MadManMike Posted August 3, 2015 Author Report Share Posted August 3, 2015 Yeah my 90 was great on fuel, 150 was great on fuel but expensive in every other way, now my current car drinks a stupid amount - it's all about smiles per gallon these days It's going to be even worse when I bolt a snail on Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MartMini Posted August 3, 2015 Report Share Posted August 3, 2015 The 90 non-pd version is very sluggish, but great on fuel and very reliable. Granted I bought a lemon when I upgraded to the 150 pd, but from what I've heard they're not the best engines anyway, even if you get a reliable one. I still have a soft spot for Leon's... Ive never found mine that slow, but then i haven't driven any of the pd's to compare to. Saying that, that's probably more to do with the fairly new turbo, 2.5" stainless exhaust, 150pd inlet, egr delete, bigger side mount.... ect ect Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadManMike Posted August 3, 2015 Author Report Share Posted August 3, 2015 My 90 was standard, my 150 was mapped to 199.5. The 150 threw you back on boost, the 90 didn't do anything. Unfortunate that the 150 couldn't handle that power (Clutch slip and it was on its third turbo when I sold it!). It took a few years of abuse before I got hold of it, by the time I did, it was on its last legs. Blessing in disguise really, it led to me getting my current car which I love Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
george_seamons Posted August 3, 2015 Report Share Posted August 3, 2015 But if I tried I could get 55MPG out of a 1.8t, Not for anything other than a quick reset of the average and a motorway cruise you couldn't. You couldn't possibly keep that up for any distance. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Posted August 3, 2015 Report Share Posted August 3, 2015 I have no idea how you guys are getting that good economy. The best I can ever get is 38 (indicated). I get about 380 miles to the tank driving as fuel efficiently as possible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pashley26 Posted August 3, 2015 Report Share Posted August 3, 2015 Not for anything other than a quick reset of the average and a motorway cruise you couldn't. You couldn't possibly keep that up for any distance. Yeah, you know best... I kept it up for a 48 mile each way commute to work every day. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MartMini Posted August 3, 2015 Report Share Posted August 3, 2015 Hell, that's good going.... driving with an erection aswell! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Booth Posted August 3, 2015 Report Share Posted August 3, 2015 Carfest token burnouts.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
george_seamons Posted August 3, 2015 Report Share Posted August 3, 2015 Yeah, you know best... I kept it up for a 48 mile each way commute to work every day. Bullshit. 55mpg is not possible on a 1.8t at anything other than coasting downhill on fuel cut. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pashley26 Posted August 3, 2015 Report Share Posted August 3, 2015 (edited) Bullshit. 55mpg is not possible on a 1.8t at anything other than coasting downhill on fuel cut. Last time you called bullshit on something I said I had to post my P60, I have no way of proving you wrong this time as I no longer have a relevant car. So take it or leave it, but you can achieve 55mpg out of a 1.8t if you don't drive like a spastic. If you're such a hero at knowing everything about 1.8t's, how come you can't seem to keep one running for more than a month? Maybe that's why you can't get decent MPG out of one? Edited August 3, 2015 by Pashley26 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadManMike Posted August 3, 2015 Author Report Share Posted August 3, 2015 Yeah, you know best... I kept it up for a 48 mile each way commute to work every day. How? Is it what your trip computer suggested or did you calculate it? I'm not saying it didn't happen, but I'm very surprised!When I Google specs for the Cupra 180, most places suggest 33, although it may not be 100% accurate, I can't see 55 being possible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luke Rainbird Posted August 3, 2015 Report Share Posted August 3, 2015 I have no idea how you managed it either, Jardo. If you can get me an extra 15mpg on the Plymouth-Gosport/vice-versa run then I'll get Alex Dark to CNC you a buttplug. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
george_seamons Posted August 3, 2015 Report Share Posted August 3, 2015 Very very small possibility that the trip computer may have said 55mpg (if the injector scaling was out), but I'd be willing to bet my S3 AND my entire years salary that it wasn't a "real life" 55mpg. Based on a 60 litre tank, that means your range would have been 725 miles. Not. A. f**king. Chance. You have a 1.8t in a lighter car now. Go prove me wrong! The only time my car wasn't running was for 4 months whilst I completely ripped the front end apart over winter to do a full wire/ pipe tuck. Other than that its never been not running for more than a weekend in 3 years of ownership. Nice try though 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AdamR28 Posted August 3, 2015 Report Share Posted August 3, 2015 Bit of a long shot, but just in case anyone is interested... http://forum.wscc.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic/115346-well-developed-flexible-reliable-and-fast-c20xe-seiw-for-sale-%C2%A313k/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pashley26 Posted August 3, 2015 Report Share Posted August 3, 2015 Cool, I'll take that bet. 55mph, 6th gear, cruise control off down the M3 for 48 miles. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
george_seamons Posted August 3, 2015 Report Share Posted August 3, 2015 Still won't get 55mpg. Are you confusing average speed and mpg? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LukasMcNeal Posted August 3, 2015 Report Share Posted August 3, 2015 Bit of a long shot, but just in case anyone is interested... http://forum.wscc.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic/115346-well-developed-flexible-reliable-and-fast-c20xe-seiw-for-sale-%C2%A313k/ Spill the beans then what's the new project! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pashley26 Posted August 3, 2015 Report Share Posted August 3, 2015 After I changed the MAF sensor and plugs it went up further. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
george_seamons Posted August 3, 2015 Report Share Posted August 3, 2015 That's instantaneous consumption... In that case my S3 does 200mpg. Who'd have thought?! Like I said, you didn't get 55mpg average. You'd be doing fairly well to get a true 55mpg average in a 130bhp 1.9 diesel of the same era, let alone a 270bhp (I think?) 4wd 1.8 petrol turbo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AdamR28 Posted August 3, 2015 Report Share Posted August 3, 2015 Spill the beans then what's the new project! Something light with 11,750 revs available 4 wheels though, of course! It's a good base but needs work... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pashley26 Posted August 3, 2015 Report Share Posted August 3, 2015 (edited) I did, and still could average 55MPG over a 48 mile each way commute down the M3. I was showing that to prove that it was continuously showing 50+ MPG. But obviously you are too busy being a dick to understand that showing an instant consumption for a prolonged period of time (multiple consumption refreshes) shows a realistic example of how the average is calculated. If anybody with a 1.8t would like a driving lesson then feel free to swing by my house, where I'll quite happily prove George wrong. Edited August 3, 2015 by Pashley26 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wrayvon Posted August 3, 2015 Report Share Posted August 3, 2015 You'd be doing fairly well to get a true 55mpg average in a 130bhp 1.9 diesel of the same era, let alone a 270bhp (I think?) 4wd 1.8 petrol turbo. Nah that really is easy. See my post earlier. I got 70+ on a 700 mile round trip to Aberdeen. (It indicated high 70s, but was actually 70.something in reality) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
george_seamons Posted August 3, 2015 Report Share Posted August 3, 2015 Like I said, 200mpg is easy to get judging by your logic. Doesn't make it a realistic average though. My LCR used to show nearly 60mpg when the injectors weren't scaled in that part of the map. I didn't go around trying to convince people it had diesel economy though, lol. Get a real life 55mpg (calculated by brimming, doing 55 miles than brimming again). If it uses any less than a gallon, you'll be ~£50k up, and I'll eat a hat (of your choice). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LukasMcNeal Posted August 3, 2015 Report Share Posted August 3, 2015 Something light with 11,750 revs available 4 wheels though, of course! It's a good base but needs work... Hmmm something with a motorbike engine? I have no idea otherwise 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark W Posted August 3, 2015 Report Share Posted August 3, 2015 It's good to know that all mileage/economy conversations are as bad as each other. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.