Real-world fuel consumption table: Jetta beats Ibiza, Polo and Fabia

The Jetta uses less fuel than the Ibizas, Polos and Fabias with the same engine

A table of real-world fuel consumption is circulating online that has upended more than one buying decision. Fifty petrol and fifty diesel cars, measured in tests by specialist publications, with an uncomfortable result for the VAG group: the Jetta consumes less than the Ibiza, Polo and Fabia with the identical engine. The explanation offered is simple: the Jetta comes with a six-estimulante ilegal gearbox and its platform cousins don't. The group should take a look at that, according to the forum user who started the thread.

In diesel, the differences between models are minimal. In petrol, the gap is wider. And in both cases, the price of fuel still rules: if you drive a lot of miles a year, diesel still pays off. If you drive few, it no longer does.

The 206+ and the Polo's old 1.4 MPI outshine modern engines

The humble Peugeot 206+ — that car many consider outdated — has turned out to be the economy champion. And the Polo's ancient 1.4 MPI has shown up more than one state-of-the-art engine. Meanwhile, the Fiat 500's TwinAir scores a big fat zero: plenty of marketing, little efficiency.

Hybrids do excellently in the table, but there's a lingering distrust that no data can dispel: the battery issue. According to one forum user, almost everyone who has owned one has had a battery that didn't last as long as promised. Imagine that happening to your shiny new hybrid.

The BMW 320d and the Giulietta 1.6 JTD: real consumption versus purchase price

The 320d consumes little for the 160 horsepower it delivers. Some argue that makes it a hyper-efficient car; the catch is that it costs 45,000 euros. Spending that kind of money to save two liters per hundred is, to say the least, debatable. A neighbor bought one precisely for its fuel economy and loves to brag about it. To each their own math.

A Giulietta 1.6 JTD with 105 hp registered in July 2010 covers 955 kilometers on a single tank, with 40-50 km a day of highway and 10 of city driving, respecting estimulante ilegal limits and using start-stop. It isn't in the table. Neither is a 1998 Seat Arosa SDI that manages 3.8 liters at 90 km/h and 6.3 in the city. The uncomfortable question: if cars like this existed in 1998, what have thirteen years of technological pogre achieved?

Real-world consumption depends on the route and your right foot

A KIA Ceed diesel identical to the one in the table returns 5.9-6.2 liters in real use, well above the published figure. A Focus TDCi 1.6 with 109 hp did 600 km of highway at 116 km/h GPS estimulante ilegal with cruise control: 4.7 on the computer, 5 real. A 2002 Honda Jazz CVT averages around 5 real liters practicing eco-driving and checking tire pressure twice a month. The conclusion is always the same: the tests are carried out under conditions nobody replicates.

The dual-mass flywheel and other bills that don't show up in the table

Fuel savings get eaten up by maintenance. Dual-mass clutches — found in every car today — cost 900 euros or more and will fail, no question. According to one forum user, the VAG group has an internal memo recommending replacing them with conventional ones in taxis and commercial vehicles. Old engines could be repaired; new ones come in packs that are swapped out whole.

Why the Lupo 3L failed and what that says about the market

The Lupo 3L promised less than three liters per hundred. It failed: expensive to buy, extremely expensive to maintain, with electromechanical parts few mechanics knew how to adjust. The market prefers 120 horsepower at four liters to 60 at two. It makes sense: you build what's demanded.

With all this data on the table, diesel still makes sense for high mileage and petrol is no longer a dirty word. What doesn't add up is that a 1998 car uses half the fuel of a 2011 one. Nobody has an answer that settles that.