69.5 Mpg

[dgman]

yes, you read it correctly,started at j28 southbound for thirteen or so miles in the 50 mph road work zone.i had cruise on and showing 53 mph on the speedo and running in 5th gear without air con but with both heated seats on and two adults and two kids on board.superb!!

[Anuj]

sound good mate, is it not 6 speed on the 220d

[dgman]

sound good mate, is it not 6 speed on the 220d

yesit is but 53mph is too slow for 6th gear.

[chandru]

geez thats good!

[cbr1100xx]

yes, you read it correctly,started at j28 southbound for thirteen or so miles in the 50 mph road work zone.i had cruise on and showing 53 mph on the speedo and running in 5th gear without air con but with both heated seats on and two adults and two kids on board.superb!!

its not april fools day yet mate!!!! :winky:

[dgman]

yes, you read it correctly,started at j28 southbound for thirteen or so miles in the 50 mph road work zone.i had cruise on and showing 53 mph on the speedo and running in 5th gear without air con but with both heated seats on and two adults and two kids on board.superb!!

its not april fools day yet mate!!!! :winky:

no worries here fella,get yourself a spider tuning box and revel in the extra power,it's addictive.

[Yeldarb]

yes, you read it correctly,started at j28 southbound for thirteen or so miles in the 50 mph road work zone.i had cruise on and showing 53 mph on the speedo and running in 5th gear without air con but with both heated seats on and two adults and two kids on board.superb!!

its not april fools day yet mate!!!! :winky:

no worries here fella,get yourself a spider tuning box and revel in the extra power,it's addictive.

I have another Dragon tuning box lying around In fact 2 or 3 FIRC......

All you need is the Lexus harness (if different to Citroen HDI fuel rail) and USB dongle.

More power more economy etc.....

[Tango]

yes, you read it correctly,started at j28 southbound for thirteen or so miles in the 50 mph road work zone.i had cruise on and showing 53 mph on the speedo and running in 5th gear without air con but with both heated seats on and two adults and two kids on board.superb!!

its not april fools day yet mate!!!! :winky:

All downhill was it?

[simon k]

and then you woke up

[dgman]

yes, you read it correctly,started at j28 southbound for thirteen or so miles in the 50 mph road work zone.i had cruise on and showing 53 mph on the speedo and running in 5th gear without air con but with both heated seats on and two adults and two kids on board.superb!!

its not april fools day yet mate!!!! :winky:

All downhill was it?

steady now,envy can be poison.

[Steve ( West Mids )]

If only all our driving were at those constant sppeds with no accelerator pedal movemnet, no brake use and no gear changes ;)

[dave1]

But how accurate was the OBC. What was your true consumption on filling it?

[dgman]

But how accurate was the OBC. What was your true consumption on filling it?

i have checked the actual consumption against the obc on previous occasions and found it to be accurate to 0.5 of a mile.the point being made is that when driven with economy in mind the 220d is capable of giving some very good fuel economy figures and compares very well with the competition.audi's obc's are incorrect by as much as 15% according to audi forums.

[Voodoo]

But how accurate was the OBC. What was your true consumption on filling it?

Hi

There was a recent article in Auto Express on fuel consumption and they did not find the OBC to be to accurate on most cars. Some being very optimistic. IIRC. :D

Greig

[Sagitar]

But how accurate was the OBC. What was your true consumption on filling it?

i have checked the actual consumption against the obc on previous occasions and found it to be accurate to 0.5 of a mile.the point being made is that when driven with economy in mind the 220d is capable of giving some very good fuel economy figures and compares very well with the competition.audi's obc's are incorrect by as much as 15% according to audi forums.

0.5 of a mile in what? I suspect that very few people are sufficiently interested in statistical accuracy to maintain the kind of records that are necessary to give proper comparisons.

I have had the car showing over 40 m.p.g tank average for the right kind of long journey. I have seen all kinds of wonderful numbers on the instantaneous readout. But over the whole life of the car, including every litre put into the tank and every mile done, the true average consumption is shown below.

The overall average shown by the in-car computer currently is 32.2 m.p.g. That's an error of less than 6% and not at all untoward for the kind of device and circumstances that we are discussing, but it is significant.

Chances are that there is always going to be an error and you would hardly expect the manufacturer to set things up in such a way that the error made the car look worse than it was - would you? . . . . . .

[dave1]

But how accurate was the OBC. What was your true consumption on filling it?

i have checked the actual consumption against the obc on previous occasions and found it to be accurate to 0.5 of a mile.the point being made is that when driven with economy in mind the 220d is capable of giving some very good fuel economy figures and compares very well with the competition.audi's obc's are incorrect by as much as 15% according to audi forums.

I brimfill mine and record mileage/litres and MPG. My OBC fuel consumption figure always seems to be almost identical to the figures I obtain by my own workings out. I always reset after refuelling. Whilst driving though, various figures show on "current mpg" part. It is these figures which I find hard to believe at times, not the overall figures.

[dgman]

But how accurate was the OBC. What was your true consumption on filling it?

i have checked the actual consumption against the obc on previous occasions and found it to be accurate to 0.5 of a mile.the point being made is that when driven with economy in mind the 220d is capable of giving some very good fuel economy figures and compares very well with the competition.audi's obc's are incorrect by as much as 15% according to audi forums.

0.5 of a mile in what? I suspect that very few people are sufficiently interested in statistical accuracy to maintain the kind of records that are necessary to give proper comparisons.

I have had the car showing over 40 m.p.g tank average for the right kind of long journey. I have seen all kinds of wonderful numbers on the instantaneous readout. But over the whole life of the car, including every litre put into the tank and every mile done, the true average consumption is shown below.

The overall average shown by the in-car computer currently is 32.2 m.p.g. That's an error of less than 6% and not at all untoward for the kind of device and circumstances that we are discussing, but it is significant.

Chances are that there is always going to be an error and you would hardly expect the manufacturer to set things up in such a way that the error made the car look worse than it was - would you? . . . . . .

if i fill up the tank avg will zero itself, if i zero the avg at the same time the mpg on tavg reads the same as avg and this pattern continues until the avg is reset.since i already know that my tavg is accurate to within 0.5 of a mile it is therefore logical too assume that the avg is also accurate to within 0.5 given the 13 mile journey length. :whistling:

[FinLex]

The OBC is dead on.

BTW, 69.5 MPG is far beyond anything I've ever recorded. Still, my overall figure is 47,9 MPG from new... And 50+ is a constant on longer runs.

[dgman]

The OBC is dead on.

BTW, 69.5 MPG is far beyond anything I've ever recorded. Still, my overall figure is 47,9 MPG from new... And 50+ is a constant on longer runs.

i suspect that we will shortlyhave a post from an ex owner followed by a wannaee telling us all that we have got it totally wrong.

[SiWhite]

I managed 45.8 out of mine over 190 miles between Gillingham and Dudley on Sunday. Not bad for a 2.5 V6 :)