What is the economy like of the cars with this engine? I know 68 is the quoted combined figure, anyone able to get anywhere near this?

What is the economy like of the cars with this engine? I know 68 is the quoted combined figure, anyone able to get anywhere near this?

should do this easy,ordering mine on sat,I am part-ex my 09 superb and i get on average 59 mph out of this so the way i drive 68mph should be a doddle

What is the economy like of the cars with this engine? I know 68 is the quoted combined figure, anyone able to get anywhere near this?

Hi

Wife's new car is a 1.6 CR Tdi elegance hatch and has covered 600 miles since she got it on the 1st. Sept. 'Best ' indicated average consumption has been 62 m.p.g. 'Average' consumption since new = 56 m.p.g.

Computer seems fairly accurate and would suggest a range of 550+ miles per tankful based on her current driving 'style'. Happy with new car!!

Alan

Hi

Wife's new car is a 1.6 CR Tdi elegance hatch and has covered 600 miles since she got it on the 1st. Sept. 'Best ' indicated average consumption has been 62 m.p.g. 'Average' consumption since new = 56 m.p.g.

Computer seems fairly accurate and would suggest a range of 550+ miles per tankful based on her current driving 'style'. Happy with new car!!

Alan

That's really useful information Alan. Keep it coming. My ex colleague (has 90bhp cr1.6 Fabia Estate) gets between 66-68mpg driving at 75ish when going to Leeds from Colchester. He's loaded quite heavily too. He has 6,000 miles on the clock. Driving with two people in it he reckons he can better than by quite a bit but I haven't seen that yet with my own eyes.

Just been up to Lake district from Leeds, round trip of 187 miles and trip computer says 54.7. Not very good compared to my old fabia 1.9 tdi, which i got 60+ mpg out of. Hopefully mpg will improve as engine frees up (only done 600 miles).

My car is a Seat Ibiza 1.6TDi Cr Sport, the official combined figure is 65MPG, it is less than the Skoda, probably because the SEAT has wider tyres. I am struggling to get anywhere near 65MPG. I have been driving it very gently and full tank to full tank showed 54 mpg.

I have just returned from a trip to London, some 300 miles, on the way down I never exceeded 60mph and the car returned 65.5mpg, on the return run at 70MPH I got 61 MPG. I would have expected to be getting much more that I am with the way I'm driving the car so must admit to being a little disappointed. I feel a trip to the SEAT dealers coming on! The car now has done 2,500 miles

Edited 22 September, 201015 yr by TSIDSG?

Hi I had the same problem with the seat altea 1.9tdi sport not a patch on the skoda,it was a 57 plate from new just kept it for 12 months,would never buy another seat total rubbish,the build quality plastics are terrible as for the fuel consumption average 47mph and I have not got lead in my right foot.

My car is a Seat Ibiza 1.6TDi Cr Sport, the official combined figure is 65MPG, it is less than the Skoda, probably because the SEAT has wider tyres. I am struggling to get anywhere near 65MPG. I have been driving it very gently and full tank to full tank showed 54 mpg.

I have just returned from a trip to London, some 300 miles, on the way down I never exceeded 60mph and the car returned 65.5mpg, on the return run at 70MPH I got 61 MPG. I would have expected to be getting much more that I am with the way I'm driving the car so must admit to being a little disappointed. I feel a trip to the SEAT dealers coming on! The car now has done 2,500 miles

TS, You will find the mpg will increase substantially over time. 2,500 miles is not nearly enough for the motor to be anywhere near bedded in yet (takes about 10k), although the initial running in is completed, or should be. But it depends on how you treated it during the first 1,000 miles...you need to really make sure the instructions in the manual about running in are followed. I certainly wouldn't worry about the fuel consumption when running in because you may harm the engine by driving it gently at constant speeds on light throttle etc etc and the figures will be less than advertised. Many people believe (not suggesting you did this) that following the instructions in the book means going gently or slowly. It doesn't! You need to really give is some beans, some work to do, otherwise these modern diesels never properly run in and you don't get the mpg you should. You won't hurt it and your engine will live a very long life. It's largely the same for petrol engines too. But you prolly know all that. Just trying to make a point for anyone else who is about to buy one and is not sure about this sort of stuff.

Don't be disappointed, you car is normal I'm sure. The dealer won't find anything wrong with it.

Estate Man

The car is currently, I believe close to 10MPG below what it should be. I know consumption will get better as the engine loosens, but I have checked the figures for the 06 Fiesta 1.6TDCi I used to have, during the first month's use it was averaging 63 MPG which was about 2 below the combined figure. As the miles went on I was able to beat the combined figure, in fact I got 70, 71 &70 MPG from the last 3 tank fulls! That was before the kin' Artic pushed me off the motorway!!

The car previous to that was an 02 Picasso 2.0 HDI, first month on the was 47 MPG, 3 below the combined figure of 50.7MPG

The mileage I cover, 25-30K per year and my driving style shows I can match and often better the official combined figure so expect the SEAT to be getting around the official 65 MPG and on my recent trip to London & back, the car should have returned closer to 70MPG

TS, I understand and I sense your angst and concern! But you are very unlikely to achieve 70mpg in a cr1.6 with just 2,500 miles on the clock at the sort of speeds you are talking about. Much later you will, but I have to say the Seat's do not seem to be as economical in use as the Skoda's. It's the way Seat set them up I suspect.

I don't have any experience with the Seat models. There may be some issue with your car...but I suspect not. Customers often would come back to see us complaining about poor fuel consumption, but a car check would rarely ever turn up a problem. It was nearly always driving style or newness of the car causing the problem. Making comparisons between other vehicles of different makes and engine sizes, that use different technologies is not a very good measure of how you think your new vehicle should be performing, at least not at this moment in time as technology has moved on so much in the last 5 years.

You may be aware the CR1.6 engine is quite different to the ones you have previously had...many of which I have had experience of in the workshop. The VWcr1.6 engine in your Seat is in a class of it's own and considerably better built than your Peugeot or Ford engines (not that those are bad engines). For example we found the Peugeot engines would loosen up much earlier, as did the Ford. This is down to production technique and materials used. VW make there engines to mostly very very tight tolerances, and the very latest common rail system is used to meet Euro regs for the forseeable future. This is often refered to as CR3. I mention this last point because it is unlikely your previous Ford or Peugeot engines had anything other than common rail 1 or maybe 2 technology in them. This would mean their engines would not only be loosened up much earlier and therefore producing more power, but would not be hampered by the latest multipump injection methods needed to meet the new emission regs or indeed probably didn't have a DPF either. In addition, the 1.6cr engine has reduced piston speed over the previous diesel range, adding to the need for more miles to bed the engine in, and to get good fuel economy in the range intended. This has been achieved by reducing the stroke of the engine. Although it remains a 'long stroke' engine...just!

This means your new engine is struggling to overcome considerable friction during this first few thousand miles of it's life (more so than the other engines you mentioned) and do this whilst injecting fuel using a different pattern of injection technique to meet the new regs. It also has a DPF which further has the effect of disproportionally reducing consumption in the early days of friction fighting. Your engine simply cannot run at peak efficiency at the moment. This tends to make them a little less economic for the first few thousand miles of life, but then it get quite a bit better. I have friends with the 90bhp engines that could only manage 55-56mpg during the first 2k miles, but then consumption improved to 65mpg plus at 5,000 miles. My ex-colleague now gets 70mpg out of his Fabia Estate with the 90bhp 1.6cr engine in it. It will do more too he says but he only has 6500 miles on the clock as yet.

Just remember to make sure your tyre pressures are spot on (they change a lot at this time of year as temps go down, this will knock your mpg), reset you trip computer before starting your journey, you don't want a false calculation for any specific journey. Are you using your aircon all the time or at all? This too will affect your consumption. I would also recommend the pencil and paper method of checking your fuel consumption at some point to make sure your computer is calibrated correctly. Although you are a Seat owner, keep posting here to let us all know how you are getting on. If you obtained 65.5mpg at around 60mph, there is unlikely to be anything wrong. This figure will rise sharply as you cover more miles.

Sorry...wrote this when very tired, bit of an unintentional long post...goes on a bit!

Edited 25 September, 201015 yr by Estate Man

Superb post Estate Man. This is really good quality information.

Thanks so much for taking the time to write this.

I will second that an excellent post very informative,now can't wait to get the new fabia 1.6 cr tdi 105 bhp!

Superb post Estate Man. This is really good quality information.

Thanks so much for taking the time to write this.

+ 1

As someone that drives a (remapped) 1.6 TDCi fiesta with early cr technology and no dpf, with an eye on the vag 1.6cr unit for the future replacement vehicle I found it a very interesting post indeed. :yes:

Estate Man - many thanks for your posting.

I have a Roomster 105 cr tdi arriving shortly. So what is the best way to run the car in?

Hello Random, glad to hear you are getting a Roomy. I'm sure you will love it.

There's no secret to 'running in' one of the diesels. The first thing to say is...follow the instructions in the manual. However, some misinterpret these instructions to mean...drive it slowly, don't rev it, use only light throttle etc during the first 1000 miles. And many of us become obsessed with finding out how many miles to the gallon it is doing. But, it's best not to worry about the fuel consumption too much to start with, and don't drive in a way that will give best fuel economy, as that will involve constant speed cruising and light throttle...all things new engines don't like and that can be harmful to the piston rings and bores if you do too much of it to start with.

If you just drive it fairly normally, without being too heavy footed in the begining, use the gearbox plenty to vary the engine speed up and down the rev range, and try to avoid too many short trips where the engine doesn't warm up fully. You want the engine oil to reach full working temp as often as possible, it's only then the real 'running in' can take place with some metal to metal contact in the bores etc. With the fully synthetic oils used today, it's actually quite hard to get this metal to metal contact, and more so in a diesel as the fuel itself also baths the pistons and rings with it's self lubing effect, so make sure that you don't go too gently otherwise the engine will never run in properly and never make full power or reach maximum fuel efficiency. As you near the half way stage of the initial running in period you can give it extra work to do with much larger throttle openings and let the revs go up gradually more and more. Many people worry abut this initial running in, but don't worry too much about it...driving normally is the key without stressing the engine too much in the early miles. It's not an exact science for road use and however you end up treating it, the engine will survive ok, but to get the best out of it, follow those instructions and you won't go wrong.

Just one other point...keep a check on the oil level as they can use a bit during the first couple of thousand miles or so. Then it goes to zero oil use. All normal stuff.

Edited 25 September, 201015 yr by Estate Man

We had our first day out yesterday in the new Fabia SE TDi 105 travelling from Hythe upto Greenwich Park, travelling up the M20 and A20. The car has about 200 miles on it and travelling to/from Greenwich at a steady 70-75 mph which is about 2500 rpm the car returned upto 61 mpg. Considering its a new tight engine, I think this is very good!! I have noticed how fuel consumptions vary due to road surfaces. On concrete, the consumption reduces by about 1-2 mpg due to the rolling resistance.

We are finding the Fabia very quiet and refined after my Octavia, which was very good. There is no doubt that these new engines are a lot more sophsticated compared to the old PD`s!! The PD`s felt like a good solid diesel engine, but the new CR engine is in a different league altogether!

Incidentally, driving to work today, which is a 15 mile journey involving 9 miles of M20, the car returned 44mpg.

Regards

Grahame

Many thanks.

Looking forward to driving the Roomster. It has been built , just waiting for it to arrive at the dealers.

No car I have ever owned made the book figures. If you look at the legislation as it applies to the requirements on which mpg figures are based you will see how unlikely it is to ever get that sort of mpg.

I cant back any of this up with hard science....I just know how I drive and I know all the book figures for all the cars I have owned. I would say that the best you can hope is to make the combined mpg figure. For the CR engine thats still a really good mpg which I reckon you will reach after the engine has properly run in.

My car has the PD engine. Driving sensibly it makes the combined figure pretty much every time. Thats calculated using the trusty pencil and paper. The computer on mine I have worked out to be overeading the average by approx 4-5 mpg.

The new CR engine stats show it to be pretty much as efficient as a PD Greenline. I was amazed at the difference in mpg after mine was run in (6 mpg more at least). So I suspect you have very little to worry about as regards mpg......just wait for it to run in.

They use every trick in the book to show elevated mpg figures. The new CR Greenline claims an extra 4mpg for the combined, based purely on the stop start system for saving fuel. I am not saying that the CR or PD engine is inefficient, quite the contrary. Just dont be too upset if you dont make the published mpg figures.

I may yet swap mine for a CR engine !

I recently took a short drive in me new Fabia 1.6 tdi SE CR along from where i work to my parents house some 25 miles away, the combined there and back MPG was close to 98mpg this was after driving up a long hill (and then obviously coming back down it)

After first fuelling and driving sensibly on motorways i have managed to get just a little under 700 miles from the tank. I am no pensioner at the age of 37 and do stick to speed limits. Maybe reading the forums I will be getting the upper end of the average MPG when the engine beds in! that if if i do not reject the car due to Central ECU problems! but thats another story!

Its best to not be disapointed with the figures from day one. My octavia vRS CR would only get the high 30's to start off with peaking at 42mpg on a long trip. Now with just over 7k on the clock its getting slowly better. Last trip (60miles) it average (via trip computer) 49.8mpg. So I would expect this to improve more with the extra mileage.

My old fabia mk1 vRS on the other hand when it was doing its usual london to crewe run would easy get over 600 miles to the tank and the best was 720!

Also how are you driving it going slow it not the answer you need to look ahead, think about the traffic and road and adjust the go pedal to reflect that.

Every car is different and they all have their sweet spots.

I recently took a short drive in me new Fabia 1.6 tdi SE CR along from where i work to my parents house some 25 miles away, the combined there and back MPG was close to 98mpg this was after driving up a long hill (and then obviously coming back down it)

Is that the 105bhp or 90bhp or 75 bhp version you have?

My wife's Fabia 1.6 CR Tdi (105 b.h.p.) showing an average of 54.7 m.p.g. since 'birth - 550 miles plus per tankful !!

Has now covered 1150 miles and 'best' journey average has been 61 m.p.g.

Compares to my Mk. 1 vRS's 'lifetime' average of 44 m.p.g. approx. - best 57 m.p.g. (has covered 62000 miles).

Direct driving comparison shows the CR as 'refined' and quiet (compared to PD) but has to be worked hard to make progress - does anyone else feel there's a 2 stage accelerator pedal pressure thing going on? - and the vRS as 'brutal' in a torque delivery comparison (wife says it's easier to drive!!). Just shows how good the 1.9 PD engines were/are.

Alan

My wife's Fabia 1.6 CR Tdi (105 b.h.p.) showing an average of 54.7 m.p.g. since 'birth - 550 miles plus per tankful !!

Has now covered 1150 miles and 'best' journey average has been 61 m.p.g.

Compares to my Mk. 1 vRS's 'lifetime' average of 44 m.p.g. approx. - best 57 m.p.g. (has covered 62000 miles).

Direct driving comparison shows the CR as 'refined' and quiet (compared to PD) but has to be worked hard to make progress - does anyone else feel there's a 2 stage accelerator pedal pressure thing going on? - and the vRS as 'brutal' in a torque delivery comparison (wife says it's easier to drive!!). Just shows how good the 1.9 PD engines were/are.

Alan

Hi Alan,

This is good feedback. The mpg is very impressive - particularly considering how few miles you have covered.

When I test drove a 105 TDI CR Fab last month, I was struck by it's dual personality. It was either sluggish or brisk. No inbetween! I wonder whether my driving style had just failed to adapt to the characteristic of the engine.

I used to own a 19TDI 130 Ibiza, so I know what you mean when you talk of brutal torque. Do you find your new Fabia is able to make quick progress and how far away would you say it is from the VRS in terms of in-gear performance? Are you ever left wanting for more acceleration? (aren't we all!!!!)

Cheers

Matt

Hi Matt

"It was either sluggish or brisk."

Think you've hit the nail on the head with that sentence.

My experience of the new car is that you have to overcome a significant 'spring resistance' of the accelerator pedal (a light foot doesn't result in brisk progress...!!)

In saying that I am genuinely pleased with the new car - I've previously described it as 'more grown up' than my Mk.1 vRS and very civilised.

Brisk progress CAN be made but you really have to push it to achieve that - unlike the vRS where brisk progress seems effortless in comparison.

Not sure how close the 1.6 CR in 105 b.h.p. guise gets to the vRS's in gear acceleration times but I've not found it 'wanting' when overtaking.

Resigned to the fact that they are 2 different cars...!!! (and to waiting for a 2.0 CR Tdi vRS sometime in the far distant future....!!!)

Kind Regards

Alan

Brisk progress CAN be made but you really have to push it to achieve that - unlike the vRS where brisk progress seems effortless in comparison.

I wonder if that's because it's still very tight?

In any event, compared to my pimpin' Citroen C5, it will feel like a dragster!

I hope you continue to enjoy your car Alan. It would be interesting to see how you are finding it at 5k.

I really can't wait to get mine.

Best wishes

Matt