Audi Q5 Forum banner
1 - 20 of 146 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
157 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Hi folks,
I'm new to this forum so apologies if this has already been posted elsewhere (although I couldn't seem to find a specific SQ5 fuel consumption thread using the search). I can see there are quite a few new SQ5 owners here so wondering what you guys are getting in terms of mpg.
I'm currently in an E90 330D auto which returns 32 mpg (all city driving 10 miles each way in rush hour to work and back) or just under 50 mpg on cruise at 70 on a long run on the motorway which I'm very happy with. Have been waiting for the SQ5 for months and test drove one at Cheshire Oaks Audi yesterday and thought it was fantastic. Just a bit concerned at the 20-22 mpg being displayed on the dash with a gentle(ish) drive around the motorway around the dealership. I've always hit the urban mpg in cars (1.2 petrol Renault Clio ,1.9 130 bhp GT TDI Golf, 228 bhp 330D auto) but found the combined mpg very difficult to attain and only really got near it on the motorway. Extra urban has never been achievable for me to be honest so only expect the urban mpg to be achievable. Audi appear to be stating 37.2 mpg urban? (or have I got this wrong) for the SQ5 which seems surprising considering it's considerably heavier than my 330D and is considerably more powerful plus permanent 4wd. Just wondering if the urban mpg is realistically achievable as I love the car just want to go into it with my eyes open even knowing depreciation will be a bigger factor than fuel economy particularly with me only doing 8k per year but I just love that engine in combination with 4wd. I was guessing urban mpg would be no more than 25 mpg which for the performance, weight etc is fine but curious to know what you SQ5 owners are getting.

Many Thanks
 

·
Still Game
Joined
·
4,615 Posts
Fuel consumption has been discussed by several SQ5 owners. I get 30 mpg.

Doing 8K the difference in fuel cost per year between 30 and 37.2 mpg is £319.45 at my local garage. I would suggest it is not worth worrying over.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
157 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
30 is more than I was expecting but 20-22 would be too low for my liking even with low mileage. Thanks for your quick reply missile.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
151 Posts
Fuel consumption tends to vary quite a bit depending on the type of motoring you are doing.

For example using DIS I regularly get 40mpg + at a steady 50/60 mph. I can get as little as 17mpg on short cold trips.

Just recently I did a tank full to tank full test over 428.5 miles. This worked out at an average of 34.75 mpg. The type of driving was very varied and did include say 300 miles of motorway driving, as well as cold start/short distances.

I am more than satisfied with this result. The key thing is, that motoring is fun!!!!!!!!!!!

I look forward to the prospect of going out in SQ.

Would others confirm my findings


ZED
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
91 Posts
Hi naq5, I did a similar run on a test drive over around 15-20 miles, and given that the boring bit of a test drive was over very quickly ( ie pootling around to see how refined it was and how it rides over average roads), I spent the rest of the time hoofing it in dynamic mode to leave a couple of VW R32's for dead, hard acceleration through tight bends and roundabout etc etc, I ended up at 23 mpg which I thought was respectable. It was on better than I'd expect in my current 535d M Sport.... I'd say 40+mpg would be a nice bonus..and fully agree with missile... I'd pay that - good smile per £ ratio....
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,240 Posts
I'm getting similar to ZED per tank - and also the long vs short/cold trips. My commute is only 4 miles so am getting below 20 for that each day - but on longer runs even including a bit of hoofing as Budda put it am getting mid 30's - and could easily achieve high 30's to 40 if I really wanted to.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
289 Posts
You diesel boys are all leadfoots. I'm getting 32mpg on longer runs on M way and a combined average of close to 29 mpg which includes a lot of short runs from my TFSI. If you are doing mostly short runs I don't think you'd notice a huge difference. OK you'd miss the extra 80 BHP the SQ5 delivers. Lets face if you've got between £35k and £50k to splash on a new car fuel consumption is not really going to be uppermost in your mind is it?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,336 Posts
My 1st 250 miles took 31 litres (tank brimmed twice) and equates to 36.65mpg - which is remarkable on a tight engine (the DIS said 42 for quite a while that day), it was roughly 50/50 motorway/A roads and in Efficiency mode (you will need to spec Drive Select to get this) which seems to force the transmission to shift up early, delay changing down. If Efficiency mode sounds terribly boring - trust me it isn't!

Whilst optimal fuel consumption isn't an overriding concern at this price-bracket it does allow one to exercise the art of the possible by driving normally. Rather oddly it seems the SQ5 is a have your cake and eat it kind of car - toe down there is very little on the roads that can keep up, and yet just driving normally returns the kind of fuel economy figures the 2.0 TDI drivers get (seems almost not fair to me).
 

·
Still Game
Joined
·
4,615 Posts
You diesel boys are all leadfoots. I'm getting 32mpg on longer runs on M way and a combined average of close to 29 mpg which includes a lot of short runs from my TFSI. If you are doing mostly short runs I don't think you'd notice a huge difference. OK you'd miss the extra 80 BHP the SQ5 delivers. Lets face if you've got between £35k and £50k to splash on a new car fuel consumption is not really going to be uppermost in your mind is it?
You are spot on, my Timberland boots are expensive on fuel. As a compaison I struggled to average 25mpg in my old 2.0 TFSI. I am too embarassed to say what my fuel comsumption was like when I owned my SP1.

http://s183.photobucket.com/user/missilebob/media/MOVDonnington_zpscf252a53.mp4.html
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
157 Posts
Discussion Starter · #10 ·
Thanks very much for all your replies gents. I know querying fuel consumption on a 300+ bhp £50k 4x4 is a little silly but I just wanted to go into it with my eyes open. All very helpful so thanks for all your input.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
32 Posts
Dont you just hate it when all someone does is ask about MPG and other people just attack them for it suggesting they should go for a cheaper vehicle...
This happens on other forums too. What's the harm in finding out the facts before making a big purchase???
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
88 Posts
Thanks very much for all your replies gents. I know querying fuel consumption on a 300+ bhp £50k 4x4 is a little silly but I just wanted to go into it with my eyes open. All very helpful so thanks for all your input.
Not silly at all. I think there is always the reality that the quoted MPG is always higher than real world as well. The worst car I ever had was a Range Rover. Very early previous generation and it used to really frustrate me when I got 12mpg. I knew it would be expensive but not that bad. You could ask a few of the current Evoque owners how they're feeling about MPG at the moment...a mate has one and it is so bad he's getting rid of it after 5 months.

Having said all of that, I really don't care personally anymore...no matter the MPG, the cost of tyres and services etc, it's all about the fun!
 
  • Like
Reactions: ?? SQ-BEAST ??

·
Registered
Joined
·
17 Posts
Thanks very much for all your replies gents. I know querying fuel consumption on a 300+ bhp £50k 4x4 is a little silly but I just wanted to go into it with my eyes open. All very helpful so thanks for all your input.
I dont think it is at all but certainly there are plenty who carry on along the lines of if you can afford 50k why would you care..... but if you could afford 50k chances are you didn't get in that position by careless either. One of the big attractions of the SQ5 is its economy so i am glad you started the thread.

Cheers
mondie
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,336 Posts
Not silly at all. I think there is always the reality that the quoted MPG is always higher than real world as well. The worst car I ever had was a Range Rover. Very early previous generation and it used to really frustrate me when I got 12mpg. I knew it would be expensive but not that bad. You could ask a few of the current Evoque owners how they're feeling about MPG at the moment...a mate has one and it is so bad he's getting rid of it after 5 months.

Having said all of that, I really don't care personally anymore...no matter the MPG, the cost of tyres and services etc, it's all about the fun!
Range Rover haven't changed then? They claim 49mpg for the Evoque 2.2 diesel manual when in reality even when driven very gently much above 37 was nigh on impossible...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
182 Posts
Dont you just hate it when all someone does is ask about MPG and other people just attack them for it suggesting they should go for a cheaper vehicle...
This happens on other forums too. What's the harm in finding out the facts before making a big purchase???
Not at all silly. If I had asked this question on the Evoque forum I would have saved all the problems getting rid of a vehicle that was delivery over 10mpg less than land rover publish.
Keep asking these very relevant questions they help many.
 

·
Still Game
Joined
·
4,615 Posts
Dont you just hate it when all someone does is ask about MPG and other people just attack them for it suggesting they should go for a cheaper vehicle...
This happens on other forums too. What's the harm in finding out the facts before making a big purchase???
I don't see anyone attacking OP, or telling him to go for cheaper vehicle. This is a well moderated friendly forum when compared to some others.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,240 Posts
For the record - MPG was one of my primary reasons for choosing the SQ5... My previous car cost a similar amount but was a petrol 3L turbo and guzzled gas (plus had 50% less torque!). It wasn't so much that I couldn't afford to run it, but seemed silly to pass up the chance to have the same performance and also get double the mileage at the same time.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
325 Posts
I agree. Mines for the wife as a family wagon. I wanted the mpg as well as a bit of performance for when I drive it. S4 drinks fuel for fun. This is similar performance and about 10mpg more so a win win really!
It's never going to be a 50mpg mega efficient run around though is it.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,240 Posts
LOL - no, defo not a super efficient runabout (thats what the Mrs' Mini is for!) - but I reckon about 30mpg is realistic long term - which is a lot better than my 17mpg average from my last car!
 
  • Like
Reactions: jonathanbr

·
Registered
Joined
·
325 Posts
Well I have a 26mpg TT and a 30mpg family run around... Didn't think this through lol
 
1 - 20 of 146 Posts
Top