Newbie; torn between 1.4tdi and 1.6tdi

[Biker]

Biker, i get it tomorrow.

Fantastic mate, at least you haven't had to wait long for it. Let us know what you think of it once you have had a chance to try it out.

@ S19JGB. You made the comment below.

i have the 1.6 CR TDi, i live near Biker but can get no where near the economy he claims.

The use of the word "claims" suggests to me that you don't believe the fuel figures I have "quoted". I can assure you all the figures I mention are arrived at from calculating my consumption from full tank to full tank.

I too did the trip to London, just short of 300 miles, non stop, never exceeded 60 MPH, consumption 65mpg

The last time I did the London trip I managed 68mpg as opposed to your 65mpg. To me that doesn't sound that different. If you take into account no two cars are the same, possible differences in traffic conditions, differences in fuel used and not least different drivers there is nothing in it (in my opinion).

The use of your car is obviously very different to mine, I have covered 11,000 miles in about nine months. You have done that in five months, might that have some influence on consumption. You state that you achieve an average of 53 mpg in normal use, I normally get high 50's. Again in my opinion, not a massive difference.

I do concede that the manufacturers "claimed" figures are near impossible to achieve, but based on what you have stated as opposed to my "claimed" figures, I think the main difference between us is our expectations from the car. I suspect mine are set lower than yours.

 

[R22 JGB]

Fantastic mate, at least you haven't had to wait long for it. Let us know what you think of it once you have had a chance to try it out.

@ S19JGB. You made the comment below.



The use of the word "claims" suggests to me that you don't believe the fuel figures I have "quoted". I can assure you all the figures I mention are arrived at from calculating my consumption from full tank to full tank.



The last time I did the London trip I managed 68mpg as opposed to your 65mpg. To me that doesn't sound that different. If you take into account no two cars are the same, possible differences in traffic conditions, differences in fuel used and not least different drivers there is nothing in it (in my opinion).

The use of your car is obviously very different to mine, I have covered 11,000 miles in about nine months. You have done that in five months, might that have some influence on consumption. You state that you achieve an average of 53 mpg in normal use, I normally get high 50's. Again in my opinion, not a massive difference.

I do concede that the manufacturers "claimed" figures are near impossible to achieve, but based on what you have stated as opposed to my "claimed" figures, I think the main difference between us is our expectations from the car. I suspect mine are set lower than yours.

Biker
I am severely pi55ed off with the consumption on my car! I use a car for work which is why I cover so many miles. I have used a company car since 1992, but bought the SEAT myself as I'm due to retire in a couple of year and would not see out the lease of a company car. I do have to pay for all the fuel used in my car and have to claim my business mileage back from the company, so I keep accurate records.
Since 2002 and over the last 200,000+ miles I have evidence of my car's economy

2002-2006 Citroen Picasso 2.0 HDi,Combined figure 51.7mpg , 110,582 miles, overall 50.77 MPG (that included towing a caravan !)

2006 - 2008 Ford Fiesta 1.6 TDCi combined figure 64.7mpg, 57125 miles (until written off by Artic!)overall MPG 65.83mpg

2008-2010 VW Passat 2.0 TDi combined figure 50.5, 51247 miles overall mpg, 50.60 mpg

2010 -2011 SEAT Ibiza 1.6TDi combined figure 65.7, 11130 miles 52.96 MPG.

According to SEAT, my Ibiza has no faults and is not unusual! apparently my previous three cars are the ones that have been unusual in providing economy figures close to the quoted figures!!
I have a 2 page document from SEAT UK advising how the tests are performed, they also state " The fuel consumption testing scheme is intended to give car buyers comparative information about the fuel consumption of different models using standardised tests"

If this statement is true how can I achieve and sometimes better the official combined figures for three previous car then find the 1.6 TDi can get nowhere near the quoted figure!!

I firmly believe SEAT have somehow managed to fudge the testing of the 1.6 TDi car to get an un representatively high economy figure from their test vehicle!

I bought this car to be an economical car using the figures quoted by SEAT I expected to get close to the quoted figures. I now find I have a small lightweight 1.6 car that can only manage 2.5 mpg better than a much larger 2.0 VW Passat!!!