# Diesel TT - What is your mpg?



## mon2s (Jan 1, 2011)

Hi all,

I have a diesel TT on order and wonder what 'real world' mpg returns owners are getting?

Thanks, SIMON


----------



## denTTed (Feb 21, 2007)

I get about 26-28.


----------



## MXS (May 10, 2010)

denTTed said:


> I get about 26-28.


On a diesel engine?


----------



## denTTed (Feb 21, 2007)

MXS said:


> denTTed said:
> 
> 
> > I get about 26-28.
> ...


Just making him jealous...


----------



## phil3012 (Jul 25, 2008)

About 50 mpg on a run, sometimes a up to 55.


----------



## wja96 (Mar 4, 2010)

I'm averaging a genuine 53.1MPG over 24900 miles so far. The car was significantly more efficient after it's first services and I'd expect that figure to be more like 55MPG at 50,000 miles. I have to say I'm very pleased with the performance/economy balance this car gives.


----------



## LEO-RS (Apr 13, 2009)

I'd say real fuel economy average of 45mpg is about right. (550m to the tank with a 55l fill up)


----------



## LEO-RS (Apr 13, 2009)

Saying that above, I can prove that it is possible to do with enough time and effort. When I first got my TDI, I tested this to the max and it is possible to average 53mpg over a full tank as shown here...

viewtopic.php?f=19&t=148029&hilit=tdi+fuel+economy

This was extreme though, the turbo did not spin up once and it was a real real effort to do this. I never managed to do this again when I started driving the car normally. My claims of 750-800m to a tank in that original post turned out to be nonsense. Near enough every tank after that averaged around 550-570 to the tank.

It never got better with miles and it definitely never got better with a remap. (Remap just messes the fuel computer calculations up by 3-4mpg over read)


----------



## hooting_owl (Sep 3, 2008)

after 22 months and nearly 9000 miles (i must get out more....) my tdi is showing an average of 48mpg on the trip. car is used for longer trips - no commutes or stop/start. i don't thrash the car, nor do i drive like grandpa.

if they offered a manual quattro with the new 2.0 petrol engine i'd get my wallet out for one as the economy difference between petrol/diesel is marginal with the latest 2.0 motor. can't afford the tts.


----------



## m4rky (Jul 20, 2008)

Mines the same - I've now done 4000 miles and I'm getting 45 mpg on average.

Having said that though I get 45 mpg by driving it quite hard so I don't have to drive like a nun to get that figure


----------



## mon2s (Jan 1, 2011)

Thanks for all the replies so far - it looks like I'm going to be happy looking at all those figures.

As long as Audi's mpg claims aren't as outlandish as those of Mercedes, and it seems they aren't, then I'll be a very happy camper indeed.


----------



## Blanchie (Jun 2, 2009)

on the 8 mile commute around 40mpg (all rural roads), Drives upto Scotland around 50mpg, warmer weather it improves around 4-5mpg.


----------



## LEO-RS (Apr 13, 2009)

mon2s said:


> Thanks for all the replies so far - it looks like I'm going to be happy looking at all those figures.
> 
> As long as Audi's mpg claims aren't as outlandish as those of Mercedes, and it seems they aren't, then I'll be a very happy camper indeed.


Be careful and dont expect too much, these Independent long term reviews rate the fuel economy poorly..

http://www.carmagazine.co.uk/Drives/Sea ... ew-280109/
http://www.evo.co.uk/carreviews/evocarr ... 0_tdi.html
http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/carreviews ... miles.html

To get the 53mpg from the tank I really did drive so gently that it was excruciating. No spin of the turbo at all and 2000 rpm gear changes, 60mph on the motorways, putting it into neutral on long downhill sections, using the brakes as little as possible, really really trying. The whole point was to try and set a benchmark of what the TDI could do, but it was not the norm and I only ever did it the once. Infact, it was pointless, there was no need splashing out £30k on a car to drive like that.

The fuel computers may well show these averages of 50mpg or so but when you actually calculate the fuel economy by doing the maths from the fuel receipts vs the mileage on the clock, it often works out lower than what the computer claims. I suspect most people will get around 550m to the tank, fuel computer showing 0 and then stick 55l back in. When you do the maths on that, (55/4.545 = 12.1g. 550/12.1 = 45.5mpg) It's strange as when I looked at the fuel computer every journey it showed around 50mpg and hence my claim not to trust the fuel computers (Especially if you remap the car as it screws all the internal calculations and is uncalibrated to the new settings)

If i could give any advice, expect a real 45mpg, anything over is a bonus. You would really need to try very hard to get a real 53mpg over the life of your ownership that in all fairness there's no point in buying the TT in the first place to do that.

Enjoy the car, the TT TDI is a great car, the Quattro is great and overall from my experience with it over 20k miles I'd give it an 8/10


----------



## m4rky (Jul 20, 2008)

Yep the TDI is a great TT and very good in the real world.

I take Mitchy's points and he is right - I can get 50 mpg but I usually get this on very long motorway drives that are over 300 miles in a straight line. When we drove to italy last year we did get almost 50 mpg - I think it worked out at 49 mpg but the roads were clear and flowing. We have done well over 50k miles in a TDI TT.

In the UK expect 45 mpg without having to try and get good fuel consumption and just enjoy the ride


----------



## mon2s (Jan 1, 2011)

m4rky said:


> In the UK expect 45 mpg without having to try and get good fuel consumption and just enjoy the ride


That'll do nicely! Thanks. Seems an excellent combination of performance, traction and economy.


----------



## triplefan (Sep 3, 2008)

m4rky said:


> When we drove to italy last year we did get almost 50 mpg


That's because you drove home behind the slowest TT of the lot :lol:


----------



## m4rky (Jul 20, 2008)

triplefan said:


> m4rky said:
> 
> 
> > When we drove to italy last year we did get almost 50 mpg
> ...


Hey the trip on the train was the best - I have never seen a roadster drop its hood whilst gling through a tunnel at 40 mph before 

Very impressive and great photo's :lol:


----------



## wja96 (Mar 4, 2010)

I disagree that 45MPG is all you should expect. I appreciate that I'm a high-ish mileage driver (it's very rare I start the engine and don't do at least 100 miles) but I think you have to drive these cars for economy if that's what you want. And that means revving them oddly enough.

Mine is most economical at about 2500rpm and I don't use 6th unless I'm doing an indicated 80mph.

If you have it in 6th spinning 1500rpm (50mph in 6th) then I reckon you'll get high 30's or low 40's.

Try revving it, what do you have to lose?


----------



## frankbaeyens (May 14, 2008)

I have done 111 000 kms (69 000 mile) by now, and average (indicated) diesel consumption is 49.5 mpg (50.5 mpg in summer time, 48.5 mpg winter). Which is excellent. About 70 percent of it is long distance highway cruising (80 mph), the rest is on secondary roads. When accelerating, gear shifts at about 3000 rpm most of the time, when in a 'sporty mood', at about 4000-4500 rpm.

I am just back from a round trip to Austria (2400 kms, including bits of fast driving on German Autobahn (100-110 mph)), some trips on mountain roads (and it was cold, about -10° Celcius), and averaged 47 mpg. On my return trip from Tirol last Saturday, I managed to get back home (590 miles) without refueling.

Cheers,
Frank


----------



## rcmorgan (Jun 28, 2009)

I have a 50 mile commute and typically get 50mg.Part of that includes cruising at 85.
I still love the huge torque of the engine for real world overtaking


----------



## mcmoody (Sep 17, 2008)

Over the last 4,500 miles or so I have averaged 41mpg. That is made up of about 75% urban driving to work and meetings with a few 20-30 mile drives. Not too bad for a quattro car with wide tyres and good performance. Best I've ever had out of it is 57mpg on a 28 mile journey whilst driving very carefully. Note I haven't had my first service yet so that may make a difference as pointed out on a previous post.

Mike


----------



## LEO-RS (Apr 13, 2009)

wja96 said:


> I disagree that 45MPG is all you should expect. I appreciate that I'm a high-ish mileage driver (it's very rare I start the engine and don't do at least 100 miles) but I think you have to drive these cars for economy if that's what you want. And that means revving them oddly enough.
> 
> Mine is most economical at about 2500rpm and I don't use 6th unless I'm doing an indicated 80mph.
> 
> ...


You get 650m to every single tank without fail and then fill it up with 55l?

Can you take a picture of your fuel computer 2 showing 53.1mpg over 25,000m as to me that is unusually high and abnormal and tells me you're not driving it properly.

I was gentle in mine and like I said, real mpg was 45mpg with tanks lasting 550-570m with a 55-58l fill up.

Read the independent magazine reviews for a real indication of fuel economy in these cars, granted they are a bit low at 35-42mpg but no way will the car do 53mpg over the entire fuel tank when driven normally.

I think a better question is, how many miles does everyone do per tank and then fill it back up with as these fuel computers are misleading everyone. No way is everyone getting 650m to a tank and then filling with 55l. (This is a genuine 53mpg)


----------



## mcmoody (Sep 17, 2008)

Mitchy said:


> I think a better question is, how many miles does everyone do per tank and then fill it back up with as these fuel computers are misleading everyone. No way is everyone getting 650m to a tank and then filling with 55l. (This is a genuine 53mpg)


I did 450 miles on a £65 fill up. I think thats around 38 mpg. That was during all the poor weather conditions.


----------



## mikef4uk (Jan 15, 2006)

My Golf mk5 usually shows 53ish, I was talking to a lad at work, he had a whole new idea on diesel fuel consumption, I was telling him how hard it is to get the Golf into the 60mpg figures, he replied, If you think that's hard try keeping one UNDER 30 mpg.. :lol: :lol:


----------



## Survey S2000 (Jul 28, 2009)

You TDI guys should all be pushing to get your MPG down! :lol:

Its a performance coupe(not sports car), so drive it like one :twisted:

I did consider the TDI, as my TT is a company car. But the 2.0tfsi is also very good on tax, MPG and the performance is good too, engine sounds nice to rev and has alot less NVH than a TDI.

No brainer to me.

Not that i check often, think i get aorund 34mpg from 2.0 tfsi


----------



## wja96 (Mar 4, 2010)

Mitchy said:


> You get 650m to every single tank without fail and then fill it up with 55l?


Effectively, yes. The fuel computer is nonsense though. I regularly get it showing 750-780 miles projected on a full tank which is rather more than 53MPG.










I calculate my fuel economy based on miles run vs. fuel purchased on my fuel card.



Mitchy said:


> Can you take a picture of your fuel computer 2 showing 53.1mpg over 25,000m as to me that is unusually high and abnormal and tells me you're not driving it properly.


No, because even Trip 2 resets at 10,000 miles and for the reason stated above the fuel readings are not accurate. The instantaneous readings will soon show that it's MUCH more fuel efficient to run the car with 2500rpm on it than it is with 1500rpm in the same gear. The reason for that is quite simple, the engine has to over-fuel to generate torque at low RPM so you get that smug feeling that it will tug itself along but in reality it's costing you a fortune.

The other reason you need some revs on is that when the gearbox is spinning faster than the engine ie. you are going downhill or coasting to a stop the engine use absolutely no diesel at all, so you need to get off the accellerator and plan your braking as much as possible for good economy. That may be your definition of not driving it properly, but all my cars over the last 10 years have done high-ish mileages (30,000 miles per year) and apart from multiple DSG gearbox failures, I've had no trouble with them at all.



Mitchy said:


> I was gentle in mine and like I said, real mpg was 45mpg with tanks lasting 550-570m with a 55-58l fill up.


As I say, I think you need to rev the CR engines. After all, it doesn't develop peak power until 4200rpm - and when was the last time you revved it that hard? I red-line mine at least once a week just to keep the injectors clean and I have the EGR valve turned down as far as it will go with VCDS which possible helps, but not 8 MPG worth. I also think my relatively long journeys help enormously as mine averages about 35-45MPG until it's properly warmed through at about 20 miles of running.



Mitchy said:


> Read the independent magazine reviews for a real indication of fuel economy in these cars, granted they are a bit low at 35-42mpg but no way will the car do 53mpg over the entire fuel tank when driven normally.


Again, I disagree. Journalist's driving styles are not a good indication of what is actually possible. And what's normal driving. I certainly don't get left behind at the traffic lights although I am guilty of rolling slowly up to traffic lights (it also helps to get them to change in your favour).



Mitchy said:


> I think a better question is, how many miles does everyone do per tank and then fill it back up with as these fuel computers are misleading everyone. No way is everyone getting 650m to a tank and then filling with 55l. (This is a genuine 53mpg)


I'm not using my fuel computer, I'm using Excel and my fuel card statement. Seriously, 53MPG is possible, and I know people who could probably do even better given that they used to regularly better my economy figures when we all drove identical Passats.


----------



## Survey S2000 (Jul 28, 2009)

wja96 said:


> I'm not using my fuel computer, I'm using Excel and my fuel card statement. Seriously, 53MPG is possible, and I know people who could probably do even better given that they used to regularly better my economy figures when we all drove identical Passats.


wja - if you are using a different method to establish your MPG then the results will surely differ as everyone seems to be refering to the IDS figures. :? You should of mentioned that first off.


----------



## wja96 (Mar 4, 2010)

Survey S2000 said:


> wja96 said:
> 
> 
> > I'm not using my fuel computer, I'm using Excel and my fuel card statement. Seriously, 53MPG is possible, and I know people who could probably do even better given that they used to regularly better my economy figures when we all drove identical Passats.
> ...


If I told you what the IDS was saying you'd just laugh - last time I checked it think it was showing 58MPG over 250 miles or something silly like that. As far as I cxan tell, the IDS generally over-reads and should not be relied upon.


----------



## Scottish4me (Jul 8, 2010)

I did a round trip of 300miles Glasgow to Aberdeen and back on friday and got 61mpg both ways. Took it easy though 65-70 as just breaking her in.


----------



## cs02kkk2 (Jan 8, 2010)

m4rky said:


> Yep the TDI is a great TT and very good in the real world.
> 
> I take Mitchy's points and he is right - I can get 50 mpg but I usually get this on very long motorway drives that are over 300 miles in a straight line. When we drove to italy last year we did get almost 50 mpg - I think it worked out at 49 mpg but the roads were clear and flowing. We have done well over 50k miles in a TDI TT.
> 
> In the UK expect 45 mpg without having to try and get good fuel consumption and just enjoy the ride


Generally do get 50mpg ob the motorway but urban I'm lucky to hit 30mpg


----------



## Neville (Jun 15, 2010)

Typically I get 30 mpg around town and 48+ mpg on a good motorway run.


----------



## m4rky (Jul 20, 2008)

Sorry to resurrect an old thread but I thought that I would do an experiment with my TDi to see exactly what sort of mileage it was doing. So over the past few weeks I have driven it in completely different ways to get a good idea of what you can expect.

Bear in mind though that my TT has only done 5600 miles and this test was carried out on winter deisel but this is what I found.

First experiment - This was to see how many miles I could drive if I was particularly careful with the loud pedal but not to the point where it got silly. I decided that I would stick to all speed limits including the motorway and generally plan ahead to keep things moving. I did not do any any distance trips and the furthest I drove was 35 miles in one trip. To be honest by the end of this tank full of fuel I was really bored of driving this way as I was just not having any fun but the results were

521 Miles using 53 litres of fuel = 44.26 MPG

Second experiment - Now this one was much more fun  I decided to drive in my usual style with no regard for fuel consumption what so ever. I also did no long distance drives during this tank of fuel ether and again the longest trip was 40 miles. The results were

468 Miles using 52 litres of fuel = 40.51 MPG

I'm really not sure what the conclusion to this is except for the fact you can drive a TT TDi how you like for another £9 per tank full. A bargain in my book for the amount of smiles it brings. The things I do for this forum


----------



## wja96 (Mar 4, 2010)

m4rky said:


> First experiment - This was to see how many miles I could drive if I was particularly careful with the loud pedal but not to the point where it got silly. I decided that I would stick to all speed limits including the motorway and generally plan ahead to keep things moving. I did not do any any distance trips and the furthest I drove was 35 miles in one trip. To be honest by the end of this tank full of fuel I was really bored of driving this way as I was just not having any fun but the results were
> 
> 521 Miles using 53 litres of fuel = 44.26 MPG
> 
> ...


I really don't understand how mine can be THAT much better than yours. I'm on winter tyres at the moment and I'm still averaging 51MPG over the last 5 tankfuls (54MPG indicated in the DIS). I'm almost exclusively uisng ASDA diesel as it's generally cheapest wherever I go, so I'm not using fancy fuels or anything and I use ALL the revs at least once every week.


----------



## mon2s (Jan 1, 2011)

Thanks for the 'research' m4rky & WJA96. I'll be happy with all of those returns after the low 30's of my current car. Not long to wait now.


----------



## m4rky (Jul 20, 2008)

wja96 said:


> m4rky said:
> 
> 
> > First experiment - This was to see how many miles I could drive if I was particularly careful with the loud pedal but not to the point where it got silly. I decided that I would stick to all speed limits including the motorway and generally plan ahead to keep things moving. I did not do any any distance trips and the furthest I drove was 35 miles in one trip. To be honest by the end of this tank full of fuel I was really bored of driving this way as I was just not having any fun but the results were
> ...


Hi Mate - Whilst I was doing these tests my DIS regularly said that I was getting over 53 - 54 MPG. It just doesn't give a true indication of MPG over a full tank of fuel - well not on my TT anyway. In fact the display on the DIS 2 readout that I have not altered from new still says that I have obtained 46 MPG since picking my TT up. Pure jackanory I'm afraid in my case.


----------



## wja96 (Mar 4, 2010)

m4rky said:


> Hi Mate - Whilst I was doing these tests my DIS regularly said that I was getting over 53 - 54 MPG. It just doesn't give a true indication of MPG over a full tank of fuel - well not on my TT anyway. In fact the display on the DIS 2 readout that I have not altered from new still says that I have obtained 46 MPG since picking my TT up. Pure jackanory I'm afraid in my case.


Interesting that your DIS reading is so far out. It can be corrected with VCDS, although mine is currently out of whack because of the winter tyres.


----------

