1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

A6 Avant questions (running costs etc)

Discussion in 'A6/S6/Allroad forum (C5 Chassis)' started by FactionOne, Oct 5, 2008.

  1. FactionOne
    Offline

    FactionOne Administrator Staff Member Administrator

    Joined:
    May 23, 2004
    Messages:
    3,244
    Likes Received:
    133
    [Oct 5, 2008]
    Hi Folks,

    I'm just examining the different possibilities I have regarding my car for work; I was thinking about switching the fleet car for an allowance and picking up an A6 Avant or allroad...

    I've decided that I'd quite like an allroad, but I don't really need what it offers over an equivalent A6 Avant, and the premium commanded by their rarity puts me off somewhat.

    So, looking at A6 Avants, I've been trying to weigh-up the options...

    There's the 1.8T quattro - 150bhp I believe? Was there a 180 version? ...If not, I guess you could chip a 150 to not far off that? - I suppose fuel economy isn't brilliant on these?

    There's the 1.9TDI - I guess reasonable fuel economy, and while probably not an exciting drive, certainly nothing to be sniffed at.

    Then we get to 2.5TDIs - I'd be looking at a quattro again, as I'm not sure the idea of having a 2.5 V6 TDI powering just the front wheels sits well with me...

    ...I'm pretty curious about the 2.5TDI quattro 180 - what is the real-world fuel economy like on these? With mixed driving - 25% town, 25% country-lane thrashing, 50% motorway cruising, what should I realistically expect as average consumption?

    Are there any pitfalls to having the V6 TDI? What are they like for reliability? Am I right in thinking that they're not very receptive to tuning?

    Being completely honest, without being armed with many facts, if I had to make a gut-choice, I'd be going for a 2.5TDI quattro 180 - but I can't help thinking about the possibilities for messing around with the petrol 4 pot - what would you suggest are advantages/disadvantages of the two?

    Any help, advice, thoughts, suggestions or musings gratefully appreciated :)

    Regards,

    Rob.

    [EDIT: Didn't mention, but just in case it wasn't clear - I'm looking at C5 chassis
    #1
  2. Ads

    Ads

    [Dec 29, 2014]

  3. meatychi
    Offline

    meatychi Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2005
    Messages:
    261
    Likes Received:
    0
    [Oct 6, 2008]
    Theres a few things I guess you need to consider:

    I have a 98 2.5tdi Q Sport with the triptronic gear box - the gear box is a little quirky in auto, it has tendancy to be a little indecisive when accelerating between normal and quick, it tends to stick in 3rd until you ease off at around 3000rpm. I tend to drive in tip mode most of the time.

    I reckon you would probably get around the mid twenties with the mix of driving you intend to do.

    You may find the auto boxes / turbos a little bit laggy, if you want to race off at a roundabout, be careful, you may find yourself draggin your heels, at danger to oncoming vehicles!

    They are probably the only real -ve's I have about my motor, on the motorway it goes like stink, it can be a little heavy on the country roads - if you can find it in you to stick to the speed limits, you can squeeze anything around the top 30's to lower 40's, mpg wise.

    I have seen equivalent motors to mine for as little as £2500 - i would definately grab another at that price!

    Hope this helps - PS there are plenty of other 2.5tdi owners on here, check out the other threads!
    #2
  4. FactionOne
    Offline

    FactionOne Administrator Staff Member Administrator

    Joined:
    May 23, 2004
    Messages:
    3,244
    Likes Received:
    133
    [Oct 6, 2008]
    Hiya,

    Thanks for the reply :thumbsup:

    Interesting to read mid-20s; I was hoping for more than that. I've been driving a 2.0TDI 140 bhp 6 speed manual Golf estate at the moment, often with the load-space pretty weighted-down, and even when rallying it a little it's still averages about 42mpg over a tank.

    I know I'm looking at a good chunk more power, and a decent amount fuel-drinking chassis/equipment weight and quattro, but I'm still quite surprised to see we might be looking over 15mpg less.

    Is the figure you suggested based on your own? Would that be a torque-converter automatic? (CVT is later models?) I'd be looking at a manual box...

    Regards,

    Rob.
    #3
  5. quattrojames
    Offline

    quattrojames Moderator Staff Member Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2008
    Messages:
    13,941
    Likes Received:
    496
    [Oct 7, 2008]
    Hi Rob,

    I have an A4 2.5TDiQ 2003 so while not totally the same is pretty similar. Economy wise I average 33, but am the first to admit I drive pretty hard on all rural roads as we have no motorways here. I am confident with 50% motorways and sensible (not excessively so) driving you should achieve average of 40. I appreciate the A6 is a heavier car.

    Touch wood, my car has never missed a beat, but my sister has a 2000 MY A6 2.5TDiQ in France which has cost them a fortune in bits and bobs.

    I don't believe the 180 can be tuned a lot more, I know someone who tried for a remap but had a lot of trouble and eventually reverted to standard. I think the pump and injectors are pretty much maxed out to give the 180, and to get any more requires injectors and fuel lines for the 3.0TDi.

    The 2.5TDi with quattro drive is a cracking combo though :salute:
    #4
  6. meatychi
    Offline

    meatychi Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2005
    Messages:
    261
    Likes Received:
    0
    [Oct 7, 2008]
    My daily commute is just over 50 miles, the first half hour is M1 and the second half are B roads, travelling between 30 and 45. To give you a better idea, if I drive the first half hour doing roughly 90mph, I will get around 33mpg, drop it to 80mph and I get around 38mpg. So to take your 50 % heavy foot into consideration, i reckon 25mpg would be about right.

    these figures are based on my 98 2.5tdi quattro with standard 5 gear tiptronic auto box.
    #5
  7. FactionOne
    Offline

    FactionOne Administrator Staff Member Administrator

    Joined:
    May 23, 2004
    Messages:
    3,244
    Likes Received:
    133
    [Oct 8, 2008]
    Thanks guys. Interesting stuff.

    I think I'm going to examine the financial side of taking an allowance instead of the car a little more closely, and all being well I think I'll have my eye out for a 180q in the near future...

    Regards,

    Rob.
    #6
  8. Dan Gliballs
    Offline

    Dan Gliballs Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2006
    Messages:
    1,568
    Likes Received:
    3
    [Oct 9, 2008]
    Could do you an excellent deal on an A6 2.7T Avant :)
    #7
  9. FactionOne
    Offline

    FactionOne Administrator Staff Member Administrator

    Joined:
    May 23, 2004
    Messages:
    3,244
    Likes Received:
    133
    [Oct 9, 2008]
    :lmfao: I'd really quite like to take you up on that, I'm sure there's plenty of fun to be had with that engine; alas I'm not sure the Field Operations Director at work would see it that way when he got the Arval All Star bill though!

    "You did 2,745 business miles this month and it cost £18,320?!?!?"

    Regards,

    Rob.
    #8
  10. Dan Gliballs
    Offline

    Dan Gliballs Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2006
    Messages:
    1,568
    Likes Received:
    3
    [Oct 10, 2008]
    Similar MPG to my old Vectra V6 really (slightly better than my S4) ;)
    #9
  11. 8cylinder
    Offline

    8cylinder Member

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2008
    Messages:
    34
    Likes Received:
    0
    [Oct 12, 2008]
    Probally the best blend of economy and performance would be a 1.9tdi with a remapp on it.
    130bhp-180bhp maybe,would certainly leave a 2.5 tdi for dead then.
    Mainly due to a heavier weight in a 2.5tdi.
    #10
  12. Macduff
    Offline

    Macduff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2004
    Messages:
    742
    Likes Received:
    0
    [Oct 12, 2008]
    2.5 can be tuned up to around 200-210 bhp then you're at the limit of the fuel system. Don't know if the injectors etc from the 3.0 can be used as that's a far newer engine.

    I'd go with the 1.9 for economy but the 2.5Q for driving enjoyment. A mapped 1.9 may be quicker than a standard 2.5Q but you'll have trouble getting all that power down through two wheels
    #11
  13. quattrojames
    Offline

    quattrojames Moderator Staff Member Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2008
    Messages:
    13,941
    Likes Received:
    496
    [Oct 12, 2008]
    And you won't get the lovely V6 growl!
    #12
  14. 936ADL
    Offline

    936ADL Member

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2008
    Messages:
    41
    Likes Received:
    0
    [Oct 13, 2008]
    I've just got rid of an '03 A6 Avant Quattro Sport Auto and i used to get low 30s on the motorway, and mid twenties around town.

    I must admit that the mpg was one of the few aspects of the car that i was disappointed with.
    #13
  15. fjtwelve
    Offline

    fjtwelve Moderator Staff Member Moderator

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2006
    Messages:
    769
    Likes Received:
    9
    [Oct 16, 2008]
    I've had my 2.5TDIQ for a while now, and have plenty of posts on this forum if you search for fjtwelve. Once you get used to the torque and power its difficult to go back. I'm driving a lot of different hire cars just now due to working away from home in Ireland, and nothing comes close to the A6. My wifes A4 is very nippy but starts to gasp just as the A6 is getting into its stride
    #14
  16. Verne
    Offline

    Verne New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2008
    Messages:
    22
    Likes Received:
    0
    [Oct 24, 2008]
    We've had our 2.8 V6 (193bhp) Avant on a '98 about 2 months and although economy wasn't that big a factor, we have been pleasantly surprised and get mid 20s around town and low 30s on a run. Both of these are improvements on our '93 BMW 525 Touring (192bhp)

    We changed from the 525 as we have 3 large dogs that wouldn't fit in the BMW, but the A6 seems quicker, has more room and is more economical.

    When we were looking we decided against the smaller engines as we were advised that they were a little gutless pulling the weight and the wife wanted similar power to the BMW, so the 2.8 it was. Kept to 2 wheel drive as was also advised the extra weight of the Quattro system pulled the mpg down quite a bit.

    Apart from a couple of niggles, have no regrets and love it
    #15

Share This Page