A word of warning to anyone order the new Audi A4 2.0 TDI. Unless you specify the larger fuel tank it comes with just a 40 litre fuel tank! I just spotted that when looking at the specification. Free upgrade to 54 litres.
I presume this is to have the standard car with a full fuel tank and able to meet low emission targets. Although a rolling road is used isn't it?
I am still please with the A3 1.4TFSI and that comes with a 50 litre tank. I am sure I'd get similar range to the previous Passat CC if I had the same 70 litre fuel tank capacity.
Interestingly, the other A4 engine options all come with at least 54 litre fuel tanks. Apart from quattro with 58 litres.
|
Whilst tests may be conducted on a rolling road the increased volume of fuel - hence weight, will contribute to increased emissions. Watch that the option does not push you into a higher emissions class?
|
|
It might push it into a higher emissions class. I won't be ordering a new car until early 2017.
|
|
It probably also changes the kerb weight, which I believe uses a 90% full tank.
|
A 40l tank is going to put a few people off.
Unless it achieves 80mpg real world driving for me it means hunting down a fuel stop overnight taking some of the flexibility out of when I do stop. Not everywhere I stop has fuel e.g. Eurotunnel.
Last edited by: gmac on Sat 12 Sep 15 at 08:32
|
|
My T5 has a 57 litre tank, others in the model range have 65...
|
|
What sort of range did that give with a T5? I'm guessing 280-300 miles max. allowing for something in reserve.
|
This absurdity has gone on long enough, hasn't it?
Nobody believes the fuel economy figures artificially produced by stunts like this and a difference of a few quid a year in duty must be cancelled out by the wasted extra time spent in filling stations.
|
>> Not everywhere I stop has fuel e.g. Eurotunnel.
Genuine question -
Are the filling stations on the exits at both Calais and Folkestone not 24hr?
If not then Auchan in Coquelles is only a few minutes away has 24/7 credit card pumps which are probably easier of access than the (nearer) Cite Europe's subterranean facility. On this side Folkestone services on the M20 are immediately after the tunnel's northbound exit.
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Sat 12 Sep 15 at 13:46
|
I try not to fill up in the UK it adds about 20% to my fuel bill, especially anything connected to the motorway network.
No idea about Coquelles, the only bit I see is from the Autoroute to the tunnel check-in.
I get at least 700 miles to a tank of diesel on one of these runs, if I showed some restraint could probably better 900.
|
>> No idea about Coquelles, the only bit I see is from the Autoroute to the
>> tunnel check-in.
From A16/J43 take D940 towards Calais. At second roundabout go left onto Ave Roger Salengro. The Auchan filling station is on the left after about 1km.
There may be a couple of others before but the Auchan one has the advantage of space to manoeuvre a caravan.
Reverse route to return to Autoroute if going east. If bound towards Boulogne/Rouen continue through Coquelles village, turning left at the roundabout adorned with the tunnelling machine 'Virginie' to rejoin the A16 further west.
|
The Lexus fuel tank is a pathetic 45 litres, but to make it worse the low fuel light comes on really early - about 12 litres left.
Even if I leave it a bit still only get 35 litres in, in fact don't think its cost me over £40 to fill it yet.
Gets me about 400 miles between fill ups, but at our current mileage it needs filling up every 5 or 6 days which is a bit to often really.
|
Does the Lexus hopelessly over read on the speedometer ?
My wife's Auris reads 57kph at 50 kph.
50mpg for a 1.8 petrol isn't too bad in my book. What were you hoping for ?
|
>> Does the Lexus hopelessly over read on the speedometer ?
>>
>> My wife's Auris reads 57kph at 50 kph.
>>
>> 50mpg for a 1.8 petrol isn't too bad in my book. What were you hoping
>> for ?
>>
Not noticed if the speedo over-reads. I'll stick my tomtom in and see how they compare.
I've recorded all my fuel, tank to tank, since I got it so over 15 tanks I'm at 53.3mpg. My expectation was around the 50 mark so happy on that front. Best I've managed was on a trip bristol / london / bristol a few weeks back when with the cruise set to 70 (except in the roadworks) I managed an indicated 72mpg over 250 miles, although I expect in reality it was around 68 which is the book figure for mine.
|
You got 72, you expected 68 and you have to fill a milk bottle every 5 or 6 days ?
What is the issue ?
I get 36mpg out of a 2.0 diesel day to day and only get real diesel economy on long runs (to be expected) and I don't think that is the end of the world for the use.
My wife gets about 53 average out of the hybrid so maybe petrol hybrid is the way to go ???
Last edited by: gmac on Sat 12 Sep 15 at 22:28
|
>> You got 72, you expected 68 and you have to fill a milk bottle every
>> 5 or 6 days ?
>> What is the issue ?
????? didn't say it was an issue, its just an irritation that the tanks not a bit bigger and the low fuel light comes on when I have only used about 33 litres of fuel.
|
|
You're getting an awful long way on a thimble full though. Ask R.P. how far he gets on 33 litres with his T5.
|
>> A 40l tank is going to put a few people off.
There will be many people who do not know the standard tank is 40 litres. So order one and then find out.
Down the line, how do you know what the fuel tank capacity on a second hand car? I know some cars have optional larger fuel tanks now (Audi springs to mind). But this extends from a decent amount to more. The A4 with 40 litres is a bit of a joke.
I'm not saying I'd not want one - not seen one close up or driven one. But I'd get the larger fuel tank.
|
|
I'm assuming the Audi will average 55-60 MPG so that still 500-540 miles of range, how far do you guys want to go before you fill up?
|
>> I'm assuming the Audi will average 55-60 MPG so that still 500-540 miles of range,
>> how far do you guys want to go before you fill up?
I doubt it'll get any near that in real world mixed mode driving.
|
My last car, a 170PS diesel, was meant to achieve about 60mpg on the official test. I know you're never likely to get that. But the best I achieved on mostly motorway driving was 47mpg. I know I could get better but that would involve gentle acceleration, cruising at lower speeds on the motorway etc. But that had a 70 litre fuel tank.
In roadworks yesterday, the A3 1.4T was easily doing 80mpg (indicated) at 50mph. but at 80mph it was a fair bit less. Best I've got with the A3 is about 44mpg.
|
This silly fact actually puts me off the entire car. It would appear Audi has deliberately compromised (hobbled?) a product, and made it less usable and less practical in order to tick a box on a test sheet. To me, it speaks volumes about the ethos behind the entire car. I wonder what else they have compromised to make the figures look good.
Also it will need to be about 15% more economical than the B8 2.0TDI that I took to Italy last Summer, to comfortably crack 400 miles to a tank.
Having to tick even an FOC option to get a basic feature like a sensibly-sized fuel tank on a car is preposterous IMHO.
|
|
As my 7 year old daughter floored me with over the weekend - don't blame the player, blame the game.
|
>> As my 7 year old daughter floored me with over the weekend - don't blame
>> the player, blame the game.
Impressive! :)
Yes, very true. But this is the first time I've seen a product made deliberately inferior to tick a box. Most of the other "eco" stuff is at worst ineffective, or at best, actually makes things better.
|
>> Having to tick even an FOC option to get a basic feature like a sensibly-sized fuel tank on a car
>> is preposterous IMHO.
Worst of all, there will be some who do not tick the FOC box and get a car with a small fuel tank. And how much of an advantage does a slightly lighter vehicle over one with a larger fuel tank which makes it heavier for some fact sheet? It can't be emissions??
Or are they claiming it is x kilograms lighter than the old one when in fact that's partly because there's no diesel in it.
And it's only the 150PS diesel that comes with the small fuel tank.
|
>> and how much of an advantage does
>> a slightly lighter vehicle over one with a larger fuel tank which makes it heavier
>> for some fact sheet? It can't be emissions??
>>
Quite a big one. For the stop-start element of the emissions test, the less weight you have to drag to 35 mph and back again helps slightly, and if that's how they get it below 99 CO2s then that's ker-ching for company car drivers.
|
>> if that's how they get it below 99 CO2s then that's ker-ching for company car drivers.
Except if you opt for the larger tank then you'll pay more but may not realise it when ordering. Same goes for some cars with larger wheel sizes.
Your response makes sense - the more powerful engines have higher emissions so the extra fuel won't have the same impact on moving it to a lower band. I bet the Jaguar XE has a larger fuel tank even with the low emissions.
|
>> Except if you opt for the larger tank then you'll pay more but may not realise it
>> when ordering. Same goes for some cars with larger wheel sizes.
Will you, though? Bigger fuel tank is merely an optional extra, V5 will still say 99g/km.
|
I think RTJ's point is that some options - wheels, roof rails, now perhaps fuel tanks - can affect the car's nominal CO2 rating, and that this will appear on the V5C.
edit: ...and this says very clearly that it won't:
www.hmrc.gov.uk/manuals/camanual/ca23545.htm
Last edited by: WillDeBeest on Tue 15 Sep 15 at 15:24
|
>> edit: ...and this says very clearly that it won't:
>> www.hmrc.gov.uk/manuals/camanual/ca23545.htm
FWIW the Audi website gives this warning:
The choice and size of wheels you select on your vehicle may also impact on the CO2 figures and subsequent Vehicle Excise Duty payable.
|
I know wheel size can impact some car's official CO2 rating because of the warning on the lease company website when I last ordered a car. For a lot of cars it does not make a difference. For others it does.
For example, the higher spec Lexus IS300h with larger wheels have higher emissions than the SE. But 18" optional wheels on a SEAT Leon FR makes no difference.
|
>> In roadworks yesterday, the A3 1.4T was easily doing 80mpg (indicated) at 50mph. but at
>> 80mph it was a fair bit less. Best I've got with the A3 is about
>> 44mpg.
>>
Is that being manually calculated or via the car's dash MPG read out RTJ?
I only ask is because mine always sits between 53-57 mpg and on long runs without much variation in speed often low 60's mpg. I do accept in reality you have to take 10% off those figures allowing for display inaccuracy.
Last edited by: VxFan on Tue 15 Sep 15 at 23:24
|
All my actual mpg figures quoted are brim to brim calculations. I've got an app on the Android phone which I enter fuel purchases and so I can see average mpg, average cost per mile, etc.
The Passat CC was always over-reading mpg on the computer compared to actual mpg measured brim-to-brim. But the A3 is pretty close to the real world mpg.
|
>> >> I'm assuming the Audi will average 55-60 MPG
>>
>> I doubt it'll get any near that in real world mixed mode driving.
The worst urban figure for a 150ps A4 2.0 TDI is 60.1 - the combined is 72.4. It used to be the case that urban was often close-ish to 'real world', so it might not be that far off.
The worst urban for a 190ps 2.0 TDI ('Ultra') is 58.9, or 55.4 if you go quattro.
|
|
I'm happy with anything north of 50mpg, which mine will do with ease if I don't gun it.
|
>>
>> I doubt it'll get any near that in real world mixed mode driving.
>>
I'm not sure it's *that* preposterous. My somewhat larger, automatic 2.1 diesel with no particular claims to be Eco is averaging around 47mpg on a long term basis (last 26,000 miles). And my I only do a few long journeys a month. On those it'll do mid 50s. So I see no reason why a vaguely Eco, manual A4 couldn't average 50mpg with out much effort, and mid 50s doesn't seem a stretch. Thats 11 or 12 miles to the litre so a 400 to 450 mile range. 15 years ago my A4 TDi averaged 42 mpg and had. 63 litre tank I think.
So 30% more efficient, 30% smaller tank!! And, I note, roughly 30% more powerful as well...
Mind you our Up! Only has a 30 litre tank; now that is small, but even that can just about make it to Paris and back on a tank if you're moderately careful about your maximum speed on the autoroute!!
Last edited by: PeterS on Mon 14 Sep 15 at 19:41
|
If you want an S-Line variant of the new A4, you cannot opt for the 2.0 TDI Ultra. So the larger wheels etc. result in higher emissions and therefore higher BIK rates.
If you opt for a 150PS 2.0TDI S-Line it sits in the same bracket for emissions as a 3.0TDI S-Line. The 190PS 2.0TDI S-Line has higher emissions than the 3.0TDI.
I don't think the fuel tank would put me off - I'd probably get the larger one. But the sport suspension on the Ultra diesels might.
Last edited by: rtj70 on Tue 15 Sep 15 at 17:29
|
Audi - Audi A4 Fuel Tank Capacity - sherlock47
