UK-POLOS.NET - THE VW Polo Forum

Got a 2018 polo GTI and currently only getting 220miles per tank. Before the winter months I was getting around 270.
I previously had a polo GT and hat got around 340per tank.
I use super unleaded petrol


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Polo gti 2018 with OPF, I have consumption between 7 and 8L per 100km (around 37MPG)

OPF?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I’m assumig that OPF is a typo and should be GPF for gasoline particulate filter.

andybarker27 wrote: ↑Sun Jan 06, 2019 3:26 pm Got a 2018 polo hit and currently only getting 220miles per tank.

What’s a Polo hit?

andybarker27 wrote: ↑Sun Jan 06, 2019 4:06 pm OPF?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Otto partikel filter or in uk it called GPF if Iam right

OPF is what the Germans (and presumably other European nations) call the GPF. HIT sounds like an autocorrect for GTI.

220 miles per tank? How far do you run the tank down? First warning (about 8 gallons consumed from full)? If so, it seems like you're doing 27/28mpg. I get 34mpg average - my 13 mile commute gives me about 34mpg on the way to work, 32mpg home (busier roads) and about 38mpg when the roads are quiet.

Mpg is all relative to your driving style, length of your commute and how congested the roads are.

Town to town driving with dual carriageways. Usually doing about 30 to 50miles per day. Don’t drive silly. Tried taking it steady or in eco mode and nothing seems to make it better. Even caining it still same ish. But winter months seems to be even worse. Most times I get in is to turn the stop start off cos it drives me insane. Way too sensitive. But even with it on fuel consumption is bad. Car only has 4995miles on tank. I always fill to top and drive it till it says about 15 to 20 miles left


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

my 115 (when ive got it ) does average 50MPG. the 95 I have on loan is averaging about the same.

I am currently getting about 61 mpg from my 95 SE, which is more efficient than the GTI. I often got 65 mpg in the summer. You could perhaps upload a dash cam video to You Tube, that way we could comment on driving style, though to be honest I think if I did that the comments would annoy me. To state the obvious, to get high mpg you need to have low revs and avoid braking if possible, so forward observation is key. Keeping a decent distance behind the vehicle in front helps. Also doing more than 50 mph increases fuel usage lots, at least in my car. Apologies if I’m stating the blindingly obvious. Of course you might not wish to drive in such a ‘careful’ manner, and just want to enjoy the car more.

I'm lucky to scrape 40mpg out of my 95.
That's urban driving, carefully.
I took it for a long run yesterday and it was showing 48mpg at 70mph.
So better MPG at 70mph than I'm getting around town.
I do live in quite a hilly area, I can only assume those who get more than this live somwhere very flat.
I'm not prepared to drive it any more gently than I do, I'm already fed up of people sailing past me as I 'gather speed' rather than accelerate.
I'm actually still convinced getting a tuning box will improve MPG.
The 95bhp just really, really struggles against the gearing.
Which means hills, especially, need larger throttle openings and less MPG.
I noticed when cruising on the hilly Aberdeen bypass yesterday that it lost speed very easily uphill.

45MPG from my GTI this morning - mix of speeds and light traffic. Normally get around 40 on the commute. Biggest factors I find are, driving style & temperature.

Hum, so there might be a place for the 1.5TSI engine in the Polo range after all?

My almost 8 years old S4 gets more than 300 miles to a tank, costs quite a bit more than Polo GTI+ to tax for a year though - gulp!

grudgey wrote: ↑Mon Jan 07, 2019 9:56 am My experience so far is...

GTi+ 2018.

47mpg on a motorway commute of 60 miles.

Around town..in eco mode averaging 26mg.....which i think is appalling.

Tank fill is c 300 miles range.

Your overall of getting 300 miles per tank (33/34mpg overall) and 47mpgon a decent stretch of motorway sounds like mine. I assume you religiously stick to 70 to get 47mpg? I get 43mpg when I maintain 80 on the motorway. I don't use Eco - for minimal gains (coasting) that it genuinely gives over other modes, the dulled throttle pedal does my head in - i'd rather use 1/3 throttle travel in Sport mode for the same effect as flooring it in Eco or 2/3 throttle in normal. Dulling the pedal response does not make it more economical, you just press harder for the same output.

monkeyhanger wrote: ↑Mon Jan 07, 2019 1:22 pm Your overall of getting 300 miles per tank (33/34mpg overall) and 47mpgon a decent stretch of motorway sounds like mine. I assume you religiously stick to 70 to get 47mpg? I get 43mpg when I maintain 80 on the motorway. I don't use Eco - for minimal gains (coasting) that it genuinely gives over other modes, the dulled throttle pedal does my head in - i'd rather use 1/3 throttle travel in Sport mode for the same effect as flooring it in Eco or 2/3 throttle in normal. Dulling the pedal response does not make it more economical, you just press harder for the same output.

Totally agree with your assessment of ECO mode.
It's the same in any car, internal combustion or electric.
Just dulls the throttle response to awful levels and you just end up using more throttle.
Some electric car drivers use it because they feel the standard throttle response is too twitchy, but they must drive with divers' boots on...

grudgey wrote: ↑Mon Jan 07, 2019 3:42 pm So forgive me for revisting this subject....of which i remain confused it.

Do you think I will get a smoother ride, better throttle response and Similar mpg if I use Normal Mode?

Yes.
Try it and measure the results.