Audi s5 2012, 12.8 MPG...

[walsh]

Hello,

Just been out to lunch with the boss. He was explaining that the new motor (3.0t audi s5) is crap on fuel (understandable)

He Reset's the trip adv at fill, points to the gauge with 1/4 left, trip reads 12.8 mpg!! This is over a mixture of urban higher speed runs.

Close to suggesting he takes it back to Audi, As I am sure this cant be right? He can be heavy footed, but still?

Or are they really that bad?

[Matt UK]

MPG can be as bad you want it to be.

Tell him to drive smoother / slower to see if it makes a difference.

[simoid]

Hmmm...

Tight engine, lots of urban runs or high speed runs - usually I can't get a car to show less than it's "urban cycle" MPG so 13mpg looks poor for an S5 which has an urban figure in the mid twenties.

Unless he's MEGA throttle heavy!

[Smanks]

If it's brand new maybe it needs a bit of time for running in, also don't always rely on OBC figures!

[walsh]

Its got 2500 miles or so on it. He does give it a bit of a poke every now and then, but generally drives relatively normally IMO.

I would expect from his driving for it to be in the 20's, average. Big, big difference between 20 and 13!

[Devil2575]

MPG is incredibly dependant on driving style and road conditions.

It's very difficult to comment on based on an internet post. He could for exmple be, sitting in lots of traffic, flooring it everywhere and getting it up to 3 figures at every chance, in which case 13 mpg sounds fair.

My advice would be to tell him to take it on a motorway and drive it at a constant 70 mph and see what he gets. If it's got a problem then it will still get poor mpg. If it comfortably gets 30 mpg+ then it's fine.

[Debaser]

Get him to keep a record of fuel added and mileage done and work it out from that.

[uuf361]

One of the guys had one of these at work and was getting just 16mpg on a mixture of journeys so perhaps not that far out once it's run in..........

[walsh]

Audi state 34.8 combined.

Going down a 1 in 3 maybe... Jesus.

[kambites]

walsh said:

Audi state 34.8 combined.

Going down a 1 in 3 maybe... Jesus.

The European testing centre people state 34.8. Nothing to do with the manufacturer.

Manufacturers have been getting better at fooling the test pretty much since it's existed. BMW were the front-runners for a long time, it just sounds like Audi have caught up.

[KaraK]

I know it's a thirsty car and all but that does sound a bit on the low side IMO - I was on track in my WRX last week and was getting about 14mpg!

[walsh]

That's interesting.. Off topic slightly, but how does that work. Map the engine to work within the test parameters?

My BMW happily pulls above the quoted combined, a fact I am using to irritate previously mentioned boss as we speak.

Maybe he just cant drive, My suggestion that I run it for a week to report back didn't go down well

[simoid]

walsh said:

That's interesting.. Off topic slightly, but how does that work. Map the engine to work within the test parameters?

Urban cycle is something along the lines of "accelerate to 30, stop for 30 seconds, accelerate again to 30" and so on. It's possible to gear the car so it'll use very little fuel to do that. Start/stop technology obviously saves a few MPG on the figure too, over a car that is idling for the periods of stoppage.

I suppose it'll also include throttle maps and the like, too.

[dave_s13]

I recenlty posted about a new Audi A6 I had the use of for a couple of weeks.

Manufacturer claimed 54odd MPG combined...I got 32!

Many others posted about how their Audi also delivered low consumption compared to the official figures.

We all know the official figures are generally optimistic vs real life but 13 mpg combined sounds frightening.

[Adrian E]

The engine management systems in modern cars recognise the glacial acceleration rates required for european fuel economy testing and will apply a suitable engine map that delivers the required result, whatever that might be. How well the car performs, drives, real world fuel economy will then depend on how thorough a job the calibration engineers did before they signed the model off.

As an aside my silly short geared 4.2 V8 S8 manages 16mpg average with mainly town driving, so that does sound silly-low. I thought this engine in the S4 was supposed to deliver the potential for 30mpg on a realistic run?!

[willisit]

2500 miles? I'd give it that again before I'd condemn it. Big, heavy car though - and it'll suffer around town. I knew a chap that went from the V8 S5 to a Diesel A5. Even that only got 40mpg on a run when new.

[simoid]

dave_s13 said:

We all know the official figures are generally optimistic vs real life but 13 mpg combined sounds frightening.

It's not combined, though. It's urban and hooning.

[walsh]

For clarity, when i say High speed run, I am talking standard 75-80mph DC type driving, rather than bouncing off the red line.

I wouldn't expect much more than 13 when storming about. This is tank on tank. 140-150 miles per tank.

[GroundEffect]

Remember it just has 2500 miles on it so it wont be at its optimum and he probably has a heavy right foot too since it's his new toy.

[Riknos]

walsh said:

Audi state 34.8 combined.

Going down a 1 in 3 maybe... Jesus.

Doubt anyone who owns one will EVER get that figure - sounds far too high!

Never expect to hit manufacturers figures in a million years. Honda have been sued and paid out over exaggerating figures - they're not the only ones doing it.

It's all down to driving style; You'd also be surprised the amount of people accelerate the brake hard EVERYWHERE, and
who cruise along in 3rd/4th gear at 4000+ rpm, then wonder why their MPG isn't hitting manufacturers figures!