DasTeknoViking
Veteran Member
Cruise control is not good for mpgs. My Golf SportWagen is coming up on 100k so it's well broken in by now.
Sent from my SM-G950U1 using Tapatalk
Sent from my SM-G950U1 using Tapatalk
Yes, that's what I calculated.That's great! Is that a hand calculated value? What % highway driving?
Because short distances and without accurately measured amounts of fuel and being able to manipulate things in these scenarios, makes them really not worth anything. It also fails to represent what the average driver can expect to get when driving. There are many ways to inflate your mileage when doing short trips. Much, much harder to do in published tank after tank after tank averages. Who would you believe when the stories are told. The one tank wonder with 60 miles or the person who consistently tracks their fuel economy online with tank after tank after tank of averages?Some of you folks are interestingly touchy about mpg reports. It seems that now my engine is seated, I'm getting better fuel economy than ever with a 54 mpg average over the last year.
You say it as if there is no way to cheat fuelly and other online fuel economy trackers. So...maybe one-tank-wonder-60 is in reality getting 55, so what? What other i.c.e. car on the road in the USA gets above 40 mpg?Because short distances and without accurately measured amounts of fuel and being able to manipulate things in these scenarios, makes them really not worth anything. It also fails to represent what the average driver can expect to get when driving. There are many ways to inflate your mileage when doing short trips. Much, much harder to do in published tank after tank after tank averages. Who would you believe when the stories are told. The one tank wonder with 60 miles or the person who consistently tracks their fuel economy online with tank after tank after tank of averages?
Not sure who you are talking to but I don't consider 3 trips of 300-500 miles each, averaged out, a one time short trip. You're one time trip of some short distance doesn't mean anything to anybody but you.
Have you got a link to instructions, or a guide?There is a way. I adjusted mine to +7% and now it's pretty accurate.
I don't think it had that much range though. Maybe +/-10%.
Thanks,I took 10 tanks and calculated an average of how far off it was. For me on the stock turbo, it was optimistic by 9% (adjustment was put at 109%). It can adjust +/- 15% so you can set it at 85% or 115%. In VCDS, go to Instruments and then Adaptation. I believe it's something like "fuel consumption"
Correct the impulse distance (odo/speedo) error before correcting MPG error.Based on this, I think I will have to wait at least a few tanks to see how close the average mpg (MFD) is to my calculated values. Then I can look into the % correction in VCDS.
Oh, That is a great idea. But it is by tire size rather than diameter, isn't it? Well, I can at least get it close to accurate in measuring distance (and therefore, speed).Correct the impulse distance (odo/speedo) error before correcting MPG error.
I took 10 tanks and calculated an average of how far off it was. For me on the stock turbo, it was optimistic by 9% (adjustment was put at 109%). It can adjust +/- 15% so you can set it at 85% or 115%. In VCDS, go to Instruments and then Adaptation. I believe it's something like "fuel consumption"