12 Reg A6 TDI 170 PS Spin.

My brother allowed me the rare treat of driving it today.

Nice to have the torque when you plant the foot, even though the Prius would beat it off the line, it wouldn't take long for the A6 to pass me out. the midrange punch from the A6 is of no comparison,obviously as the Prius engine is only 75 hp but the motor kicks in to give the extra torque, but you still got 110 combined hp V 170.

resetting the trip comp I averaged 5.7 L/100 kms over 20 kms, the new 8 speed/ratio multitronic is ultra efficient at 100 kph it's hardly spinning at 1500 revs. It shifts like a dsg too meaning you don't get the cvt rubber band effect and it's still ultra smooth.

I averaged 5.7 L/100 kms over 20 kms at speeds of 80-100 kph and some town driving.

Naturally it's the tank average that matters, but my Brothers long term average is a shocking 33 mpg or 8.6 L/100 kms, though he does drive in Dublin all the time. But still 33.6 mpg or so is shockingly bad. My other brothers 2003 S80 1.8 Turbo 180 hp 5 cylinder glorious petrol gets about 30 mpg and is so much smoother.

Just goes to show that diesel will not save you a penny if you're not driving on the open road, the Prius averages 4.4-4.7 L/100 kms per tank and while it is noisy on acceleration it's whisper quiet most other times and while Audi did a good job to suppress the diesel clatter it's still very noticeable that it's an engine I wouldn't like to have in a small car like a Golf !

However sitting in the A6 is remarkable, it's very good quality and comfortable, I really love Audi interiors, they are like no other and it isn't because I drive a Prius, Audi's a really nice cars to sit in !

Oafley Jones

Imagine if you got to try out one of the large engines. Have the same engine in the wifes Superb Combi, it's decent enough but it's still nothing to get that excited about. Have to say I find fairly quiet.

Oafley Jones

Oafley Jones wrote: »

Imagine if you got to try out one of the large engines. Have the same engine in the wifes Superb Combi, it's decent enough but it's still nothing to get that excited about. Have to say I find fairly quiet.

Indeed larger engine would be great, but I think the 2.0L 170 offers a decent level of performance and economy ( well taking out his long term average of 33.6 mpg) Which I can say must be related to his 12-15 km round trip daily in Dublin. I got 5.7 after about the same but I would like to have it for my commute to see what I could get.

It would be a fast engine in a Golf !

Yeah it's quieter when you put the foot down unlike the prius but other than that the Prius is quiet, the A6 engine is further away and has better noise isolation. but you do notice it's a diesel and it's noisy outside, quieter than the PD's of course but could be quieter.

But I really do like the A6. How anyone could pay 35K for a new Golf with the same engine with a lot less kit when you could buy the A6 for the same money.

Tea 1000

Well, you can't buy a new A6 for 35k, but in general I agree, 35k for a kitted out Golf is a lot of money, the 2 year old market would be a better bet for that kind of spend.
But the 33mpg bit - really the other brother's Volvo would be looking at low 20's for the same trips. So not a great comparison.

_Kaiser_

Those figures are pretty good in comparison to what my 05 3.0 TDI A6 does.. although to be fair I do a lot of town driving during the week and don't dawdle on the open road

Full tank does about 850-900km which isn't too bad considering the above and that my previous 2.0 TDI Passat did about 1000-1100km and cost a tenner less to fill.

What's a bit annoying though is the new version of my engine (as in the A8 brochure that Audi sent me a few weeks back - they must think I'm loaded or something! ) has more BHP and costs less to tax for the year than mine does for the quarter.

Still, the extra power and comfort is definitely worth it though.

Tea 1000

Tea 1000 wrote: »

Well, you can't buy a new A6 for 35k, but in general I agree, 35k for a kitted out Golf is a lot of money, the 2 year old market would be a better bet for that kind of spend.
But the 33mpg bit - really the other brother's Volvo would be looking at low 20's for the same trips. So not a great comparison.

No you can't buy a new A6 for 35K but the dsg GTD golf is mental money and less kit than the A6, well the A6 S line anyway. I think it comes with good kit as standard.

If I had the choice between the A6 S-line with 20 odd K miles or a new Golf GTD it would have to be the A6, the extra fuel consumption would be worth it just because it's so nice inside.

Doing 20-25K miles a year unfortunately doesn't allow spending a lot on decent cars when spending 3,000 Odd a year on fuel.

Kaiser2000

Kaiser2000 wrote: »

Those figures are pretty good in comparison to what my 05 3.0 TDI A6 does.. although to be fair I do a lot of town driving during the week and don't dawdle on the open road

Full tank does about 850-900km which isn't too bad considering the above and that my previous 2.0 TDI Passat did about 1000-1100km and cost a tenner less to fill.

What's a bit annoying though is the new version of my engine (as in the A8 brochure that Audi sent me a few weeks back - they must think I'm loaded or something! ) has more BHP and costs less to tax for the year than mine does for the quarter.

Still, the extra power and comfort is definitely worth it though.

The extra running costs would be worth it to me too depending on the Motor tax rates of course, I wouldn't want to hand over 1200 a year just on Motor tax.

That's of course if doing reasonable mileage a year which I don't do, so the car choices are limited. Wear and tear deprecation and fuel are killers when doing high mileage.

Tea 1000

Deleted User wrote: »

No you can't buy a new A6 for 35K but the dsg GTD golf is mental money and less kit than the A6, well the A6 S line anyway. I think it comes with good kit as standard.

If I had the choice between the A6 S-line with 20 odd K miles or a new Golf GTD it would have to be the A6, the extra fuel consumption would be worth it just because it's so nice inside.

Doing 20-25K miles a year unfortunately doesn't allow spending a lot on decent cars when spending 3,000 Odd a year on fuel.

You're gas! I'd never even think of fuel consumption differences between models if I were spending 35k, (assuming I was getting a ballpark similar car) let alone models with the same engine!

Tea 1000

Tea 1000 wrote: »

You're gas! I'd never even think of fuel consumption differences between models if I were spending 35k, (assuming I was getting a ballpark similar car) let alone models with the same engine!

Indeed you're right, too much prius driving, got fuel consumption on the brain !

Tea 1000

Tea 1000 wrote: »

Well, you can't buy a new A6 for 35k, but in general I agree, 35k for a kitted out Golf is a lot of money, the 2 year old market would be a better bet for that kind of spend.
But the 33mpg bit - really the other brother's Volvo would be looking at low 20's for the same trips. So not a great comparison.

well no I meant a 2nd hand A6 with 10-20K miles.

You're right though the Volvo would probably do less for the same driving.

YbFocus

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Indeed you're right, too much prius driving, got fuel consumption on the brain !

So what happened you mad lad when your brothers turned out Ok

Those figures seem ridiculous to be honest.

My 530d is able to touch 40mpg and overall average is 37. Calculated by the way not read off the mfd

mickdw

I got similar mpg out of new A6 when trying or for a weekend. Coming from a petrol, I was expecting to be stunned by what the diesel could achieve fuel wide. Instead, it drank diesel.

traco

Mpg seems very low. I've same engine, 140bhp and it's doing 44mpg based on every fill for the last two months and mileage calcs. That would be city, motorway, shops, school runs etc included and I don't spare it plus the AC is on continuously.

Highest was a slow run home from Naas in traffic so averaging 40/50 mph and the comp showed 63mpg and it's out by about 2 as opposed to the real value.

Maybe it's the auto but that seems a very poor mpg output.

YbFocus

YbFocus wrote: »

So what happened you mad lad when your brothers turned out Ok

Those figures seem ridiculous to be honest.

My 530d is able to touch 40mpg and overall average is 37. Calculated by the way not read off the mfd

HAHA Well the Prius is a good reliable car and economical which is what I need for 20-25K miles a year. And I actually like not (having) to driving a diesel for a change.


My brothers may not drive very economical to be honest but I managed 5.7 L/100 km over 15 kms so would love to test it out over a weeks commute.

The multitronic is a brilliant gearbox. It's actually worth a reduction in mpg if there is even a difference with the new gen box at all.

grogi

Deleted User wrote: »

The multitronic is a brilliant gearbox. It's actually worth a reduction in mpg if there is even a difference with the new gen box at all.

I don't believe the manual would be more economical. To the contrary...

As a general rule - achieving the advertised mileage with manual is close to impossible. Those figures are done by drivers that know the car very well and shift optimally. Doing same with auto is much easier - auto shifts (change the ratio to be exact) more often and in better moments that average driver would.

So, if you add the fact that CVTs don't loose power where traditional AT would - by compressing of the oil in torque converter - real-life consumption with Multitronic would be actually lower than with manual.

OSI

OSI wrote: »

Drove the '12 A6 for a while myself as there's one at home. Mostly motorway or N road mileage and managed 52mpg. Can't say I was overly impressed by the cabin though. I found it very boring.

I found it far form boring, I think it's a lovely place to sit.

probably depends on the spec though.

grogi

grogi wrote: »

I don't believe the manual would be more economical. To the contrary...

As a general rule - achieving the advertised mileage with manual is close to impossible. Those figures are done by drivers that know the car very well and shift optimally. Doing same with auto is much easier - auto shifts (change the ratio to be exact) more often and in better moments that average driver would.

So, if you add the fact that CVTs don't loose power where traditional AT would - by compressing of the oil in torque converter - real-life consumption with Multitronic would be actually lower than with manual.

Probably would be lower economy in town as it has to work harder, but the difference is most likely not going to worry anyone, especially anyone who might spend 50 K on a car !

The Auto would be worth more to me than loosing a few mpg.

Tea 1000

OSI wrote: »

It's an S-Line with pretty much every option ticked bar the Infrared camera. Still found it boring.

I don't mind the interiors, I think they're high quality and fairly well thought out. Not exciting, but decent. To drive they're boring!

bazz26

Not gone on the current fashion that German cars have for sticking a retractable touch screen on the top centre of the dashboard. Audi as well as BMW seem to be doing it lately and it looks very afterthought to me especially on the lesser models..

Oafley Jones

Deleted User wrote: »

HAHA Well the Prius is a good reliable car and economical which is what I need for 20-25K miles a year. And I actually like not (having) to driving a diesel for a change.


My brothers may not drive very economical to be honest but I managed 5.7 L/100 km over 15 kms so would love to test it out over a weeks commute.

The multitronic is a brilliant gearbox. It's actually worth a reduction in mpg if there is even a difference with the new gen box at all.

Multitronic ain't loved, it's the major downside of the smaller engines In Audi. Thankfully we've the DSG (also not flawless, but far better than cvt) in the Superb, fuel economy should be equal if not better than manual. Currently reading 44mpg. That's 50/50 town country. Not fantastic, but it is a large car.

Truckermal

What sort of money will a 12 s line cost I have seen them advertised for under 30k at indy dealerships.

Notch000

No offence but that's outright the worst car review I have ever read

Oafley Jones

Oafley Jones wrote: »

Multitronic ain't loved, it's the major downside of the smaller engines In Audi. Thankfully we've the DSG (also not flawless, but far better than cvt) in the Superb, fuel economy should be equal if not better than manual. Currently reading 44mpg. That's 50/50 town country. Not fantastic, but it is a large car.

No the CVT in the A6 shifts like a DSG so you don't get the rubber band effect or the high revs when you plant the foot until speed increases. I had to get my brother to check if it was Multi or dsg and it is multitronic.

Still I love the smoothness of a normal cvt like in the prius, the downside is the noise on hard acceleration as the engine buzzes. But with more power it isn't such a big deal.

Still the multitronic on my B6 A4 was fantastic and ultra smooth, makes driving diesels much better as you don't have to change gear so much with the narrower torque band.

The downside is on the older TDI Multitronics they reduced the torque compared to the manual.

But the Multitronic in the new generation A6's maybe A4 ? is leaps and bounds better than the old ones.

Tea 1000

The two big issues with Multitronic are the gap when you put the foot down and the car responding (really bad from standstill) and reliability concerns. S-Tronic is much better, but only available on the quattro models.

Tea 1000

Tea 1000 wrote: »

The two big issues with Multitronic are the gap when you put the foot down and the car responding (really bad from standstill) and reliability concerns. S-Tronic is much better, but only available on the quattro models.

Yeah on the older ones that was an issue but I didn't notice it on the New one.

They are far, far more reliable today, Certainly the S-tronic aka dsg's have been far from trouble free with the US court order of making VAG provide a 10 year 100k mile warranty on the dsg.

Tea 1000

Deleted User wrote: »

Yeah on the older ones that was an issue but I didn't notice it on the New one.

They are far, far more reliable today, Certainly the S-tronic aka dsg's have been far from trouble free with the US court order of making VAG provide a 10 year 100k mile warranty on the dsg.

It's still an issue alright. DSG seems to be more reliable even with it's issues.

RedorDead

OSI wrote: »

It's an S-Line with pretty much every option ticked bar the Infrared camera. Still found it boring.

High standards OSI - what interiors would you find unboring out of curiosity? A6 interior (esp in S Line) is a lovely place to be IMO.

bazz26 wrote: »

Not gone on the current fashion that German cars have for sticking a retractable touch screen on the top centre of the dashboard. Audi as well as BMW seem to be doing it lately and it looks very afterthought to me especially on the lesser models..

A3/A6/A7/A8 all have non touch electrically retractable screens. New M-B and BMW have static ipad like devices there instead. Not sure if they are touchscreen.

Jaguar/Landrover really lifting quality of in car electronics - the Jag touchscreen and new Range Rover split screen systems are superb.