a900ss Posted May 7, 2004 Report Share Posted May 7, 2004 All, I have got a 1.8T (163hp) FWD saloon and am rather disappointed with performance. This morning, head to head with a Volvo S80 D5 from still and all it could do was draw level all the way to 90MPH. Now both cars have the same 163 hp, the diesel volvo will have a bit more torque but weighs a lot more than the Audi. Audi claim 0-62 for my car is 8.6 sec, Volvo claim 9.8 secs for their car. I admit that mine has only done 4000 miles and the volvo was a Y reg so is fully loosened and will give its full performance but will that allow for all that difference? Am I expecting too much? I would expect it to have beaten a diesel volvo of that size with that power. According to Audi at least, it should. Also, MPG is a rather low 27.2 MPG average. Not bad on its own but my travels are 90% motorway and for licence preservation, I stick cruise on to hold 85MPH. I would have expected 30-31 MPG. Are the two related, low performance and high fuel consumption? I have been told to expect this engine to take at least 10,000 miles to fully loosen but will the performance and MPG really increase this dramatically? Any advice welcomed. Thanks PS. It was smoked by an 04 Vaux Vectra the other day from the lights. That was a 2.2 petrol, only develops 150hp, weighs more than my car and left me behind easily!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cheechy Posted May 7, 2004 Report Share Posted May 7, 2004 [ QUOTE ] PS. It was smoked by an 04 Vaux Vectra the other day from the lights. That was a 2.2 petrol, only develops 150hp, weighs more than my car and left me behind easily!!! [/ QUOTE ] ssshhh...don't admit to that. Volvo yes but Vectra.... Actually it could just be down to the fact that the Vectra has a normally aspirated engine v's the turbo 1.8 which may not pick up quite as early on in the rev range. It may also be down to your driving style - maybe you've not got used to keeping the car in its peak performance range? Alternatively though you may want to get it checked out at you dealer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
richy_uk Posted May 7, 2004 Report Share Posted May 7, 2004 Doesn't sound 100 % to me. In my 1.8T cab, 90% driving at 85 mph (theoretically hahaha ) gives me about 34 mpg. When my car was newish, I could still get easily over 30 mpg. As for performance, it will improve dramatically. Even 10k miles may not be enough for the engine to loosen up fully. If you're neck and neck with the Volvo now, you'll piss it when the engine's run in. A minor point that narks me about engine power, Audi's claimed 163 is for PS (the metric equivalent of real horses) which means in pounds shillings and pence, I think the real hp may only be 155 imperial. If the Volvo figure is 163 imperial hp, then you're slightly down already. To me, the economy bit sounds wrong and the performance will eventually come. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SPLiiX Posted May 7, 2004 Report Share Posted May 7, 2004 I agree with you guys! Try taking your Cruise down to 80 - 82 MPH and I bet you will get another 10% that would meen 30mph instead of your 27.2!!! try it!! I remember on my X5 doing about 100mph and setting the cruise control for a short while and then resseting the average MPH and it was about 14MPG but at 75MPH it was a nice 28MPG so there is a big difference when you increase your speed even a little! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apreading Posted May 7, 2004 Report Share Posted May 7, 2004 Several two hour motorway cruises I have done at 85ish recently and got well into the 30s, higher than you are expecting even, and that is with Quattro sapping the juice too! I have done 6000miles so far, but the mpg hasnt really changed a great deal over that time to be honest. Sounds like something is wrong there mate... As far as the performance goes it is hard to say. Some days I think the performance is fantastic, but other days I am shouting "come on, come on!" at it. Keeping it in the power band is part of the key, but doesnt seem to be the only answer. I am sure I read somewhere that turbos work better or worse in different weather conditions? Hard to say why you are not winning your races, but something doesnt seem quite right with the mpg so best to check it out. Of course if you have a typical Audi dealer then they will probably just tell you it is normal and fob you off... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SPLiiX Posted May 7, 2004 Report Share Posted May 7, 2004 Try the higher Octane fuel grade??? worth a try Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
a900ss Posted May 7, 2004 Author Report Share Posted May 7, 2004 Can't be the octane because I always use SUL as a minimum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apreading Posted May 7, 2004 Report Share Posted May 7, 2004 Yeah, I have been trying optimax for the last 7 or 8 tanks and it certainly does improve throttle response. Dissapointed that it make absolutely no/nada/zip/zero difference to the mpg on the 163 though... Cant really decide whether to stick with it or not. I think I will go back to std unleaded at some point and see if I miss the stuff... Deffo works better than SUL or BP Ultimate though, they didnt really improve the responsiveness over std unleaded at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GCab Posted May 7, 2004 Report Share Posted May 7, 2004 [ QUOTE ] Doesn't sound 100 % to me. In my 1.8T cab, 90% driving at 85 mph (theoretically hahaha ) gives me about 34 mpg. When my car was newish, I could still get easily over 30 mpg. As for performance, it will improve dramatically. [/ QUOTE ] Which is "your" car, richy ? Did you go for the quattro, or are you referring your original car - did you keep it ? My nick used to be GanS, btw , so you'll remember the discussion My experience with the 1.8Tq (you did ask me about it, haven't got round to proper reply/review yet ) is that economy was a bit of a shocker, especialy coming from the TDI - I get around 15-20mpg around town with the 1.8T, but this is stop-start, revving round tight suburban roads motoring. I do get 30-35mpg out on the open road but most of my driving is urban, so filling up every week (or less) compared to once every 2 wks for the same size and shape of previous car, was a bit at first. It does seem to be getting better with toppng up oil and with high-rev use (it;s done about 2,000 miles but I don't believe in running in and see no point in "nursing" a modern engine, so I've been regularly redlining it since 500 miles onward) Performance is fine; bear in mind that turbodiesels, even Volvos, can be damn quick in the lower revs whatever the 0-60 time is - my 2.5 TDI cab used to race away from most cars at the traffic lights, and could give a 330i a close run. The 1.8T cab has less shove but I've to used to it and it's plenty quick: and the quattro makes a big difference to confidence in putting the foot down. It can sap power and I've seen mag articles expressing some concern about Audi using 4wd in such a small displacement engine: but the upside is, if and when I chip it, according to Kim Collins at QS Tuning (MTM) the quattro feels infinitely nicer with an uprated engine, whereas the 2wd scrabbles around an awful lot once you add more power. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apreading Posted May 7, 2004 Report Share Posted May 7, 2004 Surprised at just how low your urban driving mpg is GCab. I get consistently 25mpg average doing a 4 mile trip across the center of reading stopping at traffic lights all the time and stuck in traffic. for the first mile it is often 20-22mpg, but by the end, when the engine is warmed up the 'current' mpg gets up to 28ish or even 30 if I force myself to drive purely for economy (totally alien concept to me!). I can drive like an old woman and get an average of 28-29 across this 4 mile torture, or drive like a loony desparate to get there and average 25. Which do you think I do? Is your urban driving for shorter ranges where the engine doesn have time to warm up, or is your traffic even worse than mine? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
farhan Posted May 7, 2004 Report Share Posted May 7, 2004 I find that the multitronic is really good for the 1.8T Had mine now for a week and man it is quick, there is an 'S' mode where the gearbox keeps the revs in the 'power band' all the time so you get instant power! very very nice indeed! But then mine is 190ps too so that may make a difference. But should not make that much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
richy_uk Posted May 7, 2004 Report Share Posted May 7, 2004 [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Doesn't sound 100 % to me. In my 1.8T cab, 90% driving at 85 mph (theoretically hahaha ) gives me about 34 mpg. When my car was newish, I could still get easily over 30 mpg. As for performance, it will improve dramatically. [/ QUOTE ] Which is "your" car, richy ? Did you go for the quattro, or are you referring your original car - did you keep it ? My nick used to be GanS, btw , so you'll remember the discussion [/ QUOTE ] I thought it was you, but wasn't sure. Unfortunately, I'm back in my original car, still not happy and still discussing it with the dealers. Shocking how they haven't contacted me in over a week and Audi UK are like chocolate teapots. 14 months, 9 visits and probably approaching 2 months without my car including the time I had their loaner is not a good record particularly with them still not fixing my car. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lmmlmmam Posted May 7, 2004 Report Share Posted May 7, 2004 [ QUOTE ] Try taking your Cruise down to 80 - 82 MPH and I bet you will get another 10% that would meen 30mph instead of your 27.2!!! try it!! I remember on my X5 doing about 100mph and setting the cruise control for a short while and then resseting the average MPH and it was about 14MPG but at 75MPH it was a nice 28MPG so there is a big difference when you increase your speed even a little! [/ QUOTE ] Spot on observation SpliiX. Now for the science bit : Drag increase cubically with speed. At constant speed drag is the major contributer to fuel consumption. The cubic relationship shows that to cruise at 85mph rather than 70mph the drag is 80% higher. Fuel consumption will follow suit (+/- a bit due to many other factors). Another thing to remember is that all modern cars are very heavy - therefore accelerating takes a lot of fuel. Finally when comparing figures it is important to remember that DIS is somewhat optimistic (in my experience). I have checked several full tankfulls against the DIS figure and find DIS to be 3-4 mpg high. I think most people on hear feel that the 1.8T engine offers a pretty good blend of performance and economy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
farhan Posted May 7, 2004 Report Share Posted May 7, 2004 as far as econom is concerned, I am also finding that it is not so frugal...well, lets see what it averages over a longer period. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
a900ss Posted May 7, 2004 Author Report Share Posted May 7, 2004 The MPG I average is not from the DIS. It has been worked out over the total mileage travelled after the first free tank divided by the total fuel gone into the tank after the first free tank. This is over a complete month so it also includes a fairly easy time for the running in period. Before you ask, I have now done 4000 miles, so the accuracy level is fairly high. To be honest, I don't really care about the fuel comsumption because I don't pay for it. I just included it to add possible weight to the fact the engine may still be very tight after 4000 miles and is therefore not as efficient as it will become, ie more performance and better mpg? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homerj Posted May 7, 2004 Report Share Posted May 7, 2004 Your fuel economy does seem a bit low. I was averaging 32.5mpg in my last 2 150break FWD 1.8T A4's, and I do not hang about - My motorway cruise would be slightly higher than yours. The econ will improve with time, but I would not expect it to make as dramtic a leap as it would have to make to get into the 30's. So get it checked out. Performance will come with the miles, the car will never be a rocket but should easily deal with the oposition your talking about. V6 vectra's used to fear me Only advice driving wise I can give for the performance is don't floor the car, from my experience max boost seems to be at about 3/4 throttle, if you floor the car its seems to drown, and go no where. Again from my experience : Turbo cars like clear / cold days, not hot / humid ones Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GCab Posted May 7, 2004 Report Share Posted May 7, 2004 AP: duration of journey may be something to do with it, I tend to make short burst trips (15-20 mins) to and from work which is most of the driving: it's nice to stretch its legs a bit at the weekends though and I try and do that even if I haven't got much of a functional excuse to go for a run: it feels cruel to keep it penned in only driving around town. (you listening, cabgirl? ) But the short drives may well be one reason for the poor consumption. We're off up to Scotland in the summer, be interesting to see how we get on. The 2.5 TDI cab served us well in the Lakes last year, except for some alarming moments when it struggled to get traction up Hardknott Pass and felt as if it was about to start sliding backward - I think this was a combination of 2WD and the extra 100kg weight of the diesel... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CabGirl Posted May 7, 2004 Report Share Posted May 7, 2004 [ QUOTE ] you listening, cabgirl? [/ QUOTE ] I'm listening GCab! I've had the car for less than three weeks! I've been busy at work and I haven't had chance to take it for a long run. 10 miles is my longest trip so far. I'm saving myself for some more summer sunshine . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steve2 Posted May 7, 2004 Report Share Posted May 7, 2004 i have just kept a record of my last tank full of optimax and the results are: 27.2 MPG, 31 MPH average This was mostly town driving with approx 75 miles of high speeds (80-120 mph) i do not drive very gentle so i expect a higher average if i did, the car goes in monday for a cambelt change and 80k service so it should get better, My brake pads are shot but no warning light? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cupramax Posted May 7, 2004 Report Share Posted May 7, 2004 [ QUOTE ] Only advice driving wise I can give for the performance is don't floor the car, from my experience max boost seems to be at about 3/4 throttle, if you floor the car its seems to drown, and go no where. Again from my experience : Turbo cars like clear / cold days, not hot / humid ones [/ QUOTE ] Homer, do you notice this still on the S-line as with the twin intercooler setup you should suffer less from heatsoak which is what you are describing above. My current Leon Cupra R also has twin intercoolers and even when run several times at a rolling road tuners the induction temps didn't suffer anything like they did on my old Cupra which was only a single intercooler, this is the same setup your old A4's would have also had. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apreading Posted May 7, 2004 Report Share Posted May 7, 2004 [ QUOTE ] AP: duration of journey may be something to do with it, I tend to make short burst trips (15-20 mins) to and from work which is most of the driving:<SNIP> But the short drives may well be one reason for the poor consumption. [/ QUOTE ] Ah, could be. My drive it 30-40 mins and the economy really improves after the first 20-15 mins when the engine has warmed up. If I stopped halfway, my economy would be pretty dire (20-23mpg I reckon, maybe less if I revved the fecker). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brn7y Posted May 7, 2004 Report Share Posted May 7, 2004 I have noticed that not only is my 190 far more perky that the 163, it is also better on the fuel, I was never very happy with the 163, it was slow and drank to much. I believe that it is possible that whilst modifying and boosting the power to 190 Audi have refined the engine to a near perfect setup, this is also backed up by the fact AMD are able to get back 250bhp from a little chip and exhaust swap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
a900ss Posted May 8, 2004 Author Report Share Posted May 8, 2004 [ QUOTE ] Only advice driving wise I can give for the performance is don't floor the car, from my experience max boost seems to be at about 3/4 throttle, if you floor the car its seems to drown, and go no where. [/ QUOTE ] What is this about 3/4 throttle for max performance? I tried it last night and whilst I would say it wasn't any slower, I also don't feel it was any quicker. Does anybody else get max performance by not fully depressing accelerator? If so, why is this? Thanks a900ss Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Braytak Posted May 8, 2004 Report Share Posted May 8, 2004 Yeah. I thought that the throttle is fly by wire, so surely this is very carefully mapped electronically. Flooring it into the carpet would have no additional mechanical effect on response would it.. Also does the car adapt to your driving style... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ari Posted May 9, 2004 Report Share Posted May 9, 2004 163PS 1.8T Cabrio 2wd and 35mpg all day long on the motorway at 85mph... Under 30mph sounds dire unless it is a quattro which seems to use a lot more petrol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now