140 vs 170 TDI for Fuel Economy

[s-line stu]

I've seen mixed figures on various websites as to which is more economical. Some say 140 some say 170.

I would have thought the 140 would be just slightly better as it's less powerful but I know that doesn't always follow as a 170's setup may be more efficient?

I have a 140 and average between 52 - 60 mpg on my daily commute which is 130 miles round trip and is all motorway.

I'd be interested to know what other people are getting?

 

[M7R]

when i got my B7 i was dead set on getting a 170 as I wanted the extra power and the 4wd, BUT i do about 500-600 miles a week normally, the offical figures are only a few mpg different but when I asked around and dug deep it would appear that the 170 only do high 30s to mid 40s best! where as the 140 does high 40s - low 50s when work out properly (the DIS will say otherwise, that normally over reads by about 10%)

I can say for sure that the offical way fuel figures are gained is pants! its a 12k trip thats all, with 2 urban cycles and then 6k on the motorway speeding to 70 a couple of times, (if your really bothered im sure i can find the exact info online for you...I can only tell you whats in the public domain and not all that I know, but I will say that type approval is my job...)

if you already have a 140 then go and see Mike at Motech peformance and get the car remapped, he travels around quite a bit and is the only guy I trust to map my car, had my map now for 1 year and done nearly 30k on it and still love it! 175bhp and 300lb ft when needed, but when driving normally it uses the audi map so the fuel eco is no worse than normal unlike the vast majority of other maps out there, plus it doesnt chnage the idle free rev map so there is no issues with the MOT and smoke,

 

[CSK423]

I've seen between 500 and 600 to a tank on my 170ps, I've struggled to get anymore than 600 from it and that's mostly motorway 70/80mph.

so around 35 to 42 mpg.

I've had it remapped to 210ps over the past 20k miles and it's up around 720 to a tank and if you're really kicking its head in I can't get below 600.

so a £400 remap get's you 42 to 50mpg.

 

[s-line stu]

By the sound of it the standard 170's aren't quite as good then. I do around 700 miles a weeks commuting and normally have around 50-100 miles left on the display when I re-fuel at the weekend. I'm also doing around 70/80mph most of the time as it's motorway all the way to the office.

 

[M7R]

dont rely on what the dis sis saying on the miles to empty though... that is worked out via the obc mpg, which is you do the sums will be wrong and over reading. since I reset my dis it now under reads by about 1mpg rather than over reading by 5-7, and now the miles to empty is far less, even a full tank is only 650-700 tops, but I know the car is way more accurate, (I am sad and keep a spread sheet of millage, fuel filled up, and the mpg for that fill, plus a overall average, and how that compares to what the car says its doing..before the change it was over reading by 13-14%)

 

[20TDI]

My personal experience- drove a Golf 140 for 3 years and a Leon 170 for 2 years, and overall the 140 seemed to do around and about 5mpg better.

So averaged over a tank of fuel with a normal range of driving, the 140 would come out at 45-50mpg and the 170 would do 40-45mpg.

I've moved to a 2.5 B7 now and my opinion is that the 2.0 engine is a small unit working ****** hard for its money, but the 6cylinder options give a much more refined feel