PDA

View Full Version : Passat CC - how thirsty?



offshore
16-05-2010, 01:51 PM
Hi Guys, I'm considering the V6 Passat CC for the new drive, but one concern is fuel economy.

I've heard that the R36 likes a drink, and as the CC is based on the same drivetrain, I'm guessing it's going to be similar.

Anyone got some real world figures for what they are getting?

Rocket36
16-05-2010, 02:40 PM
you've got a 220kw, 350nm all wheel drive V6 that will get 500+ km around town and up to 700 km on the highway per 70l tank... which is pretty good i reckon.

personally I've never considered fuel economy with any car/bike I've owned. but that's just me. if you're trying to be frugal, but a diesel!

plasmod3
16-05-2010, 02:43 PM
well currently i get about 7.4-7.9l/100k mostly. had the car about 6 months now & have about 45000km on the meter, average is 8.8l/km for that whole 45000km

offshore
16-05-2010, 03:10 PM
you've got a 220kw, 350nm all wheel drive V6 that will get 500+ km around town and up to 700 km on the highway per 70l tank... which is pretty good i reckon.

personally I've never considered fuel economy with any car/bike I've owned. but that's just me. if you're trying to be frugal, but a diesel!

Yeah diesel is the other option I'm looking at: A5 3.0TDI. Bucketloads of torque, but not the topend of the R36. Supposedly does 6.6l/100km

offshore
16-05-2010, 03:12 PM
well currently i get about 7.4-7.9l/100k mostly. had the car about 6 months now & have about 45000km on the meter, average is 8.8l/km for that whole 45000km

Those numbers are excellent. Are they measured figures or off the trip computer readout?

plasmod3
16-05-2010, 04:39 PM
off the trip computer. I did calculate it in the beginning everytime i filled up with amt of fuel put back in/ travelled dist & it seemed to match up pretty well.

Diesel_vert
16-05-2010, 06:31 PM
Interesting, are those figures from mostly highway usage? I'd imagine a V6 driven in Sydney, even as one that's as efficient as the VW, would get into the low-to-mid teens if driven somewhat carefully.

Leagle
16-05-2010, 09:35 PM
In city use, I get an average of 13.5 to 14L / 100kms from my V6 CC. Thats in stop start traffic with moderate to heavy intermittent acceleration. On highways, I get about 8.5. Its clearly thirstier than its 4 cylinder European rivals but not as bad as a high performance Falcodore.

If you are logical and care about economy, go the diesel. You get many of the benefits of the CC, including a superlative quiet cruiser and all the toys you want. The diesel may also be advantageous from a LCT point of view.

However, for me, even though I know I am paying more each week, on the 5% of occasions when I put my foot down, the V6 more than justifies the premium for me!

BTW I drove the diesel Audi - it simply did not excite me compared to the free revving V6 in the CC. If I went Audi I would have gone with the 3.2. Test drive both cars and see whether you can live with it.

offshore
16-05-2010, 10:23 PM
In city use, I get an average of 13.5 to 14L / 100kms from my V6 CC. Thats in stop start traffic with moderate to heavy intermittent acceleration. On highways, I get about 8.5. Its clearly thirstier than its 4 cylinder European rivals but not as bad as a high performance Falcodore.

If you are logical and care about economy, go the diesel. You get many of the benefits of the CC, including a superlative quiet cruiser and all the toys you want. The diesel may also be advantageous from a LCT point of view.

However, for me, even though I know I am paying more each week, on the 5% of occasions when I put my foot down, the V6 more than justifies the premium for me!

BTW I drove the diesel Audi - it simply did not excite me compared to the free revving V6 in the CC. If I went Audi I would have gone with the 3.2. Test drive both cars and see whether you can live with it.

I've hit all three engines actually :)

I liked the effortless torquey speed of the 3.0TDI, but it doesn't have the top end rush of the 3.6Petrol engine. But then you can just grab another gear and the ride the diesel wave of torque again.

Not keen on the 3.2 petrol, it's slower than the diesel, and uses more fuel.

So I'm down to the 3L diesel v the 3.6. Yeah as you mentioned, the TDI gets the LCT concession.

Anyone had good results chiptuning VAG turbo diesels?

Steve
17-05-2010, 12:07 PM
you've got a 220kw, 350nm all wheel drive V6 that will get 500+ km around town

Mine doesn't :(



So I'm down to the 3L diesel v the 3.6. Yeah as you mentioned, the TDI gets the LCT concession.


The 3.0 TDI really needs to be matched with the right car. In my old man's Q7, it works brilliantly. I don't know if I'd like it in a smaller, more sporty car that one would occasionally wish to punt around like a teenager just off his P plates.

Swallowtail
17-05-2010, 12:33 PM
I get 500 - 550 kms per tank in average driving, so that's about 11 - 12.5l/100km (based on a 62l refill which is pretty much usual). That's probably 50/50 highway / town driving. The trip computer on mine is wildly optimistic. It reckons I average 10.5, but I have tested it properly and it's about 10% dreaming.

On longer runs the economy improves markedly - very easy to get 8s, and 7s are achievable if you try.

Leagle
17-05-2010, 12:47 PM
I've hit all three engines actually :)

I liked the effortless torquey speed of the 3.0TDI, but it doesn't have the top end rush of the 3.6Petrol engine. But then you can just grab another gear and the ride the diesel wave of torque again.

Not keen on the 3.2 petrol, it's slower than the diesel, and uses more fuel.



Agree about your comments about the 3.2 though it is still more exciting than the TDI. I ended up buying the V6 CC as it was far better value than either the 3.2 OR 3.0TDI!

If you think about it, you can get a lot of extra fuel with the savings that you can achieve by buying the VW V6 over the Audi TDI. I think the Audi would cost you around $20K more?

GoLfMan
17-05-2010, 01:13 PM
Anyone had good results chiptuning VAG turbo diesels?

yup, mines chipped and they respond just as well as petrols to a chip tune :)

the Audi 3l TDI will go to 200kw 600nm with a chip :D

I'd be going the Audi A5 TDI over the 36 anyday sorry, driven a 3.6CC and while it was quick it didn't really push my buttons... My diesel felt faster :P

Rocket36
17-05-2010, 01:59 PM
I'd be going the Audi A5 TDI over the 36 anyday sorry, driven a 3.6CC and while it was quick it didn't really push my buttons... My diesel felt faster :P

But it's not! :P

You can't have the same fun with a 3.0 TDI as you can with the 3.6 Petrol when considering the two (3.0 TDI A5 and 3.6 V6 CC).

GoLfMan
17-05-2010, 02:46 PM
how could you NOT have fun with 550nm!

offshore
17-05-2010, 05:30 PM
Agree about your comments about the 3.2 though it is still more exciting than the TDI. I ended up buying the V6 CC as it was far better value than either the 3.2 OR 3.0TDI!

If you think about it, you can get a lot of extra fuel with the savings that you can achieve by buying the VW V6 over the Audi TDI. I think the Audi would cost you around $20K more?

Yeah, around that, maybe a bit less. There's some discounting going on at the moment. The Audi has better paint, interior and wheels, whilst the CC has better standard inclusions and of course that mental 3.6.

I felt the 3.0TDI was more exciting than the VW 3.2 but not as fun as the 3.6. Different style of "speed" though. The diesel reminded me of a big bore V Twin motorcycle like a ducati. Effortless wave of torque at low to mid revs.

offshore
17-05-2010, 05:38 PM
Thanks for the feedback GolfMan. Do you have the A5 2 door or the Sportsback?

Lance B
18-05-2010, 12:08 PM
well currently i get about 7.4-7.9l/100k mostly. had the car about 6 months now & have about 45000km on the meter, average is 8.8l/km for that whole 45000km

45,000kms in 6 months??? Man you must do some driving!!

Lance B
18-05-2010, 12:10 PM
With my R36, I get about 500+kms city driving and about 700kms highway driving, the same as Rocket R36.

plasmod3
18-05-2010, 07:47 PM
i do quite a bit of highway runs, about 80% of my drive is on highways. perhaps the reason for the economy although it is on the m5/hume...

offshore
20-05-2010, 09:13 PM
Decision made finally. I've gone with the A5 - mind you it was a hard choice, because the CC was a very tempting proposition.

I've put a deposit down on an A5 Sportback, 3.0 TDI, 7 Speed DSG.

It will be the first "auto" I've ever owned. Will post pics in a couple of weeks when I pick it up.

GoLfMan
20-05-2010, 09:25 PM
Thanks for the feedback GolfMan. Do you have the A5 2 door or the Sportsback?

sadly neither mate :(

congrats on your purchase though!

tryingavw
21-05-2010, 12:43 PM
Decision made finally. I've gone with the A5 - mind you it was a hard choice, because the CC was a very tempting proposition.

I've put a deposit down on an A5 Sportback, 3.0 TDI, 7 Speed DSG.

It will be the first "auto" I've ever owned. Will post pics in a couple of weeks when I pick it up.

as a matter of interest which car DROVE the best? i read a lot they reckon the a5 is brilliant but a bit boring to drive.

Rocket36
21-05-2010, 01:14 PM
Can I ask a question... You were worried about the cost of fuel when considering the CC, but have spent an extra $30,000 - $40,000. Why the initial concern on fuel consumption?

offshore
21-05-2010, 01:44 PM
as a matter of interest which car DROVE the best? i read a lot they reckon the a5 is brilliant but a bit boring to drive.

Actually the drive was quite similar.

Braking and turning dynamics, much the same. The main difference was in the power delivery. The Diesel was very effortless, massive torque on demand at any RPM (and potentially more with a chip). The 3.6 petrol had more urgency at the top-end on the other hand.

Both equally nice in their own way.

What clinched it for the A5 was the aesthetic and design stuff. The exterior paint, one of the best interiors I've seen, and the overall visual design.

http://www.vwwatercooled.com.au/forums/images/imported/2010/05/a5sb_02-2.jpg

I was also very keen on the design of the 19" Audi factory wheels, and probably would have put them on the Passat if I had gone down that path.

Fewer visits to Mr Shell is a bonus, but not the deciding factor.

offshore
21-05-2010, 01:54 PM
Can I ask a question... You were worried about the cost of fuel when considering the CC, but have spent an extra $30,000 - $40,000. Why the initial concern on fuel consumption?

Hi Rocket. See my other post. It wasn't the deciding factor, but certainly a bonus.

I did crunch some numbers before deciding.

The initial difference is more like 20-25K (with the Audi discounts that are available at the moment). And don't forget the resale price will be higher, so over 5 years it's probably only going to be about $10-12K difference before the running cost savings are factored in.

I've estimated it to be about $1000 cheaper to run per annum (fuel and maintenance), so over 5 years, total gross price difference is as little $5K.

Rocket36
21-05-2010, 02:04 PM
LOL!!! Your numbers don't make sense... You're factoring in the fact your resale will be higher over a 5 year period when it's a BRAND NEW MODEL and there is no way know knowing exactly wha the resale will be. I'm not saying the R36 resale is any better, but after 5 years for both cars you need to compare the percentages (not amounts). And I doubt there will be much in it at all!

You're budgeting is similar to that of the current government - "let's base it on the best possible scenario" when it should be based on the worst possible scenario. And you can't predict fuel savings given the fluctuating price of fuel, and ESPECIALLY considering diesel is tipped for a 20 - 30 % increase in the next two years. Anyway, that's your choice.

Interesting feedback about how it drives. I was considering an upgrade later this year or early next year to a low km 2009-2010 S5 but might look at the A5 3.0 V6 instead. Although I still have trouble getting past how all diesels sound like trucks (and yes that's based on driving recent models and yes it's my opinion and yes I know not everyone thinks that, but I do).

What colour did you go for? I reckon the Audis look best in White or Black - I'd get white.

R34
21-05-2010, 03:00 PM
I don't understand the resale value thing that everyone gets hung up over
The percentages would be similar so I would rather loose 50% of $70k over 3-4 years than 50% of $90k
Does that make sense or am I looking at it wrong
What if you bought a Passat and wacked the $20k difference in the bank
After 4 years you'd have $35K + say $25k equalling $60k as opposed to $45k from the Audi sale (and a higher interest bill if financed)
Not knocking your decision mate but you seemed to be concerned about costs then bought on emotion (which is fine of course) :-)

Rocket36
21-05-2010, 03:25 PM
Yeah, agree with R34 on this. That's what I was trying to say.

offshore
21-05-2010, 04:01 PM
LOL!!! Your numbers don't make sense... You're factoring in the fact your resale will be higher over a 5 year period when it's a BRAND NEW MODEL and there is no way know knowing exactly wha the resale will be. I'm not saying the R36 resale is any better, but after 5 years for both cars you need to compare the percentages (not amounts). And I doubt there will be much in it at all!.

I have used percentages and they most certainly make sense. I'll break it down for you.

Start with an estimate of a 40% residual value after 5 years which is reasonable for these cars.

....................Passat..A5
Drive away price: 70K 90K
Residual @40% 28K 36K
Net Cost 42K 54K

Thats a 12K difference.

This difference only changes by a grand or two whether you use a 35% or 45% residual for your estimation.

Obviously theres other variables like how well maintained the car is, and the mileage etc, but lets work on all these factors being equal.

Next, 3 years free service was on offer for the Audi. Couldn't get this for the Passat. The 3.0TDI doesn't require the timing belt replacement (uses a chain designed for the life of the engine).

Factor in the lower fuel costs of the diesel.

Put all this together and there isn't much of a difference in the total cost of ownership.



Interesting feedback about how it drives. I was considering an upgrade later this year or early next year to a low km 2009-2010 S5 but might look at the A5 3.0 V6 instead. Although I still have trouble getting past how all diesels sound like trucks (and yes that's based on driving recent models and yes it's my opinion and yes I know not everyone thinks that, but I do).


I know what you mean, and I have felt the same about most other diesels I've driven. This one really doesn't have the disel "tractor" feel at all. It actually reminds me of a chipped VAG 2.0T with a slightly lower redline.

On the subject of chipping, I've been reading up on the UK boards. Some of the guys have chipped the 3.0TDI to 220kw/600Nm, and are reporting it's as quick as the S5.



What colour did you go for? I reckon the Audis look best in White or Black - I'd get white.


Agree white looks good, esp on the S5.

Last car was white so I needed a change, went for a pearlescent dark blue. I'll post pics when it arrives.

Leagle
21-05-2010, 04:41 PM
Congrats Offshore. There is a youtube video (by "fifth gear") comparing the Passat R36 (which has same engine as V6 CC) vs the Audi 3.0 TDI (looks like same engine as A5 sportsback the car you chose).

Here is a link of it:
YouTube - Fifth Gear - VW Passat R36 vs. Audi 3.0 TDI (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e-eMp_Z0Nds)

The upshot is that there is not much difference between the performance of the two cars around a track (the R36 narrowly pips the Audi).

As I tried to hint earlier, everyone's tastes about power delivery is different so its good that you drove both cars before you made your decision. It really is a question of whether you prefer torque (Audi TDI) to power (Passat V6). You obviously went for torque.

Your logic in choosing the Audi over the VW in justifying the additional premium is interesting though. Even though your last post suggests that there is only a $12K difference, well, that still gets you a nice holiday! Also, as Rocket implied, there is the opportunity cost forgone in having to fork out more for the Audi in the first place.

I have a friend of mine who is currently looking for a new car. He has driven all the Euros out there including BMW 3 series, Merc C class and is also contemplating Lexus. At the end of the day he concedes that the VW Passat R36/CC beats all similarly priced Euros from those marques hands down. However, he just can't seem to get past the people car badge...

Now I'm not saying thats why YOU chose the Audi over the VW. However I am sure a lot of people still seem to choose Audi (which is part of VW BTW), BMW, Merc have for that reason.

Personally, I gave up on "badge" (for badges sake) long time ago. I've owned lots of marques from Bimmers and Audi to Holdens and Fords and now... VW. I always bought the car that I thought hit the "sweet spot" for best value for money.

My last car (WRX) was (imho) the best bang for your buck car money could buy ("Motor" agreed with me!) For me, without a question of a doubt, feature for feature (and I think you will find the CC still has more standard features than the Audi), the VW Passat CC V6 is the best value for money car when taking luxury, performance and style into account.

If Ford/Holden ever had the quality of a good German car such as VW now has in its cars, I would buy that (all other things being equal). If my VW proves unreliable (and so far its been a good experience), I would not likely be a repeat customer. For me its all about value.

Sorry if all this sounds a little bit condescending. The Audi A5 sportsback is still a fanstastic car. Style, performance and... badge cred. Personally though, I still don't understand why it costs $25K or so more than the CC!

R34
21-05-2010, 04:53 PM
I looked at the A5 sportback but a 2.0T with Sline and Adj Suspension and it was $102k drive away
Could've got it down maybe $10k but the diesel was so much more.
Both the missus and I were underwhelmed by it in the end...certainly looked nice but I've had real coupes with more room in the back.
In the end we couldn't be bothered haggling for the A5 especially after driving an R36 the same day

R34
21-05-2010, 04:57 PM
....................Passat..A5
Drive away price: 70K 90K
Residual @40% 28K 36K
Net Cost 42K 54K

Thats a 12K difference
Plus say $14k in additional lease payments.
$300 pm difference would buy a lot of fuel too

offshore
21-05-2010, 05:19 PM
Congrats Offshore. There is a youtube video (by "fifth gear") comparing the Passat R36 (which has same engine as V6 CC) vs the Audi 3.0 TDI (looks like same engine as A5 sportsback the car you chose).

Thanks, yes I saw that when I was doing my research. The A5 Sportback does indeed use the same 3.0TDI engine, but is a touch quicker than the coupé due to the new 7 speed DSG in the Sportback.



Your logic in choosing the Audi over the VW in justifying the additional premium is interesting though. Even though your last post suggests that there is only a $12K difference, well, that still gets you a nice holiday!


True, but it was more about clearing up the "real" price difference. One poster claimed it's $40K!

I'll pass on my experience of what's going in the market right now for these cars, based on my recent purchasing experience.

I've found Audi dealers are knocking pretty decent chunks off RRP (15%+) at the moment (Q5 excepted - it's got big waitlists). You're looking at driveaway prices of low 80's for a petrol and low 90's for a diesel (inc metallic paint, sunroof etc).

Whereas the R36 and CC seem to have significant waitlists and dealers are therefore not willing to knock much off (like the Q5). This brings the prices a lot closer together than the rrp would suggest.



At the end of the day he concedes that the VW Passat R36/CC beats all similarly priced Euros from those marques hands down. However, he just can't seem to get past the people car badge...

For me it wasn't the badge, but the design elements. If I was after a small hatch, I'd buy a Sirocco in a heartbeat if they were available. From my perspective the badge doesn't make a huge difference in the VW/Audi example, because it's pretty well known that they are the same organisation (VAG), and VW is already viewed as a premium brand in AU anyway.

Ultimately, people often don't buy "nice" cars on price and raw specifications alone. Otherwise there would be no 911 Turbos on the road - they would all be GTR's.

Other factors such as design, aesthetics etc come into play.

In this example, the Audi paint and interior really is the best in the business, and the shape of the SB in the metal is one of the best new designs I've seen in a while. And yes I know that's subjective :)

It's hard to put numbers around this stuff, but it all gets factored into the total package at decision time.

Rocket36
21-05-2010, 06:15 PM
Interesting comments re paint. I took my R36 to one of the best detailers in the country not long after moving to Melbourne and he surprised me when he said the VW paint depth and quality is one of the best he's worked with (and he's worked with everything from beautiful exotics to run of the mill Commodores). Bottom line is, you have to be happy with the decision you made and shouldn't have to justify it to anyone.

For me, the value for money of the R36 (for what I get out of it) simply can't be beaten. I am still yet to experience better seats in ANY car and that includes an F430 I was lucky enough to get a ride in! I look at the A5 seats on car sales photos and they look flat and slipery compared with the Alcantara body hugging R36 seats. And that sort of turns me off wanting to do my switch to Audi.

Buggermedumplings
21-05-2010, 08:03 PM
For me, the value for money of the R36 (for what I get out of it) simply can't be beaten. I am still yet to experience better seats in ANY car and that includes an F430 I was lucky enough to get a ride in! I look at the A5 seats on car sales photos and they look flat and slipery compared with the Alcantara body hugging R36 seats. And that sort of turns me off wanting to do my switch to Audi.

It's all subjective...I think for a car that borders on $80k you should be getting full leather seats. However that's just me...

Rocket36
21-05-2010, 08:10 PM
Full leather isn't as good as Alcantara. Who wants to be slipping around in the twisties?

R34
21-05-2010, 08:17 PM
I agree the SB is a beautiful looking car but really that's all it's got.
It's a compromised design that does nothing better than an A4.
I couldn't even sit in the back it has so little head and leg room.
Having said that I still drool when I see one and still love my current Audi.
But in the end I didn't think it was worth the effort of haggling for the SB as to me they're not worth low 80's for the petrol.
Even my wife who has become an Audi nut the last 3 years was unimpressed

But I went through the exerscise of optioning up an A4 with everything the R36 had the list price cost was over $120k.(LCT doesn't help)
Of course you wouldn't do that and would go for a S4 :-)
So I was a bit disappointed with Audi as a result.

With regard to the R36 to Audi diesel review in the UK.
They may have been a little less excited by the Audi if the price difference between the two was similar to what it is here.
In the UK I think the price of the two is similar with the R36 being more expensive.

We all like different things and just as well or it would be a boring world
My thoughts expressed about the A5 are just that my thoughts

And for the record I received 10% off my R36

Buggermedumplings
21-05-2010, 08:39 PM
Full leather isn't as good as Alcantara. Who wants to be slipping around in the twisties?

True if you're driving a GT3...

However full nappa leather in my TDI is my preference... Again all subjective and personal taste.

R34
21-05-2010, 08:44 PM
True if you're driving a GT3...

However full nappa leather in my TDI is my preference... Again all subjective and personal taste.
True but on a mild day my shirt was damp after a test drive of an A5 with leather.
I couldn't even de-option leather.
It looks great but it's a personal hate of mine and also turned me off the CC.

Rocket36
21-05-2010, 08:58 PM
True if you're driving a GT3...

WTF??? True... If you're driving ANYTHING!!! Leather is classy but too slippery for proper spirited driving in any car.


However full nappa leather in my TDI is my preference... Again all subjective and personal taste.

Absolutely. Glad you're happy with your choice.

Buggermedumplings
21-05-2010, 09:00 PM
True but on a mild day my shirt was damp after a test drive of an A5 with leather.
I couldn't even de-option leather.
It looks great but it's a personal hate of mine and also turned me off the CC.

Active climate seats baby! Sweaty backs are a thing of the past!

Rocket36
21-05-2010, 09:01 PM
Active climate seats baby! Sweaty backs are a thing of the past!

That's true... Once they're mainstream, no more sweaty leather. :D

tryingavw
21-05-2010, 10:22 PM
Start with an estimate of a 40% residual value after 5 years which is reasonable for these cars.

....................Passat..A5
Drive away price: 70K 90K
Residual @40% 28K 36K
Net Cost 42K 54K

Thats a 12K difference.

Factor in the lower fuel costs of the diesel.

Put all this together and there isn't much of a difference in the total cost of ownership..

sorry but i reckon you are really kidding yourself. a 90k car will probably depreciate at a higher % as well, you're out of pocket by 20k ( or much more if leased) , the fuel saving $ will be small and maintenance will probably be higher.

Just admit you could stretch the extra 20k , you like the badge and just wanted the car!

i also went to the audi dealership when i was looking ( a5, diesel AWD i think), but was put of by their price estimates of $110k at the time - sounded way too expensive and they werent that interested . never even drove one in the end. that was around june 2009.

Rocket36
24-05-2010, 10:23 AM
Best range I've seen on the .:R36 so far...

http://i639.photobucket.com/albums/uu115/kjnielsen/Volkswagen%20R36/Range.jpg

Charcoal007
22-06-2010, 10:07 PM
I've hit all three engines actually :)

I liked the effortless torquey speed of the 3.0TDI, but it doesn't have the top end rush of the 3.6Petrol engine. But then you can just grab another gear and the ride the diesel wave of torque again.

Not keen on the 3.2 petrol, it's slower than the diesel, and uses more fuel.

So I'm down to the 3L diesel v the 3.6. Yeah as you mentioned, the TDI gets the LCT concession.

Anyone had good results chiptuning VAG turbo diesels?

I have had a 2.0 TDi CC for 6 months. I do 65 kms each way to work. Part free flowing Motorway and part stop start motorway and local traffic. Consistantly getting 5.5L/100kms and over 1,000 kms per fill. On a long highway trip I expect to get 1,300 kms from a tank. I have a chip fitted and the only difference to the V6 is the turbo lag. To fix that just use sport mode to keep the turbo spinning.

http://www.vwwatercooled.com.au/forums/images/imported/2010/05/P1080996smallweb-2.jpg

tryingavw
23-06-2010, 12:57 PM
also its FWD- 4WD in the V6 would indicate to me better handling ( at a cost in economy though of course)




I have had a 2.0 TDi CC for 6 months. I do 65 kms each way to work. Part free flowing Motorway and part stop start motorway and local traffic. Consistantly getting 5.5L/100kms and over 1,000 kms per fill. On a long highway trip I expect to get 1,300 kms from a tank. I have a chip fitted and the only difference to the V6 is the turbo lag. To fix that just use sport mode to keep the turbo spinning.

http://www.vwwatercooled.com.au/forums/images/imported/2010/05/P1080996smallweb-2.jpg

apom
23-06-2010, 05:29 PM
...... I have a chip fitted and the only difference to the V6 is the turbo lag. To fix that just use sport mode to keep the turbo spinning.

http://www.vwwatercooled.com.au/forums/images/imported/2010/05/P1080996smallweb-2.jpg

Oh please....you can keep telling yourself that but just be happy that you get better economy. If it was that simple, no one would buy a V6 and VW would "chip" the cars in the factory and sell them like hot cakes!

passatstef
23-06-2010, 10:56 PM
im getting a sports r36 wagon.i took the wife to the local vw dealer in canberra and its had all the goodys for 72k drive away and she feel in love with it straight away and i did to.

im thinking going for a test drive in it.it might feel a bit different to my old 98 v6 passat.i will let you guys know whats happening with situation:banana:

genkifd
21-12-2010, 11:05 AM
ive had my CC v6 for a three weeks - so far mostly city driving has an average fuel consumption of 12.1 L/100 which is pretty good. the first week it was sitting around 14 L / 100.

revivor
30-12-2010, 10:35 PM
My R36 has been getting between 10.4-10.7l/100km (City + Highway mix) that just hit 10000k on the clock :)
City driving alone produces 11-12l/100km. Still pretty happy with that. Did a Newcastle - Mt Thredbo trip in winter & managed to get 8-9l/100km. I observed that Caltex fuel gives better fuel economy than Shell (gives out a lot of black particles on exhaust tip). IMO.

ScottyP
07-03-2011, 12:33 PM
With regard to the trip computer, does DTE give you klms to empty, or to when you hit reserve? I'm just coming to the end of my first tank in my MY09 CC (bought second hand) and it's currently showing 90klms DTE.

Cheers,
Scott

revivor
07-03-2011, 03:56 PM
With regard to the trip computer, does DTE give you klms to empty, or to when you hit reserve? I'm just coming to the end of my first tank in my MY09 CC (bought second hand) and it's currently showing 90klms DTE.

Cheers,
Scott

It's till you hit bottom empty! Normally when I hit reserve, it shows the balance km before empty (heard its not very accurate). I still watch the needle gauge which is a better gauge.

ScottyP
08-03-2011, 11:21 AM
Thx revivor! The answer became apparent this morning when DTE hit 70 just above reserve.