MPG - Anything Wrong?

[leeds2592]

Hi all,

Couple of months ago I bought a 56 plate 2.0 FSI (I know its not the T version but coming from a 1.2 Clio its definitely a step up). Now, I probably do around 90 miles a week, with 60 miles of those being trips to and from work 3 days a week. The rest being short trips around town of only a few miles etc.

My problem is, only the trips to work, if driven very sensibly I can average around 32mpg according to the trip computer. On other days with short trips its usually around 25-27mpg. There's not that much power either which is leading me to think I've made the wrong choice and to sell up so I can get a TDI and a remap.

Are these just a bit **** on fuel or is there something not quite right?

Thanks in advance

 

[S.]

i think they are S**** on fuel.
they like to drink a lot and not having a 6th gear doesn't help with economy.

 

[mjr901]

Its a heavy car, the petrols are not great on fuel.

The TDI's are actually very good i found, pretty quick and 45 average mpg, I'd for sure get the 170TDI over the FSI.

I'd go TDI if you want the balance of Power/Economy.

Stay away from the BKD engines though, go 170tdi .

 

[OVRA3]

I've got a tfsi Quattro and I get 21 ish in town and 30 at a push on a run they are **** on fuel.. My average is 25.3 just checked

 

[leeds2592]

Mine does have 6th and I use it quite a lot which adds to the confusion a bit.

Kinda regret getting it a bit, although it was a decent price which lead me to buy it in the first place.

 

[cjsuk]

as a comparison I get 36mpg 80mph for an hour in my 2001 1.8t A3, driving round town 22-26 mpg and been an **** on the road 12 - 18 mpg. I would have thought on a newer Audi like yours the engine would be more efficient especially with the extra gear.

 

[cjsuk]

Do you reset the mpg computer on every trip?

 

[leeds2592]

I've found that it sort of resets itself on every trip. I finish a trip with a mph figure and when I set off again a few hours later, it drops to around 10mpg and then works its way up.

I'm just a bit reluctant to do any mods if there's anything wrong. However, on a long motorway journey I would assume that it would get a decent mpg figure but I'm yet to do a long trip.

 

[cjsuk]

Silly thing is, some mods can help, even cleaning some bits n bats can help such as throttle body intake temp sensors etc etc. It all depends how its been used before you got it. I wouldn't think its anything major but I think you should get more mpg out of it.

 

[leeds2592]

I can tell its had a hard life and been thrashed around a bit so I got a full service last week just to make sure it wasn't a shed. Other than the oil not being changed in quite a while and the filters being filthy, it wasn't too bad.

 

[cjsuk]

I was getting crap figures until I cleaned the IAT sensor it was original 11 yr old part! The 2 wires in the sensor were black, after cleaning to a nice copper colour my mpg was better and the car run better too and that's from just a really simple sensor. Never a wrong move though, having a service

 

[Chris93]

The thing I have found with the 2.0t engine which is very similar to yours is that it takes a long time to walm up and it doesn't work very efficiently until this happens. On short journeys the cold engine uses a lot of fuel but on a 50 mile plus motorway run tr engine warms up and I can see 39mpg out of mine if I am careful and around 36 driving normally but I am looking at 23 ish in town. Never driven a non turbo 2.0 but 150hp surely can't feel that slow can it?

Chris

 

[Artimus]

They're not very good fuel figures.

I have the 2.0T (DSG) and return better figures than that ...I'm getting an avg 28 around town and would have thought the non-turbo would have been better.

Perhaps you need to modify your driving for town and stay in a higher gear. If your route is mostly 30mph roads, you shouldn't be using 6th gear at all, as you'll just be labouring the engine at low revs and not using the optimal torque spread! Forget 6th gear until you hit 50mph and aim to keep the revs between 2500-2900rpm.

hope this helps.

 

[Minstadave]

I've got a 2.0T DSG and average 36-38 MPG doing my 25 mile each way commute. Very rare to see below 30MPG even around town.

Don't listen to the tractor drivers, the 2.0TFSI is pretty good on fuel for it's 200 horses. Your figures do look low, make sure the fuel filters been changed and take it for a good run.

 

[audicruiser]

I've got a 2.0T DSG and average 36-38 MPG doing my 25 mile each way commute. Very rare to see below 30MPG even around town.

Don't listen to the tractor drivers, the 2.0TFSI is pretty good on fuel for it's 200 horses. Your figures do look low, make sure the fuel filters been changed and take it for a good run.

I agree and get the same figures plus mines mapped. If your only getting 21 mpg around town and not over 30 mpg on a run then I would say there's a problem.

Turbo engines are normally better on fuel than their non turbo cousins as the turbo actually makes them more efficient!

 

[Ads]

Hi all,

Couple of months ago I bought a 56 plate 2.0 FSI (I know its not the T version but coming from a 1.2 Clio its definitely a step up). Now, I probably do around 90 miles a week, with 60 miles of those being trips to and from work 3 days a week. The rest being short trips around town of only a few miles etc.

My problem is, only the trips to work, if driven very sensibly I can average around 32mpg according to the trip computer. On other days with short trips its usually around 25-27mpg. There's not that much power either which is leading me to think I've made the wrong choice and to sell up so I can get a TDI and a remap.

Are these just a bit **** on fuel or is there something not quite right?

Thanks in advance

The mpg's you have quoted equate to about 350-390miles per tank which is about right for a 2.0FSI for "normal" non motorway driving. Its pretty much exactly the same as mine used to do when I had one.
Pure motorway driving and it'll rise to somewhere around 450miles to the tank.

As for the lack of power, they do feel underpowered, but that's mainly because of the smooth power delivery. First gear is awful, second gear is the best, and the rest are just ok.
Acceleration at low revs is poo, but if you hold on to a gear longer, keeping the revs high, then it becomes a lot more responsive.

 

[leeds2592]

I'll have to take it on along run one day as I haven't really stretched its legs, so to speak, yet. I've also not fully filled the tank up so I may fill it to the brim and see how many miles I get out of it.

With regards to the power. I came from a 1.2 Clio so I think I was just expected it to be very quick. I agree Ads, second gear is definitely the better of the gears and when it gets higher in the revs it can shift but that makes my mpg go down. I can't win! haha.

Does the RON of fuel actually make that much difference? I know you're supposed to run it on 98, but will I see anything dramatic for the extra cost of the fuel?

 

[Artimus]

you'll notice a considerable difference in acceleration on Super, but you'll also run the risk of becoming addicted to it & burning even more fuel.

...pity we can't have our cake & eat it too.

 

[MattyW19]

Hi all,

Couple of months ago I bought a 56 plate 2.0 FSI (I know its not the T version but coming from a 1.2 Clio its definitely a step up). Now, I probably do around 90 miles a week, with 60 miles of those being trips to and from work 3 days a week. The rest being short trips around town of only a few miles etc.

My problem is, only the trips to work, if driven very sensibly I can average around 32mpg according to the trip computer. On other days with short trips its usually around 25-27mpg. There's not that much power either which is leading me to think I've made the wrong choice and to sell up so I can get a TDI and a remap.

Are these just a bit **** on fuel or is there something not quite right?

Thanks in advance

If insurance is a problem, then look at the 1.4 TFSI before you make any decisions. I've got one and I'm achieving 50+ MPG on a 30 mile dual carriage way trip. Comes with stop start too, which is handy for city driving!

 

[Ads]

Does the RON of fuel actually make that much difference? I know you're supposed to run it on 98, but will I see anything dramatic for the extra cost of the fuel?

Super makes no noticeable difference at all on the non turbo FSI. You'll get more of an improvement if you do a 20min battery disconnect every month or so to reset the ECU. That seems to live up things bit.

 

[MrLapou]

My 2009 2.0T Quattro S-Tronic does about 30 around town and 38 on long runs @ about 70mph.
Whip it and that drops to about 24... Love the performance though.

 

[OVRA3]

My 2009 2.0T Quattro S-Tronic does about 30 around town and 38 on long runs @ about 70mph.
Whip it and that drops to about 24... Love the performance though.

38 would be a dream if I am very careful in mine I can get 34 and that's very careful!

 

[leeds2592]

Bit of an update. Started going to a new gym which is around 10 miles away, pretty much one road straight there with not much stopping for traffic lights etc. Driving with a light right foot and doing a steady 50 mph, I managed to get it up to 39.2mpg but it wouldn't go over the 40mpg .

This has now got me thinking about retrofitting cruise control

 

[Zak0123]

Cruise control can be good to improve MPG to help against involuntary foot movements etc but it can also compromise it. For example when going uphill non-cruise control users would generally slow slightly and accelerate going downhill, cruise control however will obviously just power through uphill thus increasing MPG.

 

[Chris93]

39.2mpg over 10 miles is pretty good, i would need at least 50 miles to get anywhere near that figure with mine

Chris

 

[leeds2592]

Suppose that figure is pretty decent. That was driving like an absolute Grandad though, reading the road very far ahead and bearly touching the brake etc.

Think I'll probably get rid of this car after I've had it for around a year and get a TDI to remap :thumbsup:

 

[audigex]

Sounds about right for the 2.0T. The TDI is great - I have the 170 and I get better mpg than my 1.2 Clio, while travelling significantly faster. 33mpg while flooring it onto an A-road then sitting in traffic, and I can't get it much lower than that if I try.

There are a lot of us who've gone from Clios to A3s, I wonder if there's a link?