This is why I’m not a fan of longer top gears on an FSI:
In Steve's post, at the top of this thread, the longer top gear reduces the revs at 80 mph by about 10%.
Surely that's an improvement, not least, a decrease in fuel consumption?
Maybe, maybe not. With that 10% reduction in engine speed, comes a similar 10% reduction in engine power/bhp. Remember, the FSI engine is normally aspirated, and power continues to increase up to about 5,500 rpm, (around 110 bhp). It's an engine that's designed to rev. Torque is broadly flat between 3.000 and 5,000 rpm.
To run at 80 mph for an extended period, at least in UK, would involve a few hills and dales.
I think the loss of 10% of engine power, (from around 72 to around 63 bhp), could result in the need for a bit more right foot, or a gear change, maybe both, going up the hills. (Much the same for 70 mph).
So fuel consumption on a run could actually rise, and the increased engine load, (pulling a higher gear at lower revs), could increase engine wear. The same is true at 70 mph, similar drop in power, (from around 62 to around 53 bhp). You need power to maintain a steady speed, as gradient varies.
Sadly, the opportunity to drive at high speed, for extended periods in UK, tends to be a bit rare in my experience, so it's all a bit academic.
Mac.