2.0 TDI 170 Fuel Consumption

[John140]

I went from the B6 TDI 130 to the B7 TDI 140, and I am still dissapointed by the 2.0TDI fuel consumption. Ive done 12K so far and on a good day I can just about get 44mpg on a run, where my old TDI 130 would have done 50, and round town I am down to 35-36 where my old car would have done 40 ish. I would like someone to tell me why the 2.0TDI is so much more thirsty in the real world, whereas on paper it should be about the same.
Also, it seems that these engines vary from car to car, speaking to some people they have no issues at all with fuel consumption. MY car is fitted with the 'BRE' version of this engine, and the Audi dealer say that everything is normal as far as they can see.
Have they done something different with the EGR setup on these engines to meet Euro 4, which has screwed the fuel consumption ?

[bogey888]

I love my B7 A4 2.0TDI 170 S-Line Special Edition but the mileage sucks, wished I got the petrol version now! Around town I get around 30-33 MPG which is not great, today I got the best mileage on the motorway, 48 MPG and that was driving it like grandad!!! Have Audi tweaked this diesel engine that much that it drinks as much as a petrol engine!!????

[prolfe]

It must be an abnormality with the both of your engines. As in mine it is so easy to hit high forties, low fifties.

As for the petrol, you really do have to drive like a grandad, just to hit 35mpg let alone give it some stick.

[JohnH]

I drove my '07 A4 TDi 170 SE Avant like a 'grandad' today and it managed all of 41mpg, admittedly it was into a headwind at times but I even had the aircon off (never run a previous car without the climate/aircon on auto all the time and always beat manufacturers claimed figures).

Daren't use the cruise either as this makes matters worse..... Got 44mpg out of it on a 200 mile run last week but had to stick to 65-70mph without cruise or aircon - not happy since HMRC reckon sub-2.0l diesels can do a 47mpg average.

I'm kicking myself because when Audi lent me a car for a 2-day test drive last year, that only managed 40mpg and had averaged 41mpg in 6K miles according to its trip computer (spookily what mine has averaged in 13K miles). I naively accepted the dealer's 'there's something funny about that car' explanation.

I keep telling myself it's getting better but I'm glad I only leased it for 2 years, very disappointed - I used to get 38mpg out of my 1999 A4 1.8SE 6 years ago whilst running the climate /aircon constantly.

I guess I'll ask a dealer but had been hoping to merely visit them for servicing since nothing has gone wrong (except steering noise). Expect they'll no-doubt suggest it's down to 'driving style' ?

Oh well, rant over....

[John140]

My beef is, how have VW/Audi managed to go from having the most efficient diesels, to diesels which barely have any MPG advantage over petrols considering the additional cost. To get even 45 mpg out of my car I have to drive it so gently and never use the CC, its just unreal, in my old 1.9 TDI 130 I could get high 40's average MPG using the CC most of the time !

[EPrice]

Hi. I read this with interest as I have been very dissapointed with my A4. I previously had a BMW325i Sport and got an average of 29mpg through the time I owned the car (70k miles hard driving). I moved to the Audi to reduce tax and to get more consumption. I have now done 28k miles in the A4 170 and the mpg is very bad. I get anywhere between 32 - 36 even on long runs. 33mpg is fairly normal.

I have had it back to the Audi dealer and, as expected, they did nothing but say it was due to the cold weather etc (anything to get rid of me!). I have driven the 140 version and got 45mpg, giving around 600+ miles per tank compared with the 170 version at around 430.

In the BMW on a long run I got 380+. Definately not worth moving from the fun of the petrol straight 6 to this tractor for 50 miles a tank. I would like to know how Audi got their mpg figures (took the 140 numbers, thought it would be a bit worse and took a couple of didgits off).

The handling is also nothing like the BMW with the front wheels being set to far back and the engine hung over the front. Hurry up car lease and end so I can give this car up! I would strongly recommend anyone thinking of buying one not to. Tax, mpg and performance are better on the BMW 320D MSport.

Only positives:- well built and practical.

[John140]

I just wish someone out there could answer the question "why are some VaG 2.0 TDI engines thirsty and some economical" ? as no one seems to know.

I have a friend who has a 2.0 tdi 170 Avant and he seems to get high 40's most of the time out of his car with 14K on the clock,. which is better than my car.

[gtrevor]

I have a friend who has a 2.0 tdi 170 Avant and he seems to get high 40's most of the time out of his car with 14K on the clock,. which is better than my car.

As people have said you should really be getting high 40's ... I've got the 233bhp 3.0 TDI Quattro and I'm averaging 42.5mpg with 15,000 miles on the clock....

[John140]

I can only get high 40's if I am feather light on the throttle and dont do more than 65-70 on the motorway.
My old A4 1.9 TDI 130 would give me high 40's cruising at nearly 85 (on the continent of course).

[EPrice]

You still to way better than me. 460miles out of a tank is good going giving 35mpg. Never manged more than 500 miles giving 38mpg even if all motorway driving and on clear roads late at night.