number3
Registered User
I'm still getting between 55/60 average , 60/62 on longer drives, from my 2lt TDI S-Line ,set to auto on the Audi drive button thingy 
Mark
Mark
A3 real fuel consumption
- Thread starter b52
- Start date
I'm still getting between 55/60 average , 60/62 on longer drives, from my 2lt TDI S-Line ,set to auto on the Audi drive button thingy
Mark
is auto a setting on all cars?? Not just stronic! I know this might appear a dumb question to others!
number3
Registered User
At least you mpg sounds more promising! Hopefully mine will also be if I ever get it!!!! Taking so long!!!!!!
When I had a demo A3 2.0TDi Sport for a weekend I got 53mpg driving not particularly carefully on mainly dual carriageways for 300ish miles.
I was pretty happy with that. I'm sure I could have gotten over 60 if I'd be more careful.
Also, the car had about 4000 miles on the clock.
I was pretty happy with that. I'm sure I could have gotten over 60 if I'd be more careful.
Also, the car had about 4000 miles on the clock.
Last edited:
Picked car up on weekend (2.0 TDi) - mix of A roads and motorway returned 51mpg on 160 mile journey home. Past experience indicates an extra 5 to 10 mpg yet to come as it loosens up. I'd be pretty happy if I could get close to 60mpg.
Slight update, this morning I had a 40mile run in Auto at ~70mph, achieved 48mpg. Same run on the way home at 50-60mph, again in Auto I managed 58mpg.
Ive got a A3 SB brand new 2ltr Diesel Manual, SE spec with 17inch multi spoke wheels.
Heres my fuel comsumpiton ive noticed in short
Motorways/long drives at 70mph 50-55mpg
Above 70mph I wont say what speed but take a guess averaged 40mpg
Short journeys country lanes and from main road to my house which is in the country side im averaging about 33mpg?? :-O thats on a 10 mile journey
Taking into consideration the above information im averaging about 40mpg
Heres my fuel comsumpiton ive noticed in short
Motorways/long drives at 70mph 50-55mpg
Above 70mph I wont say what speed but take a guess averaged 40mpg
Short journeys country lanes and from main road to my house which is in the country side im averaging about 33mpg?? :-O thats on a 10 mile journey
Taking into consideration the above information im averaging about 40mpg
I'm still getting between 55/60 average , 60/62 on longer drives, from my 2lt TDI S-Line ,set to auto on the Audi drive button thingy
Mark
Mark, a little off-topic but how have you found the noise of your 2L TDI? Currently awaiting delivery of a 1.6TDI, coming from 3 x 1.6 petrol cars, my only reservation is that its going to be noticeably louder. But with the newer engines its pretty smooth I imagine?
number3
Registered User
You'll never get away totally from the rumble of a diesel when idling , but it's the quietest diesel I've ever had, and on the flip side sounds sweet at speed when putting your foot down!!! .... Safely of course
Mark
You'll never get away totally from the rumble of a diesel when idling , but it's the quietest diesel I've ever had, and on the flip side sounds sweet at speed when putting your foot down!!! .... Safely of course
Mark
Comparing to my A4, it's a little louder on start-up but quieter and more 'petrol-like' on the move.
Engine has a nice raspy note too.
One thing that did strike me is the lack of any diesel-like hesitation from low revs. It's very responsive and pulls like a petrol. My A4 is a bit gutless at very low revs.
This is what I ended up with in my current car yesterday. Overall mpg had decreased due to the M6 being a son of a b*tch all the way home so the Sat Nav sent me on a few 'lively' detours but you get the overall idea of what I'm getting per tank of unleaded.
squiretolley
Registered User
Chester Draws
Registered User
Whilst I think the standard testing procedures are a level playing field the concern I have is that although we all realise we will not achieve them in real world driving it appears to me that some makes of car get closer than others to the official figures . That is the information I would find more useful when choosing what make / model to buy.
I feel Audi seem a long way off of their figures but may be wrong . Anybody else got similar thoughts?
I feel Audi seem a long way off of their figures but may be wrong . Anybody else got similar thoughts?
I do feel slightly disappointed due to thinking my new A3 was not only gonna be a hell of a lot more powerful than my current car but also slightly more economical!
I agree. VAG seem to be one of the worst offenders. BMW seem to get much closer IMO.
Land Rover are the worsted in my opinion, just got shut of my Evoque which is supposed to do 47 combined, I drove that car like a nun and still only averaged 29mpg and that was quite a lot of motorway driving.
Mark
Glad to see the ASA getting involved.
I have a huge bee in my bonnet about the official test. I've read the official testing schedule and no one on this planet drives like that. Accelerating from 0-70kph over 40 secs and 3 gear changes (each gear change taking 2 secs). Lots of gentle accelerating and decelerating and constant speed over level ground. This means that the engine is under minimum load throughout, and the brakes hardly need to be used.
Athough this ensures a level playing field, it is only to compare car performance under THOSE conditions. It cannot tell you how one engine's performance will be affected by varying those conditions compared to another. And this is why even larger engines are managing to achieve surprising high official figures. Not to mention, they have been geared and programmed to take advantage of the test. As soon as you put normal load on the engine, they behave very differently.
Am not sure why we are surprised that official figures are a crock. Were engines really that inefficient 10 years ago? The increases in the official figures would suggest that. Yet my 2001 A4 1.9 tdi 130 out-performs a new A5 2.0 tdi 177 by over 10% (barely 45mpg compared with 52mpg over the same 125 mile journey) despite the official figures suggesting the A5 is 20% more frugal. Yes, the A5 has more power, but I wasn't using it. And yes, if I drove and 50mph on level ground in the ludicrously highly geared 6th gear it may do better than the A4. But that's probably down to it only having 5 gears. At least I can stay in top gear when coming to incline unlike the A5, which will struggle in 6th a start fuel drinking like a fish. Even my dealer (Service, not Sales!) that the engine was crap.
I just cannot believe that the EU has not realised that their test, and therefore the carbon emission targets they have set for manufacturers, probably aren't worth the the paper they are written on. What's the point in cars achieving better official figures when in reality they emit the same, if not worse, CO2 than before.
So if you want to get close to the official figures, stick a brick under the accelerator pedal and disconnect the brakes.
I have a huge bee in my bonnet about the official test. I've read the official testing schedule and no one on this planet drives like that. Accelerating from 0-70kph over 40 secs and 3 gear changes (each gear change taking 2 secs). Lots of gentle accelerating and decelerating and constant speed over level ground. This means that the engine is under minimum load throughout, and the brakes hardly need to be used.
Athough this ensures a level playing field, it is only to compare car performance under THOSE conditions. It cannot tell you how one engine's performance will be affected by varying those conditions compared to another. And this is why even larger engines are managing to achieve surprising high official figures. Not to mention, they have been geared and programmed to take advantage of the test. As soon as you put normal load on the engine, they behave very differently.
Am not sure why we are surprised that official figures are a crock. Were engines really that inefficient 10 years ago? The increases in the official figures would suggest that. Yet my 2001 A4 1.9 tdi 130 out-performs a new A5 2.0 tdi 177 by over 10% (barely 45mpg compared with 52mpg over the same 125 mile journey) despite the official figures suggesting the A5 is 20% more frugal. Yes, the A5 has more power, but I wasn't using it. And yes, if I drove and 50mph on level ground in the ludicrously highly geared 6th gear it may do better than the A4. But that's probably down to it only having 5 gears. At least I can stay in top gear when coming to incline unlike the A5, which will struggle in 6th a start fuel drinking like a fish. Even my dealer (Service, not Sales!) that the engine was crap.
I just cannot believe that the EU has not realised that their test, and therefore the carbon emission targets they have set for manufacturers, probably aren't worth the the paper they are written on. What's the point in cars achieving better official figures when in reality they emit the same, if not worse, CO2 than before.
So if you want to get close to the official figures, stick a brick under the accelerator pedal and disconnect the brakes.
I recall the government invested almost £30m of the tax-payers' money in the Evoque as it was meant to be a super-green 4x4. I'm really surprised that no one has taken Land Rover or the government to task over this. A hybrid was also part of Land Rover's promise which hasn't been delivered.
Far from green, I was spending a fortune on fuel with that Evoque, running a fiesta zetec at the moment until my Audi arrives, feels like I've had a big pay rise it uses so little fuel.
Mark
Help
Ok in early march I received my long awaited Audi A3 1.6 tdi s-line which for economy reasons was replacing my 2010 Golf GTD.
The audi has been running at around 40 mpg over 2000 miles since I received which I am concerned about, this is also with AC off and me driving carefully. I know it's early days but still !
I have had a brand new audi a3 before (1.9 tdi 105ps 2009) which immediately performed amazing on mpg and was noticeably better from the off than my 53 plate 2.0 tdi 140ps
My golf (GTD 2.0 170ps) was averaging around 41-42 mpg on a quoted 50+ combined but the Audi is quoted at 74 combined.
I did speak to Audi about this and they gave me some spiel taken straight out of an economy handbook.. The salesman did say he had recently taken a customers car out on an mpg test and achieved 55mpg... Then after I left it suddenly struck me why he needed to do the trial in the first place.
What are others finding as I'm feeling I wish I kept my golf at this rate !?!?
Ok in early march I received my long awaited Audi A3 1.6 tdi s-line which for economy reasons was replacing my 2010 Golf GTD.
The audi has been running at around 40 mpg over 2000 miles since I received which I am concerned about, this is also with AC off and me driving carefully. I know it's early days but still !
I have had a brand new audi a3 before (1.9 tdi 105ps 2009) which immediately performed amazing on mpg and was noticeably better from the off than my 53 plate 2.0 tdi 140ps
My golf (GTD 2.0 170ps) was averaging around 41-42 mpg on a quoted 50+ combined but the Audi is quoted at 74 combined.
I did speak to Audi about this and they gave me some spiel taken straight out of an economy handbook.. The salesman did say he had recently taken a customers car out on an mpg test and achieved 55mpg... Then after I left it suddenly struck me why he needed to do the trial in the first place.
What are others finding as I'm feeling I wish I kept my golf at this rate !?!?
That seems particularly low. I'd be expecting about 50mpg with a tight 1.6TDi engine, rising to 55mpg over the next 5-10k.
I'm currently getting mid 40s in my 2.0TDi and hoping to average 50mpg as it loosens up.
If it continues, I'd complain to the dealer and get them to check it out.
squiretolley
Registered User
I've averaged 50mpg over the first 300 miles in my 2.0 TDI. That's normal driving mostly in dynamic mode (can't help but select it!).
Your figures sound really poor considering its the 1.6! I know quite a few people on this forum are having issues with the 1.6TDI.
Your figures sound really poor considering its the 1.6! I know quite a few people on this forum are having issues with the 1.6TDI.
I'm done just under 1500 miles in my 1.4tfsi now and my overall average is sitting at 40mpg although this is gradually increasing.
I've been getting close to 45mpg on most journeys now.
I've been getting close to 45mpg on most journeys now.
TreborA4
Registered User
Getting 50/51 mpg on a 40 mile run each way to work. It seems to be going up each day!
This is on a busy A road in East Anglia/Lincolnshire, steady trundle with the odd overtaking opportunity!
This is in Dynamic mode all of the time.
This is on a busy A road in East Anglia/Lincolnshire, steady trundle with the odd overtaking opportunity!
This is in Dynamic mode all of the time.
.... and are you following the guidance from the shift arrow or are you doing your own thing?
TreborA4
Registered User
I guess you mean gear change indicator?
if so, I do use the shift arrow as guidance but generally my driving style is in line with it anyway.
I might try the Auto mode tomorrow!
Chester Draws
Registered User
Thats pretty good Chester! What sort of speed/distance was this over? Im still struggling to get above between 55-60 on a 35 mile run at about 65-70 mph.
Chester Draws
Registered User
As the dial says , 58 min journey , 41.8 miles . This was on a Friday commute home M25 , A3 , stop start past Guildford so a good mix of driving . Was cruising about 65 I would say .
Chester Draws
Registered User
Very happy but the bummer is I now have a company fuel card .
If I had known I was getting one I would have gone for the cheaper 1.4 and got a few more goodies with the cash saving í ½í¸
If I had known I was getting one I would have gone for the cheaper 1.4 and got a few more goodies with the cash saving í ½í¸
Has it taken the 6000 miles to get it to that performance Chester? I have a 1.6 on order (due June) and it'll be the lowest powered Audi I've ever bought, so good to see those figures.
Audi have been getting bad press, particularly over this engine, do you think it's because most owners are complaining before their engine has been broken in?
Chester Draws
Registered User
