very painful on the MPG.

This car needs to start producing closer to 40 mpg. I have stinking feeling however, that 36-37 is about all I will ever get, given my routes.

Math - 36.2 MPG
MFI Data - 39.6 (har)

This morning I filled up at a different station, that does not use "diesel guard" in their fuel, with 12 gallons, and added 3oz XPD. Im going to alter my route to use more highway in so far as much as possible. Might also check my tire pressures, but I dont want to over inflate for the sake of economy and sacrifice traction.

So far - unuimpressed vs my old sportwagen, which I admittedly have no fuelly or long term data for.

 

[andyrooski17]

My first fill up today - I am unimpressed so far. Then again, my route to work has been packed with people and stoplights this past tank.

Also had to spend some time in city areas and gave the wife a driving lesson which was very painful on the MPG.

This car needs to start producing closer to 40 mpg. I have stinking feeling however, that 36-37 is about all I will ever get, given my routes.

Math - 36.2 MPG
MFI Data - 39.6 (har)

This morning I filled up at a different station, that does not use "diesel guard" in their fuel, with 12 gallons, and added 3oz XPD. Im going to alter my route to use more highway in so far as much as possible. Might also check my tire pressures, but I dont want to over inflate for the sake of economy and sacrifice traction.

So far - unuimpressed vs my old sportwagen, which I admittedly have no fuelly or long term data for.

Any idea what your average speed was for your first tank? I've been keeping track of my last 8 tanks (since it got warm here, after 15 k miles). My average speed varies a lot depending on traffic and how much city driving I do, and it has a big effect (not surprisingly) on FE. You can also see the variation in hand calculation based on different auto-stop points at different stations/pumps:

So, if you were driving in a lot of traffic, and giving your wife a driving lesson, you could've been down there in the 27-28 mph average speed range, in which case it's really easy to envision you getting 36.2 MPG.

 

[andyrooski17]

I use Fuelly (Obviously!), and over the course of 129 fill-ups in my old Prius, I tracked the accuracy of the computer's calculated mpg with the "actual" mpg where I divided the mileage by the number of gallons I put in the car (I always filled until I heard the click for consistency's sake). In the end the car was on average giving me 2.5% over the actual mpg from filling up in terms of data.
So anyone done a long-term accuracy check of the Golf's computer mpg versus actual mpg? I'm following the same procedure, and with only 4 fill-ups in and my GSW is giving me an mpg that's a good 9.5% over the actual mpg from filling up. It seems that the biggest difference are my 2 outliers thus far, and if you look at the 2 fill ups with similar mpg, it's about 8% over.

If you check out the graph on my previous post, and trust me on the math, the hand calculation on my last 8 tanks has averaged 7.3% lower than the computer numbers.

 

[Borsig]

I think alot of peole here chirping numbers that start with a 5 are reciting mfi numbers, which are obviously incorrect.

I can get the avg speed soon and will post it. Starting today I am altering my route home to avoid traffic. 3 miles more, but speed is 10mph more and time is 8 mins shorter for that route. Fuel consumed seems to work out in slight advantage for the longer route. It's also far more pleasant to drive, and less chance of getting rear ended in stop and go, not to mention easier on the car.

Will cost me about 700-800 more miles on the clock per year. I may aslo adjust tire
.
Eta - average speed was 28mph for that tank

 

[andyrooski17]

I think alot of peole here chirping numbers that start with a 5 are reciting mfi numbers, which are obviously incorrect.

I can get the avg speed soon and will post it. Starting today I am altering my route home to avoid traffic. 3 miles more, but speed is 10mph more and time is 8 mins shorter for that route. Fuel consumed seems to work out in slight advantage for the longer route. It's also far more pleasant to drive, and less chance of getting rear ended in stop and go, not to mention easier on the car.

Will cost me about 700-800 more miles on the clock per year. I may aslo adjust tire pressure.

Well, Fuelly says otherwise. There are plenty of folks on there getting 50's for some tanks, and even a few over 50 on average (some are Club members). Unless they are deliberately cooking the books, which would be silly, they are reciting actual mpg figures.

I think you are underestimating how good these cars can be under ideal conditions. Just wait until your first long highway cruise, when the computer reads 56+ mpg, and it'll be easy to envision that people with certain commutes can average 50+ in real-life.

Just saw your edit - 28 mph makes sense. If you check back around page 26 of this thread, you'll see the folks with close to 50 mpg on Fuelly are averaging mid-40's for average speed. It's a big big difference.

 

[SpecialTest]

I think alot of peole here chirping numbers that start with a 5 are reciting mfi numbers, which are obviously incorrect.

I can get the avg speed soon and will post it. Starting today I am altering my route home to avoid traffic. 3 miles more, but speed is 10mph more and time is 8 mins shorter for that route. Fuel consumed seems to work out in slight advantage for the longer route. It's also far more pleasant to drive, and less chance of getting rear ended in stop and go, not to mention easier on the car.

Will cost me about 700-800 more miles on the clock per year. I may aslo adjust tire
.
Eta - average speed was 28mph for that tank

My lifetime average is 45 mpg via Fuelly. Last time I checked my extended average speed via the MFI, it was in the 40's. Currently I've been seeing an uptick in gas mileage, but I've only had 6 tanks of gas through the car.

 

[Zut Alors!]

If you check out the graph on my previous post, and trust me on the math, the hand calculation on my last 8 tanks has averaged 7.3% lower than the computer numbers.

Sounds about right compared to mine through 4 tanks. I'm going to have a lot of tanks like the last two fill-ups I've had, so 7%-8% sounds like what it'll be for me also as the miles and tanks of diesel will pile up. What I think is interesting is that the more highway miles I drive, the higher the difference the computer gives. I did 41 on the interstate actual, but the computer said that I was hitting almost 47.

As an aside here's the lifetime comparison of my Prius. Correlation stayed pretty consistent apart from here and there.

 

[Southalabama84]

I use Fuelly (Obviously!), and over the course of 129 fill-ups in my old Prius, I tracked the accuracy of the computer's calculated mpg with the "actual" mpg where I divided the mileage by the number of gallons I put in the car (I always filled until I heard the click for consistency's sake). In the end the car was on average giving me 2.5% over the actual mpg from filling up in terms of data.

So anyone done a long-term accuracy check of the Golf's computer mpg versus actual mpg? I'm following the same procedure, and with only 4 fill-ups in and my GSW is giving me an mpg that's a good 9.5% over the actual mpg from filling up. It seems that the biggest difference are my 2 outliers thus far, and if you look at the 2 fill ups with similar mpg, it's about 8% over.

I've logged the MFI mpg figure for each fillup on Fuelly. I have never had one close to the actual calculated mileage since I've owned the car. In fact, it appears to be getting worse the last few tanks.

I have also taken a picture of the "refuel" page of the MFI each fillup so I could go back and log my average mph for each fillup.

One day I may create a spreadsheet similar to yours to show the disparity but I have not created anything yet.

 

[Borsig]

One thing that IS fairly accurate on the MFI is the "refuel amount". Mine read 12 gallons today. Took 12.07 gallons to fill. Granted it's only one data point.
(this feature must be enabled by vag-com use)

12 gallons. So...... small......

 

[Zut Alors!]

I've logged the MFI mpg figure for each fillup on Fuelly. I have never had one close to the actual calculated mileage since I've owned the car. In fact, it appears to be getting worse the last few tanks.

I have also taken a picture of the "refuel" page of the MFI each fillup so I could go back and log my average mph for each fillup.

One day I may create a spreadsheet similar to yours to show the disparity but I have not created anything yet.

I wish Fuelly had entry points for MFI and average speed you could put in outside of notes to calculate, which makes it easier when you export it.

I just exported my fill-ups into Fuelly's csv and made a quick graph. I'm a science teacher so I use data like this for my students to tinker with as experimental data. Poor kids know more about my old Prius than they probably know about their own parents' cars.

 

[gmcjetpilot]

As promised, and by popular demand of noone in particular, I decided to revisit the Fuelly data on MT vs. DSG. Here's what i found, taking all US cars (not GSWs) that were explicitly listed as TDIs and explicitly stating one transmission or the other. There were 61 MTs and 43 DSGs, so that's getting to be a nice sample size. Here's what I found:

Manual: 44.3 MPG (3.1 stddev)
DSG: 41.3 MPG (2.9 stddev)
DSG 6.8% worse

So, back earlier in the thread (around page 14) we had an argument over what would constitute a "significant" or "slight" difference between the two transmission types. We settled on 5% difference, referenced to the MT.

So by that made-up critereon, there is more than a slight difference between the DSG and the MT. MTers rejoice! DSG owners, cone of shame.

I will tack on my typical caveat, that the DSG owners seem to be doing more city driving, which makes sense logically and would cause lower FE, but the fuelly data on this is pretty unreliable IMO.

Maybe I'll revisit after this summer, just as a final check, but it's becoming more tedious as more and more '15s get added to fuelly.

"Cone of shame"? Ha ha get over it... DSG JSW TDI is 42 mpg, not made up.... including a year of short city commuting. You can have your manual.... I enjoy drinking my coffee and driving..... blaaaa shame on you... ha ha.

 

[gmcjetpilot]

At 70, my SE DSG (17" wheels) seems to be right at 2000, maybe a little lower. It seems weird that the SEL with bigger wheels should be running higher RPMs...

However, the tach only has markings every 200 RPMs, so it's tough to quibble over differences less than that. I'm also not sure how much tachs vary from car to car in terms of their accuracy to the "true" value.

Anyhow, i'd say close enough to the calculation, whatever it tells us.

You are right, but the rim size is not the same as the outside tire diameter, which is about the same regardless of rim size.... The skinny side wall big rim look is popular.... That is why the outer tire size is about the same. They do vary a little, but usually it is only 1% or 2%.

RPM is likely coming from the engine is accurate. Is speed off? I suppose and that affects the MFD fuel economy. You can adjust that with a Ross Tech cable....

You probably know this, but gas millage with the smaller RIM diameters (15", 16") is better than larger rims (17", 18"). The mass/weight of the bigger rims is higher (metal weighs more than rubber and air). The other good things about smaller diameter rims, better (softer) ride and less likely to damage the rim by pot hole or curb. The big rim skinny side wall tire is better for handling turns....

 

[andyrooski17]

"Cone of shame"? Ha ha get over it... DSG JSW TDI is 42 mpg, not made up.... including a year of short city commuting. You can have your manual.... I enjoy drinking my coffee and driving..... blaaaa shame on you... ha ha.

My cone of shame to DSG owners was tounge-in-cheek...since I am one.

And almost exclusively for the purpose of drinking coffee

 

[Borsig]

I can almost bet that my 18" VW / Ronals weigh less than VW's 17" stockers that come on the SE, and the 18" OEM wheel on the SE.

You are right, but the rim size is not the same as the outside tire diameter, which is about the same regardless of rim size.... The skinny side wall big rim look is popular.... That is why the outer tire size is about the same. They do vary a little, but usually it is only 1% or 2%.

RPM is likely coming from the engine is accurate. Is speed off? I suppose and that affects the MFD fuel economy. You can adjust that with a Ross Tech cable....

You probably know this, but gas millage with the smaller RIM diameters (15", 16") is better than larger rims (17", 18"). The mass/weight of the bigger rims is higher (metal weighs more than rubber and air). The other good things about smaller diameter rims, better (softer) ride and less likely to damage the rim by pot hole or curb. The big rim skinny side wall tire is better for handling turns....