# Disappointed in fuel economy



## Canthoney (Aug 5, 2012)

Is there anyone else that is slightly disappointed in the fuel economy of the Atlas? I was expecting it to be a little better than the Touareg. You know because it weighed less. I wish the four-cylinder was available with all wheel drive. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Young04 (Oct 14, 2005)

Canthoney said:


> Is there anyone else that is slightly disappointed in the fuel economy of the Atlas? I was expecting it to be a little better than the Touareg. You know because it weighed less. I wish the four-cylinder was available with all wheel drive.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


The Atlas weighs just slightly less than the Touareg. I did not expect it to be any better. Overall, I am fine with the fuel economy on my 2013 VR6 Touareg. I think the Atlas' fuel economy is very similar to the upcoming 2018 Traverse. The Honda Pilot's is better, but VW chose not to make the same type of powertrain innovations that Honda has incorporated into their Pilot.


----------



## Canthoney (Aug 5, 2012)

Young04 said:


> The Atlas weighs just slightly less than the Touareg. I did not expect it to be any better. Overall, I am fine with the fuel economy on my 2013 VR6 Touareg. I think the Atlas' fuel economy is very similar to the upcoming 2018 Traverse. The Honda Pilot's is better, but VW chose not to make the same type of powertrain innovations that Honda has incorporated into their Pilot.


True, I was just expecting more Pilot MPG instead of Explorer MPG. Damn dieselgate 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## vwatlasusa (Feb 26, 2017)

*Me too*

I was also little disappointed. If it had 300+ hp then I would have lived with that fuel economy..


----------



## DennisMitchell (Oct 26, 2014)

Wonder why the Atlas gets lower MPG than Audi vehicles?

2018 Atlas AWD 4052 lbs 17 City 23 Highway 19 Overall (Haldex) 

2017 Audi Q7 2.0T 4696 lbs 20 City 25 Highway 22 Overall (Torsen)

2017 Audi Q7 3.0T 4938 lbs 19 City 29 Highway 22 Overall (Torsen)

2018 Audi Q5 4025 lbs 2.0T 23 City 27 Highway 25 Overall (Quattro Ultra - Haldex)

2018 Audi SQ5 3.0T 4442 lbs 19 City 24 Highway 21 Overall (Torsen)


----------



## Canthoney (Aug 5, 2012)

DennisMitchell said:


> Wonder why the Atlas gets lower MPG than Audi vehicles?
> 
> 2018 Atlas AWD 4052 lbs 17 City 23 Highway 19 Overall (Haldex)
> 
> ...


I know why, it's because the VR6 is an old engine. They really need an updated 6 cylinder for VW. 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Don® (Oct 11, 2011)

Canthoney said:


> I know why, it's because the VR6 is an old engine. They really need an updated 6 cylinder for VW.


^ this...

One of the reasons why VW used the Haldex over a torsen; the truck drives as a FWD and when needed, engages the rear - this basically helps with mpg.


----------



## Drive by (Mar 13, 2017)

Older engine = less costs to amortize = lower price to us. So while I would love more power/torque and better mpg if that cost me $10k more upfront vs over the 5 years I'll own it. Maybe I don't care as much.

Although if it feels boring or gutless ever day I drive it, I won't buy it in the first place. So VW runs a very real risk of coming off as "boring and under performing". At this point, that's the biggest unknown. Q7 is fun to drive for a largish vehicle. Explorer is loud but spirited. Pilot is typical Honda boring, Highlander total yawn. So maybe the market doesn't care after all. ???


----------



## GjR32 (Dec 22, 2010)

Drive by said:


> Older engine = less costs to amortize = lower price to us. So while I would love more power/torque and better mpg if that cost me $10k more upfront vs over the 5 years I'll own it. Maybe I don't care as much.
> 
> Although if it feels boring or gutless ever day I drive it, I won't buy it in the first place. So VW runs a very real risk of coming off as "boring and under performing". At this point, that's the biggest unknown. Q7 is fun to drive for a largish vehicle. Explorer is loud but spirited. Pilot is typical Honda boring, Highlander total yawn. So maybe the market doesn't care after all. ???


Some very interesting points


----------



## edyvw (May 1, 2009)

Drive by said:


> Older engine = less costs to amortize = lower price to us. So while I would love more power/torque and better mpg if that cost me $10k more upfront vs over the 5 years I'll own it. Maybe I don't care as much.
> 
> Although if it feels boring or gutless ever day I drive it, I won't buy it in the first place. So VW runs a very real risk of coming off as "boring and under performing". At this point, that's the biggest unknown. Q7 is fun to drive for a largish vehicle. Explorer is loud but spirited. Pilot is typical Honda boring, Highlander total yawn. So maybe the market doesn't care after all. ???


^This.
But, there are some issues. 
Honda and Toyota attract traditional buyers of similar vehicles. Not interested how they get from point A to point B, but to get there with little drama as possible. 
Problem with VW is image. It is European brand, and people who buy vehicles in this category are skeptical of Euro brands. I think VW is playing wrong here. 
1. They kept VR6 with strictly DI, while for example Highlander had DI and port injection engine. Right now, Toyota has IMO better engine then VW in this segment. I drove new Highlander and it is good car! For this segment is is IMO best thought of vehicle. Engine is good, power is good, transmission is good (same like Atlas). VW wants to take over customers from Highlander and Pilot that have updated engines. Seriously do not get this!
2. Traditional VW buyers got used on turbo applications. Until few days ago I was thinking seriously about Atlas. But last few days I just cannot imagine VR6 at 6800ft in Colorado Springs providing me feeling typical VW would. We have Tiguan wife drives, and that car is perfect for the Rockies. 
3. Like I said market does not care, but, what market pays attention to is reliability, and people who buy these cars know how to check internet. Not sure average Toyota buyer will just hope like that to VW after reading about CBU etc.


----------



## DJMcGoven (Mar 2, 2007)

I'd be interested in seeing all the fuel economy numbers for the competitors. VW stated that it wants the Atlas competitive in its segment. So I'm assuming that the rest have similar MPG numbers. 

I think the engine choices are were decided because they didn't want a completely new one and risk reliability issues. And from what I understand, lots of people lease in this segment. So reliability plays less of a factor for the buyer who doesn't plan on keeping it long term. 

Sent from my ONEPLUS A3000 using Tapatalk


----------



## Drive by (Mar 13, 2017)

capclassicv2 said:


> I'd be interested in seeing all the fuel economy numbers for the competitors. VW stated that it wants the Atlas competitive in its segment. So I'm assuming that the rest have similar MPG numbers.
> 
> I think the engine choices are were decided because they didn't want a completely new one and risk reliability issues. And from what I understand, lots of people lease in this segment. So reliability plays less of a factor for the buyer who doesn't plan on keeping it long term.
> 
> Sent from my ONEPLUS A3000 using Tapatalk


Guess I'm the minority. I've had 3 VW over the years, 87 GTI, 96 Jetta, 98 Passat. GTI rock solid fun. Jetta, transmission issues, Passat transmission issues, front suspension issues - major $$ to fix. My Honda Odyssey is a 2006. It's old, and looks a bit shabby but I've only ever done oil changes, one timing belt and brakes/tires. NO extra surprises. But it's wearing out (slowly). While I want fun in the next choice, it cannot have historical VW BS around reliability. When I first found this forum I searched on the Passat and other MQB for topics that would red flag. I didn't find CBU, so now I have to research that. I WILL NOT stand for more VW service BS. When I had the cars and they worked they were wonderful. But 4 different dealers and many $$$ never fixed the above problems. I plan to keep this next vehicle 8-10 years. I like no car payments! 

So while I'm excited about the Atlas, the potential for boring driving experience and worse, the potential for incompetent service will send me away. The service guys were always nice but they never fixed the problem. That's not acceptable. Every other brand I've had the service departments were top notch.

So for those of you who have the VR6 and other MQB platforms, tell me I'm now worrying about nothing but tell me the truth.


----------



## Don® (Oct 11, 2011)

I share the same sentiment; however, most of the repairs and service I've had to do after warranty, I've done myself.
Taking what you said into consideration, I don't think the Atlas is going to be any different from the others, it's just VW.
I know that after the warranty period is over, the VR6 is going to need a timing chain service, and that's going to be costly.
Aside from that, servicing the Haldex every 40k miles is not cheap either.


----------



## jkopelc (Mar 1, 2017)

Atlas: 17/23/19

Competitor mileage (city/highway/combined)

Pilot: 19/27/22
Explorer: 17/24/20
Highlander: 20/26/22
CX-9: 20/26/23

The Atlas is definitely coming in on the lower side which is unfortunate. Not making any excuses, but I am sure this new VW entry was/is under high scrutiny due to the emissions scandal. I know I cross shopped the Explorer last year and even rented one for a road trip. It never came close to the mileage numbers stated. As with any new vehicle you try and tick off as many boxes as possible that appeal to as many people as possible.

For me personally, the Explorer felt super bulky, fuel economy was not there and the front seats had no thigh support (i felt as if they were very short). Visibility was also not the greatest due to large cabin pillars.
The Durango had nice mileage, but lacked the pano roof and reliability is not always high on Dodge products.
Even drove the XC-90 for a few days and loved it, but wasn't willing to shell out the cash (especially now since we can get practically all the same features for 20k less) and even though it has a well tuned 4 cyl engine, the mileage numbers under real world conditions couldn't come close.

So in the end it comes down to a number of things including style, price, fuel econ, ride/handling, features, etc

Every manufacturer has to try and guess what it is that the most people want in order to sell the most number of units. For some of us, the mileage may be a turn off but for others, it may be a trade off that we accept due to a number of other things which we value as much higher on our list of priorities.


----------



## jkopelc (Mar 1, 2017)

Regarding the Atlas, I cant say I am an expert by any means of how the numbers are calculated and under what conditions (except from the info that is available to use which is typically under ideal conditions).

However, am curious regarding the normal vs sport vs economy modes which are select-able. With modernization in vehicles, not sure what impact these settings could or might have on mileage. Additionally, these are often program and timing changes which can be updated at dealers. So overtime, there may be opportunity to fine tune and tweak this? We've also got the start / stop functionality which again I am not sure if this factors into the mileage or not


----------



## DJMcGoven (Mar 2, 2007)

Hmm that's not good. Are those all the V6 engines? I know that's the VR6 MPG cause they haven't released the 2.0T. And I do know that the CX-9 is 4 cylinder. But if the Pilot and Highlander are the V6 engines then that's pretty bad results. 

Sent from my ONEPLUS A3000 using Tapatalk


----------



## Dimcorner (Feb 20, 2001)

I think the Pilot is V6 only and the figures for the Highlander seems like the V6 as well.
Looking at the Highander specs it seems like their 2.4L I4 gets less mileage than the V6. (20/24 vs 21/27 for the 2017 models)


----------



## vwbugstuff (Mar 27, 2004)

I realize that it may be "apples to oranges" but for us the Atlas will be replacing our '03 Eurovan, so that's how I'm making my comparisons. And thus far (albeit without driving one) the Atlas is checking off all my boxes.

The EV weighs 4478 lbs., has 201 hp and 181 ft-lbs. of torque. It has the VR6 engine with almost 177,000 mostly trouble-free miles and a 4-speed transmission. It gets about 17 mpg around town and 20-ish on the highway. It has a 4400 lb. towing rating but I had to add a class 3 hitch, wiring and heavy duty trans. cooler. We tow a 3300 lb. camper and really haven't had any "get-up-and-go" or lack-of-torque issues. As far as technology goes, it's rocking with a VW-premium AM/FM Cassette radio with a whopping 4 speakers.

So, as much as I still love the utility of our van, I'm looking forward to the upgrades (fuel econ., torque, trailer towing) and features that the Atlas has to offer. I'm not buying a hot rod but I'm sure that the "Sport" mode will suffice if I want to do a little spirited driving on my way to the Home Depot.

And of course, the warranty is a big plus as well.


----------



## DasCC (Feb 24, 2009)

jkopelc said:


> *Atlas: 17/23/19*
> 
> Competitor mileage (city/highway/combined)
> 
> ...


that mileage seems poor. That Touareg VR6 status. 

I wonder if post dieselgate, VW is giving conservative MPG rating to avoid another scandal.


----------



## Canthoney (Aug 5, 2012)

It is just uncompetitive in terms of MPG and power right out of the gate. I just don't understand why they couldn't put in the Golf R tuned 2.0 in there, or a new 6 cylinder. Hell, even the Q7 gets better fuel economy and it has a 3.0 supercharged V6 engine. I hope they add a hybrid to the lineup. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## jkopelc (Mar 1, 2017)

Its being done in order to offer the vehicle at a competitive price and again its a game of trade offs. Lets also not forget the minuscule market share VW currently has. If they had Explorer market share they could afford lots of new engines, etc. But lets not forget the explorer has its woes too. This is VW's first foray into the segment and personally I think they've done a pretty good job to appeal to the masses. Again just my opinion (and not defending them by any means) but for those who want large vehicles, fuel econ isn't the top of the list. You cant get the ability to haul 7 people but then expect superb aerodynamics. You cant get tons of HP and expect 50 mpg. You cant haul 5000 lbs if you buy a Honda fit. Its all about give and take and like I said previously each buyer is different and needs to decide what is tops on the list. Anyway, as stated, I wish the mileage was better but I also want the Atlas sooner rather than later. Will they refresh and offer different engines? Yes! However for those who want to be early adopters, you have to decide if you like the package that is in front of you or not.


----------



## 3PedalPassat (Mar 8, 2014)

*doesnt take much*



jkopelc said:


> Its being done in order to offer the vehicle at a competitive price and again its a game of trade offs. Lets also not forget the minuscule market share VW currently has. If they had Explorer market share they could afford lots of new engines, etc. But lets not forget the explorer has its woes too. This is VW's first foray into the segment and personally I think they've done a pretty good job to appeal to the masses. Again just my opinion (and not defending them by any means) but for those who want large vehicles, fuel econ isn't the top of the list. You cant get the ability to haul 7 people but then expect superb aerodynamics. You cant get tons of HP and expect 50 mpg. You cant haul 5000 lbs if you buy a Honda fit. Its all about give and take and like I said previously each buyer is different and needs to decide what is tops on the list. Anyway, as stated, I wish the mileage was better but I also want the Atlas sooner rather than later. Will they refresh and offer different engines? Yes! However for those who want to be early adopters, you have to decide if you like the package that is in front of you or not.


Ill drink to that. I'm also shocked that here in Canada they are offering a 59% residual!!! that's HUGE and will make up for my entire gas bill. Cant come soon enough! Also - id bet they are sand bagging the numbers to ensure that any one that is tested, gets better MPG than reported. They will be on the side of caution at this point. :beer::beer::beer:


----------



## jkopelc (Mar 1, 2017)

59% over how many months and how many annual kms?

Agreed they might be being as conservative as possible. Seem to recall a post where someone asked a training guy about mileage based on receipts and he mentioned 22-23mpg (which would likely have been mostly highway with maybe 30% city as he drove from location to location - just an assumption though)


----------



## ussr1023 (Jan 19, 2017)

Maybe they will bring the new 2.5T VR6 next year. It is offered on the Chinese Version Atlas.


----------



## Don® (Oct 11, 2011)

ussr1023 said:


> Maybe they will bring the new 2.5T VR6 next year. It is offered on the Chinese Version Atlas.


The 2.5TSI 5 cyl...?


----------



## vwbugstuff (Mar 27, 2004)

Don® said:


> The 2.5TSI 5 cyl...?



https://www.forbes.com/sites/tychod...he-guangzhou-auto-show-in-china/#509bd50d3a90


----------



## edyvw (May 1, 2009)

If I decide to get rid of BMW, I think I will wait new engine in Atlas. Was merging on interstate this morning and slammed pedal, and immediately I was thinking: hell no I am going from 425 torque to 266 torque, and on top of that, apparently very thirsty horses.


----------



## jkopelc (Mar 1, 2017)

Nice link to the Terramont for China. Definitely going to add fuel to the fire for those here that wish we had a stronger engine. Likely it will come but for the time being VW went with their tried and true engine. 

Again already available, hopefully less issues and their techs will be extremely familiar with it. 

Don't get me wrong the specs of a 2.5 at 299 seems pretty sweet and eventually it may show up here. However there will be costs to bring it from overseas to NA. And again looking at that price in China topping out at 65k USD I'm more than happy to spend less for the VR6. 

Another review below on the 10 surprises from the Atlas. Although this guy isn't my favourite from TFL Car the brand as a whole typically does very thorough reviews. 

Two things of note. He mentioned pretty torquey at 2800 rpm which is nice to see that pretty low in the band we're achieving our power. Secondly love the comparison to the Tahoe and we actually have more interior cubic space!!

https://youtu.be/kPuuFqtWlkY


----------



## edyvw (May 1, 2009)

jkopelc said:


> Nice link to the Terramont for China. Definitely going to add fuel to the fire for those here that wish we had a stronger engine. Likely it will come but for the time being VW went with their tried and true engine.
> 
> Again already available, hopefully less issues and their techs will be extremely familiar with it.
> 
> ...


Sometimes I have a feeling 10 year old child would do better then TFL guys. 
You just cannot make up some stuff these guys said.


----------



## Don® (Oct 11, 2011)

I suspect the 2.5L V6 is a variant of the new Audi 3.0L V6 Turbo...
This is what I expected the Atlas to come with.



> _Compared to its predecessor (the 3.0L supercharged V6), the new V6 is much lighter, which is critical for Audi vehicles since they are all based on the FWD layout, and puts the engine 100% ahead of the front axle. The new engine are more efficient too, due to the elimination of mechanical air compressor, and also the adoption of spray-guided direct injection._


----------



## vwbugstuff (Mar 27, 2004)

The 11th surprise that I got from the TFL video was how good the Kurkuma Yellow looked in the sunlight.

As for the engine thing - it is what it is. If it turns out to be an issue it gives VW the chance to turn things up a notch in the future.


----------



## jkopelc (Mar 1, 2017)

Nice review with emphasis below on the engine:

https://www.slashgear.com/2018-vw-atlas-first-drive-a-7-seater-suv-to-dethrone-explorer-06481067/

Volkswagen’s route of choice didn’t prove demanding with any arduous terrain or troublesome weather. Instead, I stuck with either the Normal or Dynamic drive modes, and with the standard 8-speed transmission in either Drive or Sport. VW expects most Atlas buyers to go for the V6 when it hits dealerships in May – indeed, the four-cylinder won’t arrive until around August – and it’s an engine that suits the SUV well.

Pick-up is smooth but insistent, and the lack of engine noise in Normal drive mode belies how eager the Atlas can be. Keeping up in highway traffic isn’t an issue; nor is that all-important 50+ mph surge for overtaking. In fact, long stretches of road are the Atlas’ forte, with precise steering that quickly brings the wheel back to center rather than tramlining across ill-kept asphalt.


----------



## jkopelc (Mar 1, 2017)

Hence the caveat on the TFL video. The guy in the video isnt the greatest and the southern guy with the goatie is sometimes a joke. But I think Roman (is the main guy's name) is probably the best review guy they have


----------



## vwbugstuff (Mar 27, 2004)

jkopelc said:


> Nice review with emphasis below on the engine:
> 
> https://www.slashgear.com/2018-vw-atlas-first-drive-a-7-seater-suv-to-dethrone-explorer-06481067/
> 
> ...



Nice find.:thumbup::thumbup:


----------



## ussr1023 (Jan 19, 2017)

I was reading a Chinese article talking about the new 2.5T. They are guessing it is a modified VR6, instead of a traditional V6. Something about a real V6 may not fit on MQB.


----------



## dcsh (Dec 23, 2015)

ussr1023 said:


> I was reading a Chinese article talking about the new 2.5T. They are guessing it is a modified VR6, instead of a traditional V6. Something about a real V6 may not fit on MQB.


It's an EA390 VR6 2.5T, built in Germany.


----------



## KurtK (Feb 13, 2012)

Drive by said:


> Guess I'm the minority. I've had 3 VW over the years, 87 GTI, 96 Jetta, 98 Passat. GTI rock solid fun. Jetta, transmission issues, Passat transmission issues, front suspension issues - major $$ to fix. My Honda Odyssey is a 2006. It's old, and looks a bit shabby but I've only ever done oil changes, one timing belt and brakes/tires. NO extra surprises. But it's wearing out (slowly). While I want fun in the next choice, it cannot have historical VW BS around reliability. When I first found this forum I searched on the Passat and other MQB for topics that would red flag. I didn't find CBU, so now I have to research that. I WILL NOT stand for more VW service BS. When I had the cars and they worked they were wonderful. But 4 different dealers and many $$$ never fixed the above problems. I plan to keep this next vehicle 8-10 years. I like no car payments!
> 
> So while I'm excited about the Atlas, the potential for boring driving experience and worse, the potential for incompetent service will send me away. The service guys were always nice but they never fixed the problem. That's not acceptable. Every other brand I've had the service departments were top notch.
> 
> So for those of you who have the VR6 and other MQB platforms, tell me I'm now worrying about nothing but tell me the truth.


I don't have the MQB platform but my experience has still been very different than yours. I'm sure that VW has improved reliability on vehicles more recent than the ones you owned. I have owned a 2003 Passat, 2007 Jetta, 2013 Passat, 2014 Tiguan, and 2016 Passat. Have not had major mechanical problems with any of these vehicles.


----------



## Drive by (Mar 13, 2017)

KurtK said:


> I don't have the MQB platform but my experience has still been very different than yours. I'm sure that VW has improved reliability on vehicles more recent than the ones you owned. I have owned a 2003 Passat, 2007 Jetta, 2013 Passat, 2014 Tiguan, and 2016 Passat. Have not had major mechanical problems with any of these vehicles.


Thanks. That (re)instills some confidence. The other reviews mostly negeate the driving comments so now all I'm left with is reliability.


----------



## bajan01 (Nov 26, 2001)

Canthoney said:


> I know why, it's because the VR6 is an old engine. They really need an updated 6 cylinder for VW.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


VW needs to put a 3.0T in the Atlas.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## GTINC (Jan 28, 2005)

bajan01 said:


> VW needs to put a 3.0T in the Atlas.....


And what 3.0T would that be?


----------



## atlas tsi shrugged (Jan 26, 2018)

bajan01 said:


> VW needs to put a 3.0T in the Atlas.


Is the 2.0T not good enough? Have you driven one?

As I said in another thread, VW is making a big mistake in my opinion, by not making the 2.0T available with 4Motion, as this will put off a lot of potential buyers who are looking for good gas mileage AND all-wheel drive "safety".

In my experience owning a 2.0T Atlas, the engine is plenty strong. And while I wish I had 4Motion, the FWD with Electronic Differential Lock is pretty good even on ice. Better than I expected, at least, and that's with the stock tires.

And I am getting between 29-30MPG just driving around town.


----------



## bajan01 (Nov 26, 2001)

atlas tsi shrugged said:


> Is the 2.0T not good enough? Have you driven one?


Not in the Atlas but I have driven the 2.0T Q5 and wasn’t really impressed. The 2.0T Atlas is lower powered than the Q5 and a heavier vehicle. My wife has the VR6 Atlas and although I wish it had more power it isn’t too low on power for her needs. I am also a bit biased on the 3.0T as I drive a SQ5. I do appreciate the mileage that you are getting though, I couldn’t dream of that in either of our vehicles.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## KarstGeo (Jan 19, 2018)

Just keep in mind that 3-4 mpg overall will be for most folks a few hundred dollars extra a year..while we all want great mpgs, this isn't a huge deal to me. I agree with the others that I am surprised that the 2.0 turbo isn't available with 4Motion. I would have liked to drive the 2.0 but none around to test here. From my experience with larger vehicles and small displacement turbos is that they are noisy.


----------



## KurSELPremium (Dec 18, 2017)

V6 4MOTION, So far, about 14-17 in town, max 25 on highway if careful, typical highway more like 22. So, not happy, but I accept it considering size and engine in it.


----------



## Pnvwfun (Jan 22, 2018)

I tried using the Eco mode this week and did notice my average with a mix of city and highway went from 21 to 22. I test drove the Highlander and didn't like how it drove, and it isn't as roomy as the Atlas. All of the other vehicles noted are not as roomy either. Even the Audi Q7 doesn't have as much room. I'm happy with my mileage versus size and performance.


----------



## GTINC (Jan 28, 2005)

KurSELPremium said:


> ......So, not happy, but I accept it considering size and engine in it.


that is confusing. Why buy it if you wanted something with more efficiency?


----------



## KarstGeo (Jan 19, 2018)

~800 miles highway road trip this past weekend. Started at ~500 miles on the odo. SEL w/4Motion VR6. Normal driving mode. Cruise most of the way, average speeds 60-70. Computer shows 26.1 mpg for the trip. Outstanding. Edit. Just filled up and calc'd it with the gallons/miles - 26.0. Great!


----------



## GTINC (Jan 28, 2005)

KarstGeo said:


> ~800 miles highway road trip this past weekend. Started at ~500 miles on the odo. SEL w/4Motion VR6. Normal driving mode. Cruise most of the way, average speeds 60-70. Computer shows 26.1 mpg for the trip. Outstanding.


What is the real fuel mileage?


----------



## golfzex (Mar 29, 2004)

For my wife and I, MPG was not on the list of buying factors and we are very happy with our Atlas overall.

VR6 engine has good torque down low, haven't had any issue with merging or accelerating in traffic.

Id have to check the MFD to see what our MPG actually is, but we are not filling it enough to make us concerned about mileage.


----------



## AudiVW guy (Feb 7, 2006)

Fuel economy of the Atlas v6 is abysmal and disappointing 
all hi way driving at 120-130/km per hour - we only get 480 KMs per tank..


----------



## GTINC (Jan 28, 2005)

AudiVW guy said:


> Fuel economy of the Atlas v6 is abysmal and disappointing
> all hi way driving at 120-130/km per hour - we only get 480 KMs per tank..


What does the Altas competition get?


----------



## KarstGeo (Jan 19, 2018)

AudiVW guy said:


> Fuel economy of the Atlas v6 is abysmal and disappointing
> all hi way driving at 120-130/km per hour - we only get 480 KMs per tank..


To put it in standard U.S. units that work for my brain..that's 16mpg for all highway/300 miles per tank? Just sounds really weird. Maybe for pure city. Really all highway at 75mph? I mean, my wife just drove 800 miles of all highway averaged 26mpg at close to that speed (70) with an SEL 4Motion. Do you have winter tires? In the snow?


----------



## Atlas53 (Jan 29, 2018)

*Atlas mileage*

With 7000+ miles on our V6 Atlas, I'd say that mileage is better than advertised. My average mileage hovers around 21, with highway trips yielding 24-25. I tend to accelerate at a moderate pace, but when I've needed to poke it the power needed is there. So, the power seems adequate and it makes nice noises. My wife drove the Atlas today (something she does rarely), and commented on how she thought it had good power and finds it more fun each time she drives it. This, from someone who drives a manual trans GTI every day. I also find it to be more fun every day. The handling has become confidence inspiring - something that took some time with a vehicle this heavy, and required upping the tire pressures by 5 psi to about 40 all around. All good.


----------



## bajan01 (Nov 26, 2001)

I also get mid 20s on long trips.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## TiGeo (Apr 7, 2008)

Atlas53 said:


> With 7000+ miles on our V6 Atlas, I'd say that mileage is better than advertised. My average mileage hovers around 21, with highway trips yielding 24-25. I tend to accelerate at a moderate pace, but when I've needed to poke it the power needed is there. So, the power seems adequate and it makes nice noises. My wife drove the Atlas today (something she does rarely), and commented on how she thought it had good power and finds it more fun each time she drives it. This, from someone who drives a manual trans GTI every day. I also find it to be more fun every day. The handling has become confidence inspiring - something that took some time with a vehicle this heavy, and required upping the tire pressures by 5 psi to about 40 all around. All good.


Why the increase to 40psi about the recommended 35?

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


----------



## TiGeo (Apr 7, 2008)

Atlas53 said:


> With 7000+ miles on our V6 Atlas, I'd say that mileage is better than advertised. My average mileage hovers around 21, with highway trips yielding 24-25. I tend to accelerate at a moderate pace, but when I've needed to poke it the power needed is there. So, the power seems adequate and it makes nice noises. My wife drove the Atlas today (something she does rarely), and commented on how she thought it had good power and finds it more fun each time she drives it. This, from someone who drives a manual trans GTI every day. I also find it to be more fun every day. The handling has become confidence inspiring - something that took some time with a vehicle this heavy, and required upping the tire pressures by 5 psi to about 40 all around. All good.


Why the increase to 40psi from the recommended 35?

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


----------



## 0macman0 (Nov 6, 2017)

Atlas53 said:


> With 7000+ miles on our V6 Atlas, I'd say that mileage is better than advertised. My average mileage hovers around 21, with highway trips yielding 24-25. I tend to accelerate at a moderate pace, but when I've needed to poke it the power needed is there. So, the power seems adequate and it makes nice noises. My wife drove the Atlas today (something she does rarely), and commented on how she thought it had good power and finds it more fun each time she drives it. This, from someone who drives a manual trans GTI every day. I also find it to be more fun every day. The handling has become confidence inspiring - something that took some time with a vehicle this heavy, and required upping the tire pressures by 5 psi to about 40 all around. All good.


I agree with everything said here, the handling is superb for the size. I went to 40 psi as well for the corners.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## 0macman0 (Nov 6, 2017)

KarstGeo said:


> To put it in standard U.S. units that work for my brain..that's 16mpg for all highway/300 miles per tank? Just sounds really weird. Maybe for pure city. Really all highway at 75mph? I mean, my wife just drove 800 miles of all highway averaged 26mpg at close to that speed (70) with an SEL 4Motion. Do you have winter tires? In the snow?


The other thing that could kill mileage is extended and frequent winter vehicle warmups before driving. I’m getting low 20s consistently


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## KarstGeo (Jan 19, 2018)

0macman0 said:


> The other thing that could kill mileage is extended and frequent winter vehicle warmups before driving. I’m getting low 20s consistently
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



Agreed; with remote start and folks warming up their vehicles this could play into it. We keep ours in the garage so no issues but my car is outside and my winter mileage is pretty $hitty from warming it up every day etc.


----------



## Atlas53 (Jan 29, 2018)

*Increase in tire pressure*

Increasing the pressure to 40psi from the recommended 35psi stiffens the sidewalls, lessening the flex when cornering. It gives the tires additional bite at initial turn-in, as well. There is the risk of adding ride harshness when increasing air pressure, but the effect is negligible in this case. VW has done a nice job tuning the suspension for a balance between comfort and handling, and it only takes this slight tweak to improve the handling side.


----------



## GTINC (Jan 28, 2005)

KarstGeo said:


> Agreed; with remote start and folks warming up their vehicles this could play into it. We keep ours in the garage so no issues but my car is outside and my winter mileage is pretty $hitty from warming it up every day etc.


Why do folks do this? Not good for the engine bearing lubrication. If the driver isn't healthy enough to clear the windows and drive a momentarily cold vehicle, should they be driving at all?


----------



## Daekwan (Nov 5, 2017)

Atlas53 said:


> Increasing the pressure to 40psi from the recommended 35psi stiffens the sidewalls, lessening the flex when cornering. It gives the tires additional bite at initial turn-in, as well. There is the risk of adding ride harshness when increasing air pressure, but the effect is negligible in this case. VW has done a nice job tuning the suspension for a balance between comfort and handling, and it only takes this slight tweak to improve the handling side.


Good tip!

I generally start with the maximum recommended tire pressure on any new vehicle. You figure maximum pressure gives you the best mpg and longest tread life in addition to less flex.. at the cost of comfort. After a couple hundred miles I start to back off pressure if the ride is too harsh. The first day we brought the Atlas home I went to the sidewall posted max of 44. I have yet to back it down.. but having a wife who is healing from c-section delivery just two weeks ago and brand new twins in the second row.. it makes sense to take your suggestion and come down to 40psi.. maybe even 38. 

Lets be real for a minute. No matter how much you pump up the pressure.. at the end of the day the Atlas is still a 260hp three row crossover based SUV aka a "mommy mobile", "tall car", "modern day station wagon" or "minivan for people who don't want to drive a minivan". And while its fun to firm up the ride and the Atlas is actually a pretty fun to drive vehicle. Its by no means a performance vehicle or even "sporty" SUV.. like a Cayenne Turbo, X5M, SQ5 or Explorer Sport.


----------



## KarstGeo (Jan 19, 2018)

Daekwan said:


> Good tip!
> 
> I generally start with the maximum recommended tire pressure on any new vehicle. You figure maximum pressure gives you the best mpg and longest tread life in addition to less flex.. at the cost of comfort. After a couple hundred miles I start to back off pressure if the ride is too harsh. The first day we brought the Atlas home I went to the sidewall posted max of 44. I have yet to back it down.. but having a wife who is healing from c-section delivery just two weeks ago and brand new twins in the second row.. it makes sense to take your suggestion and come down to 40psi.. maybe even 38.
> 
> Lets be real for a minute. No matter how much you pump up the pressure.. at the end of the day the Atlas is still a 260hp three row crossover based SUV aka a "mommy mobile", "tall car", "modern day station wagon" or "minivan for people who don't want to drive a minivan". And while its fun to firm up the ride and the Atlas is actually a pretty fun to drive vehicle. Its by no means a performance vehicle or even "sporty" SUV.. like a Cayenne Turbo, X5M, SQ5 or Explorer Sport.


I disagree; running tires at the max tire manufacture recommended inflation pressure can pre-maturely wear out the center tread of a tire. VW is telling you what to run your tires at for a reason which does include a range (unloaded to loaded) and also takes into account fuel economy. By brother-in-law used to do this. I asked him one day after we checked his tires why he was at such high pressures and he responded "because that's what the tire says". I corrected him and showed him the label on the inside of the door. No wonder he was wearing out tires so fast!


----------



## *DesertFox* (Sep 26, 2017)

Daekwan said:


> Good tip!
> 
> I generally start with the maximum recommended tire pressure on any new vehicle. You figure maximum pressure gives you the best mpg and longest tread life in addition to less flex.. at the cost of comfort. After a couple hundred miles I start to back off pressure if the ride is too harsh. The first day we brought the Atlas home I went to the sidewall posted max of 44. I have yet to back it down.. but having a wife who is healing from c-section delivery just two weeks ago and brand new twins in the second row.. it makes sense to take your suggestion and come down to 40psi.. maybe even 38.
> 
> Lets be real for a minute. No matter how much you pump up the pressure.. at the end of the day the Atlas is still a 260hp three row crossover based SUV aka a "mommy mobile", "tall car", "modern day station wagon" or "minivan for people who don't want to drive a minivan". And while its fun to firm up the ride and the Atlas is actually a pretty fun to drive vehicle. Its by no means a performance vehicle or even "sporty" SUV.. like a Cayenne Turbo, X5M, SQ5 or Explorer Sport.


The maximum pressure on the tires is what they are rated up to, NOT the maximum that is appropriate for your car. You should always inflate to the pressure in the manual or on the sticker in the doorfram. Running tires over-inflated will cause uneven wear on the tread (more wear in the centre) and can lead to blow-outs if the tires get hot. 

Over inflation reduces the contact patch between your car and the road, making your car's handling worse.

How many mpg are you going to get by inflating the tire to the max? A 1/2mpg maybe? Most reviews stated the Atlas gas mileage was poor, but it's a large SUV so what do you expect.


----------



## GTINC (Jan 28, 2005)

*DesertFox* said:


> The maximum pressure on the tires is what they are rated up to, NOT the maximum that is appropriate for your car. You should always inflate to the pressure in the manual or on the sticker in the doorfram. Running tires over-inflated will cause uneven wear on the tread (more wear in the centre) *and can lead to blow-outs if the tires get hot*.....


If that was the case it would not be molded into the sidewall of the tire. It is not what should be used for normal conditions, but it will not risk the durability of the tire.


----------



## IraceVW (May 18, 2015)

DennisMitchell said:


> Wonder why the Atlas gets lower MPG than Audi vehicles?
> 
> 2018 Atlas AWD 4052 lbs 17 City 23 Highway 19 Overall (Haldex)
> 
> ...




Aerodynamics too. Doesn’t the Q models sit lower and have a sleeker design?

I was having this conversation with a friend about the 5 door Imprezza and Crosstrek. Virtually identical in every metric except the Crosstrek is lifted and mpgs suffer. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## dgleeds (Jun 29, 2013)

I have had many VWs, all of which are well made fun to drive cars. The Atlas is no different. It VWs version of the 7 passenger family truckster. It's not supposed to be a Sports-car. The fuel economy for me is slightly better or at sticker values. I had driven several rentals, Dodge Caravan, Ford Flex, etc., before deciding to trade my TIG in for a larger vehicle. All of which were no where near as fun to drive. It's great IMO, it reminds me of my 2005 V6 Touareg, albeit a slightly less luxurious interior. However build quality is as good as any VW.

I really don't see the need for 500HP/500torque variant, it would be sweet but if your looking for a GTI get one of those. This is a 7 seater SUV and performs like one. I have zero complaints with performance or fuel economy(remember it has a larger tank as well). 

Maybe VW will throw a better turbo in this model to increase MPG and grab a little more HP and Torque. That would probably see many of the complaints seen in this thread drop away.


----------



## KarstGeo (Jan 19, 2018)

dgleeds said:


> I have had many VWs, all of which are well made fun to drive cars. The Atlas is no different. It VWs version of the 7 passenger family truckster. It's not supposed to be a Sports-car. The fuel economy for me is slightly better or at sticker values. I had driven several rentals, Dodge Caravan, Ford Flex, etc., before deciding to trade my TIG in for a larger vehicle. All of which were no where near as fun to drive. It's great IMO, it reminds me of my 2005 V6 Touareg, albeit a slightly less luxurious interior. However build quality is as good as any VW.
> 
> I really don't see the need for 500HP/500torque variant, it would be sweet but if your looking for a GTI get one of those. This is a 7 seater SUV and performs like one. I have zero complaints with performance or fuel economy(remember it has a larger tank as well).
> 
> Maybe VW will throw a better turbo in this model to increase MPG and grab a little more HP and Torque. That would probably see many of the complaints seen in this thread drop away.


This.


----------



## danporges (Dec 31, 2017)

Seems like i may be in the minority here, but I am not disappointed with the Atlas at all. I am averaging around 19mpg with a vast majority of my time being city or stuck in bumper to bumper traffic. I have done two 5-600 mile trips on the highway, both with a FULLY loaded vehicle and averaged 23-25mpg based on gallons of gas in tank and actual mileage calculation.
I do know that at least in New England we have horrible winter gas blends and mileage overall is worse here this time of year. That combined with the remote starting and warming up of the vehicle crushes the numbers. 
In terms of power, my wife has a Pilot and we both hate that car. It is gutless and boring to drive, very loud on highway and extremely cheap feeling inside. Also, she has the Touring with the 9-spd and that transmission is very rough, never able to get into a gear and stay there. We both prefer driving my Atlas SE R-Line 4 Motion.

I have noticed that when i run premium fuel, especially top brands like Sunoco 94 and Shell V-Power, the car performs better off the line fairly substantially.


----------



## golfzex (Mar 29, 2004)

dgleeds said:


> I have had many VWs, all of which are well made fun to drive cars. The Atlas is no different. It VWs version of the 7 passenger family truckster. It's not supposed to be a Sports-car. The fuel economy for me is slightly better or at sticker values. I had driven several rentals, Dodge Caravan, Ford Flex, etc., before deciding to trade my TIG in for a larger vehicle. All of which were no where near as fun to drive. It's great IMO, it reminds me of my 2005 V6 Touareg, albeit a slightly less luxurious interior. However build quality is as good as any VW.
> 
> I really don't see the need for 500HP/500torque variant, it would be sweet but if your looking for a GTI get one of those. This is a 7 seater SUV and performs like one. I have zero complaints with performance or fuel economy(remember it has a larger tank as well).
> 
> Maybe VW will throw a better turbo in this model to increase MPG and grab a little more HP and Torque. That would probably see many of the complaints seen in this thread drop away.





danporges said:


> Seems like i may be in the minority here, but I am not disappointed with the Atlas at all. I am averaging around 19mpg with a vast majority of my time being city or stuck in bumper to bumper traffic. I have done two 5-600 mile trips on the highway, both with a FULLY loaded vehicle and averaged 23-25mpg based on gallons of gas in tank and actual mileage calculation.
> I do know that at least in New England we have horrible winter gas blends and mileage overall is worse here this time of year. That combined with the remote starting and warming up of the vehicle crushes the numbers.
> In terms of power, my wife has a Pilot and we both hate that car. It is gutless and boring to drive, very loud on highway and extremely cheap feeling inside. Also, she has the Touring with the 9-spd and that transmission is very rough, never able to get into a gear and stay there. We both prefer driving my Atlas SE R-Line 4 Motion.
> 
> I have noticed that when i run premium fuel, especially top brands like Sunoco 94 and Shell V-Power, the car performs better off the line fairly substantially.


Same, my wife and I love ours.

Plenty of power for normal driving and no issues merging or passing.
Trans is very smooth
Tech is amazing
Its huge
Its very comfy (Our does have the upgraded leather seats that come with premium)
Its looks great (obviously a matter of opinion)
Great sound system (Fender)
Performed great in the snow


We are around 2500 miles currently and have zero complaints.


----------



## KarstGeo (Jan 19, 2018)

Just did a 120 mile highway trip today. Mostly flat. 2k miles on the SEL 4Motion. Eco mode. Cruise. Close to speed limit. 27.5 mpg.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


----------



## AudiVW guy (Feb 7, 2006)

well i have to say something very interesting 
at 4000 KMs i changed the oil and put in what the now incorrect VW manual said - 0-30 502 pennzoil euro lx synthetic 
it ruined my economy down from 650 KMs per tank to 480KMs per tank.. 
now at 11 000 KMs I changed the oil and put in 0-40 Mobil 1 502 synthetic 
and my economy is back to regular again.. wow. VW deserves a slap for incorrect published manuals.


----------



## KarstGeo (Jan 19, 2018)

AudiVW guy said:


> well i have to say something very interesting
> at 4000 KMs i changed the oil and put in what the now incorrect VW manual said - 0-30 502 pennzoil euro lx synthetic
> it ruined my economy down from 650 KMs per tank to 480KMs per tank..
> now at 11 000 KMs I changed the oil and put in 0-40 Mobil 1 502 synthetic
> and my economy is back to regular again.. wow. VW deserves a slap for incorrect published manuals.


I just can't imagine that much difference from oil type. The 0-30 should be better economy (to me) but have more consumption.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


----------



## AudiVW guy (Feb 7, 2006)

KarstGeo said:


> I just can't imagine that much difference from oil type. The 0-30 should be better economy (to me) but have more consumption.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


no other way for me to explain it.. i will never use penzoil again in any auto we own, as well VW needs to get their act together, that is one horrible mistake worse than TDI emission in my eyes.


----------



## GTINC (Jan 28, 2005)

AudiVW guy said:


> well i have to say something very interesting
> at 4000 KMs i changed the oil and put in what the now incorrect VW manual said - 0-30 502 pennzoil euro lx synthetic
> it ruined my economy down from 650 KMs per tank to 480KMs per tank..
> now at 11 000 KMs I changed the oil and put in 0-40 Mobil 1 502 synthetic
> and my economy is back to regular again.. wow. VW deserves a slap for incorrect published manuals.


You are delusional.


----------



## GTINC (Jan 28, 2005)

AudiVW guy said:


> no other way for me to explain it.. i will never use penzoil again in any auto we own, as well VW needs to get their act together, that is one horrible mistake worse than TDI emission in my eyes.


What is your angle. Why spew such untruths?


----------



## Pnvwfun (Jan 22, 2018)

AudiVW guy said:


> KarstGeo said:
> 
> 
> > I just can't imagine that much difference from oil type. The 0-30 should be better economy (to me) but have more consumption.
> ...


Canadian manuals must be different because mine doesn't say Penzoil at all. I replaced at 9462 miles with Castrol 0-30 and my mileage hasn't changed. Castrol is even stamped into the plastic oil fill cap.


----------



## KarstGeo (Jan 19, 2018)

What exactly is the mistake?

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


----------



## AudiVW guy (Feb 7, 2006)

KarstGeo said:


> What exactly is the mistake?
> 
> Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


the manual says use 0w-30 502 - which is impossible to find then the manual goes on to say but can use 504

confused? yup.. 

so on first oil change we used lx euro spec 0w-30 502 - pennzoil - brutal - only got 480Kms per tank 

We phoned up VW HQ - and asked what the hell is doing on - as many atlases on under the hood say 502/504 oil
but mine says 502 under the hood.. 
VW HQ finally said they printed the manual incorrectly and will be recalling them lol 
then said use 5w-40 502 oil only not 30 and not 504.. 

talk about a big phuck up.. 

so the second oil change i put in Mobile 1 0w-40 502 and my mileage returned - hope it didn't screw anything up.


----------



## KarstGeo (Jan 19, 2018)

AudiVW guy said:


> the manual says use 0w-30 502 - which is impossible to find then the manual say but can use 504
> confused? yup..
> 
> so on first oil change we found lx euro spec 0w-30 502 - pennzoil - brutal
> ...


Ok got it, thanks for the detail! Mine in the U.S. says 502/504 under the hood. The manual says it's factory filled with 0w-30 VW502; the manual says 504 if you can't find 502. It is quite confusing actually. So you are saying it's not filled from the factory with OW-30? I asked our dealer and they use 5W-40 that meets VW502. I think one thing that has to be mentioned is that viscosity and VW spec (502) are independent i.e. you can use any viscosity you want as long as the oil meets the VW502 standard and the manual states as much i.e. "use a viscosity that is appropriate for your area".


----------



## AudiVW guy (Feb 7, 2006)

KarstGeo said:


> Ok got it, thanks for the detail! Mine in the U.S. says 502/504 under the hood. The manual says it's factory filled with 0w-30 VW502; the manual says 504 if you can't find 502. It is quite confusing actually. So you are saying it's not filled from the factory with OW-30? I asked our dealer and they use 5W-40 that meets VW502. I think one thing that has to be mentioned is that viscosity and VW spec (502) are independent i.e. you can use any viscosity you want as long as the oil meets the VW502 standard and the manual states as much i.e. "use a viscosity that is appropriate for your area".


after my experience - i will not mess around any more. 
it is going to be 502 - 0w-40 Mobile 1
I live in an area where it is 6 Months winter - 3 months summer and 3 months of rain.. 
so 0w makes sense in my case.. 

i can not believe how stupid VW is by having 504 and 502 out there to confuse everyone and the mixing 30 and 40... 

i used 0-30 and it was brutal - ruined my economy and felt sluggish - once i put 0-40 back - life is good.. i hope no long term issues have occurred. 

and yes if you go to VW.ca and choose maintenance and choose your car and model it states now : 5w40 502


----------



## Bdub4202005 (Apr 17, 2018)

*Fuel Economy seems pretty bad*

First let me say that I basically drive all side streets. Rarely hitting the freeway. My work is 4 miles each way all sidestreets. I take kids to sports and some occasional errands. I had a Highlander before and would fill up around 230 miles every time. Pretty sure it had same size tank, maybe even like half a gallon or so less. With my new Atlas I am getting the refuel warning around 180 saying I have 35 miles left or so. When I drive home today 4 miles from work that will be down to 25 miles. Basically, every 4 miles really accounts for 10 on the warning. I might have a slightly heavy foot but I have been taking off slower then most next to me just testing it out. I tried driving in ECO mode but wasnt satisfied with the feel. I've stayed consistently in Normal mode for weeks and this is the mileage I am getting. Pretty disappointed. Oh well I guess.


----------



## *DesertFox* (Sep 26, 2017)

Bdub4202005 said:


> First let me say that I basically drive all side streets. Rarely hitting the freeway. My work is 4 miles each way all sidestreets. I take kids to sports and some occasional errands. I had a Highlander before and would fill up around 230 miles every time. Pretty sure it had same size tank, maybe even like half a gallon or so less. With my new Atlas I am getting the refuel warning around 180 saying I have 35 miles left or so. When I drive home today 4 miles from work that will be down to 25 miles. Basically, every 4 miles really accounts for 10 on the warning. I might have a slightly heavy foot but I have been taking off slower then most next to me just testing it out. I tried driving in ECO mode but wasnt satisfied with the feel. I've stayed consistently in Normal mode for weeks and this is the mileage I am getting. Pretty disappointed. Oh well I guess.


Highiander 19.2 gal tank

Atlas 18.6 gal tank


----------



## KarstGeo (Jan 19, 2018)

Bdub4202005 said:


> First let me say that I basically drive all side streets. Rarely hitting the freeway. My work is 4 miles each way all sidestreets. I take kids to sports and some occasional errands. I had a Highlander before and would fill up around 230 miles every time. Pretty sure it had same size tank, maybe even like half a gallon or so less. With my new Atlas I am getting the refuel warning around 180 saying I have 35 miles left or so. When I drive home today 4 miles from work that will be down to 25 miles. Basically, every 4 miles really accounts for 10 on the warning. I might have a slightly heavy foot but I have been taking off slower then most next to me just testing it out. I tried driving in ECO mode but wasnt satisfied with the feel. I've stayed consistently in Normal mode for weeks and this is the mileage I am getting. Pretty disappointed. Oh well I guess.


So what mpgs are you getting and what did you get in the Highlander? Miles per tank is somewhat meaningless unless they are the same. So 50 less miles for how many gallons?

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


----------



## snobrdrdan (Sep 10, 2008)

Bdub4202005 said:


> First let me say that I basically drive all side streets. Rarely hitting the freeway. My work is 4 miles each way all sidestreets. I take kids to sports and some occasional errands. I had a Highlander before and would fill up around 230 miles every time. Pretty sure it had same size tank, maybe even like half a gallon or so less. With my new Atlas I am getting the refuel warning around 180 saying I have 35 miles left or so. When I drive home today 4 miles from work that will be down to 25 miles. Basically, every 4 miles really accounts for 10 on the warning. I might have a slightly heavy foot but I have been taking off slower then most next to me just testing it out. I tried driving in ECO mode but wasnt satisfied with the feel. I've stayed consistently in Normal mode for weeks and this is the mileage I am getting. Pretty disappointed. Oh well I guess.


Stop & go city driving = poor mileage regardless of what you're driving, (unless it's a EV ), especially if it's a big heavy SUV

I'm going thru the same thing with my Traverse


----------



## KarstGeo (Jan 19, 2018)

I mean my Ford Focus gets 25 or less in this kind of driving...they all do poorly. What is getting folks riled up is the small tank IMHO. Do the math...it's not that much worse than other vehicles in this class. 3 or 4 mpg (assuming average annual mileage and gas prices) is about $200 a year...not going to break the bank.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


----------



## Bdub4202005 (Apr 17, 2018)

KarstGeo said:


> So what mpgs are you getting and what did you get in the Highlander? Miles per tank is somewhat meaningless unless they are the same. So 50 less miles for how many gallons?
> 
> Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


I just took a road trip over the holiday. 5 people in the car and some bags. I was getting about 20mpg overall. Going from SoCal to northern Nevada which is all pretty much slight uphill so seems decent I guess. I think the highlander was around 21 so I am not too thrown off on that. I guess the mileage is likely the same. It is just different because I used to always fill up around 230 and now I am always around 200. I need to actually do the math next time I fill up to get a real figure.


----------



## Bdub4202005 (Apr 17, 2018)

snobrdrdan said:


> Stop & go city driving = poor mileage regardless of what you're driving, (unless it's a EV ), especially if it's a big heavy SUV
> 
> I'm going thru the same thing with my Traverse


Yeah, true that. After my road trip this past weekend I am a little more satisfied. It was telling me I could make it all in one tank to my destination but didnt wanna chance it out in the middle of the desert. My highlander used to say basically the same thing. That I would barely make it. Maybe next time I will take a 5 gallon jug and test it out trying for all the way.


----------



## GTINC (Jan 28, 2005)

Bdub4202005 said:


> ....guess the mileage is likely the same. It is just different because I used to always fill up around 230 and now I am always around 200. I need to actually do the math next time I fill up to get a real figure.


What was your point if these were not real numbers?


----------



## jingranbury (Mar 21, 2018)

I'm not that disappointed in my mileage as I expected it to be in the same range as my former Ford Flex... My Atlas is barely broken in (1,000 miles) and is averaging 20 mpg in mostly rural 25 to 50 mph roads and a lot of stop and go driving... My Flex averaged about 20.6 during it's 7 year life and it was not as heavy as the Atlas and was used quite a bit only for highway driving... Plus I have a heavy foot on our Texas highways where the speed limits are 70 to 85 mph and many drivers drive 10 mph over the limits... For normal driving I keep it in normal mode, but on our Texas two lane rural roads with higher speed limits I keep it in sport mode for quicker passing power... I also own a 2015 Miata MX 5 with a 6sp manual and only average about 23.4 mpg because it is a high revving engine and it weighs 2,000#s less than the Atlas, plus uses premium fuel only... I do expect the mileage to improve by a little bit once the engine is a little more broken in... Probably something in the 21 mpg range to a little more if I do more highway driving at reasonable speeds... When you buy a big heavy SUV and load it down with people and gear and expect to get more 19 to 22 mpg, then maybe you should have bought something else...


----------



## KarstGeo (Jan 19, 2018)

Bdub4202005 said:


> I just took a road trip over the holiday. 5 people in the car and some bags. I was getting about 20mpg overall. Going from SoCal to northern Nevada which is all pretty much slight uphill so seems decent I guess. I think the highlander was around 21 so I am not too thrown off on that. I guess the mileage is likely the same. It is just different because I used to always fill up around 230 and now I am always around 200. I need to actually do the math next time I fill up to get a real figure.


Good deal...always do the math...it doesn't lie! :thumbup:


----------



## ace20ri (Aug 25, 2017)

*My wife and I are very disappointed in the Atlas fuel economy*

First time posting but I'm envious of the fuel economies posted in this thread. My wife and I own a V6 SEL Premium with 4MOTION and have gotten horrible fuel economy. We are averaging 13mpg! We live in Silicon Valley and drive 60/40 city/highway. I would assume (I use that word very lightly) a delta of 1-2mpg but 4mpg below the rated 17 city mpg and 6mpg below the rated seems ridiculous. Tires are inflated per VW and we drive mostly in normal and flip it to ECO on the express ways and highways.

We have other issues with the Atlas like the weird noise during sudden change while in 3rd gear (I believe there is another thread on this). Our navigation also loses positional data frequently and gets possessed when it does. We've taken it in once already and they had to open a service ticket with VW engineering to "fix" it. I've figured out how to perform a soft reset on the infotainment (press and hold the power button until the screen shows "Starting Navigation"). After 6k miles, the brakes are squealing as well!

We're going to schedule another visit to address these issues along with the mpg. I'm going to keep scheduling appointments (our dealership says they only accept appointments for the Atlas due to certified tech availability) until these issues are resolved. Sorry for the rant, but wanted to add my 2 cents... I will post the response they give/corrective actions after our appointment.

Stay tuned. Picture of the mpg and video of the navigation possessed attached for giggles.

Average MPG:
https://drive.google.com/open?id=1TPWQUd_XOXQe3i8ljCBCszUXanICTsxN

Navigation possessed:


----------



## neilsak (May 30, 2018)

*** THRILLED WITH FUEL ECONOMY ***

I think it all depends on where you are coming from in terms of previous vehicle to be able to make a statement on fuel economy. I used to own a 2009 Audi Q7 S-Line. That requires PREMIUM fuel (91+ octane), and on average, I was tanking that beast at around $120 CAD. And I was lucky if I made it thru the week on just 1 tank, but for arguement sakes, let's assume 1 tank per week best case.

I switch over to the Atlas. Besides being blown away by all the tech it comes with (I have the SEL Premium / Execline with R-Line), it also takes REGULAR fuel (87 octane). First time I went to tank up, I had to click the pump 3 times because I thought the pump was defective and stopped prematurely. Total cost, $65 CAD, about half of what I was paying on my Q7, and about the same my wife pays to tank up her 2.0L A4. And that tank lasts me at least the full week, so efficiency is there !!

I had the biggest smile on my face, gonna save me some $$$$ !!!

So like I said, it all depends on where you are coming from. For me, the Atlas is VERY fuel efficient, and to say that it will cost me $65-$75 CAD a week to move such a large truck is VERY reasonable !!


----------



## KarstGeo (Jan 19, 2018)

ace20ri said:


> First time posting but I'm envious of the fuel economies posted in this thread. My wife and I own a V6 SEL Premium with 4MOTION and have gotten horrible fuel economy. We are averaging 13mpg! We live in Silicon Valley and drive 60/40 city/highway. I would assume (I use that word very lightly) a delta of 1-2mpg but 4mpg below the rated 17 city mpg and 6mpg below the rated seems ridiculous. Tires are inflated per VW and we drive mostly in normal and flip it to ECO on the express ways and highways.
> 
> We have other issues with the Atlas like the weird noise during sudden change while in 3rd gear (I believe there is another thread on this). Our navigation also loses positional data frequently and gets possessed when it does. We've taken it in once already and they had to open a service ticket with VW engineering to "fix" it. I've figured out how to perform a soft reset on the infotainment (press and hold the power button until the screen shows "Starting Navigation"). After 6k miles, the brakes are squealing as well!
> 
> ...


With an average speed of 15 mph no doubt you will have horrible mpgs! If you took a 100% highway road trip for 100 miles with cruise, what mpgs would you get? If I didn't average more than 15 mine would be this bad too! The noise in third is nothing to worry about as I see it, just a "normal" noise that this vehicle makes.


----------



## Pnvwfun (Jan 22, 2018)

KarstGeo said:


> With an average speed of 15 mph no doubt you will have horrible mpgs! If you took a 100% highway road trip for 100 miles with cruise, what mpgs would you get? If I didn't average more than 15 mine would be this bad too! The noise in third is nothing to worry about as I see it, just a "normal" noise that this vehicle makes.


I agree, a 15 mph average over your 60/40 hwy/city split is what's killing the mileage. My average is 21-22 mpg at an average speed of 30-40 mph over my 70/30 split. When my average speed goes up, I've done 28 mpg on my way to work. The dealer can't do anything to help with that Silicon Valley traffic (I've been in it a few times), but hopefully they can do something about the flaky navigation. I'm glad I didn't get it with that.


----------



## KarstGeo (Jan 19, 2018)

Iv'e said it in several of the mpg posts here...it's a combination of lower mpgs AND a small tank that is causing those that are mathematically challenged to think that the mileage is really bad when in reality, it's exactly where it's supposed to be for this vehicle and isn't much different than other larger SUVs/minivans on the market. The ratings are spot on and actually a bit conservative on the highway.


----------



## GTINC (Jan 28, 2005)

KarstGeo said:


> Iv'e said it in several of the mpg posts here...it's a combination of lower mpgs AND a small tank that is causing those that are mathematically challenged to think that the mileage is really bad when in reality, it's exactly where it's supposed to be for this vehicle and isn't much different than other larger SUVs/minivans on the market. The ratings are spot on and actually a bit conservative on the highway.


Yes, miles per tank is not a legitimate measure of efficiency.


----------



## cgvalant (Nov 14, 2005)

neilsak said:


> *** THRILLED WITH FUEL ECONOMY ***
> 
> I think it all depends on where you are coming from in terms of previous vehicle to be able to make a statement on fuel economy.


This. We traded an Armada in on the Atlas and we were lucky to get 13mpg highway in that! The Atlas has been great so far!

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk


----------



## KarstGeo (Jan 19, 2018)

cgvalant said:


> This. We traded an Armada in on the Atlas and we were lucky to get 13mpg highway in that! The Atlas has been great so far!
> 
> Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk


But according to some if the tank is huge and you only fill it once every other week it gets great mpgs. So funny.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


----------



## golfzex (Mar 29, 2004)

Nope

VR6 w/4motion











Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## Pnvwfun (Jan 22, 2018)

On my commute home last Friday, there was heavy traffic on the freeway and side streets. For the first 8 miles, my average speed was 15 mph and it only averaged 13 mpg. Once I got past the freeway slowdown and could go normal speed, my avg speed went up to 20 mph and the mileage was at 17 mpg avg, the rated city mileage. My average speed only got up to 30 mph for the commute but my mileage was 22 mpg over that entire distance. 

The EPA rated mileage is for a specific driving profile and average speed has a lot to do with it, and ANY vehicle only averaging 15 mph will not get its EPA rated mileage, with the exception of some hybrids and electric vehicles.


----------



## wroclaw (Dec 20, 2017)

Actually I am pleasantly surprised with the mileage (SEL 4motion). Just drove to SeaTac ant back, total ~ 100 mi on freeway at 60-70 mph on average with maybe 5-10 min of slow/stop and go traffic. The computer showed 26.9 mpg.


----------



## KarstGeo (Jan 19, 2018)

Pnvwfun said:


> On my commute home last Friday, there was heavy traffic on the freeway and side streets. For the first 8 miles, my average speed was 15 mph and it only averaged 13 mpg. Once I got past the freeway slowdown and could go normal speed, my avg speed went up to 20 mph and the mileage was at 17 mpg avg, the rated city mileage. My average speed only got up to 30 mph for the commute but my mileage was 22 mpg over that entire distance.
> 
> The EPA rated mileage is for a specific driving profile and average speed has a lot to do with it, and ANY vehicle only averaging 15 mph will not get its EPA rated mileage, with the exception of some hybrids and electric vehicles.


Stop making so much sense.


----------



## jackalopephoto (Jul 5, 2015)

Don® said:


> ^ this...
> 
> One of the reasons why VW used the Haldex over a torsen; the truck drives as a FWD and when needed, engages the rear - this basically helps with mpg.


That's the standard marketing lingo that all manufacturers use but in reality it's not true. FWD until the wheels slip doesn't help gas mileage, because the driveshaft and rear diff are never disconnected. They're always being spun, whether it's by the axle or the rear wheels


----------



## GTINC (Jan 28, 2005)

jackalopephoto said:


> That's the standard marketing lingo that all manufacturers use but in reality it's not true. FWD until the wheels slip doesn't help gas mileage, because the driveshaft and rear diff are never disconnected. They're always being spun, whether it's by the axle or the rear wheels


And yet, folks are convinced that using the A/C effects the fuel usage......


----------



## KarstGeo (Jan 19, 2018)

jackalopephoto said:


> That's the standard marketing lingo that all manufacturers use but in reality it's not true. FWD until the wheels slip doesn't help gas mileage, because the driveshaft and rear diff are never disconnected. They're always being spun, whether it's by the axle or the rear wheels


Yes but it does help vs. say a vehicle the puts power to all 4 wheels 100% of the time and that is the point of the comparison. AWD gets worse mileage than non-AWD b/c of, as your say, the weight of the driveshaft, diff, etc. in addition to it's use under power when needed.


----------



## Itgb (Jul 18, 2008)

jackalopephoto said:


> That's the standard marketing lingo that all manufacturers use but in reality it's not true. FWD until the wheels slip doesn't help gas mileage, because the driveshaft and rear diff are never disconnected. They're always being spun, whether it's by the axle or the rear wheels


I'm sure you could find other sources, but this article from VW (The Atlas and Golf Alltrack get their winter pass with 4Motion) states that the 4Motion system is a 90/10 split. So it's not just connected to the rear axle, it's driving the it all the time. Definitely not saving that much fuel like the new Audi Ultra system that actually decouples from the rear axle.


----------



## hotshoe32 (Feb 1, 2006)

atlas tsi shrugged said:


> Is the 2.0T not good enough? Have you driven one?
> 
> As I said in another thread, VW is making a big mistake in my opinion, by not making the 2.0T available with 4Motion, as this will put off a lot of potential buyers who are looking for good gas mileage AND all-wheel drive "safety".
> 
> ...


Fellow 2.0T S owner here. I LOVE how it drives but admit that I would have sprung for 4Motion if offered with the 2.0T. Also been waiting for an opportunity to brag about my gas mileage on here 

*DISCLAIMER: The below is average over an approximately 40 mile commute from Frederick, MD to Baltimore with hardly any traffic, and a fair amount of downhill coasting on the Baltimore Beltway, and i was very much hyper miling it. But STILL!*










With more normal traffic, I can average between 30-33 with relative ease (but still making an effort). I can also cut that in half if i drive it like my old MkV GTI - which is still enjoyable if I am in the mood:biggrinsanta:. 
The Aisin 8speed box is a wonderful automatic and was a real selling point for me, along with the EA888 2.0T. I really think it drives like a huge Golf with this motor, which it technically is (MQB).

I happen to have a Yukon loaner at the moment (long story) which, relative to my Atlas 2.0T: 
- Has significantly less legroom (albeit more width)
- A second row that doesn't allow access to third row which child seats installed
- No quicker despite V8 
- Makes Atlas feel like a Cayman handling-wise
- Costs literally double
- Gets half the gas mileage :thumbdown:


----------



## ChimneyJim (Jul 25, 2012)

Every few years since 2003 I get the bug for a Yukon. Then I drive one and look hard at the space you don’t get. Since I don’t tow 8000# I quickly get over these infatuations. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## KarstGeo (Jan 19, 2018)

To me the only reason for a Tahoe-size/type SUV is 1) towing or 2) huge people.


----------



## Pnvwfun (Jan 22, 2018)

KarstGeo said:


> To me the only reason for a Tahoe-size/type SUV is 1) towing or 2) huge people.


It is also wider and taller so not easy to park in city parking garages.


----------



## DerekBlain (Nov 20, 2000)

Only have 192 miles on my SEL Prem AWD w/20's but for my 5 to 10 miles of daily driving (daycare, work, gym, errands) I am averaging...wait for it...8-9mpg. Needless to say I'm am quite jelly of the people getting double digit mileage. 

I was expecting it to be worse than my AWD V6 CC (averaged about 15-18mpg in same daily driving) but I gotta climb out of the single digits at some point. I had been driving in Normal mode and the AC is usually on at 74. I switched over to Econ yesterday and will drive it that way this week to see if I can get a digit or two mpg increase. Haven't checked tire pressure post-purchase. Some here have suggested running at max, others at 4 to 5 psi under. I've also been reading in this thread about break-in period and people's mileage increasing as they get more miles on their Atlas. Hoping the same happens here. 

That being said, I did get out on the freeway yesterday and was able to hit 21 / 22 for the 30 miles freeway trip at speeds ranging from 60mph to 80mph. Yes! Hoping by exposing my engine and digital cockpit screen to that potential, it sees the glory that is double digit mpg and helps me achieve it more regularly haha. 

Still love this beast though. I enjoy the heck out of driving it!


----------



## KarstGeo (Jan 19, 2018)

DerekBlain said:


> Only have 192 miles on my SEL Prem AWD w/20's but for my 5 to 10 miles of daily driving (daycare, work, gym, errands) I am averaging...wait for it...8-9mpg. Needless to say I'm am quite jelly of the people getting double digit mileage.
> 
> I was expecting it to be worse than my AWD V6 CC (averaged about 15-18mpg in same daily driving) but I gotta climb out of the single digits at some point. I had been driving in Normal mode and the AC is usually on at 74. I switched over to Econ yesterday and will drive it that way this week to see if I can get a digit or two mpg increase. Haven't checked tire pressure post-purchase. Some here have suggested running at max, others at 4 to 5 psi under. I've also been reading in this thread about break-in period and people's mileage increasing as they get more miles on their Atlas. Hoping the same happens here.
> 
> ...


Don't bother with mpg discussions with 150 miles on it...look at long term use over 5K miles and start doing some math. It will get a little better after a few thousand after things in the motor loosen up a bit but yes, for a 5-10 mile/day around town drive, it's going to suck. Mine gets in the mid-teens for that type of driving with 6K miles on it and so did our minivan...my Ford Focus will get low-20s at best in driving like that. Your tire pressure should be per the door sticker...35 psi. Trying to over-inflate for better mpgs isn't worth the negative impacts to comfort and control and will wear your tires out (at least the center of the tread) faster.


----------



## finz72 (Sep 3, 2018)

*Atlas Real World Gas Milage*

I just checked FUELLY and saw that the V6 Atlas is getting 19.5 MPG. I am trying to decide on wether or not to purchase the vehicle. What have people here been experiencing ? Less than 20 MPG can be a deal breaker ...


----------



## GTINC (Jan 28, 2005)

finz72 said:


> I just checked FUELLY and saw that the V6 Atlas is getting 19.5 MPG. I am trying to decide on wether or not to purchase the vehicle. What have people here been experiencing ? Less than 20 MPG can be a deal breaker ...


A vehicle the size of the Atlas with V6 power and something less than 20 mpg is a "deal breaker"? Not sure you have any business buying a new vehicle.


----------



## Chris4789 (Nov 29, 2017)

*Very Happy with the Atlas and its fuel mileage.*

I have 11,000 miles on my V6 AWD Atlas and usually get 15/16 MPG around town & (terrible) commute driving. I get 23/24 on steady freeway driving at 65-70 MPH. 
I just completed a boating trip towing my 3500 lb. ski boat and got 15.5 MPG from my home at 350‘ elevation up to 8,000’ and down to the lake at 6400’. On the trip home I got 18.5 MPG because there is more coasting in that direction. 
In summary, I am very happy with the fuel mileage and the performance of this larger, 7 passenger vehicle that can tow well.


----------



## Adamrives (Nov 7, 2014)

We took a trip to Florida from Texas all Highway 65-70 mph and averaged 30.5 on both the screen and by actually figuring it up. Average in town and highway about 24 mpg. Vr6 FWD. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## sillyowl (Aug 9, 2018)

Drive a v6 AWD Averaging 16 mpg in city and 24 highway.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## finz72 (Sep 3, 2018)

sillyowl said:


> Drive a v6 AWD Averaging 16 mpg in city and 24 highway.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



Yup, thats about 20 combined. It looks as though I shouldn't expect more than 20mpg combined for the V6 4motion.


----------



## finz72 (Sep 3, 2018)

Chris4789 said:


> I have 11,000 miles on my V6 AWD Atlas and usually get 15/16 MPG around town & (terrible) commute driving. I get 23/24 on steady freeway driving at 65-70 MPH.
> I just completed a boating trip towing my 3500 lb. ski boat and got 15.5 MPG from my home at 350‘ elevation up to 8,000’ and down to the lake at 6400’. On the trip home I got 18.5 MPG because there is more coasting in that direction.
> In summary, I am very happy with the fuel mileage and the performance of this larger, 7 passenger vehicle that can tow well.



Its nice to know that the Atlas fits your towing needs and that you are happy with the gas milage. For someone who doesn't tow such as myself and drives 60% of the time in stop and go traffic, I may not even get 20 MPG with the V6 AWD. Interesting ....Thanks !


----------



## RotationalAth (Jul 3, 2018)

Have you considered getting a 2.0T? Of course it does not come in AWD unfortunately. However, if that is not a deal breaker for you, I highly recommend it. I have ~ 2000 miles on it so far, and my lifetime gase mileage is 23.1mpg and rising. Highway trips are 26-27mpg and very slow stop and go trips are 20-22mpg.


----------



## KarstGeo (Jan 19, 2018)

Almost 9K miles and average over mixed driving but weighted towards around-town/short trips with the 4Motion VR6 is 18ish mpg. Pure highway trips in the mid-20s with an all-time high of 27 over a few hundred miles but keep in mind speed limit was 55. Short-trip tanks during the school year can be as low as 15 or 16 for a tank. My numbers are spot-on w/r to what VW said this vehicle would get and in-line with other large people movers. Our last vehicle, a Honda Odyssey got about the same overall.

I think there is a lot of misunderstanding about mpgs and how the manufacture arrives at them. The combined number is probably the best long-term number to use. "City" driving can be v. low depending on how much stop/go/trip lengths are involved. Folks see the highway number and think "I'll get that all the time" which jsut doens't happen for many people unless you only commute on the highway. Keep in mind that 1 mpg difference over a year at average mileage (12K) and $2.5/gal gas is about a hundred bucks.

And then of course there is the issue of the small gas tank which compounds people's perception of the poor mileage with posts going on about the small which of course is a separate issue from the mpgs and is also compounded by the tank reserve so the light comes on when the tank has a few gal left.


----------



## DerekBlain (Nov 20, 2000)

I've had my Atlas nearly 3 mos and am at approx 2000 miles. My driving is around town (couple miles back and forth to work, daycare, errands, etc) and I get about 11-12mpg in my SEL PREM AWD V6. Its been warm since i bought the Atlas and AC is set to 72 all the time. Was driving on Econ mode for awhile but recently switched to Normal with no discernible change in mpg. 

Took the family to Vegas a few weekends ago. Set the ACC to 80mph (ACC is awesome by the way) with AC on, carrying 4 occupants and luggage I averaged 22mpg on both legs of that trip.


----------



## sillyowl (Aug 9, 2018)

finz72 said:


> Yup, thats about 20 combined. It looks as though I shouldn't expect more than 20mpg combined for the V6 4motion.


I know several folks who own an Odyssey and don’t get anywhere near what the manufacturer claims. If you get a v6 AWD, anything around 16 in city is good IMO. Preety thirsty beast! 

If you really need AWD you will have to sacrifice on mpg and I think that’s true for any manufacturer with a v6


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## *DesertFox* (Sep 26, 2017)

If you are buying a large SUV the last thing you worry about is gas mileage.


----------



## finz72 (Sep 3, 2018)

sillyowl said:


> I know several folks who own an Odyssey and don’t get anywhere near what the manufacturer claims. If you get a v6 AWD, anything around 16 in city is good IMO. Preety thirsty beast!
> 
> If you really need AWD you will have to sacrifice on mpg and I think that’s true for any manufacturer with a v6
> 
> ...



Oh geez !! I've seen some posts with city driving at 13-14 MPG, which would be totally unacceptable. I appreciate the real figures, being that I don't "need" a 7 person hauler, I may renew my interest in either the Tiguan SEL-P or the Audi Q5. The Atlas in a 4 cyl FWD does not give me all the bells and whistles as the SEL-P Atlas. If that trim did, I would buy that in a heartbeat ....


----------



## AudiVW guy (Feb 7, 2006)

i have the exculine vr6 awd and it is terrible. 
525 KMs a tank..


----------



## finz72 (Sep 3, 2018)

DerekBlain said:


> I've had my Atlas nearly 3 mos and am at approx 2000 miles. My driving is around town (couple miles back and forth to work, daycare, errands, etc) and I get about 11-12mpg in my SEL PREM AWD V6. Its been warm since i bought the Atlas and AC is set to 72 all the time. Was driving on Econ mode for awhile but recently switched to Normal with no discernible change in mpg.
> 
> Took the family to Vegas a few weekends ago. Set the ACC to 80mph (ACC is awesome by the way) with AC on, carrying 4 occupants and luggage I averaged 22mpg on both legs of that trip.


Whoa !! 11-12 mpg city ? Man, that is terrible !!!


----------



## finz72 (Sep 3, 2018)

AudiVW guy said:


> i have the exculine vr6 awd and it is terrible.
> 525 KMs a tank..



Thats about 17 MPG per tank .....Too low for my taste, sad to say ...


----------



## RotationalAth (Jul 3, 2018)

finz72 said:


> Oh geez !! I've seen some posts with city driving at 13-14 MPG, which would be totally unacceptable. I appreciate the real figures, being that I don't "need" a 7 person hauler, I may renew my interest in either the Tiguan SEL-P or the Audi Q5. The Atlas in a 4 cyl FWD does not give me all the bells and whistles as the SEL-P Atlas. If that trim did, I would buy that in a heartbeat ....


The only things I can think off that I would like from the SEL-P in my 2.0T SEL are the digital dash and the surround camera / birds view camera. Never cared for the ventilated seats or Park assist. Obviously don't care for AWD either.

Either way, it looks like you have to wait to 2019 and hope that they offer what you like to have in 2.0T, but if gas mileage is such a priority, I'd get the SEL 2.0T for sure over the V6.


----------



## Hohlraum (Aug 19, 2018)

I'm seeing just under 20MPG combined with 1600 miles on the odo. one 9hr round trip for a weekend but almost everything else is driving around in a metro area. mixture of hwy (majority), side roads, streets etc. On that trip we got ~23.5 mpg when it was all highway.


----------



## Liza5783 (Nov 2, 2017)

*Atlas Fuel Economy*

My dad has about 20k miles on his Atlas now his averages are 21.5 mpg at an average speed of 38 mph.and a short term fuel economy over 260 miles was 22.5mpg at an average speed of 43 mph.


----------



## RotationalAth (Jul 3, 2018)

Well, now that the 2019 changes are out, it does look like the SEL will come with a digital cockpit... but I can't tell if they will make the 2.0T in anything above the S Trim :what:


----------



## Liza5783 (Nov 2, 2017)

RotationalAth said:


> Well, now that the 2019 changes are out, it does look like the SEL will come with a digital cockpit... but I can't tell if they will make the 2.0T in anything above the S Trim :what:


From what I heard it will only be 2.0 for the S and that's it.


----------



## RotationalAth (Jul 3, 2018)

Liza5783 said:


> From what I heard it will only be 2.0 for the S and that's it.


Wow. If that is true I am so glad I pulled the trigger on a 2.0T SEL. No idea why VW is doing this. They are shooting themselves in the foot with the VR6. They should have a 2.0T AWD in SEL and SEL-P trim levels and watch the sales explode...


----------



## huntrm (Sep 18, 2018)

*SEL - 24MPG on Eco mode*

Just purchased an Atlas SEL Premium/AWD and drove for 3.5 hours doing about 75mph on the interstate with the AC on in eco mode.

I was able to get 24.1 - 24.3 MPG - I'm pretty excited. Car has less than 1,000 miles.


----------



## Icantdrive65 (Nov 8, 2001)

finz72 said:


> Thats about 17 MPG per tank .....Too low for my taste, sad to say ...


Do you seriously think he's running it to dry? Miles or kilometers per tank is not a measurement. The refuel reminder comes on when there is still a reserve of about 3 gallons. 

We have gotten about 20 mpg in the 10k miles we have had ours (V6 AWD) with mostly mountain road driving that falls somewhere between city and highway. Closer to city conditions.


----------



## finz72 (Sep 3, 2018)

RotationalAth said:


> Wow. If that is true I am so glad I pulled the trigger on a 2.0T SEL. No idea why VW is doing this. They are shooting themselves in the foot with the VR6. They should have a 2.0T AWD in SEL and SEL-P trim levels and watch the sales explode...


I would be the first in line to get the 2.0T AWD ,SEL-P !!!! I might even go for the 2.0 FWD SEL-P Trim !! Being that I will be off lease soon and will make my purchase at the end of the year, I may just go with the 2019 Tiguan SEL-P RLine ...


----------



## AudiVW guy (Feb 7, 2006)

Icantdrive65 said:


> Do you seriously think he's running it to dry? Miles or kilometers per tank is not a measurement. The refuel reminder comes on when there is still a reserve of about 3 gallons.
> 
> We have gotten about 20 mpg in the 10k miles we have had ours (V6 AWD) with mostly mountain road driving that falls somewhere between city and highway. Closer to city conditions.


our atlas is horrible and dealers response is they all are lol 
I usually fill up when the chime comes on @ 480 KMs a tank.. i do another 25 - 30 kms in hopes to see it reach 500 to 525KM but that is a wet dream.


----------



## chjud (May 13, 2018)

My wife has the Tiguan Highline AWD and I drive an Atlas V6 Execline AWD - the atlas gets the better mileage with 10.6L (22.9mpg) and the Tiguan is at 12L (19.6mpg). 
I am quite happy with the mileage for the Atlas. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## Pnvwfun (Jan 22, 2018)

My extended range trip mpg indicates 21.7 for the last 3000 miles or so. I do drive more freeway miles than city miles, which makes the most difference. I once achieved 30.0 mpg on my way to work one morning because there was no stopping on the freeway but the traffic was moving at 60 mph or less, and I didn't need AC or heat that morning. I was also in ACC mode on the ECO setting. 

I also almost always use stop-start in city driving. There are times when I disable it in heavy stop-and-go traffic. According to tests done by SAE, the average car uses the same amount of gas for starting as it does for 7 seconds of idle. When the AC is on and doing a heavy cooling load the start-stop will deactivate so mileage will be lower.

Given the size, power, handling and utility of the car, I am extremely pleased with my mileage.


----------



## OZ.IN.USA (Jan 29, 2011)

Pnvwfun said:


> My extended range trip mpg indicates 21.7 for the last 3000 miles or so. I do drive more freeway miles than city miles, which makes the most difference. I once achieved 30.0 mpg on my way to work one morning because there was no stopping on the freeway but the traffic was moving at 60 mph or less, and I didn't need AC or heat that morning. I was also in ACC mode on the ECO setting.
> 
> I also almost always use stop-start in city driving. There are times when I disable it in heavy stop-and-go traffic. According to tests done by SAE, the average car uses the same amount of gas for starting as it does for 7 seconds of idle. When the AC is on and doing a heavy cooling load the start-stop will deactivate so mileage will be lower.
> 
> *Given the size, power, handling and utility of the car, I am extremely pleased with my mileage.*


*
*

The complaints and concerns that mileage is not higher is puzzling, so this comment wins the most sensible of the day. Congratulations.


----------



## *DesertFox* (Sep 26, 2017)

OZ.IN.USA said:


> [/B]
> 
> The complaints and concerns that mileage is not higher is puzzling, so this comment wins the most sensible of the day. Congratulations.


:thumbup::thumbup::thumbup:


----------



## knedrgr (Jun 6, 2011)

V6 AWD and the car has 21,000+ miles on the OD. My commute is a mixture of city/hwy. I live in a 4-season state, so it all depends on the season and gas type. Winter, I'll see 20-21mpg average. And Summer, I'll see 24-25mpg. My daily commute is just myself, so the car is mostly empty. And will only have the kids and wife on the weekend. 

We've taken the car on a few longer trips, and it averages about 24-25mpg with fully loaded cargo, 3 adults, and two kids.

Pretty happy with the size of the car and carrying capacity. Wasn't expecting a hybrid's MPG numbers.


----------



## finz72 (Sep 3, 2018)

knedrgr said:


> V6 AWD and the car has 21,000+ miles on the OD. My commute is a mixture of city/hwy. I live in a 4-season state, so it all depends on the season and gas type. Winter, I'll see 20-21mpg average. And Summer, I'll see 24-25mpg. My daily commute is just myself, so the car is mostly empty. And will only have the kids and wife on the weekend.
> 
> We've taken the car on a few longer trips, and it averages about 24-25mpg with fully loaded cargo, 3 adults, and two kids.
> 
> Pretty happy with the size of the car and carrying capacity. Wasn't expecting a hybrid's MPG numbers.



That's really not bad for the Atlas but a little abnormal from the responses and what FUELLY rates the V6. I am impressed. I also live in a 4 season state so I'm interested in knowing how the summer MPG is better than winter ? I know that I have my A/C working overtime in the hotter months and usually, that will give you decreased mileage. Is there any special driving tricks to get those numbers ? Regular gas ? Thanks !


----------



## knedrgr (Jun 6, 2011)

finz72 said:


> That's really not bad for the Atlas but a little abnormal from the responses and what FUELLY rates the V6. I am impressed. I also live in a 4 season state so I'm interested in knowing how the summer MPG is better than winter ? I know that I have my A/C working overtime in the hotter months and usually, that will give you decreased mileage. Is there any special driving tricks to get those numbers ? Regular gas ? Thanks !


Yes, I run on 87 oct. I haven't ran 93 or 100 oct since my WRX days. LOL.

Winter gas has a different mixture vs Summer gas. Also, the colder air is more condense and causes your car to run a little richer.

https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=11031

Like you've mentioned about using the AC in the summer, a lot of this also goes back to the owner's driving habit. My LE model has the sunroof, so it's open most of the time, weather permitting, and I don't run the AC that often. I also switch between Sport and Eco modes, depending on the traffic pattern and city/highway roads. Most of the time I don't tailgate, so I'm not consistently on/off the gas on/off the brakes. I give fair distance between cars and will coast when I see others using their brakes.


----------



## brachiopod (Sep 15, 2018)

I'm actually happy with mine. Around town is 20 or 21. Recent road trip, not all highway and about 25% driving around at the destination was 26.8. Best I've seen, fueling on the highway, driving 5 hours, then refuel, was 28.9. Last 721 miles (when I reset it) was average of 24.5 at average speed of 39. I wasn't really expecting it to be this good. I just use the "normal" driving mode, I'm not convinced that "eco" does anything.


----------



## atlas7 (May 29, 2017)

First I removed the 36lb stock wheels and replaced them with 22lb pressure cast wheels (next best to forged) and then I removed the 50 lb muffler in the rear. Now I get 375-400 miles per tank (still have 18 gal tank). Working on lowering it 3" through Scale and hoping for another 25-50 miles per tank. All that is still under 25mpg. I was getting 275 miles per tank in the begining and am very happy to be doing SO much better...sounds like I could lighten my right foot several times and get even better....NO WAY POSSIBLE:laugh: Sport and heavy right foot for ME! If you want great gas mileage get a scooter, if you want comfort, carrying capacity and complete safety get an ATLAS. Its my GTI MAXI.


----------



## GTINC (Jan 28, 2005)

atlas7 said:


> First I removed the 36lb stock wheels and replaced them with 22lb pressure cast wheels (next best to forged) and then I removed the 50 lb muffler in the rear.....


Yeah, that would help......


----------



## mackopes (Apr 17, 2015)

Some thoughts/stats on this as well. Been tracking ‘real’ usage for my 2007 GTI, my ‘now turned in’ 2015 GSW TDI, and my new Atlas V6 AWD, with Fuelly...
If you factor the current price of Regular for the Atlas, Premium for the GTI and Diesel for the TDI, this is the cost per mile I am getting (or got)

TDI 8.3 cents/mile (38.5 MPG over 60K tracked miles)
GTI 10.6 cents/mile (29 MPG over 40K tracked miles)
Atlas 12.7 cents/mile (22 MPG over 2000 tracked miles)

Overall VERY pleased like others have said considering the size/utility of it. My 2 boys call the Atlas the ‘Beast’ as they think it’s huge inside (compared with what they have grown up used to


----------



## mooooc333 (Oct 10, 2018)

*MPG*

I've unfortunately only been getting about 18.3 mpg over my first 1,500 miles on my 2018 Atlas SEL R-Line AWD - been driving the last 750 mi in ECO mode as well and really not too much improvement. Any suggestions on how to improve? I would drive a majority on the highway so at a minimum I would expect to see 19 or more. Used to average 19 in my 2014 Ford Explorer so figured this could be similar.


----------



## jkueter (Feb 12, 2008)

mooooc333 said:


> I've unfortunately only been getting about 18.3 mpg over my first 1,500 miles on my 2018 Atlas SEL R-Line AWD - been driving the last 750 mi in ECO mode as well and really not too much improvement. Any suggestions on how to improve? I would drive a majority on the highway so at a minimum I would expect to see 19 or more. Used to average 19 in my 2014 Ford Explorer so figured this could be similar.


You should be doing better than that on the highway. I drive in sport most of the time, my average for mixed driving (weekday commute) is 19/20. On road trips that are mostly highway it's more like 23-25mpg.


----------



## shijmus (Oct 8, 2018)

jkueter said:


> You should be doing better than that on the highway. I drive in sport most of the time, my average for mixed driving (weekday commute) is 19/20. On road trips that are mostly highway it's more like 23-25mpg.


I have a se tech 4motion,
my mpg is 17.4 in past 1000 miles and 20.0 in past 170 miles, average mph is ~19 and 22 respectively, I'm driving it very soft in eco mode, mpg in atlas is slightly worse than my gle350, which accelerates faster though


----------



## KarstGeo (Jan 19, 2018)

It's all about the avg speed...when you post your mpg you need to post that from the mpg screen to have it be meaningful...

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


----------



## Pnvwfun (Jan 22, 2018)

KarstGeo said:


> It's all about the avg speed...when you post your mpg you need to post that from the mpg screen to have it be meaningful...
> 
> Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


You are so right. The 17.4 mpg previously posted was at 19 mph average. That sounds like a lot of city mileage. My latest 3077 Extended mile averages are 21.9 mpg at 32 mph. Speed does matter, and average speed can be misleading if the peak speeds are high. For instance, I get about 28 mpg driving to work when my avg speed is below 40 and my top speed is 60 due to traffic. But when traffic is light and I get up to 68 mph for a short distance, I only avg 26 mpg.


----------



## KarstGeo (Jan 19, 2018)

People often think they are driving "highway" when it's really more "city" when you look at the average speeds. To get a full tank of highway driving, it's actually quite hard unless you are on a trip or commute like me 100 miles day with the cruise on!


----------



## Proettermann (12 mo ago)

Today from Denver Airport to Fort Collins Airport (55 miles), speeds between 50-75MPH in slow-down-speed-up traffic thanks to plenty of construction on I-25. AC on, driver's seat heat on (I just like it), adaptive cruise control most of the way and a tank full of 87 for the V6 resulted in:


----------

