Does the 3.0TDI S Tronic Really do 61MPG?

[Wizbit!]

Hi,

I'm looking at buying a 2016 A6 3.0 TDI S Tronic (non-Quattro). Is the 215 BHP version of the engine. The specs say this car will do 61MPG which is only 1 MPG worse than the 2.0 TDI which is officially listed as doing 62MPG... Is this true? Does anybody have any experience here to verify this as it seems to good to be true...

Thanks

 

[Gazwould]

https://www.honestjohn.co.uk/realmpg/audi/a6-saloon-2011

 

[Wizbit!]

https://www.honestjohn.co.uk/realmpg/audi/a6-saloon-2011

Thanks - i'd not seen that website before.
So not quite the 61MPG officially claimed, but surprisingly it is within a couple of MPG of the 2.0 TDI.

 

[Cantata]

I have a 2012 version (which I thought is 205hp) and usually get 52-54mpg on a very long run. Otherwise averages 45-47.

 

[Wizbit!]

I have a 2012 version (which I thought is 205hp) and usually get 52-54mpg on a very long run. Otherwise averages 45-47.

Thanks

 

[NHN]

Always take these numbers with the salt plans of salt lake city, real world usage is far from the test drives manufacturers perform, I'd have said 40-45 tbh so not far of as stated above.

 

[J10NMM]

My 2ltr rarely gets over 45mpg... on a long motorway run I might see 50 but it tends to sit around the 45...

 

[AlS3BE]

I had the 272 Quattro and on long runs I was getting 55mpg+ And on rare occasions it did show 60mpg. All depends on cruising speeds, at 60mph it will easily get 55-60mpg, at 70mph 55mpg and at 80mph it was around 45mpg.
I had the 2.0 190 fwd before the 272 and fuel consumption was about the same between them.
the 3.0 is smooth and effortless whereas the 2.0 took a bit of push to get going especially on a 2 ton barge. That’s probably why there isn’t much between them. Push it hard enough and you are in low teens.

 

[Frizzley]

Hi,

I'm looking at buying a 2016 A6 3.0 TDI S Tronic (non-Quattro). Is the 215 BHP version of the engine. The specs say this car will do 61MPG which is only 1 MPG worse than the 2.0 TDI which is officially listed as doing 62MPG... Is this true? Does anybody have any experience here to verify this as it seems to good to be true...

Thanks

I had a 218PS 3.0 TDI engine in my A5 Quattro. Over the 3 years I had it I averaged 38mpg mostly doing short journeys to and from work. On a long motorway run in dynamic it would easily average 50mpg+ at 70mph.

Car before this one I had a manual 2.0TDI A5 Quattro which averaged around 32mpg overall with at best mid 40‘s on long motorway runs.

The 3.0ltr was effortless to drive with the big plus point being all the extra torque compared to the 2.0ltr which really usefully for overtaking without having to drop through the gears.

The 218 ps version was only available in the A5 for about a year before being replaced by the 272ps version and when I asked about this at my local dealers, they said one of the main reasons for the change was to put a bigger step between the 2.0 and 3.0 TDI units.

FWIW my current S5 (diesel) averages 45mpg at 70 and around 35 overall which is pretty good fir a 350ps unit!

 

[Gazwould]

I had the 2.0 190 fwd before the 272 and fuel consumption was about the same between them.
the 3.0 is smooth and effortless whereas the 2.0 took a bit of push to get going especially on a 2 ton barge. That’s probably why there isn’t much between them. Push it hard enough and you are in low teens.

Shame Audi never did bi-turbo in these high output 2.0 TDI as they are bound to lack spool.

 

[AlS3BE]

Shame Audi never did bi-turbo in these high output 2.0 TDI as they are bound to lack spool.

they want to distinguish the difference from the high powered 2.0 and low powered 3.0. The biturbo muddies the water a bit.

 

[Gazwould]

Agreed , I have a 2.1 bi-turbo with 218 and 580 .