D5 (2005 on) Fuel Consumption

[RoyMacDonald]

I belive the test includes a cold start now. From 2008 I think.

Roy

[dodgyken]

http://www.green-car-guide.com/news/...l-life-mpg.htm

[RoyMacDonald]

http://www.vcacarfueldata.org.uk/inf...ing-scheme.asp

Originally Posted by dodgyken

http://www.green-car-guide.com/news/...l-life-mpg.htm

This site has a bit more info in the Government tests.http://www.vcacarfueldata.org.uk/inf...ing-scheme.asp

I do wonder how long they run the engine in for. They say at least 1,800 miles but as petrol engines get worse over time and diesels get better, it would account for why I get better than official mpg figures, and why I get better mpg from my 2003 XC90 D5 than my wifes Toyota 1.3 petrol Yaris. It should be the other way around according to the official figures. They do say this to be fair though......

Because of the need to maintain strict comparability of results achieved by the standard tests they cannot be fully representative of real life driving conditions.

Firstly, it is obviously not practicable to test each individual new car; thus only one production car is tested as being representative of the model and may therefore produce a better or worse result than another similar vehicle. Secondly, there are infinite variations in driving styles and in road, car and weather conditions, all of which can have a bearing on the results achieved. For these reasons the fuel consumption achieved on the road will not necessarily be the same as the official test results.

I was just thinking it's not supprising that they can't give a totally accurate picture of mpg. You only have to look on the forums to see how much people mpg varies for the same model and how much ire the subject generates. I've been accused of lying even though I've posted photos of the readout. LOL.


Roy

[Robbijay]

A lot of the figures you guys are posting on here are very surprising!
I've got a 2006 D5 manual (so I have the DPF), which I drive, fast. Most of my driving is 'combined' commuting to work, i.e. cold start through town for about 3 miles, national speed limit dual carriageway for a couple of miles, then single carriageway A road, through another town and then some country B roads to finish. I was getting 42 avg unitl I got it serviced and then it shot up to 45 (prob more to do with warmer weather?). It's now dropped to 44, maybe because I've been putting V-power in?

I think this is great since I have fun in it all the time, and still get 5 mpg better than I did in my last car (1.8 S40) if I drove that like a saint.

I do put a shot of millers in every tank, which supposedly helps and cleans the injectors etc and although I said I drive fast, I'm also in the IAM so I've been taught to look ahead and so I save fuel by easing off and not racing up to red lights, bends and other cars etc. It's amazing how much fuel you save if you ease off as soon as you see a queue of traffic or red light instead of racing up to it. Taking your foot off the throttle and selecting the right gear going down hill uses no fuel at all, and makes sure in in the right gear for going up the other side if necessary.

LMAO at tingymagigs fuel consumption though, my mates got a 55 reg D5 V70 and red lines it everywhere (literally, drives like a 'see you next tuesday') and still gets 38mpg!

[MileMuncher]

Originally Posted by robbijay1

my mates got a 55 reg D5 V70 and red lines it everywhere (literally, drives like a 'see you next tuesday') and still gets 38mpg!

[R-P]

Originally Posted by dodgyken

It doesn't take much to damage fuel economy - a classic example is getting the gearbox to lock up - sometimes you have to go faster than you initially want to for the gearbox to lock up - then drop your speed slightly - and it will maintain the lock - and be more fuel efficient.

I can achieve the official numbers.

Hi all, will properly introduce myself later, but for now, this thread and this post caught my eye.

My D5 is not very fuel efficient and I am trying to find what is wrong.

I dropped by the (2nd) Volvo dealer for some questions, and they seemed quite knowledgeable, but when I discussed the locking up of the geartronic, I got a glazy stare...

How I understand it: the axle going into the automatic-oil-filled-thingy and the axle coming out will make a real connection, like a clutch in a handshifted car, right?
Does this mean that when slowly accelerating in 5th, the revs should increase with the same rate as the speedometer? Or will it unlock the moment there is the slightest increase in power (that's what it does for me, the revs will go from 2000 to 2300 almost instantly)?

And my fuel economy with very careful driving (!!!, OK, it's a geartronic and an AWD, but don't forget the delicate driving part.)


(dashcomputer shows 9.0l/100km or 35.3mpgimp instead of 8.5l/100km or 33.3mpgimp)

The reason I think it is bad: My '96 2.0 Ford Mondeo automatic with only 4 gears has better economy on gasoline with thrashing the car than the Diesel Volvo has with 5 gear and delicate driving. (The revs in top gear are also the same....strange...)

[RoyMacDonald]

Originally Posted by R-P

The reason I think it is bad: My '96 2.0 Ford Mondeo automatic with only 4 gears has better economy on gasoline with thrashing the car than the Diesel Volvo has with 5 gear and delicate driving. (The revs in top gear are also the same....strange...)

Have you compared the weight of the XC90 to the Mondeo and also the frontal area?

Must say I've never gotten over 30 mpg with a 2.0 liter petrol car. Even my wifes 2004 1.3 ltr Toyota Yaris auto barely gets to 30mpg. That Mondeo must have some engine.

All the best.

Roy

[R-P]

Originally Posted by RoyMacDonald

Have you compared the weight of the XC90 to the Mondeo and also the frontal area?

Must say I've never gotten over 30 mpg with a 2.0 liter petrol car. Even my wifes 2004 1.3 ltr Toyota Yaris auto barely gets to 30mpg. That Mondeo must have some engine.

Thanks for your input.
I forgot to mention: it's a V70. Yes, the weight (1340kg vs. 1691kg) is a big difference, as is the AWD. But still: it's a diesel being driven as politely as possible, vs. a petrol being driven normally with some abnormal moments...

I simply cannot get the Volvo to be more fuel efficient. When driving to Austria through Germany I stopped below 170 (105mph) because the fuel usage dropped to very low 20's...

Maybe I expect too much, but when I see someone saying they never drop below 38 while redlining the thing, then there's something wrong if I use 20% more fuel (assuming the AWD fuel inefficiency is easily countered by my careful driving, therefor thinking a one on one comparison would be allowed).

And no offence, but how do you guys drive the Yaris?????
My parents did 30mpg on average in their 145's/245's 30 years ago.

[Robbijay]

are you doing town or city driving? Volvo say about 32 MPG for urban driving with 52 extra urban & 42 combined. How many miles has it done? you may need to use some injector cleaner as those injectors are pretty delicate.

[R-P]

Originally Posted by robbijay1

are you doing town or city driving? Volvo say about 32 MPG for urban driving with 52 extra urban & 42 combined. How many miles has it done? you may need to use some injector cleaner as those injectors are pretty delicate.

Not a lot of in-town driving, pretty much secondary roads and motorways: but they are often congested, so it's not all cruising at 60mph... (it will do close to 50mpg when on CC on a straight at 50mph)

Been thinking about the injectorcleaning, as the sound has become sportier (I'm passed that so it's not a wanted change, it sounds more raw, in Dutch I'd say more ruffle (?) more like a drumroll, a Subaru WRX with large exhausts, hard to explain in English, hope you get what I mean) since getting this engine (50k miles into a 120k car) about 3 months ago. The 120k original engine had one injector fail completely.

Does this injector-cleaner work well? Any brands that are particularly good?