Verbrauchsprobleme am 1.9 TDI PD 131PS | Posts 16+

No, technically everything is the same and everything is fine .

During the last inspection, everything was definitely fine. And that was 3 weeks ago.
However, the differences in consumption have existed for over a year. Nobody ever seemed to care.
I borrowed the boxes for a while.
The boss said that the fuel consumption has always differed by 2 liters per 100 kilometers.
He's been to the workshop several times because of it, but they haven't been able to find anything wrong.

During the last inspection, everything was definitely fine. And that was 3 weeks ago.
However, the differences in consumption have existed for over a year. Nobody ever seemed to care.
I borrowed the boxes for a while.
The boss said that the fuel consumption has always differed by 2 liters per 100 kilometers.
He has been to the workshop several times because of this, but they couldn't find anything there.

The 'fuel consumption behavior' of one of the drivers cannot be the cause? It reminds me of trucks that sometimes consume more fuel than others.

Also, how was the consumption measured?
Do you only read the amount on the display, or do you stop filling when the pump automatically stops, or do you keep filling until it won't take any more?
What is the difference in rolling resistance between a vehicle that comes to a complete stop from exactly 50 km/h and other vehicles of the same type?
What is the tread depth of the tires on the 3 boxes?

Were the speed differences of the three boxes measured at exactly 100 km/h using the same mobile navigation system?

Fuel consumption increased AFTER DPF retrofit, timing belt replacement cost higher? Or original DPF?

There are many possible factors.

It's like a house: The consumption varies quite a bit, and the weather is never the same.

Actually, the fuel consumption shouldn't matter to you, since the 3 VWs are company cars .

Hello, If the environmental conditions for the vehicles, including the drivers, are the same for all vehicles, and fuel consumption data has been recorded over a longer period, then the tank behavior and MFA (Multifunction Display) readings are irrelevant. The actual, significantly different fuel consumption that was criticized and questioned is the key issue. At the very least, the two switches should consume a similar amount of power and operate consistently over a long period of time.
Then we're left with issues like motor problems, ZR (Zahnriemen - timing belt), FB (Förderband - conveyor belt), settings, errors, a leaky LL (likely a component name), LMM (likely a sensor name), and VTG (likely a system name) settings? Brake release mechanisms, etc., as possibilities.
The other nozzles, if any, are also mentioned and could provide an explanation.

I would like to remind you of the emergency vehicle T5 (2.5L, 174 hp) which always performed poorly and was repeatedly outperformed by the 131 hp version with the same wheelbase. "Where are the extra 40 horsepower?" everyone asked spontaneously.
LLK (coolant), turbocharger replaced, injectors were cleaned but then replaced. Nothing found under warranty, workshop contacted. Everything is okay now, but it didn't improve performance.
At 150,000 kilometers, there was a major engine failure requiring a completely new engine, and it has been running since then.
And strangely, a T5 tow truck experienced something similar around the same time, and a new engine fixed the problem.
It's not the driver, the driving conditions, or the weight that has changed. The performance!
Software, hardware, nozzles, or other components. But the workshop tried to get away with a successful repair under warranty: they first made excuses about needing a break-in period, then didn't properly measure anything, and used a comparison vehicle. This is unacceptable. It's the fuel.
No one had found the error before.
And so, I believe there are reasons for that here as well.

"For years, I've had various..." AVF 130hp 3BG Kombi models are being driven.
Based on my experience, the TT5 engine results in approximately one liter more fuel consumption, and it's difficult to achieve less than 6 liters per 100 kilometers, even on quiet drives.
7L is a common gear setting for an automatic transmission vehicle on a moderately fast highway.
The MFA (Multifunction Display) is generally quite accurate, with a difference of up to a maximum of 0.5 liters per 100 kilometers.

The Audi C4 AEL, with a manual transmission and 2WD, is equipped with a nice overdrive in the 6th gear (unlike the Passat), which compensates well for the large engine when driving outside of the city.
Official top speed: 203 km/h. Real-world speed: 3600 km.
Every chip tuning request is implemented as quickly as possible, typically at a top speed of around 20 km/h at approximately 4000 RPM.
A beautiful and enjoyable combination... and remarkably quiet on the highway compared to the 3BG.

Good evening

Yesterday, we took the Trendline Schlater for a spin; it has 131 horsepower.
After the last few days showed fuel consumption figures again around 7.6 liters per 100 kilometers, the following actions were taken:

- Intake manifold with bypass valve removed.
- Intercooler hoses removed.
- I meticulously cleaned all the items at the parts washing station.

Inside the AGR/exhaust flap housing, there was a thick sludge of soot and grime.
Directly cleaned.
After that, everything was reassembled, and the intake manifold gasket, as well as all the other gaskets, were replaced.
AGR Discontinued.
Air mass sensor replaced.

Now, approximately 170km have been driven with the car, and after clearing the previous data in the MFA2, it shows 5.7L/100km. With today's trip, it has now reached 6.3L/100km.
I'd say, let's do it!
By the way, if you set the cruise control to 100 km/h and just let the car roll along, the MFA (Multi Function Display) shows a fuel consumption of 4.9 liters per 100 kilometers.

We're going to do the exact same thing with the Highline again tomorrow. Let's see what comes out of it.


Regarding the AEL.
I have a chip tuning installed, boosting the power to 175 horsepower. However, the cylinder head has been modified, and the injection timing is set to '62'. The exhaust system is 'free-flowing,' and the turbocharger is running at its limit.
Depending on the mass airflow and turbocharger settings, I can achieve up to 179 horsepower and 414 Nm of torque with the K14 turbocharger.
Despite the chip tuning, I'm getting 6.8 - 7.2 liters per 100 kilometers with my fully equipped Avant Quattro. Unless I'm constantly accelerating hard, in which case it goes up to 8.5 liters per 100 kilometers. He runs at 220 km/h at 4000 rpm .

Did you also verschandeln the chakras in your head?
Are there any pictures?

Good evening

I also cleaned the ear canals and scrubbed them as best I could with a cotton swab. And then, a small brush was used in the channel, compressed air was used to blow everything out, and finally, it was reassembled.
So far, it's consuming 6.2 liters per 100 kilometers.

I didn't take any pictures.
I'd be happy to do that when I do the Highline conversion. I just haven't had the chance yet because I've had other things to take care of. I recently replaced the engine mounts on my AEL. Colleagues at the ADR (presumably a training center or similar) helped with the cylinder head, etc.

Okay, be happy about the positive result, and measure the fuel consumption after driving 500+ km!