Fuel consumption

[monkeyhanger]

It is rather confusing with driver profile modes and then the D or S gearbox mode.
Why didn't they just incorperate the gearbox modes in the profile modes? Or did they?

What is sportier - D mode and sport or S mode and normal?

You can only have S mode for the gearbox if you are in Sport (as far as I'm aware).

When you put the car into Sport mode, by default the DSG gearbox goes into S mode (selects lower gears and hangs on to the gears longer, with higher revs before changing up during acceleration). You also get the full throttle response and the loud fake engine noise.

If you want the throttle response of Sport but not the gear change attributes of gearbox "S" mode, you can pull back on the sprung gear stick position of "D" to change "S" to "D". You will see this in your dash info as S1 would become D1 (for 1st gear), S2 becomes D2 etc. Similarly, if you are in Eco mode, you have E1, E2, E3 etc.which change up very early and labour the engine.

Sport mode with D gearbox mode is no thirstier than Normal mode with D gearbox mode - you just press the pedal less to get the same response from the engine.

So you've got a Polo GTI, the full travel of the throttle pedal gives you access to the whole 200ps power.

You stick it in Normal and you have somewhere in the region of 75% of the power across the pedal travel (but if you floor it and press into the clicky part of the accelerator pedal then this gives you full throttle).

Similarly, you stick it in Eco mode and the response is blunted further, with maybe 50% of power available across the pedal travel.

With Eco you gain coasting mode, which will give you modest gains and the Eco mode of the gearbox making changes up happen very early. In Normal and Sport there is no coasting mode.

[EmiLiuZ]

It is rather confusing with driver profile modes and then the D or S gearbox mode.
Why didn't they just incorperate the gearbox modes in the profile modes? Or did they?

What is sportier - D mode and sport or S mode and normal?

You can only have S mode for the gearbox if you are in Sport (as far as I'm aware).

When you put the car into Sport mode, by default the DSG gearbox goes into S mode (selects lower gears and hangs on to the gears longer, with higher revs before changing up during acceleration). You also get the full throttle response and the loud fake engine noise.

If you want the throttle response of Sport but not the gear change attributes of gearbox "S" mode, you can pull back on the sprung gear stick position of "D" to change "S" to "D". You will see this in your dash info as S1 would become D1 (for 1st gear), S2 becomes D2 etc. Similarly, if you are in Eco mode, you have E1, E2, E3 etc.which change up very early and labour the engine.

Sport mode with D gearbox mode is no thirstier than Normal mode with D gearbox mode - you just press the pedal less to get the same response from the engine.

So you've got a Polo GTI, the full travel of the throttle pedal gives you access to the whole 200ps power.

You stick it in Normal and you have somewhere in the region of 75% of the power across the pedal travel (but if you floor it and press into the clicky part of the accelerator pedal then this gives you full throttle).

Similarly, you stick it in Eco mode and the response is blunted further, with maybe 50% of power available across the pedal travel.

With Eco you gain coasting mode, which will give you modest gains and the Eco mode of the gearbox making changes up happen very early. In Normal and Sport there is no coasting mode.

Ahh cool. Thanks for clearing that up. That's a lot easier to comprehend now As a 25 year old i'll most likely make an individual profile with most things in sport besides suspension and engine sound. We'll see once I get it next month. Depends on how artificial the engine sound is in normal or sport. I heard that the sport suspension settings should be too tough for daily drives.

[monkeyhanger]

WLTP ready gearing has made these cars perform way differently from what we've been used to.

The prevalent testing regime influences the gearing offered because all marques are looking to perform best on the test cycle, not in real life.

The outgoing NEDC test cycle favours urban driving, so gearing suits being able to trundle along in 5th at 30 mph and offers good 30-50mph fuel economy. The 11 minute test cycle had the car at a standstill for almost 3 minutes of that, so when stop-start tech was brought in, it made a huge difference to simulated mpg, but not a lot to the average driver that doesn't spend 1/4 of their time static.

Now the "more real" WLTP test cycle strongly favours upper end economy, so unless you spend most of your time doing 60mph in 6th, you're going to be largely worse off around the doors.

I'd expect the people that get comparable fuel economy vs published figures in their new Polos spend most of their commute sat at 60-70 on dual carriageways or motorways. The 7 speed DSG goes some way to being the best of both worlds - i'm surprised the 6 speed wet clutch DSG for performance VWs hasn't been put out to pasture in favour of the 7 speed which the Golf GTI PP and R have used since facelift with much improved fuel economy.

[Andy Beats]

WLTP ready gearing has made these cars perform way differently from what we've been used to.

The prevalent testing regime influences the gearing offered because all marques are looking to perform best on the test cycle, not in real life.

The outgoing NEDC test cycle favours urban driving, so gearing suits being able to trundle along in 5th at 30 mph and offers good 30-50mph fuel economy. The 11 minute test cycle had the car at a standstill for almost 3 minutes of that, so when stop-start tech was brought in, it made a huge difference to simulated mpg, but not a lot to the average driver that doesn't spend 1/4 of their time static.

Now the "more real" WLTP test cycle strongly favours upper end economy, so unless you spend most of your time doing 60mph in 6th, you're going to be largely worse off around the doors.

I'd expect the people that get comparable fuel economy vs published figures in their new Polos spend most of their commute sat at 60-70 on dual carriageways or motorways. The 7 speed DSG goes some way to being the best of both worlds - i'm surprised the 6 speed wet clutch DSG for performance VWs hasn't been put out to pasture in favour of the 7 speed which the Golf GTI PP and R have used since facelift with much improved fuel economy.

Yup, my findings are the car is far more economical at 70mph than it is around town.
Which is precisely the opposite of what I need, but it sounds like most cars will be the same if the test favours that now.

[Andy Beats]

Now don't get me wrong I didn't by a GTi to sipp fuel but a little more transparency in fuel figures would have been helpful and enabled me to make a more informed decision.

No offence, but I thought everyone knew the claimed figures were a total crock of crap these days?
Hence the popularity of 'real life MPG' websites run by Honest John, where owners put their actual findings in.
I don't even know what the claimed MPG is for my car.
I just expected a small turbo-charged 1000cc car to do 40MPG pretty easily.
I bet the claimed MPG is miles more than my expectations....I'd probably laugh....

[Andy Beats]

I tend to completely ignore claimed figures and just use experience with umpteen cars over the years, base my expectations on that.
Usually there or thereabouts.
Unfortunately not with the Polo, I really didn't think I'd see 30MPG or less on the display unless I was driving it absolutely mental-like.
Never in my wildest dreams did I think 30MPG or less would be common, driven gently.
Huge disappointment, but I'm trying to dampen my anger by assuming the other cars I was going to go for (Citroen C3/Nissan Micra) might have been just as bad.

[silverhairs]

Just filled up for the second time. I do the neck to neck to get an accurate MPG. Polo SEL 115BHP DSG box. I've covered 401 miles, travelled from North Lincolnshire down to March in Cambridgeshire a round trip of 240 miles aprox the rest on short journey's, but you have to remember Lincolnshire is pretty flat so not many hills to climb, and I've got 45.22 MPG. Not too bad when VW say 60 MPG

[Leif]

WLTP ready gearing has made these cars perform way differently from what we've been used to.

The prevalent testing regime influences the gearing offered because all marques are looking to perform best on the test cycle, not in real life.

The outgoing NEDC test cycle favours urban driving, so gearing suits being able to trundle along in 5th at 30 mph and offers good 30-50mph fuel economy. The 11 minute test cycle had the car at a standstill for almost 3 minutes of that, so when stop-start tech was brought in, it made a huge difference to simulated mpg, but not a lot to the average driver that doesn't spend 1/4 of their time static.

Now the "more real" WLTP test cycle strongly favours upper end economy, so unless you spend most of your time doing 60mph in 6th, you're going to be largely worse off around the doors.

I'd expect the people that get comparable fuel economy vs published figures in their new Polos spend most of their commute sat at 60-70 on dual carriageways or motorways. The 7 speed DSG goes some way to being the best of both worlds - i'm surprised the 6 speed wet clutch DSG for performance VWs hasn't been put out to pasture in favour of the 7 speed which the Golf GTI PP and R have used since facelift with much improved fuel economy.

I’m afraid I completely disagree. If I do 70 mph the mpg drops markedly, even 60 mpg hits it. It’s comfortable at 40-50 mph in fifth, but does good mpg at 30 mph in fourth. It’s rather impressive, but whereas my VW Up had a perky engine, the Polo is much heavier so they’ve had to change the gearing. I have no problem using the gears for a rapid overtake when needed. But the Polo engine is much more powerful and smoother, overall more pleasant to drive. Most of my journeys are cross country on B roads, between 40 and 50 mph, with some villages and town driving, but I do avoid congestion. 61 mph is my current average, 64 mph in the summer. This car has a very efficient little 3 pot engine, but no car is going to do well if you have to navigate lots of traffic queues and junctions. My best is 41 miles and over 80 mpg according to the computer which in reality must be closer to 70 mpg, and that was on a motorway in summer, probably mostly downhill or flat, though I am suspicious of the value.

The WLTP figure will be more realistic, but even so it’s only a few mpg less than the old one. So it’s still overestimating the real mpg for many people.

[monkeyhanger]

Is yours the 7 speed DSG Leif?

7 speed does give a better spread of ratios, almost mirroring the 6 ratios we're all used to pre-WLTP, plus a tall cruising gear for 7th.

Ratios 1-4 are really high in the 6 speed GTI DSG. My Golf R is very comfortable in 5th at 30mph (Although admittedly, it has a lot more torque, which does help easy progress in a high gear at low engine speeds). The GTI isn't that comfortable in 5th below 38mph. At 30mph the GTI is kind of between the change thresholds of 4th and 5th

For the GTI, mine seems far more economical at 60+ than 20-40mph. Sitting at 20-30mph it seems very thirsty for what little work the car is doing. It could really do with lower gears 1-6 to help urban driving + a tall 7th.

Oddly, Dark_cze's manual GTI seems geared a fair bit lower - at 80mph in 6th, his engine speed is 2700rpm, mine is 2400.

[mike sel]

7 speed DSG in my SEL 115. I have found my average MPG is 50-54 in the summer I am getting about 46-48 at the mo. My commute is 14 miles on country roads, I find at around 55mpg I am getting the best fuel econ. as I have said before on a motorway drive with aircon off in eco mode and summer over a 55 mile motorway drive, Christchurch to Portsmouth that's duel carriage way A31 then motorway M27, if I keep the car at 56mph no sharp gas pedal movements then I get to 69.8 MPG for the trip. (I at no point ever went over 69.9).

I have been driving a loan POLO SE 95 5 gear mannual for a couple of weeks (mine in dealer) and I have to say the clutch seems relatively weak im finding pulling away from stationary needs a bucket of revs. I miss the sport mode of the DSG and the extra 20HP the 115 offers (I did not think it would make that much difference) Also I don't like the 15" wheels they seem to wallow more then the 16" on mine. I miss the active info dash on mine, I miss this the most, for anyone undecided....go for it it will change the way you receive information. I was spoilt having it and I am actually now please I have experienced driving with the old dials. Don't get me wrong the analogue dash is set out well, I do have a few issues with it but generally is as good as any I have used and better then most. But the active info display is really something else again. I move my maps over to it (the other half can do her thing with the music on the main screen without bothering me) I still get the rev counter and speedo, I then can have a choice of info in the centre of both rev counter and speedo. If I want I can open up the maps to full screen. I would say its the best value option available. I get my Polo back today and to be honest I cant wait. No offence to SE 95 owners at all, its a nice car, but for me the SEL 115 DSG with 16" wheels and an active info display + sat nav is a better car. I lose on about 5MPG average and of course I had another 5k taken out of my wallet (over the SE manual) but ill take that hit for the better car.

[Andy Beats]

I find options like 'active screens' out of place on small cars.
No-one expects them, no want really wants them.
It's like full leather, no-one expects that in a small car either.
If you accept you won't get any of the extra money back on that option when it comes to re-sale time, that's fine.
It might make the car more attractive over the next one, but it won't fetch a penny more.

[RUM4MO]

I wonder what the reliability of these active screen dash pods will end up being like 5 years down the line, having issues with the MMI etc screen is one thing, having that sort of problem with what is your source of more important info could be annoying and certainly an MOT failure - I suppose if aftermarket support springs up to assist there, it will be okay.

I'll stick with analogue(ish) function dedicated instruments for the time being.

I didn't think that there was much real leather in the leather trim - is it not just leatherette at leather prices, well for the seats?

[Andy Beats]

I didn't think that there was much real leather in the leather trim - is it not just leatherette at leather prices, well for the seats?

Not even sure if any Polos come with full 'leather' seats.
Mine has part leather/pleather.
Renault used to do a trim in their Clio that had full leather and it just struck me as really odd.
It's not a luxury car....no-one expects it be a luxury car....
If you want a luxury car, don't go for a small car.

[monkeyhanger]

I find options like 'active screens' out of place on small cars.
No-one expects them, no want really wants them.
It's like full leather, no-one expects that in a small car either.
If you accept you won't get any of the extra money back on that option when it comes to re-sale time, that's fine.
It might make the car more attractive over the next one, but it won't fetch a penny more.

Everyone will end up with the active info/digital instrumentation. Tech is getting cheaper all the time, and we're probably at about the point now where the TFT screen is cheaper than the dial set-up That has a tiny central TFT screen of its own. VW won't be able to charge extra for for this very long. It's already standard in all facelifted performance Golfs (I think all Golfs, but unsure).

I'd expect the tech to be pretty robust/reliable down the line - no moving parts.

There's plenty of Pleather in all VWs leather seat offerings - side's, backs, pretty much every surface you're not in direct contact with when sat on the seat.

They charge far too much for leather when you can get a far superior retrofit with higher quality leather for about £1100 If you want it. Don't fancy leather at all in a car -stone cold in the Winter and boiling hot in the summer (yes you have your seat heaters, but never felt the need to heat a cloth covered seat). Leather sags too.

[SRGTD]

Continuing off topic (apologies!) but no, no Polos have full leather. Pretty sure that any ‘leather look’ portions of the seat facings aren’t leather either; they’re vinyl / ‘pleather’.

In the Golf, much of the ‘full leather’ option isn’t leather either. Only the parts that you sit on or lean against are real leather - the seat cushion and back rest sections of the seats, and the inner sections of the front seat bolsters. The rest is leather-look vinyl and it’s expensive too (£1,750 - £2,650, depending on the car’s trim level and whether Vienna or Nappa leather selected) and not very good quality as it’s prone to sagging and creasing early on in a car’s life - especially the drivers seat cushion and outer side bolster - and I personally don’t like the saggy, lived-in look. It’s also hot to sit on in the summer and cold in the winter before the seat heating warms up.