UK-POLOS.NET - THE VW Polo Forum

But you don't buy a blue GT to drive slowly. That's why we have the bluemotions

iichel wrote:But you don't buy a blue GT to drive slowly. That's why we have the bluemotions

Well... I did. I bought it to go too and from work while maintaining a good fuel economy but still have a fun car when I feel like putting the foot down.

It is a great compromise that really shows that economy and fun can go hand in hand.

If you just want to drive fast, why didn't you just buy a GTI instead???

Over the last 15,000 miles, my GTI has averaged 38.4, which includes commuting stuff as well as 'fun' driving.

If I put my mind to it, I can get 48mpg, but it is a bit boring!

Mart!n-GTI-DK wrote:

iichel wrote:But you don't buy a blue GT to drive slowly. That's why we have the bluemotions

Well... I did. I bought it to go too and from work while maintaining a good fuel economy but still have a fun car when I feel like putting the foot down.

It is a great compromise that really shows that economy and fun can go hand in hand.

If you just want to drive fast, why didn't you just buy a GTI instead???

For me, lower road tax, and the promise of having fun with cheaper bills. It dosnt matter how much you say "you should drive it gently" VW sell the car as a car that can be enjoyed with low bills.

rsmagee wrote:It dosnt matter how much you say "you should drive it gently" VW sell the car as a car that can be enjoyed with low bills.

I'm not saying you should... I'm just saying that's one of the reasone I bought mine.

I can only speak for my self.

But I can only agree with you on the FUN part.
It really is a great fun little car. I still love it. And I've had mine 19 month now.

Hi guys

I'm a new member and have owned a BGT for 8 months now, whilst I agree that fuel economy varies from driver to driver and road
conditions I am very annoyed that VW quote theses figures. I owned a 205 bhp diesel Volvo that got much closer to the quoted figures from them despite driving it however I wanted. I know the manufacturer figures are always generous but I think VW need to re state a lower figure. There is no point in having a turbo car if you need to drive it like an old woman to get the fuel figures. I could drive any car really slow and get better fuel consumption. I think we have been miss sold these cars and maybe we should even get together and let VW know how unhappy we are.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

13bluegt wrote:Hi guys

I'm a new member and have owned a BGT for 8 months now, whilst I agree that fuel economy varies from driver to driver and road
conditions I am very annoyed that VW quote theses figures. I owned a 205 bhp diesel Volvo that got much closer to the quoted figures from them despite driving it however I wanted. I know the manufacturer figures are always generous but I think VW need to re state a lower figure. There is no point in having a turbo car if you need to drive it like an old woman to get the fuel figures. I could drive any car really slow and get better fuel consumption. I think we have been miss sold these cars and maybe we should even get together and let VW know how unhappy we are.

That Volkswagen have misled people as to fuel consumption is a pretty strong claim. All VW have done is test the car in a laboratory under the requirements set in EU law. The fact the results they achieved in a lab have little resemblance to what people get in real life says more about the inaccuracy of the testing process, rather than VW misleading people.

When you read the details of the testing cycle itself you can see why the figures have so little grounding in reality. Manufacturers know how to design cars to perform best in test conditions, and do so accordingly. It's why so many new cars have eco modes that turn themselves on every time you start the car.

13bluegt wrote:Hi guys

I'm a new member and have owned a BGT for 8 months now, whilst I agree that fuel economy varies from driver to driver and road
conditions I am very annoyed that VW quote theses figures. I owned a 205 bhp diesel Volvo that got much closer to the quoted figures from them despite driving it however I wanted. I know the manufacturer figures are always generous but I think VW need to re state a lower figure. There is no point in having a turbo car if you need to drive it like an old woman to get the fuel figures. I could drive any car really slow and get better fuel consumption. I think we have been miss sold these cars and maybe we should even get together and let VW know how unhappy we are.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

If you want to kick off over mpg should have got a Toyota Prius or a 1.0 Citroen c1. Regardless of it being a "blue gt" it's still a sports model that pushes 140bhp? I wouldn't buy any petrol car with a turbo that produces over 100bhp and expect super mpg. It's not why you buy these cars. If your going to drive slow to hit the figures then why bother spending the extra cash, just get the basic 1.2 model. Mpg figures are never realistic anyway

This is silly. I love the car, but stop defending salesmen who push the BlueGT becuase of its economy. It is sold as cheap to run fast car. In reality it is a cheap to run car or a fast car not both.
Just because you have accepted the compromise does not mean it is ok. I have accepted it with it but peveed I was mislead.

To me its a wonderful car, and it achives the best that current tech can provide. However it is being sold as something even better.

PS, got 58mpg with a DTUK box driving to London from Lancashire, this car seems to love hot air counter-intuitively!!

rsmagee wrote:This is silly. I love the car, but stop defending salesmen who push the BlueGT becuase of its economy. It is sold as cheap to run fast car. In reality it is a cheap to run car or a fast car not both.
Just because you have accepted the compromise does not mean it is ok. I have accepted it with it but peveed I was mislead.

To me its a wonderful car, and it achives the best that current tech can provide. However it is being sold as something even better.

PS, got 58mpg with a DTUK box driving to London from Lancashire, this car seems to love hot air counter-intuitively!!

You're totally correct. The car is either eco or fast, not both. Anyone that wants more economy needs to drive economically, it's not a miracle machine. Most cars don't meet the quoted figures (I'm looking at you in particular BMW) because of how the test is designed and most people don't drive economically. I get my economy from the fact I ease off to 65-70mph on the motorway and let all the idiots go so I'm less annoyed and less likely to get cut up. Costs me a couple of minutes in journey time and I leave the thrashing about for the country roads at the weekend

Shame you were mislead, my salesman sold it to me as alternative to the GTI as I do 63 miles a day round trip to work. I agree on the hot air too, mine was so much more fun last week.

Mayhem wrote:

13bluegt wrote:Hi guys

I'm a new member and have owned a BGT for 8 months now, whilst I agree that fuel economy varies from driver to driver and road
conditions I am very annoyed that VW quote theses figures. I owned a 205 bhp diesel Volvo that got much closer to the quoted figures from them despite driving it however I wanted. I know the manufacturer figures are always generous but I think VW need to re state a lower figure. There is no point in having a turbo car if you need to drive it like an old woman to get the fuel figures. I could drive any car really slow and get better fuel consumption. I think we have been miss sold these cars and maybe we should even get together and let VW know how unhappy we are.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

If you want to kick off over mpg should have got a Toyota Prius or a 1.0 Citroen c1. Regardless of it being a "blue gt" it's still a sports model that pushes 140bhp? I wouldn't buy any petrol car with a turbo that produces over 100bhp and expect super mpg. It's not why you buy these cars. If your going to drive slow to hit the figures then why bother spending the extra cash, just get the basic 1.2 model. Mpg figures are never realistic anyway

I have a right to "kick off" about fuel consumption. Yes it's a turbo petrol car and yes it produces 140 bhp and I don't drive it slow but it is sold as an economical car which it is not. Even driving it slow to try to achieve the figures quoted it's not possible. The whole fuel figure testing cycle needs changing and manufactures need to be more realistic with their figures.
It's just s**t from VW that's what it is, we don't drive in a wind tunnel or however they measure it. Let's have some realistic figures quoted so we can make informed decisions about what we buy.

rsmagee wrote:... this car seems to love hot air counter-intuitively!!

I think so too. Got mine BlueGT DSG in October and also feel the MPG I get is not quite what it should be, but now in the past couple of weeks, the weather has warmed up a bit and maybe the humidty is a little lower, the MPG has improved to the low 50's. I have a Scirocco 140 DSG Diesel and I can drive that and get very close to the combined cycle MPG figures by just being sensible, not quite so for the BlueGT.