Gas Consumption for A4 3.2

[stylesx]

Im a bit concerned with the numbers im getting here. First off im located in Canada so i will be speaking Liters and CDN dollars, which may i add is higher then the American $$ :)

So here is my problem, I own a 2007 A4 3.2 with about 3500km on it already and a fill up costs me around $57 BUT ONLY lasts me 350km !!!!! i think that is crazy !!!
So im hoping that there is some sort of computer self adjusting feature that might let the car run rich now for the break in period and then level off some time.

Let me add that im not an aggressive driver at all, so can someone please provide some input on this please.

Thank you

[typerlover]

Im filling up at about $50usd, usually around $45 but the prices just went up.

Getting anywhere from 300-320 miles per tank, and I'm at just over 3000 miles on the car.

What that means in liters and km, I don't know and won't ever.

[stylesx]

Im filling up at about $50usd, usually around $45 but the prices just went up.

Getting anywhere from 300-320 miles per tank, and I'm at just over 3000 miles on the car.

What that means in liters and km, I don't know and won't ever.

320 miles = 514.99008 kilometers

Thanks respectable, is yours a 3.2 also ?

[Buttafuoco]

it gets better after about 10k miles

[stylesx]

WOW thats quite a bit afterwards :)

[dmoney1282]

I have an 05.5, 3.2 Quattro with approximately 22,500 miles. My mileage numbers have been pretty good. I usually get anywhere from 280-340 miles on a tank of gas, with about 40% highway 60% city. And that mileage is using about 13.6 gallons. The tank is 16.6 gallons I believe. I've gotten over 370 miles when my driving is more highway biased.

I got the car CPO so I don't know how the mileage was when it was new. However, usually the gas mileage will start to get better after the engine breaks in. Probably after 3k-5k I would think. Also, thats expensive gas. For those 13.6 gallons I referenced above, it cost me about $38 for premium.

Have you checked your tire pressure? That will have a big impact on your MPG

[alex310]

My car has a very large system in the back, I get about 260 miles to the full tank on my 3.2, I'm a very calm driver, but Los Angeles is stop and go traffic.

[barkerd427]

OP, you have to take into account what type of driving you do and the length of your trips and the time it takes for your car to warm up. As an American living in Europe I am well versed in Metric and English conversions and you are hardly getting any MPG, but you are paying a lot less than I am per tank. If you are doing a lot of stop and go driving with very limited distances traveling at about 55 MPH then you will have very low KPL or MPG. Also, it is probably cold there like it is here and mine is lowered by about 5 MPG per the computer. If any of this helps or you need more info just post it up. I have put 30,000 miles on my car in the first year, so I have quite a bit of experience with it and it's tendencies. I usually play a game while I am driving where I am always trying to get the best MPG I can get. Mine is a 2.0 and not a 3.2, but same concept.

[OceanBlueB7]

I have noticed a CONSIDERABLE difference in my mileage depending on driving style(i.e. aggressive vs. mild) and gauge my gasoline bill expectations accordingly.

[stylesx]

Just an updated on this, I am at 8,000km now and am still getting MAX 460km on a full tank

[JCleary]

Why does everyone talk about miles per tank? Does nobody know how to calculate miles per gallon or km per liter??? Weird.

On the diesel sites it's all about hand-calculating miles per gallon. My gas-hog 2.0 averages 21mpg. I've had tanks as low as 17mpg, and one tank rang in at 28mpg.

And another thing- The trip computer should be called a Lie-o-Meter! It's 2-3mpg optimistic at any given time.

I've read you can adjust with a Vag-Com, but I have not bothered.

If I knew the mileage on the 2.0T was going to be this bad, I would have gotten a 3.2!

[MojaveA4]

My 2.0 mileage is REALLY dependent on my driving style. If I take it real easy then I get 450 miles a tank and if I have fun, 320 miles a tank. Obviously, the fun factor drops a lot for the good gas mileage which is why I rarely can pull off 450 unless I make it a game.

[Slo.Mo.Shun.]

Why does everyone talk about miles per tank? Does nobody know how to calculate miles per gallon or km per liter??? Weird.

On the diesel sites it's all about hand-calculating miles per gallon. My gas-hog 2.0 averages 21mpg. I've had tanks as low as 17mpg, and one tank rang in at 28mpg.

And another thing- The trip computer should be called a Lie-o-Meter! It's 2-3mpg optimistic at any given time.

I've read you can adjust with a Vag-Com, but I have not bothered.

If I knew the mileage on the 2.0T was going to be this bad, I would have gotten a 3.2!

It all depends on your driving style, sometimes I hardly get 320 miles per tank, sometimes 450-500, and my personal best 632.

[a4dc89]

It all depends on your driving style, sometimes I hardly get 320 miles per tank, sometimes 450-500, and my personal best 632.

WOW 632 is out of this world!! The best ive gotten is around 420 or so. Perhaps FWD makes a bigger difference than i thought

[Slo.Mo.Shun.]

FWD cars have a bigger gas tank too and run lower rpms at cruising speeds

[3.2some]

I get around 300 miles a tank but I drive my car like I stole it AND my daily commute is 60 miles a day. I've got 30K on the odometer.

[Widget]

So your saying there is a different gear ratio for 2wd vs. Quattro?

[Sanjman]

Why this thread is useless:

1) Already talked about how it is pointless to compare.
2) People have different tanks depending on Quattro and FWD.
3) People weigh differently.
4) People driving differently.
5) People use different types of gas not to mention different octane ratings and different amount of additives.
6) People live in different altitudes, weather conditions, humidity, and temperatures.
7) People have different modifications to their car.
8) People have either Quattro or FWD which also means different weight, distribution, and different transmissions (quattro: 6 speed versus FWD: CVT)
9) People have different transmissions: auto and manual.
10)the MuthaF*** list goes on... and on.

If you think something's wrong... take it back... but it's obvious that your car's mileage has or is improving...

[acidrome]

^ wow a mutha F***** pessimist

everything u ever post is negative. how about not posting at all.
if noobs or the gerneal public want to answer each other post. so be it, MR. NEGATIVE

[Sanjman]

^ wow a mutha F***** pessimist

everything u ever post is negative. how about not posting at all.
if noobs or the gerneal public want to answer each other post. so be it, MR. NEGATIVE

point being is that he's not going to get a good answer because no one really knows... and all the answers he'll receive can't even be compared to that person's car unless if if they have AT LEAST the same exact car with the same exact features... but I am pretty mean in other threads where it's a repost... I don't consider this a repost exactly... so I wasn't exactly yelling... on this thread.

[barkerd427]

stylesx - What kind of driving do you do? ex. How far do you usually drive, how fast, stop and go or highway...

[Sharkfin]

my 2.0T costs $50 to fill up on premium (93)

[JCleary]

Why this thread is useless:

1) Already talked about how it is pointless to compare.
2) People have different tanks depending on Quattro and FWD.
3) People weigh differently.
4) People driving differently.
5) People use different types of gas not to mention different octane ratings and different amount of additives.
6) People live in different altitudes, weather conditions, humidity, and temperatures.
7) People have different modifications to their car.
8) People have either Quattro or FWD which also means different weight, distribution, and different transmissions (quattro: 6 speed versus FWD: CVT)
9) People have different transmissions: auto and manual.
10)the MuthaF*** list goes on... and on.

If you think something's wrong... take it back... but it's obvious that your car's mileage has or is improving...

It would not be useless if miles per gallon (or liters per 100km if you're metric)were used instead of miles per tank. Just shows either the overall lazyness of the posters in this forum or their inability to do simple math...

[stylesx]

Why this thread is useless:

1) Already talked about how it is pointless to compare.
2) People have different tanks depending on Quattro and FWD.
3) People weigh differently.
4) People driving differently.
5) People use different types of gas not to mention different octane ratings and different amount of additives.
6) People live in different altitudes, weather conditions, humidity, and temperatures.
7) People have different modifications to their car.
8) People have either Quattro or FWD which also means different weight, distribution, and different transmissions (quattro: 6 speed versus FWD: CVT)
9) People have different transmissions: auto and manual.
10)the MuthaF*** list goes on... and on.

If you think something's wrong... take it back... but it's obvious that your car's mileage has or is improving...

hahahahaa Angry :) .....jokes
BTW the thread is not useless as its helping me realize that there is no problem with my car and that the consumption is normal :)
Also you are perfectly right that you can only compare apples to apples and i don't expect to get answers from an A4 2.0 owner as the title specifically states my engine and since its a 3.2 then that right off the bat states a quattro.


Thank you

[B7A4Sport]

Just to give styles a bit of a rest, I am going to include the following factors in my comment: weather, altitude, driving style, car model & specs, etc:

- Quattro tank
- I weigh 185 lb.....no f'ing clue what that is in kg's.....
- I drive pretty hard most of the time, I have a tip trans and hate regular Drive w/ a passion.
- 91 oct. Shell V-Power: not far from $50 U.S. to fill 2/3 of the way @ $3.79 per gallon w/ 7.125% tax in CA
- Drove from San Fran Bay Area to Squaw Valley, Lake Tahoe and back on one tank; go from + 50 ft altitude to 6,200 ft, going from relatively humid to dry, Bay Area: +/- 65 degrees F and Tahoe +/- 45 degrees F.
- Stock 2.0T A4 Quattro Sport
- Auto/Tip trans
- **muthaF'ing things to make the list go on and on**

I left from Corte Madera, CA, went to Squaw Valley, CA (while up there took one trip up to Tahoe City and back while up there), and made it back all on one tank.

Total distance: 406.9 miles
Average Speed: +/- 65 mph
MPG: 406.9 / 16.4 gal (full Quattro 2.0T tank) = 24.81 MPG

Considering a good deal of that driving was spent climbing 6,000 vertical feet thru thinner air, I think this is killer mileage compared to my old car (v6 Nissan Maxima), which was almost done with its tank by the time you get to Tahoe, let alone enough to get you back down the mountain or all the way back home.



Hey, at least I'm tryin'!

[stylesx]

Good info but I wouldn't expect the 2.0T to perform like the 3.2L, but good info for whoever owns a 2.0T and wants to know consumption

[B7A4Sport]

Yea, me either; the 4-banger should do a little better with the 6-speed than a V6. I'm a big fan of shifting with the TIP, cuz I think Drive tends to put the car in too low a gear and spends more gas shifting down to 5th when I'm going 35; sounds like it's intentionally trying to break the tranny so I can spend a few grand fixing it.........you can't fool me, Audi!

But yes, its a good gauge for someone wanting to know 2.0T consumption; I, for one, was pleasantly surprised!

[stylesx]

Anyone want to trade their 2.0T with my 3.2 :) ahhah

[Tgr_Clw]

Note that colder temperatures equal to crappy fuel economy. Wait until is gets a bit warmer and check then.