Speed ​​limit 120 on the highway? A self-experiment.

It's Saturday and I'm on my way to Bamberg. Around 160 kilometers and the opportunity to try it yourself. A speed limit of 120 km / h on federal German motorways is being discussed, I am already trying it out today. With a car that is anything but particularly suitable for it.

Speed ​​limit self-test in 9-3 aero. The least suitable car for this.
Speed ​​limit self-test in 9-3 aero. The least suitable car for this.

My Saab 9-3 Aero is almost 20 years old, has a 4-speed automatic, and 17 ″ tires for the vehicle class. So you shouldn't expect miracles, the reference value of the last freeway journeys is 9,8 liters as consumption. They were driven at an average of 150, 160 km / h - a speed at which Saab and driver feel comfortable.

Another quick reset of the on-board computer, then it goes on the highway. Tempo 120, I can feel it on the first few meters, is really slow. Almost every other road user overtakes me, whether it's a small car, van or SUV. My accelerator foot doesn't like sneaking either, I constantly catch myself with the speedometer oscillating between 130 and 140. But it doesn't help, I have to go through it now! So the cruise control activated, 120 set, and the 9-3 climbs the Kauppenaufstieg on the A3. It's boring, and before the readers get bored, a short story from my life.

The Kauppen ascent

A reader recently said that I should tell more about myself. After all, he reads me every day and is therefore in contact with me more often than with some family members. All right then! The Kauppen ascent the A3 is new, multi-lane. Its old version was extremely dangerous, and the most accident-prone section of the motorway in northern Bavaria. I think it was 1971 when I almost breathed out my very young life there. My father and I were driving the descent from Rohrbrunn towards Aschaffenburg in a Ford Taunus 12 M (the one with the Saab engine) on the opposite lane. There was a wooden board on the roadway that a truck that had been driving had lost it. Evasion was impossible, the traffic was already too dense at that time. The Ford drove over the wood, which whirled to the underbody and cut the brake line.

I don't know how my old man got it, but he kept his nerve. Somehow he made it to the next parking lot, let the Ford roll out, and stopped safely. My mother only found out about it casually, and how she reacted is beyond my memory. The story still goes through my head after decades when I drive the descent. The route has changed since then, but I still recognize the spot with the parking lot.

With the little story we passed the time to Würzburg. I still don't enjoy 120 km / h, but consumption has dropped to 8,3 liters. Not bad, but I have to go across town now, and that's when the automatic system hits. When I roll onto the A7, there are 8,5 liters on the display again. In the meantime I've got used to about 120. I glide along relaxed, enjoy the comfort of the 9-3, the speed of the gearbox, which has just been translated, is just under 3.000 revolutions.

The Kauppen ascent of the A3, there is something to tell here.
The Kauppen ascent of the A3, there is something to tell here.

What about climate change?

Of course, I'm not just doing the self-test because of the discussion about the speed limit. I am also concerned with conserving resources and the question of how a 20-year-old car fits in with the times. That evening, television from Spain will report. Greta Thunberg organized her biggest climate academy so far, the topic moves the masses. Maybe. Or maybe not. As it looks on the A70, no one is interested in CO2 emissions and ecological footprints.

I like to scold the big, thick SUVs that plow under full load on the highway. They still exist today, but with my 120 km / h hiking dune I am a traffic obstacle for everyone. The highway is relatively clear and people drive according to a modified Donald Trump quote "I have a lot of horsepower, why shouldn't I use it?". Trump once said that in connection with nuclear weapons. And he didn't mean that as fun.

From Dacia to Bentayga, everything that goes or almost everything overtakes me today. The crews of vehicles with Romanian or Bulgarian license plates alone are consistently slower than I am. Stoically at 110, they pull their railroad to the east with their diesel vehicles, which we are no longer allowed to drive. Economical and guaranteed sustainable. The consumption probably with fabulous values ​​under 4 liters. Not because of the environment, but for other reasons.

Speed ​​limit 120 relaxed

Consumption continues to drop towards Bamberg. 8,2 then 8,1. Shortly before Bamberg I see 8. I am relaxed on the road, low blood pressure and resting heart rate. You can live at 120 km / h, no question! I'm only 160 minutes slower on the 10 kilometers - a number that can be neglected. Does the consumption drop below the magic 8?

He does not do it. When I was at Muckelbauer drive to the yard, it is still on the display. I pull out the iphone, at that moment it jumps to 8,1. Bad luck! The bottom line is an under-consumption of 1,8 liters in the room. With a more sensitive gas foot and without Würzburg city traffic, it would have been 2 or 2,1 liters.

As I said, my Aero is not the ideal car for self-tests of this kind. If you exclude the automatic system, which I do not want to do without, it would be half a liter less consumption with the manual transmission. Tires in a smaller dimension would result in another 0,1 liters per inch. Around 7 liters of fuel would not be an illusion with a 20-year-old 9-3 at a speed limit. In the end, this would only be a small advantage for modern vehicles with 8 or 9-speed automatic transmissions.

The reward of sneaking. Only 8,1 liters of consumption. In fact, it was only 8,0.
The reward of sneaking. Only 8,1 liters of consumption. In fact, it was only 8,0.

How sustainable is that?

There are few arguments that would speak against old cars in everyday life. On the contrary. If a general speed limit is introduced, its greatest disadvantages are eliminated. Modern cars score with better chassis, brakes and lighting systems. Their strengths count especially at high speeds and are becoming increasingly less important at a comfortable 120 km / h.

The biggest asset is sustainability. Because the greatest consumption of resources took place two or three decades ago. If you now consume one or two liters per 2 kilometers more, then you can cope with it. For classification only: The production of a new VW Golf emits an average of 5 tons of CO2. If we generously assume that the Golf consumes 2 liters less per 100 kilometers, then the old Saab can be moved 2 kilometers with this CO105.000 backpack without the modern Golf having an environmental benefit.

And while the VW Group gives the average lifespan of its products at 200.000 kilometers, the legends from Trollhättan play in a higher league. When the next Golf goes into production in Wolfsburg and its predecessor ends up at the recycling center, my old Saab still drives and is therefore a really sustainable vehicle.

35 thoughts on "Speed ​​limit 120 on the highway? A self-experiment."

  • Full “boring” (@Hartmut),

    that is indeed a good argument. And it is honest. And you (at least I) can understand it immediately. I only feel speeds relatively.

    Even 100 km / h can be really fun. For example, on an unpaved dirt road with my old Volvo. Or 60 km / h on the thin tires of a racing bike. Conversely, in the younger Saab, even at 140, I still have to be careful not to fall asleep at the wheel on a low-traffic BAB…

    For the BAB I would prefer a regulation similar to that for federal and rural roads. There either the signs or a general speed limit apply. It could be freely defined for the BAB. It could also be 200 km / h.

    It is a pity that we hardly discuss the level of a reasonable limitation in D, do not sound out the greatest possible consensus and the best compromise. The discussion is pretty black and white and only knows lame versus infinite. It doesn't get any bipolar…

  • My “thank you” related to Anddeu's contribution, that was all.

    Discussions are such that different opinions are exchanged, so here too and I think the way in which this is done is absolutely ok.
    The addiction to harmony can take on grotesque forms.
    You have different opinions - so what?

    There are idiots among the supporters and among the opponents of the speed limit and just as examples of idiots on highways etc. are mentioned here, there are also unbearable snores and snails that are more than just nerves.

    But that's not the point, they won't change even with the speed limit.

    As the saying goes: SAAB drivers are individualists. When did they start calling for more regulations?

  • have no Saab, absolutely wants a 900-I, (turbo) but currently have four old / older boxes from 76-97.

    120 km / h is fully “boring” and I have only done it once on German motorways. Was open with our SLK in bright sunshine and of course.

    Otherwise, I prefer my personal travel speed of 160 km / h. Of course, this is due to the equipment. A Porsche v. 83, an Alfa 164 v. 96 and an Alfa Giulia v. 76 with a 2.1 and a tight 160 Cavalli.

    If it really comes to 120 km / h I have a real problem

    VG Hartmut

  • @ Suburban Casanova & Linus

    Quotes: “Please be careful not to let the discussion slip.” or “Thank you!”

    That's cheap, isn't it? Is there even a single comment by a proponent of a speed limit that would have slipped out of the two articles on the topic? One who has been shown to make false claims?

    “Not slipped” & “Thanks!” does that also mean that any comment per limit is considered to have slipped away per se in the opinion of Messrs Casanova and Linus? Is this factual or presumptuous?

    Quote: "In fact, we already have a speed limit."

    Yes and? If nothing changes anyway, where would the problem be if it were laid down in law?

    Quote: “If everyone would abide by the general provisions of the StVO (…) then there would be no need to discuss a speed limit.”

    An admission that not everyone does it and, conversely, you need one. It is also interesting that the frequent drivers and self-proclaimed BAB professionals, of all people, never or hardly ever want to see a speedster.

    Although I only cover a few thousand kilometers per year on the BAB, motorcycles and sports cars at 300 km / h plus are no stranger to me. Or station wagons and SUVs, which on the two-lane (!) A20 with a fluctuating roof load (for example bicycles including fluttering panniers and baskets on the beating handlebar) claim 200 km / h plus the left-hand lane for themselves and threaten to charge it destroy or lose parts of the same. Fuck it because you're late and the Sweden ferry MUST be reached on time ...

    Nobody can reasonably deny that on German motorways, at least occasionally and in sections, naked madness rules. Anyone who claims to have never seen questionable wagons quickly as a self-proclaimed BAB professional is simply unbelievable. Or a visual aid is urgently needed. Add to that the absurd claims that you would have saved 99% of the emission without a limit and similar nonsense ...

    So if the discussion threatens to slip, why and who is it exactly?

    My impression is that the supporters of a limit are just as reluctant here as they are probably on the BAB. Once again the expression of the silent majority comes to mind ...

    And yet, whoever screams louder (and drives faster) may ultimately get it right. As I said, an admonishing reference to the culture of discussion and objectivity from this side, of all things, seems to me to be quite cheap. And there is no milder way to put it. So who is slipping? Which faction should restrain itself exactly why?

  • Thank you!

  • Please be careful not to let the discussion slip.
    I travel a lot professionally, earlier in the Saab, currently in the Volvo (don't go back in a row).
    In fact, we already have a speed limit. There are only a few motorway sections where there is not already a signposted speed limit. But it is also difficult to drive quickly on the others because the traffic density does not allow it. Anyone traveling on the Berlin - Munich route on weekdays can hardly achieve an average speed of 130 km / h. I am in favor of traffic being regulated more via temporary speed limits. If the traffic density increases, the speed should be regulated using the gantries. If there is little or no traffic, everyone can drive as fast as road and visibility conditions allow.
    If everyone adhered to the general provisions of the Road Traffic Act - only drive as fast as visibility, road, weather and traffic conditions allowb and so fast that one can stop safely within sight - then there would be no need to discuss speed limit.

  • @ Ken-Daniel S

    I think we agree. The bottom line is that Saab drivers increasingly like to use vacuum cleaners. Be it a 900i, a 9000 or a young 9-3. They have always (and sometimes very happily) foregone the displacement and cylinder. Whether a luxury car can now have 1,6 or 2,0? ? ?

    Only Saab drivers think in such - almost cute - categories. For fans of other brands, this discussion is more of a 6- and an 8-cylinder and only begins with a cubic capacity that has already shown the maximum at Saab.

    In this respect, no NG driver even needs to consider a guilty conscience even if he preferred a 2,0 or 2,8 over the 1,6T. Still fascinating that this car was available at this time and in this size. Kind of typical Saab, right?

  • Thumbs up for alternative facts

    Currently, there is a commentary on opinion leadership that claims we have saved 1970% of emissions since the 99s, and proponents of a speed limit should shut up and Greta anyway.

    I happen to have a car from exactly 1970 with a remarkable 160 HP at that time. A Porsche also had no more. It is a Volvo 164E with a 4-speed manual switch plus (electrically) switchable overdrive (5th gear). In the papers there are 190. According to Wikipedia, it is 193 and 8,9 from 0 to 100. At least 180 according to the speedometer, I and I out of sheer pleasure of the joy sometimes for a few kilometers when traveling to the Baltic Sea on the German. BAB granted ...

    Otherwise I drove it mostly with 120 and at the destination there was a consumption of 10,5 liters. If we had saved 1970% of emissions since the 99s, my chrome glasses (with which I have often driven the same route) would have to make do with 0,105 liters ...

    The currently cheered 18-fold comment on the alleged saving of 99% of our emissions that has already been achieved is so irrelevant and so ridiculous that I will not go into this further.

    Rather than a single comment, the free flight of the thumbs horrifies me anyway. What is actually going on here? Has the author of alternative facts collected all of the devices in his extended family and has given thumbs up for himself and against others? Has he also voted several times? Has the lobby intervened? Or does the average Saab driver and blog reader really not know the difference between emissions (total), individual pollutants, carbon monoxide and carbon dioxide?

    I cannot and do not want to believe the latter. The level of education here seems to me to be above average, the level of reflection higher.

    In this respect, the survey also seems manipulated and failed to me. Too bad. Really a shame. It would have been interesting to see how the majority of Saab drivers tick on this question.

    I also liked a lot of comments that didn't want to make friends with 130 or less. Someone had bid and led 150. And stated that it would help and be enough to melt the differences between the tracks. For me personally, everything is fine now between 120 and 210. But we need some limit ...

    ... we certainly do not need alternative facts and (too obvious) manipulation of surveys.

  • @ Andi 39

    With pure e-car supporters, I always ask myself which car did they have before the e-car and how did they live there? Do they then demonize their previous work?

  • @ Herbert Hürsch
    With some models you are more likely to search for the vehicle and only then will there be a question of which engine is inside. A neat 900i can also make you happy.
    With the 6 liter displacement vehicles, the question arises, why are we driving medium-sized vehicles with 0,8-1,5 liter displacement for our standards, while others continue to drive the V8 with 6 liter displacement. Some of them supposedly protect the environment, while others blow out more.
    The 1,6T was not particularly popular as the used car ads show. Is there an NG driver with 1,6T? In cars of this length, the small engines are still viewed with skepticism.

  • @ Anddeu,

    that (self-driving cars) is one of my concerns. I prefer to drive in a country with a speed limit of my own and sometimes 10 or 20 km / h too fast than not to drive anymore in the future or to send data online permanently to manufacturers, police and insurance companies during my journey.

    A speed limit (also largely adhered to) seems to me the least impending evil. And it takes many arguments against self-determined motorists with analog cars and conventional drives to take the wind out of their sails.

    CO₂ emissions drop. Traffic will be safer. And the space requirement for motorways is also decreasing because more vehicles move more smoothly on fewer lanes. Just think of braking distances and safety distances for 130 or 250. There are actually 4 × as many vehicles safely on one track.

    Especially if and because we want to drive independently in the future, we should make a small concession. Otherwise, we transfer sovereignty over speed, distances, braking maneuvers and steering to the legislature, the manufacturers and the insurance companies sooner rather than later ...

  • The issue of the tipping mood is such an issue. When I look at the rhetoric of some electric car supporters in certain forums, you have worries. The militancy and intolerance towards other lifestyles and partly also towards people who cannot afford an electric car (not even in the future) is scary. The division of society is palpable - also on this topic

  • The 9-3I Aero can be driven very economically in the right conditions. I find it fascinating what good engines Saab has developed over the years.

    I keep thinking about using mine again in everyday life. However, I don't really trust him anymore and staying somewhere is also a horror for me. Ideally, somewhere far away from people who are familiar with Swedish technology.
    Basically, I also see little that speaks against old cars in everyday life (once outside the Saab field). However, I also wonder where the mood “tilts” at some point. The more driving bans expand (diesel or petrol), the faster they will unfortunately also disappear.

  • … Would this really end the discussion? It would probably only change in regular discussions about adjusting the pace up or down. Perhaps the discussion will take care of itself with the introduction of self-driving cars.

  • @Linus
    Couldn't have said it better.

  • The driver chauffeurs himself

    Exciting what's going on here. The survey started with a plus for the supporters of a speed limit and is currently still 50:50 ...

    And that on a car and turboblog. You don't have to be a prophet or pollster to know exactly what the majority of voters want.

    And yet one of the arguments put forward many times by the opponents is that politicians should not dictate as much as possible.

    Supporters of a limit could be very, very correct. Wouldn't it be great if “up there” would just do what the majority want?

    Also noteworthy is the level of expertise with which some chauffeurs are rebuilt here (99% emissions already saved) and how their fingers crossed when one takes the risk to answer objectively to such an overheated comment.

    I am there for a limit if only because it would end this discussion. It took me far too long to get out of nuclear power.

  • You don't have to regulate everything about prohibitions - here I also contradict the statement that we have never had as much freedom as today. We have never had as many restrictions as we have since World War II and everyone runs after the doom prophets without even thinking. We have to be told “how dare you” - by a 2 year old who has certainly started something good but inevitably has no life experience - but everyone parrots your statements.
    Just check the facts and put them in relation, then a lot looks very different.
    My favorite example is the street in Hamburg, which runs parallel to the Elbe and where driving bans have already been pronounced - 100m next to it cruise ship, tanker etc. Are we ready to make logical thinking punishable?
    There are far too many rules, laws and prohibitions - this is unworthy and colossal presumption for a mature citizen.

    I drive a 900 Turbo 16S and often just drive up to 4.000 rpm because I no longer want this old car to have to drive at full throttle.
    But it's just fun to be able to speed over the highway at 200 km / h, experience the great suit of the turbo engine and just enjoy driving this car.

    This is also of value beyond money and emissions discussions. Man as such is not born to always act sensibly - he has to do it far too much anyway.
    I am blessed with a pronounced tempament, which is already the devil for most people today ...

    Because of my age, that will be over in a few years anyway, so I'm definitely not going to subordinate myself to these bureaucrats who are allowed to call themselves “government”.

  • The engine question (@ Ken-Daniel S)

    I have the impression that the injectors within the Saab friends are experiencing a certain renaissance. If at all available, the i-motors are also often used if they are in a delicious used car.
    This is not possible with some models. NG and chrome glasses, for example, were never on the market without charging, so the question does not even arise.

    Conversely, with a 2,0 or 2,3 liter turbo, you don't need to have a guilty conscience, because they can be moved around the consumption level of their uncharged and unexcited colleagues with the same displacement.

    I find it much more interesting that cars with a displacement of 6 liters are still being built after Saab offered 10 in a limousine over 1,6 meters long 5 years ago.

  • I see it the same way and fully agree with your opinion!

  • "We have never had as much freedom as today". Right. But not for long. The attentive observer sees their disappearance. And a speed limit is the least.

  • @ ken-daniel s
    I agree 100% with that !!
    Driving fast is fun, driving fast does not necessarily mean racing or being an environmental sow. I think the automatic link is nonsense.

  • The only question is why do we dream of Turbo X, Viggen and other fast cars? Because in Germany you can use it to drive fast, not only to accelerate quickly, but to be able to drive higher speeds with ease for longer periods. Of course you need much less with 120 than with 220. I've already written a few times that I also enjoy driving with as little consumption as possible. Only then the question arises why we drive 2,0T, TTID, V6. At 120 or only 100 and to accelerate this, a 1,8i with 122 HP is sufficient. It saves even more in everything.

  • Hello Saab driver ... u. everyone else too ... there is a speed limit in Sweden, in Switzerland, in Italy, in Spain, in Austria, etc. ... so what is the point of the German fuss. I am driving on German roads 130. This is good for my Saab 9-3 Aero with currently 486780 km. Consumption when I drive in Sweden at 110 km / h ... 7,1 ltr.
    Environmentally friendly, gel bags and Saab spared

  • So I have also “slowed down” vehemently for more than a year. In everyday use I have been driving two of these rather unpopular “9-5 3.0t petrol monster limousines” with 4-speed automatic for several years. They are both now very close to the "real" legal age and will be celebrating their 21st birthday this year.

    As a “suspended” person living in the province (every real city is more than 100km away), as I have raised several times, I achieve a long-distance share of about 80%. Both on-board computers are pretty accurate, but I still calculate the real consumption over km, fill up and set three. The older one really needs 9,2l and the younger one 9,3l. I never drive more than 130km / h on the AB. As a result, the son, the elderly parents, the mother-in-law and good friends sometimes have to wait a little longer for us to arrive, but this is a time loss of 15 to 20 minutes each way. Nevertheless, I occasionally have to force myself to just let the “lead feet” pass. Once you have that in your blood, then you will be stressed and z. T. profile neurotic permanent left-handers only sorry.

    I used to drive 160-180 km / h. Back then it was definitely fun. Now I'm enjoying the peace and listening to music. I mostly leave the “company car lane” on the left and am pleased that I hardly have to reach any destination under deadline pressure.

    An occasional trip through Berlin or MD is of course all the more frustrating. Under 12-13 l / 100km there is nothing to be done, then the sustainability is put into perspective a little, although you can hardly eject soot particles with the old intake manifold injectors. All “modern” direct petrol injectors now also have particle filters. Another part that can clog. That's how it is with progress. Everything will be better, but nothing will be really good.

  • @ Axel Valentiner = Branth,

    Saved 99% of emissions? ? ?

    It's really wonderful. In fact, that was what politicians and business people said when exhaust gas including carbon dioxide was not considered an emission per se and people still talked about pollutants ...

    About carbon monoxide. It may have felt like yesterday, but you don't need to come with Greta today. She is too young to know the debate about lead and catalysts, regulated and unregulated or even missing.

    From Greta's perspective, we have saved exactly 1970% in emissions since the 0s and it is not even wrong.

  • In the KIA-E-Soul, the range at 120 km / h is only half as large as at 80 km / h, speeds above 120 km / h are rarely used. In the SAAB 9-5 Kombi TU-Autom. a cruising speed of 150 - 170 km / h is pleasant on an empty highway. When traveling overall (also with Holland, Belgium, England), my 9-5 clearly consumes less than 8 liters, in short-distance city traffic, on the other hand, around 11 liters / 100 km.
    Environment: If you start 1970s cars with 100% emissions, then soon it was only 50% with unregulated catalytic converter, and 10 years later only 5% with the regulated catalytic converters. In comparison with today's preparation and cleaning systems, this is probably still around 1%. (Hello Greta: In 50 years we have reduced the emissions of a car by approx. 99% - what do you think we would have done nothing?) And now should we be able to save significant emissions on the few freeways with free driving on rare occasions? It's all about walking and forbidding.

  • The maximum

    It would be interesting to see what you could consume on the route.
    The difference would then correspond to the savings potential that a speed limit would bring.

    My personal experience is that you can easily drive twice the amount of fuel through a car if you move it above 120 or 130 without a limit.

    Conversely, the savings potential compared to unlimited full throttle driving is 50% and more for many cars. In view of the current debates, that alone is enough for me to advocate a speed limit.

  • Incredible, but true: I also did a fabulous self-experiment of this kind last Saturday night and drove back from Munich to Bayreuth at midnight at 120. My "challenge" was to get my 9-3 / II from 10 to less than 7 liters: successful, up to Hienberg it was 6,5, then the Franconian Switzerland put another 0,4 liters / 100 km on it with its mountains ,
    The crazy thing was, however, that the police stopped me behind Munich to check me for alcohol, drugs and illegal things - such as weapons. The result was negative, but with my slow driving style I immediately fell into a traffic control grid. Where do I come from? Admittedly, I was not at the security conference, but at my nephews, who also act as "terrorists": they are 2 and 4 years old and have thrown sand at me on the playground. But if I had said that ... Maybe I should get a Mustang V8, which is probably less noticeable than a Saab. But I think I will continue to use my Saabs to save fuel and resources. On principle. And out of joy. Our nature and our Saabs. Franconian greetings Gunther

  • Hi there,

    again a nice article by and with you and understandable for me in several points.
    It was with me about 20 years ago when I often commuted between Chemnitz and Munich. At that time it was a TDI Golf with 110 PS ... sorry, the 9000 AERO from Papa was only allowed to accompany me from time to time 🙂 and with the Golf I was mostly on the road with 160 - 180 ... driving down and refueling was in order to come back home . Then my self-experiment, 120-130, about 20 minutes longer on the way but with the same tank of fuel drove back and arrived much more relaxed.
    I had another positive impression during my vacation in the USA when I was able to drive several 1000 km without stress and rushed car.
    I think 120 on our highways is a bit exaggerated, but I would be 130-140 immediately.
    That alone is missing from all the representatives who think only because they already have 4 zeros on the grille, the 5 zeros have to tell me at a distance of 1,5m that they are in a hurry and only because they think they are important.
    The time saved is put into perspective again when refueling, when working more because more money is spent on fuel and when you come back from a stressful journey.
    So that it doesn't get boring, you should concentrate on the short but intense accelerations, which are fun too
    Ciao Alex

  • The manual transmission is slightly longer. According to the manual, the manually switched aero should have 120 revolutions at a speed of 2.790 and the automaton at 2.930.

  • Hello Tom, nice that you dared to try it yourself. For a year now I have been moving my 93 SC TiD from 2008 on the German autobahn usually only with 120. As a result I drive well under 6 liters per 100 km despite the automatic, and I arrive at the destination more relaxed. Arriving the few minutes later doesn't hurt me. In total, this is just 10 minutes from Dresden to Potsdam, for example. For that I come back and forth with half a tank. 🙂… LG

  • What would be the speed of the Aero with manual transmission? How is the gearbox designed?

  • This coincides well with my observations. The B19 through WÜ can spank any good cut :-D. I usually set the cruise control to 130 and so you actually sail quite well in flowing traffic between AB and N. Due to manual switching, the moving dune (MY99, 2.0i) is a good 1,5 - 2 L lower in consumption in urban traffic than the convertible (MY01, 2.0SE LPT) with its automatic system. On the BAB and country road there is only 1L difference.

  • Congratulations on trying yourself. I'm already doing this in the endurance test. However, 130 with my 9-5 1,9TID and automatic. Also there I am constantly pressed by (mostly white) small trucks, which I have at most uphill again. My diesel consumption is then just under 6 liters and I can theoretically drive from Cologne to Berlin and back without refueling. Despite my “self-limitation”, I feel like a free citizen in a free country and have no feeling that I am not using the last freedom we have. What thinking! We have never had as much freedom as today!


Comments are closed.