# 4.2L motor has better EPA gas mileage than the 2.8L ????



## nycevw (Sep 12, 2002)

I'm looking to get a 2001 A6. I figure I should get a 2.8L because a smaller engine means better gas mileage. I searched for MPG estimate for the 4.2L, and 2.8L for comparison and according to the EPA website the 4.2L(quattro) gets 15 MPG city/23 highway, and the 2.8L(quattro) 15 MPG city/22 highway. Which means the 4.2L is 1 MPG better on the highway, and is identical to the 2.8L in the city. 
http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg...shtml
http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg...shtml
http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg...shtml
How could this be?? With over 1.4L and a couple of hundred pounds difference you would think that the 2.8L is more fuel efficient. Edmunds.com also post similar MPG numbers to that of the EPA.
For those who own an A6 what engine do you have and what is your average gas mileage


----------



## Massboykie (Aug 15, 2006)

*Re: 4.2L motor has better EPA gas mileage than the 2.8L ???? (nycevw)*

Hey Nyc
This would not surprise me as the 2.8 in the A6 is known to be a little week for the C5. I bet this is caused by just having to "get on it" more often in the 2.8 to get the car moving and that will obviously "drink" a lot more...
This is obviously a non-scientific opinion...








Cheers
Massboykie


----------



## an_a6 (Aug 10, 2007)

*Re: 4.2L motor has better EPA gas mileage than the 2.8L ???? (Massboykie)*

probably, i get ike 17mpg.


----------



## Massboykie (Aug 15, 2006)

*Re: 4.2L motor has better EPA gas mileage than the 2.8L ???? (an_a6)*

Hey An_a6
Wow, really? My chipped 2.7 gets on average around 20, and most of my commute is "city" driving. On the long road it's much better. Then I must also say if I "lean on it" a little during the week, I can see the needle drop...







....but it's just so much fun...
Cheers
Massboykie


----------



## Jory (Apr 29, 2005)

*Re: 4.2L motor has better EPA gas mileage than the 2.8L ???? (Massboykie)*

My 2.7t tip gets around 18 city and 23-24 highway. I've also owned a 2.8 and observed mileage similar to the 2.7t. It all depends on how you drive them. The 2.8 is quite gutless (200hp for over 2 tons) so I had to step on it more to get around. Although the stock 2.7t auto is no powerhouse, I can keep my foot out of it and still get around while getting pretty good mileage.


----------



## an_a6 (Aug 10, 2007)

*Re: 4.2L motor has better EPA gas mileage than the 2.8L ???? (Massboykie)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Massboykie* »_Hey An_a6
Wow, really? My chipped 2.7 gets on average around 20, and most of my commute is "city" driving. On the long road it's much better. Then I must also say if I "lean on it" a little during the week, I can see the needle drop...







....but it's just so much fun...
Cheers
Massboykie

yeah...but you should see me drive. as the post above states, you have to unch it more to get it to move...
i bet if i tried i could get it to 19, but i wouldnt expect more.


----------



## frankinstyn (Oct 11, 2004)

*Re: 4.2L motor has better EPA gas mileage than the 2.8L ???? (an_a6)*

I find my 2.8 moves well enough. but it does shift down a gear whenever i romp on it. getting 21 city 23-26 highway. i dunno. still seams pretty damn good for accelleration. just the same. given the choice and very minor difference in gas mileage, i'd get the 4.2 if they are priced similarly and well-kept. the reliability between them is identical. if not a hair less due to transmission issues with the 4.2.


----------



## MARCSICKSURF (May 7, 2004)

*Re: 4.2L motor has better EPA gas mileage than the 2.8L ???? (frankinstyn)*


_Quote, originally posted by *frankinstyn* »_I find my 2.8 moves well enough. but it does shift down a gear whenever i romp on it. getting 21 city 23-26 highway. i dunno. still seams pretty damn good for accelleration. just the same. given the choice and very minor difference in gas mileage, i'd get the 4.2 if they are priced similarly and well-kept. the reliability between them is identical. if not a hair less due to transmission issues with the 4.2.

Hey dude nobody in the Car lounge would help me, I'm plannin to buy a 98 A6 2.8 w/ 61k miles on it, my question is how's the 2.8 for you? is it problematic or not?


----------



## frankinstyn (Oct 11, 2004)

*Re: 4.2L motor has better EPA gas mileage than the 2.8L ???? (MARCSICKSURF)*

Well I've only had it for two months but so far I do love it. However that is contrary to the popular opinion that the 2.8 is slow. 
Reliability is very good on these. I certainly haven't had any problems yet but like I said its very new to me.


----------



## Jory (Apr 29, 2005)

*Re: 4.2L motor has better EPA gas mileage than the 2.8L ???? (MARCSICKSURF)*


_Quote, originally posted by *MARCSICKSURF* »_
Hey dude nobody in the Car lounge would help me, I'm plannin to buy a 98 A6 2.8 w/ 61k miles on it, my question is how's the 2.8 for you? is it problematic or not? 

I have a 2.8 for a while. It has been great reliability/maintenance wise. Not great mileage, and it felt underpowered to me, but overall a bullitproof engine http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## an_a6 (Aug 10, 2007)

*Re: 4.2L motor has better EPA gas mileage than the 2.8L ???? (MARCSICKSURF)*

as stated above, it really is bullet proof. not only the engine, but also the car. and it really is a great car, it made me fall inlove with audi.


----------



## PerL (Jan 9, 2001)

*Re: 4.2L motor has better EPA gas mileage than the 2.8L ???? (frankinstyn)*


_Quote, originally posted by *frankinstyn* »_However that is contrary to the popular opinion that the 2.8 is slow.

As long as you don't expect to get a race car, you wont feel that the 2.8 is slow. I would rather say that it has medium performance, but it is not at all slow.


----------



## MARCSICKSURF (May 7, 2004)

*Re: 4.2L motor has better EPA gas mileage than the 2.8L ???? (an_a6)*


_Quote, originally posted by *an_a6* »_as stated above, it really is bullet proof. not only the engine, but also the car. and it really is a great car, it made me fall inlove with audi.

Ok another question, maintenance wise how would u say it has been for you & your A6? I mean how many miles before Timing Belt gives, Water pump? Sorry to be a pest but i may be purchasing this car tomorrow


----------



## PerL (Jan 9, 2001)

*Re: 4.2L motor has better EPA gas mileage than the 2.8L ???? (MARCSICKSURF)*

Timing belt (and water pump) is to be replaced every 75k miles.


----------



## frankinstyn (Oct 11, 2004)

*Re: 4.2L motor has better EPA gas mileage than the 2.8L ???? (PerL)*


_Quote, originally posted by *PerL* »_Timing belt (and water pump) is to be replaced every 75k miles. 

Yup. The book says 100k but around 75 is the best bet so as not to risk destroying your engine. You might consider seeing if you can get the dealer to do it as part of the deal. It'll cost as much as a thousand for you to get someone to do it. If you a competent mechanic you can do it yourself for about $300.


----------



## PerL (Jan 9, 2001)

*Re: 4.2L motor has better EPA gas mileage than the 2.8L ???? (frankinstyn)*


_Quote, originally posted by *frankinstyn* »_
Yup. The book says 100k but

Really? It says 120k km here in Europe, which is approx. the same as 75k miles. I guess the book you refer to is the Bentley?


----------



## frankinstyn (Oct 11, 2004)

*Re: 4.2L motor has better EPA gas mileage than the 2.8L ???? (PerL)*


_Quote, originally posted by *PerL* »_
Really? It says 120k km here in Europe, which is approx. the same as 75k miles. I guess the book you refer to is the Bentley?

Huh? Interesting. My little user's manual that came with the car says 100k. It really doesn't matter though. These have a tendency to break and destroy the valve between 80 and 110 so you'd better just be safe and stick with the much more realistic 75k.


----------



## GLS-S4 (Jun 6, 2005)

*Re: 4.2L motor has better EPA gas mileage than the 2.8L ???? (frankinstyn)*

FWIW after 2.7T Performance upgrades, my gas mileage actually went up slightly but much easier to consume more fuel when pushed hard.

If Timing Belt Kit is left too long, it's often a failed Tensioner Roller or other type of roller that seizes and causes the Timing Belt to shred.
Interesting in Audi '99 Service Schedule, Audi actually lists different mileages for Tensioner Roller and T-Belt replacement. Obviously most folks would do the full TB kit at once.
How hard the car has been driven is another factor when considering early T-Belt replacement.
http://www.bentleypublishers.c...d.pdf



_Modified by GLS-S4 at 10:23 AM 1/27/2008_


----------

