Chris NottVolks Autos
Results 1 to 14 of 14
  1. #1
    Reverse Gear

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    2

    B8 S4 - Fuel consumption figures change!

    Why when I bought my B8 S4 did the brochure have combined fuel consumption figure of 29.1 and a VED band K (225 kg/km) and now the spec on Audi.co.uk says 28.2 mpg VED band L (234kg/km).

    I've had the S4 since June and the jury is out. My 2003 M3 had better real world fuel consumption than the S4 and I'm not overly impressed. And please don't tell me you "you don't buy an S4 and then worry about the fuel consumption". It's an S4 not a lambo and if Audi can't get the consumprion figures right they deerve a class action!

    Any thoughts...

  2. # ADS
    ADS
    Join Date
    Always
    Posts
    Many
     
  3. #2
    3rd Gear

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    East Sussex
    Posts
    618
    TBH pretty well most car manufactures release fuel figures that are not achievable in everyday motoring, they have to be tested under certain conditions.

    Also M3's were always quite good on petrol if driving right.

    I am quite pleased with my S3 getting 30+ sometimes, but never really lower than 28 on an overall journey.
    Has the band changed for DSG v Manual?

  4. #3
    Just Plain Old's Avatar
    5th Gear

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Warwickshire
    Posts
    1,257
    I would reccomend the APS sportec remap and Miltek sports exhausts........

    That's what I've had done, and I'm not bothered about the crap fuel consumption anymore...!!! I was when it was standard, because I resented pouring petrol down a drain for crap performance.....

    PS: My average fuel consumption is now 17mpg, which is actually a 'slight' improvement after the remap.
    In my personal opinion

  5. #4
    Trev241's Avatar
    1st Gear

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    229
    Recent trip to France and Belgium returned 32mpg at 80mph using cruise, most I ever got from S3 under same conditions was 28mpg. Overall consumption was also pretty poor for S3 so I am quite happy with the S4 given the size of the beast.
    Trev

  6. #5
    1st Gear

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    254
    Crumbs JPO thats an expensive set of upgrades, but still far cheaper than an RS5.

    Many including myself wouldnt call 5.1 seconds crap performace. What were you driving prior to the S4?

  7. #6
    Just Plain Old's Avatar
    5th Gear

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Warwickshire
    Posts
    1,257
    Quote Originally Posted by Necroscope View Post
    Crumbs JPO thats an expensive set of upgrades, but still far cheaper than an RS5.

    Many including myself wouldnt call 5.1 seconds crap performace. What were you driving prior to the S4?
    I had a 2003 S4 from new with the same sort of Mods AmD stage3 remap and Miltek exhaust....... So I guess I'm just spoilt....!!

    It should now be running between 440-450 bhp, and is a totally different car! Just need some bigger brakes now... Like you say cheaper than an RS5,,, mind you I do like the RS5.
    In my personal opinion

  8. #7
    1st Gear

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    254
    The RS5 looks awesome, especially in red.

    Your car must be awesome now, whats it like to drive under normal "legal" road going speeds? Has the low down torque moved up the rev range?

    What's this upgrade done to your insurance premium?

    Do you have ADS, and if so how has the mod effected that between the auto and dynamic settings? I love how i can adjust the throttle responce on my car, have you lost this feature?

  9. #8
    Neutral

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Tyne & Wear UK
    Posts
    62
    Quote Originally Posted by pak1golf View Post
    Why when I bought my B8 S4 did the brochure have combined fuel consumption figure of 29.1 and a VED band K (225 kg/km) and now the spec on Audi.co.uk says 28.2 mpg VED band L (234kg/km).

    I've had the S4 since June and the jury is out. My 2003 M3 had better real world fuel consumption than the S4 and I'm not overly impressed. And please don't tell me you "you don't buy an S4 and then worry about the fuel consumption". It's an S4 not a lambo and if Audi can't get the consumprion figures right they deerve a class action!Any thoughts...

    Of course the m3 will get better fuel consumption, smaller car, rwd, lighter, Straight six N/a aspriated vs a big 4 door saloon, 4wd, supercharged v6 use the stuff between your ears next time ......... Also how many miles are on it, it will use alot more fuel when bedding in probably wont see good figures until 10k.

  10. #9
    1st Gear

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    254
    lovely reply there cmgreen, if you read the post correctly people are complaining about the claimed figures against the actual real world figures!

  11. #10
    Just Plain Old's Avatar
    5th Gear

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Warwickshire
    Posts
    1,257
    Quote Originally Posted by Necroscope View Post
    The RS5 looks awesome, especially in red.

    Your car must be awesome now, whats it like to drive under normal "legal" road going speeds? Has the low down torque moved up the rev range?

    What's this upgrade done to your insurance premium?

    Do you have ADS, and if so how has the mod effected that between the auto and dynamic settings? I love how i can adjust the throttle responce on my car, have you lost this feature?
    Best way to describe it is totally transformed the car.

    Insurance is hard to find, but as I'm an old ba$tard not stupidly expensive (circa 800)

    All buttons work as normal......... as far as I can tell.
    In my personal opinion

  12. #11
    Reverse Gear

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    2
    The answer is? The later car (current model) is heavier (can't remeber by how much just been on holiday and can't remember what it was) hence the mpg comes down and the CO2 goes up. The roof rack now takes an extra 10kg load so may be they have strengthened the roof?

  13. #12
    Reverse Gear

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    5
    I think the S-tronic is 224g /km and just slips into the lower tax band and the manual is just over so costs 2 times each year for RFL.

    Had a B6 S4 for 7 years. Only slightly better fuel consumption on gentle A road driving 28mpg vs 25 for the old car. Otherwise fuel consumption much like the old car. Slightly dissappointing

  14. #13
    1st Gear

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    254
    The emissions going up one band almost makes you wish the car still had the V8. Lets face it the V8 sounds better, pulls as well and has simular mpg.

    If the 3.0TFSI wasnt chippable upto 400+ bhp it would be a no brainer....

    Glad my car is in the lower bracket with a manual box.

  15. #14
    Reverse

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    235
    You are correct, only the Man Avant was previously in the higher tax band, not it appears the Man Saloon is too. And check out the ROTR price now the VAT has gone up!!
    Arrived - Audi S4 S-Tronic Avant in Sepang Blue -
    Car History
    07 S3, 96 Rover 214 (interim special), 05 Impreza STi PPP, 04 BMW 330D, 03 Impreza STi PPP, 03 Evolution FQ330, 02 Impreza STi, 01 Impreza WRX, 00 Leon Cupra, 98 Astra Sri, 97 Megane RT, 96 Bravo SX, 93 309 Gld, 90 AX GT, 89 309 SRi, 71 Mini, 85 Samba, 86 Metro 1.0, 85 MG Metro Turbo, 81 Metro 1.3 (My first car )

 

 

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO

Garage Plus, Vendor Tools vBulletin Plugins by Drive Thru Online, Inc.

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO