Real world MPG 2.0TDI

[Wuffles]

This is regarding an A3, http://www.am-online.com/news/2013/3...-advert/32623/ ? Or proper court do you think?

[Whippy53]

Dat's da Puppy!

[Johnny31]

just found a very interesting view on the difference between DIS and calculated MPG (credits to a random Merc driver :-)):
"The computer display is based on the calculated amount of fuel injected into the engine. Its accurate.

What isn't accurate is the tires. Even a few psi can make a measurable difference in rolling distance. Thats why the difference is larger in the cold, the tire diameter shrinks due to the higher density of the air in the tires filling less volume with the same pressure. On top of that, a tire gets smaller as it wears. Slap on a set of new tires and your MPG will instantly jump a few points, even though actual economy doesn't change.
On top of that, the tires balloon out from centrifugal force on the highway. Which will further return worse mileage in city driving."

Never thought about that one really!

[Olio]

Basically the watchdog simply told Audi off because they didn't put the * after their claim, and in very tiny fonts indicated that this was a standard EU test (or whatever wording they use)

Which isn't quite saying Audi and other cars manufacturers have been told off for giving unrealistic figures.

[Goal flag]

I think Audit have already taken note of that complaint. When I picked up my A6 last week there was a poster for one of the Q cars with quoted MPG figures. The MPG disclaimer, about being tested to EU standards etc, was quite prominent in the advert, i.e. certainly not hidden in the small print.

[istate75]

I thought you guys might be interested in my fuel consumption on my brand new 2.0Tdi S line Avant Multi with 19" wheels. Picked it up with just over half a tank in Coventry last Friday and drove it gently back to Rugby. ( I live in Rugby) Pottered around on Saturday and filled it up. Monday, drove to Warrington. Got stuck in horrendous traffic on the M6 due to 2 accidents (lost a good hour), then after Warrington across to Bradford. Stayed in Bradford. Tuesday, Bradford to Pontefract and then home. Wednesday to Burton and back across country (topped up tank). Thursday to Chesterfield and back. Pottered around a bit today (only 10-15 miles at most). I tried to keep to around 75 mph on the motorway, although very bad weather including a thunderstorm and hail slowed everything to a crawl then hit a jam near East Midlands airport losing 30 minutes. Total milage so far is 578 miles. My overall consumtion since 0 miles is showing 39.6mpg.

[Passatier3]

Given the time you spent in jams etc. then that's not too bad really. Without those you would probably have been around the 44 mpg. that I typically get. Once your average has ben hurt by jams etc. it's very difficult/takes a long time to get the average up again.

Knowing that I can get around 45 mpg., given favourable conditions, is good enough for me.

[Passatier3]

And by changing only the gearbox to manual, we can see that the best manual stats are around 6 l/100 (about 47 MPG)

So about 47 MPG for the best manuals, and about 40 for the best multi, also seen by checking the "automatic" category, where multi start at around 40/43. (there is a lower one but fuelling data is incorrect, unless one can average 100 MPG over 5k miles)

While I still do not know the reason, it seems there is sufficient evidence of a significant difference in MPG between the manual and multi boxes on this engine.

Whilst we might not completely agree with the figures (I'm bettering 40 for instance) I think that pretty much sums up what our thoughts are with regard to the manual and Multitronic transmissions. That despite the quoted figures for each being very close under test conditions in reality there is a substantial difference which can pretty safely be laid at the door of how the Multitronic works and possibly power losses in the transmission - I say possibly because there does seem to be some conflicting evidence with regards to that, but personally feel that a CVT can never be as efficient as a manual gearbox, which in itself suffers a slight powerloss.

[newA6]

I have a 2.0 Tdi S line multitronic and was disappointed in barely getting 40mpg, at times - especially in morning on was to work lucky to get 35mpg.
but now, car is 4 months old, 7000 miles and "warmer weather ? " I easily get 42+ to work, often 50 on way home - generally mid 40's is average and I keep a record of mileage, costs and fuel used on spreadsheet and this calculates actual mpg from fuel used fill up to fill up and computer seems accurate....

[dgarside]

So after 6-12 months of a solid 38mpg or there abouts, I decided to try a change in driving style for a few tanks. So for about a 1000 miles I've been driving with a less heavy right foot, slower acceleration but not much change in top end speed. With this bit of change (temporary) my average is now up to 45mpg with a couple of longer trips up to 55mpg (never seen before). This equates to a difference of approx. 100 miles on a tank full (approx, so don't flame me).

Can't say i'll be sticking to this but at least I know how to save money/fuel if need be :-)

BTW - Multitronic 2.0 TDI SLine 20" wheels - 29000 miles.