Skoda Roomster Fuel Consumption

pistolero

Hi There, anyone own one of these? Trying to get user comsumption figures on a 1.2 petrol and diesel. Any info appreciated.
Cheers.

MuppetCheck

Id a loan of a 1.2 tdi for a while. It's very underpowered and required a lot of hard driving to keep up with traffic. I struggled to get over 40mpg from it but a lot of that was it working hard at 130 ish on the motorway.

pistolero

Thanks for that - any idea how compares with petrol version?

MuppetCheck

pistolero wrote: »

Thanks for that - any idea how compares with petrol version?

Haven't a notion. I don't think I would inflict the pain of one on myself tbh.

Bpmull

You would be way better of with a 1.6tdi good power and a lovely car real spacious inside. I know someone with a roomster 1.6tdi it does between 50-60 mpg the guy I know puts up 90k km a year on his he has near 250k km on it now and never had any issues with it. He loves it and I spent 2 weeks in it and found it very comfortable even on long trips 800km trips in one day you still wouldn't be sore getting out of it. Personally I wouldn't buy a 1.2 petrol or diesel I would only buy a 1.6 diesel.

166man

Skoda 1.2TDI......................the Irish special....:rolleyes:

MuppetCheck

166man wrote: »

Skoda 1.2TDI......................the Irish special....:rolleyes:

But it's available in other countries? Doubt they put the effort in for a small market like Ireland.

166man

MuppetCheck wrote: »

But it's available in other countries? Doubt they put the effort in for a small market like Ireland.

T'was more of a tongue in cheek comment tbh... I can't imagine a car I'd want less than a VAG with a 1.2TDI.

MuppetCheck

166man wrote: »

T'was more of a tongue in cheek comment tbh... I can't imagine a car I'd want less than a VAG with a 1.2TDI.

Lowest power engine in the range. Every range has to start somewhere.

166man

MuppetCheck wrote: »

Lowest power engine in the range. Every range has to start somewhere.

True, but surely the 1.6TDI is as economical in daily driving, much nicer to drive and in roughly the same C02 tax bracket?

I see the logic with the 1.2TSI but am lost with regards to the 1.2TDI.

ba_barabus

Randomly though I posted in this thread earlier????

Bpmull

166man wrote: »

True, but surely the 1.6TDI is as economical in daily driving, much nicer to drive and in roughly the same C02 tax bracket?

I see the logic with the 1.2TSI but am lost with regards to the 1.2TDI.

If anything the 1.6 tdi is probably better on fuel. I see no advantage to a 1.2 tdi at all as it would constantly be under pressure trying to move the car around. As I said they are not A bad car once they have the 1.6 engine comfortable and very spacious.

Bpmull

ba_barabus wrote: »

Randomly though I posted in this thread earlier????

The op seems to have two similar threads running I think you posted in the other one. They are both about roomsters anyway.

ba_barabus

Bpmull wrote: »

The op seems to have two similar threads running I think you posted in the other one. They are both and roomsters anyway.

Cheers, I thought I was going MENKLE there

MuppetCheck

166man wrote: »

True, but surely the 1.6TDI is as economical in daily driving, much nicer to drive and in roughly the same C02 tax bracket?

I see the logic with the 1.2TSI but am lost with regards to the 1.2TDI.

Brings the average emissions of the range as a whole down to meet regulatory requirements, some people will use them for economy, they are a cheap diesel yada yada yada.

Then there's people that will just buy the lowest engine in a range and convince themselves it's great because it's a new car.

166man

MuppetCheck wrote: »

Brings the average emissions of the range as a whole down to meet regulatory requirements, some people will use them for economy, they are a cheap diesel yada yada yada.

Then there's people that will just buy the lowest engine in a range and convince themselves it's great because it's a new car.

Yeah true, just can't see the logic myself.

MuppetCheck

166man wrote: »

Yeah true, just can't see the logic myself.

Economy and regulations would be the logic behind it.

166man

MuppetCheck wrote: »

Economy and regulations would be the logic behind it.

I can't see the logic of choosing the 1.2TDI over the 1.6.

Furp

We had one for a few years the 1.4 petrol it was good famly car, but even that engine felt underpowered especially on the motorway with a full load not that econonmical either think we averaged around 7.4/100km over the course of owning it.

pistolero

Cheers for those, have an offer of one or the other , just a town runaround. Had a drive and ok in both for what I'll be doing, just curious
about fuel consumption!!

Leonard Hofstadter

OP, why not buy a petrol model? Roomster TDIs are going to be very hard to find even in diesel obsessed Ireland, as they were very expensive over their petrol counterparts, and the TSI models are very good for fuel economy and emissions (by petrol standards).

Officially the 1.2 TSI does nearly 50 mpg. The 1.2 TDI does 67 mpg officially, and the 1.6 TDI does 60 mpg.

So, as you can see, the 1.2 TSI is actually quite close to the 1.6 TDI.

As it happens, my neighbour has had not one but two Roomsters. One was a 2008 1.4 petrol (85 bhp), and the other is a 2011 1.2 TSI with 105 bhp. She much prefers the 1.2 because not only is it much faster, but being turbocharged, it delivers the power lower down the rev range, so doesn't need to be worked as hard. When my neighbour bought the first one, she tried the 1.2 non turbo petrol (which is less economical than the 1.2 TSI by the way). Admittedly this has 5 bhp less than the 1.2 TDI, but she went straight for the 1.4 petrol (replaced by the 1.2 TSI since), she said that it was too heavy a car for that size engine.

The 1.2 TSI is available in either 85 or 105 bhp formats, there should be plenty of 105 bhp models around, as they were something like only €300 extra over the 85 bhp model. That's what I would buy instead of the diesel. The 1.2 TDI is only a three cylinder engine, so it will be a lot rougher than a regular four cylinder engine too (the TSI petrols are all four cylinders, and the 1.6 TDI is also a four cylinder engine).

The 1.6 TDI is the grand total of €10 cheaper than the 1.2 TDI to tax every year.

Given that the 1.6 TDI 105 is no less than €3,370 dearer than the 1.2 TSI 105, you'll be waiting 337 years before you get the tax savings back. Yes, it will be more economical, and you would of course get quite a bit of that extra premium back when selling second-hand, but it will also have things like DPFs and DMFs to go wrong if you're planning on doing urban driving, so could easily end up being more expensive to run than the petrol.

A petrol will be nicer to drive, because it will be smoother, quieter, sound nicer, and lighter over the front wheels as well. Being turbocharged, it will have a lot more grunt at low revs than a regular petrol engine as well. You'd be mad to be even considering the diesel really.

MuppetCheck

Actually captainspeed, the 1.2tdi isn't rough at all. It's surprisingly smooth believe it or not. Slow as a wet week but surprisingly refined for a small capacity diesel.

Leonard Hofstadter

MuppetCheck wrote: »

Actually captainspeed, the 1.2tdi isn't rough at all. It's surprisingly smooth believe it or not. Slow as a wet week but surprisingly refined for a small capacity diesel.

Fair enough so . It would be still absolutely bonkers to go for one though on cost and performance grounds, though .

MuppetCheck

LIGHTNING wrote: »

Its a tall enough city car why not just drive it at 100km/h on the motorway. You would see a massive mpg improvement by doing so.

Because I had much better things to do than extend a 2 hour plus commute in that thin can;)