Hey guys, 

 

A bit surprised at the high fuel consumption of my 1 week old octy. On my daily commute of 10km, a mix of city driving and a little motorway, and making a conscious effort to drive smoothly (I usually have a heavy foot), I’m struggling to get below 8l/100km (31mpg across the pond). With the replacement 1.0 octy I had whilst waiting for my car to be delivered, I was getting 7.4l/100km with a heavy foot and expedient driving for the same journey (not a morning person :p)

 

I’m sort of putting it down to a new engine loosing itself up progressively, but wonder what others experiences were like from new?

 

Also on occasion there is a burnt rubber smell coming from the car when standing next to it. Dealer says “it’s absolutely normal and should disappear soon”. Might be new clutch plates...?

 

Apart from that it’s pretty smooth and 150hp is nice power (last car had 125hp)

 

Anyone else got some free factory upgrades (I got black pack, seems standard for anything +150hp when you order now until mk4 is out, supersport steering wheel, kessy )

 

Cheers

S.

My Ateca with the 1.5 is only now at 7500miles is consistently getting over 40mpg. Taking awhile for it to loosen up.

I get 35-40mpg on my commute to and from work if I leave home during rush hour.  If I leave early I get about 50mpg on the way in to work as it's mostly downhill, and 40ish on the way back if I leave late.  It's only 7 miles each way so there isn't really time for it to get warmed up.  On a decent motorway run it will do 50mpg easily. My Octy has 9k on the clock and I haven't really noticed an improvement in fuel consumption since it was new.

 

Burning rubber smell should not be DSG Clutch Plates, but then Car Dealers are more likely to lie than drug dealers or say things are normal.

Not normal with the salesperson's daily drive  car if they lend that demonstrator though.

Next time they might say, GPF and normal, if they knew what a GPF was.

Edited 22 October, 20196 yr by Roottootemoot

Fuel consumption in my 1.4 tsi dsg  estate was "poor" for the first few k miles. Now done 18k and get just under 40 urban and regularly nearly 50 at motorway speeds motorwa

On 22/10/2019 at 13:34, superchiwawa said:

Hey guys, 

 

A bit surprised at the high fuel consumption of my 1 week old octy. On my daily commute of 10km, a mix of city driving and a little motorway, and making a conscious effort to drive smoothly (I usually have a heavy foot), I’m struggling to get below 8l/100km (31mpg across the pond). With the replacement 1.0 octy I had whilst waiting for my car to be delivered, I was getting 7.4l/100km with a heavy foot and expedient driving for the same journey (not a morning person :p)

 

I’m sort of putting it down to a new engine loosing itself up progressively, but wonder what others experiences were like from new?

 

Also on occasion there is a burnt rubber smell coming from the car when standing next to it. Dealer says “it’s absolutely normal and should disappear soon”. Might be new clutch plates...?

 

Apart from that it’s pretty smooth and 150hp is nice power (last car had 125hp)

 

Anyone else got some free factory upgrades (I got black pack, seems standard for anything +150hp when you order now until mk4 is out, supersport steering wheel, kessy )

 

Cheers

S.

 

my 1.5 skoda octavia dsg does 6.2L/100KM. (mixed, on E10)

 

 

I am very disappointed with the fuel consumption of my Karoq 1.5 SEL. I have only just reached 5000 miles on the clock  so am hoping it will improve with more miles but at the moment I get less than 30 mpg locally and struggle to get more than 43 mpg on a long motorway run. I also just had my 1st service where the local Marshalls also insisted that I have an update because of the people who have had 'kangaroo petrol' problems in 1st gear. I told them I did not have that issue as I was convinced it was only evident on manual cars. They still performed the update, now the engine is as flat as a pancake so it will be going in again after Christmas break.

I also find that the car is noisier than before when on a run so who knows what they have done. I don't believe they really know what they are doing half the time and the service manager just has a blank look on his face when I speak to him. If things don't improve soon it will be goodbye to the Karoq. My previous Octavia 1.2 TSI was head and shoulders above this car - over 50 mpg and when like a train. I don't think this 1.5 is a very good engine as it's much noisier than the 1.2 ( rattles like a pig ) but the dealership tells me it is normal - Now there's a surprise!!!!!!!!!!

8 hours ago, Rockinghorse said:

I am very disappointed with the fuel consumption of my Karoq 1.5 SEL. I have only just reached 5000 miles on the clock  so am hoping it will improve with more miles but at the moment I get less than 30 mpg locally and struggle to get more than 43 mpg on a long motorway run. I also just had my 1st service where the local Marshalls also insisted that I have an update because of the people who have had 'kangaroo petrol' problems in 1st gear. I told them I did not have that issue as I was convinced it was only evident on manual cars. They still performed the update, now the engine is as flat as a pancake so it will be going in again after Christmas break.

I also find that the car is noisier than before when on a run so who knows what they have done. I don't believe they really know what they are doing half the time and the service manager just has a blank look on his face when I speak to him. If things don't improve soon it will be goodbye to the Karoq. My previous Octavia 1.2 TSI was head and shoulders above this car - over 50 mpg and when like a train. I don't think this 1.5 is a very good engine as it's much noisier than the 1.2 ( rattles like a pig ) but the dealership tells me it is normal - Now there's a surprise!!!!!!!!!!

A car as heavy as the Karoq with only a 1.5 engine pulling it along will never be good at economy. The engine has to work harder than lets say a 2.0 as it will not be able to produce as much low down power, even with the added turbocharger. Physics is physics.

People complained on the Kuga forum about the economy of the 1.5 aswell but it is a small engine. It would be perfectly fine in a small city car but it baffles me why manufacturers build these heavy small engined cars, feed a load of bs about how they are economical and lie about the mpg figures. When in reality they are not economical apart from the cheaper road tax, which isnt as cheap as it used to be anymore.

8 hours ago, Rockinghorse said:

I am very disappointed with the fuel consumption of my Karoq 1.5 SEL. I have only just reached 5000 miles on the clock  so am hoping it will improve with more miles but at the moment I get less than 30 mpg locally and struggle to get more than 43 mpg on a long motorway run. I also just had my 1st service where the local Marshalls also insisted that I have an update because of the people who have had 'kangaroo petrol' problems in 1st gear. I told them I did not have that issue as I was convinced it was only evident on manual cars. They still performed the update, now the engine is as flat as a pancake so it will be going in again after Christmas break.

I also find that the car is noisier than before when on a run so who knows what they have done. I don't believe they really know what they are doing half the time and the service manager just has a blank look on his face when I speak to him. If things don't improve soon it will be goodbye to the Karoq. My previous Octavia 1.2 TSI was head and shoulders above this car - over 50 mpg and when like a train. I don't think this 1.5 is a very good engine as it's much noisier than the 1.2 ( rattles like a pig ) but the dealership tells me it is normal - Now there's a surprise!!!!!!!!!!

 

 

Good luck with complaining to your dealer, mine weren't really interested after my car had the supposed software fix. My car had been more or less fine except for being a bit rough pulling away in first gear/ stalled a few times pulling away, car now seems somewhat flatter and fuel consumption did drop as well. Response from dealership was that it was all within normal parameters, end of story and software update cannot be reversed either. My engine doesn't rattle though, can't say that I'm ever too aware of the engine at all to be honest, although it does still come pretty close to stalling more often than I would like when pulling away and completely stalled on me just days after the update when I'd just left a carpark; one minute engine running, next I was coasting. Personally I'd rather have had a diesel engined car than this particular engine, maybe even the 1 litre petrol engine might have been more straightforward than the 1.5 litre version which is quite a complicated engine with the cylinder deactivation setup. I think the GPF filter and emissions regulations are likely to be factors in these issues.

6 hours ago, Ecomatt said:

A car as heavy as the Karoq with only a 1.5 engine pulling it along will never be good at economy. The engine has to work harder than lets say a 2.0 as it will not be able to produce as much low down power, even with the added turbocharger. Physics is physics.

People complained on the Kuga forum about the economy of the 1.5 aswell but it is a small engine. It would be perfectly fine in a small city car but it baffles me why manufacturers build these heavy small engined cars, feed a load of bs about how they are economical and lie about the mpg figures. When in reality they are not economical apart from the cheaper road tax, which isnt as cheap as it used to be anymore.

The Karoq is not particularly heavy being MQB based, especially the fwd 1.5tsi. Sure the 'SUV' styling is a little worse aerodynamically than say an Octavia estate but there are few complaints from the heavier and far bigger 1.4tsi Kodiak users.

Although the 1.5tsi engine is a relatively sophisticated mass produced budget engine it is obvious that VW have had a lot of problems getting it to meet WLTP consumption and emission standards while offering acceptable driving characteristics. 

If the engine met published specs then there should be no problem.

When I test drove a 1.5 I was really impressed with how quiet it was but the one I bought has never been as quiet. I complained once before but the engineer told me it was completely normal as it was the high pressure pump which is to blame. I have seen this explained on a number of videos for new cars and seems to be common. It is more of a loud ticking than a rattle and to be fair is more noticeable outside the car on tickover. My Octavia 1.2 was so quiet I used to think it had stalled.

They have obviously richened up the mixture to stop these cars stalling ( although mine never had that issue ) which is why they burn more fuel after the update. I will complain and get them to check it out but I do not have much confidence in the dealership. I bought my two year old Octavia from Murray Skoda in Plymouth and they were superb in their customer service and I wish I had gone to them for my new Karoq but they are a fair way away so I chose to go local - Big mistake. I had hoped I would keep this car for a few years but its not looking likely.  

The engines met what was required for the WLTP  & RDE2, and if they were retested.

They met minimum PS and Nm Torque, the ones with 'issues' that required updates and that VW group agreed were not safe to drive never met the 'safe to have on the road spec'.

 

The RDE2 figures will be interesting to compare with the RDE ones.

 

If Australian Owners of 1.5 TSI EVO Manual or DSG's have issues no doubt the Australian Authority will eventually tear VW Group a new one...

Edited 29 December, 20196 yr by Roottootemoot

This is very true - My neighbour had the same engine in his Audi A3 manual and had so many issues he took it back and insisted on a replacement. They gave him a same age A3 1.5 DSG which is a lot better but he still says that neither of them are as good as the 1.4 engine in his previous 2017 A3. He reckons the 1.4 was much quicker and definitely much more economical. I believe my Octavia with the 1.2 engine was far better all round.

Re the 1.4TSI Euro 6.

Fandabydozy engines, but not meeting the low emissions needed by 2021 with New Cars.

So much that the 1.4 TSI without ACT / DSG is going in the new VW Hybrids as they did in the Euro 6 Hybrids, but with tweaks.

 

But then the fact that there is Hybrid in the WLTP / RDE2 testing means that the C02 g/km can be fiction compared to the 1.4TSI just being used with petrol and no electric propulsion.

Like many will be used on long journeys.

 

https://www.am-online.com/news/market-insight/2019/07/16/rde2-vehicle-emissions-test-prompts-return-of-pre-registrations

 

Edited 29 December, 20196 yr by Roottootemblowinootsoot

18 hours ago, Ecomatt said:

People complained on the Kuga forum about the economy of the 1.5 aswell but it is a small engine. It would be perfectly fine in a small city car but it baffles me why manufacturers build these heavy small engined cars, feed a load of bs about how they are economical and lie about the mpg figures. When in reality they are not economical apart from the cheaper road tax, which isnt as cheap as it used to be anymore.

 

I've done just over 1,000 miles in a loaned, 69 reg Kuga 1.5 Ecoboost 4x4 auto.

 

26mpg overall (and that's by the trip computer so probably worse) and it hasn't been thrashed toooooo badly....what a joke.

 

What a horrible car though. Gearbox is absolutely woeful and there's no way it has the 180bhp quoted on paper 😑

@pist0nbr0ke

Is that a 1.5 176Ps / 174 bhp you have? 

Ford are needing to go Hybrid as well because they struggle to get low emissions and actual good economy. 

Current WLTP / RDE figures really are fiction.  The thing is they will still be fiction when it is the WLTP / RDE2 on Hybrids.

Edited 29 December, 20196 yr by Roottootemblowinootsoot

The 1.4 TSI in our manual 4x4 Kodiaq is an absolute peach. Silky smooth, eerily quiet, almost silent and achieves 35 mpg on the school run and closer to 45 mpg on a longer run.

 

That sort of fuel economy for a small petrol engine in a big car is excellent. I'd have been happy with anything less than 40 mpg average.

^^^ It is great, but if it was tested to RDE2 and had to meet the required emissions it would have to go off the road.

SEAT & VW kept using 1.4 TSI 148 bhp Manuals under derogation rules in the Alhambra & the Sharan got Manual & DSG when WLTP came in.

They are still available new now.

 

 

Edited 29 December, 20196 yr by Roottootemblowinootsoot

2 hours ago, Roottootemblowinootsoot said:

@pist0nbr0ke

Is that a 1.5 176Ps / 174 bhp you have? 

Ford are needing to go Hybrid as well because they struggle to get low emissions and actual good economy. 

Current WLTP / RDE figures really are fiction.  The thing is they will still be fiction when it is the WLTP / RDE2 on Hybrids.

 

Yes, sounds right. It's a Titanium X, so well equipped, but it really isn't a nice engine/gearbox combo. Only way to drive it smoothly and 'briskly' is to shift manually - no paddles or tiptronic type 'box so you end up using the buttons on the gearstick all the time and having to spend a lot of time steering with one hand...

 

It handles reasonably ok, but the body roll is worse than my 14 reg Ranger 😄

 

Over £35k list and over 200g/km, wtf?!

Edited 29 December, 20196 yr by pist0nbr0ke

Well, here’s my summary 4 months later and 5000+ km.

 

Motorway average about 6.2 l/100km, or about 740km on one tank which is pretty decent.

City driving is not great. Between 8.5-10.5 L/100km depending on how much of a rush I am, over 10km. About half of that is warmup time. Weekly commute averages about 600-640km on one tank

 

Long term is 6.4l/100km.

 

Switching between 95 and 98 doesn’t seem to make a big difference (the manual states improved economy and performance), though I hardly went about the comparison scientifically with recorded and calculated data. 

 

Honestly I was expecting more from city driving from so much eco tuned petrol burning tech. But so be it...

 

And who else finds that lag when you put your foot down and the computer takes a moment to decide what you most probably want unnerving? I find myself switching to sport mode quite often to avoid that. Go means go, not let’s think about it then go...!

Edited 16 January, 20206 yr by superchiwawa

On 28/12/2019 at 23:09, Ecomatt said:

The engine has to work harder than lets say a 2.0 as it will not be able to produce as much low down power, even with the added turbocharger.

 

My 1.4TSi produces far more torque everywhere in the rev range than the normally aspirated 2 litre petrol it replaced. 250Nm from 1500 to 3500 rpm way more than the NA 2 litre petrol did (210Nm peak at 4250 rpm). Pretty much the opposite of what you state.

On 29/12/2019 at 10:53, Rockinghorse said:

When I test drove a 1.5 I was really impressed with how quiet it was but the one I bought has never been as quiet. I complained once before but the engineer told me it was completely normal as it was the high pressure pump which is to blame. I have seen this explained on a number of videos for new cars and seems to be common. It is more of a loud ticking than a rattle and to be fair is more noticeable outside the car on tickover. My Octavia 1.2 was so quiet I used to think it had stalled.

They have obviously richened up the mixture to stop these cars stalling ( although mine never had that issue ) which is why they burn more fuel after the update. I will complain and get them to check it out but I do not have much confidence in the dealership. I bought my two year old Octavia from Murray Skoda in Plymouth and they were superb in their customer service and I wish I had gone to them for my new Karoq but they are a fair way away so I chose to go local - Big mistake. I had hoped I would keep this car for a few years but its not looking likely.  

I use Murry Skoda in Newton Abbot for service, they don't do sales. I find them very good, better than the more local dealer in Exeter.

6 hours ago, superchiwawa said:

Well, here’s my summary 4 months later and 5000+ km.

 

Motorway average about 6.2 l/100km, or about 740km on one tank which is pretty decent.

City driving is not great. Between 8.5-10.5 L/100km depending on how much of a rush I am, over 10km. About half of that is warmup time. Weekly commute averages about 600-640km on one tank

 

Long term is 6.4l/100km.

 

Switching between 95 and 98 doesn’t seem to make a big difference (the manual states improved economy and performance), though I hardly went about the comparison scientifically with recorded and calculated data. 

 

Honestly I was expecting more from city driving from so much eco tuned petrol burning tech. But so be it...

 

And who else finds that lag when you put your foot down and the computer takes a moment to decide what you most probably want unnerving? I find myself switching to sport mode quite often to avoid that. Go means go, not let’s think about it then go...!

I just did two fairly long journeys and drove very carefully trying to squeeze the max out of a tankful. 50% was motorway but the best I achieved was 40.4 MPg.

 

4 hours ago, Lingnoi said:

 

My 1.4TSi produces far more torque everywhere in the rev range than the normally aspirated 2 litre petrol it replaced. 250Nm from 1500 to 3500 rpm way more than the NA 2 litre petrol did (210Nm peak at 4250 rpm). Pretty much the opposite of what you state.

Yes that is correct but you cannot compare a NA engine to a turbocharged engine for power or torque. Compare your 1.4t to a 2.0t and your 1.4t will have to work harder to make the power.

42 minutes ago, Ecomatt said:

Yes that is correct but you cannot compare a NA engine to a turbocharged engine for power or torque. Compare your 1.4t to a 2.0t and your 1.4t will have to work harder to make the power.

I disagree with you.

The 1.4tsi offers effortless torque at lower revs compared to a NA engine unless it is quite large capacity.

 

With the 1.4tsi it is the turbo enabling low rev grunt which you can only get with revs on an NA engine.

In my experience the 1.4tsi is the far more efficient of the two.

 

I really feel for the OP as his 1.5tsi consumption figures are far worse than I would be expecting from the engine. Either an individual fault in his or a generic problem meeting the new emission figures.

Edited 16 January, 20206 yr by Gerrycan