I LOL'd at the fuel consumption of a basic Audi A3 from the UK site.

It seems they just replaced "litres per 100 km" with "miles per gallon" 
without bothering to convert the actual numbers!

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'image1.jpg' (31 KB)

Preview of image 'image1.jpg'

scott wrote:
> I LOL'd at the fuel consumption of a basic Audi A3 from the UK site.
> 
> It seems they just replaced "litres per 100 km" with "miles per gallon" 
> without bothering to convert the actual numbers!

6 MPG? For a big, powerful car like that?

Sounds about right to me! :-D

Post a reply to this message

> 6 MPG? For a big, powerful car like that?

What, the Audi A3, it's only a baby (125 BHP weighing 1260 kg)! The A6 or A8 
fair enough...

> Sounds about right to me! :-D

Well the actual figure seems to be 45.6 mpg combined, which is ok-ish for a 
petrol car like that (i know of faster and heavier petrol cars that have a 
similar figure, and diesel ones that trash it).

Post a reply to this message

scott wrote:
>> 6 MPG? For a big, powerful car like that?
> 
> What, the Audi A3, it's only a baby (125 BHP weighing 1260 kg)! The A6 
> or A8 fair enough...

It looks pretty huge in the picture. ;-)

Mind you, have you ever noticed how when you buy a cake in a shop, the 
thing on the box always looks huge, while the contents generally don't 
resemble it closely?

>> Sounds about right to me! :-D
> 
> Well the actual figure seems to be 45.6 mpg combined, which is ok-ish 
> for a petrol car like that (i know of faster and heavier petrol cars 
> that have a similar figure, and diesel ones that trash it).

That's almost identical to my Renault Megan. (Although it's been 
decreasing lately...)

Post a reply to this message

> It looks pretty huge in the picture. ;-)

Renault Megane 4295 x 1808 x 1471 mm
Audi A3 4328 x 1765 x 1421 mm

Seem about the same to me...

> Mind you, have you ever noticed how when you buy a cake in a shop, the 
> thing on the box always looks huge, while the contents generally don't 
> resemble it closely?

I find that usually when the shop is much bigger than your house.  Like when 
my mum bought this sofa set from a shop (which is obviously vastly larger 
than her living room, and probably our whole road), when she got it home it 
looked like twice the size as the one in the shop!

> That's almost identical to my Renault Megan. (Although it's been 
> decreasing lately...)

Mine depends how fast I drive, for one whole tank I went on uber-economy 
mode and got 55 mpg, most of the time I get around 48-52.

I also found out that turning the air-con off reduced the fuel consumption 
by about 3 mpg during normal driving, I wouldn't have expected quite that 
much, but there you go.

Post a reply to this message

>> It looks pretty huge in the picture. ;-)
> 
> Renault Megane 4295 x 1808 x 1471 mm
> Audi A3 4328 x 1765 x 1421 mm
> 
> Seem about the same to me...

OK. I guess it just "looks" large then.

It's a bit like how the new mini somehow "looks" small, even though it's 
actually bigger than almost every car on the road! o_O

>> Mind you, have you ever noticed how when you buy a cake in a shop, the 
>> thing on the box always looks huge, while the contents generally don't 
>> resemble it closely?
> 
> I find that usually when the shop is much bigger than your house.  Like 
> when my mum bought this sofa set from a shop (which is obviously vastly 
> larger than her living room, and probably our whole road), when she got 
> it home it looked like twice the size as the one in the shop!

Heh, yeah. But usually the picture on a cake box shows the cake on a 
tiny plate, with lots of small things next to it, to make it look really 
big. ;-)

Also, at work we often have these magazines like "Perfect Interiors" and 
stuff. And you look at the front page and think "yeah, if my house was 
that big, *I* could probably make it look good too!" :-P

>> That's almost identical to my Renault Megan. (Although it's been 
>> decreasing lately...)
> 
> Mine depends how fast I drive.

Well, yes. And the terrain and so on. But remember, I drive the same 
route every day, at approximately the same speed. Driving along the 
motorway really is drastically more efficient. (Except the M45; that's 
uphill.)

> I also found out that turning the air-con off reduced the fuel 
> consumption by about 3 mpg during normal driving, I wouldn't have 
> expected quite that much, but there you go.

I haven't measured any difference.

What I *have* measured is that for the past several weeks, my fuel 
efficiency has been slowly decreasing. I recently had the car serviced 
(it was overdue) and it's gone up somewhat, but it's still not quite as 
high as it used to be.

Post a reply to this message

> Well, yes. And the terrain and so on. But remember, I drive the same route 
> every day, at approximately the same speed. Driving along the motorway 
> really is drastically more efficient. (Except the M45; that's uphill.)

Assuming you don't drive faster than 70mph or so, the most important factor 
is how often you brake.  Braking wastes energy and is what reduces your fuel 
economy.  Driving around towns and off motorways you tend to brake a lot, on 
motorways you don't.  When you're driving, try to anticipate when you will 
have to brake and take your foot off the accelerator earlier, your target 
should be to brake as little as possible!

> What I *have* measured is that for the past several weeks, my fuel 
> efficiency has been slowly decreasing. I recently had the car serviced (it 
> was overdue) and it's gone up somewhat, but it's still not quite as high 
> as it used to be.

Could be any number of things, air temperature, clogged air filter, leaky 
exhaust, old oil, tyre pressures, how often you use headlights/heater/heated 
windscreen.

Post a reply to this message

>> Well, yes. And the terrain and so on. But remember, I drive the same 
>> route every day, at approximately the same speed. Driving along the 
>> motorway really is drastically more efficient. (Except the M45; that's 
>> uphill.)
> 
> Assuming you don't drive faster than 70mph or so, the most important 
> factor is how often you brake.

Yeah. In a town, every 200 yards you arrive at yet another junction. ;-)

>> What I *have* measured is that for the past several weeks, my fuel 
>> efficiency has been slowly decreasing. I recently had the car serviced 
>> (it was overdue) and it's gone up somewhat, but it's still not quite 
>> as high as it used to be.
> 
> Could be any number of things, air temperature, clogged air filter, 
> leaky exhaust, old oil, tyre pressures, how often you use 
> headlights/heater/heated windscreen.

Well, the service involves replacing the air filter, oil filter and oil, 
as well as checking all the tyre pressures.

Maybe it's just because it's winter?

Post a reply to this message

Invisible wrote:
> 
> Maybe it's just because it's winter?

It does effect. When the temperature changes from 0C to -15C, my fuel
consumption raises from ~5,4l/100km (43,5mpg) to ~6l/100km (39,2mpg),
having the avg speed roughly the same (~95km/h).

-Aero

Post a reply to this message