Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!





Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Do you currently drive a 2019 Ford Ranger and live in Michigan?
A reporter would like to talk to you; please reach out to [email protected] for more details.

2014 Volkswagen Passat TSI Long-Term Road Test

Edmunds.comEdmunds.com Posts: 10,059
edited September 2014 in Volkswagen

image2014 Volkswagen Passat TSI Long-Term Road Test

Here's our March fuel economy update for our long-term the 2014 Volkswagen Passat 1.8 TSI. We spent way too much time in traffic this month.

Read the full story here


Tagged:

Comments

  • handbrakehandbrake Posts: 99
    I'm starting to get the sense (after reading reviews of the new crop of smaller turbo engines) that there ain't a lot of fuel economy gain when you go from a larger, non-turbo engine to a smaller, turbo one. It seems like the bulk of the benefit is that you get better torque characteristics with about the same economy.

    For all that added cost and complexity, no thanks.
  • Driving our EOS 2.0 turbo, I learned to drive it differently to get good mileage. Easing up in speed as I would in a non-turbo, my mpg was bad, 21-2 mpg. Then I started putting my foot in it early, getting up to the speed limit relatively quickly as traffic permitted, then letting off and gently maintaining speed. Now, in city/hwy mix, about 27 mpg, at least according to the computer.
  • dgcamerodgcamero Posts: 148
    I average 26.6 overall in my GTI's 2.0t FSI with DSG. This is hand calculated over 55,000 miles. I get about that average in suburban commuting with heavy use of A/C or heat, and country road commuting (a/c and heat don't make much of a difference on country roads), and about 26 on the interstate at 75mph. What surprises me is that I get nearly 30mpg while suburban commuting with no a/c or heat, and roughly the same on country roads.
  • dgcamerodgcamero Posts: 148
    I also easily get 2 mpg worse in the summer using 87 instead of 93 octane, and about 1 mpg worse during the winter with 87 vs. 93.
  • agentorangeagentorange Posts: 893
    If you drive a turbo car in town like the average car-journo, the gas mileage will plummet. Drive it like a normal human and it's not so bad. Drive it on the freeway at altitude and you will never want a normally aspirated car ever again. Boosted cars flatten the scenery without shifting, it's great.
  • fordson1fordson1 Posts: 1,512
    handbrake, there is a '93 Ford Ranger base-model with low miles waiting for you out there, I'm sure. Zero complexity. Let's try a comparison between this car and the Kia Forte, a car with a larger, non-turbo engine - the Passat is over a half-second faster both in 0-60 and in the quarter-mile. It has way more torque. The Passat is 500 pounds heavier than the Forte, and has a ton more room and cargo capacity. the Kia just finished a month with a lot of highway driving; the Passat just finished a month with almost all city driving. The Kia has over 15,000 miles on it, and its average mpg pretty much is what it is. The Passat has only 6,000 miles and except for this all-city-driving month, has been increasing its mpg every month. Yet these two cars right now, over their respective lifetimes, are averaging only 2.3 mpg difference, and will end up with probably a 1.5 mpg difference. I think that's more than reasonable.
Sign In or Register to comment.