# New Atlas’ have 19.5 Gal Fuel Tanks



## Savvv (Apr 22, 2009)

Did they change this with the facelift? We currently only have a 16 on our 2019. I know it’s only 3.5 gallons but that’s an extra 70 miles of range normal driving or 35 miles towing. Wonder what they did to gain the extra capacity and if the fuel tank from a 2021 would fit.


----------



## *DesertFox* (Sep 26, 2017)

I think you're mistaken. I have 2018 and the fuel tank is 18.6 gallons.


----------



## *DesertFox* (Sep 26, 2017)

The 2021.5 is 18.6 gallons


Savvv said:


> Did they change this with the facelift? We currently only have a 16 on our 2019. I know it’s only 3.5 gallons but that’s an extra 70 miles of range normal driving or 35 miles towing. Wonder what they did to gain the extra capacity and if the fuel tank from a 2021 would fit.


The 2021.5 is 18.6 gallons


----------



## Savvv (Apr 22, 2009)

*DesertFox* said:


> The 2021.5 is 18.6 gallons
> 
> 
> The 2021.5 is 18.6 gallons


Hmmm. VW’s site currently says 19.5. 

I know if we are on 0 miles range and fill up we can get just a tad over 16 into it. It’s pretty much the same as my Tiguan.


----------



## *DesertFox* (Sep 26, 2017)

Could you post the link to VW site that currently says 19.5.

Thanks!


----------



## *DesertFox* (Sep 26, 2017)

Savvv said:


> Hmmm. VW’s site currently says 19.5.
> 
> I know if we are on 0 miles range and fill up we can get just a tad over 16 into it. It’s pretty much the same as my Tiguan.


You can fill up at 0 miles and only put 16 gallons in the tank.
There is still 2.8 gallons remaining.


----------



## anorine (Jul 29, 2019)

*DesertFox* said:


> Could you post the link to VW site that currently says 19.5.
> 
> Thanks!


I was interested in this debate - I went to the builder on VW's site and here it is. You can see in the hyperlink that this is for the Atlas.


----------



## *DesertFox* (Sep 26, 2017)

Wow! Thanks! All the reviews I read list the fuel capacity at 18.6.


----------



## Savvv (Apr 22, 2009)

*DesertFox* said:


> You can fill up at 0 miles and only put 16 gallons in the tank.
> There is still 2.8 gallons remaining.


Just pulled the owners manual. Says 18.6 gallons. Could it be a case of its acceptance volume is only 16 gallons? I can’t believe they’d let you drive another 50 miles on a 0 range. I’ve heard of having a 20 mile or so reserve capacity where the fuel pump housing holds fuel for when the tank runs dry but that’s insane.


----------



## anorine (Jul 29, 2019)

*DesertFox* said:


> Wow! Thanks! All the reviews I read list the fuel capacity at 18.6.


I had heard mumblings of the increase, but I never l went looking until this thread.


----------



## bboshart (Aug 6, 2012)

Not that it's necessarily reliable, but my '21.5 owners manual has the following:



















And when I have 1 bar on the fuel gauge left and it says 40 miles left, it usually takes 16 1/2 gallons.


----------



## G-CAN (Sep 25, 2013)

One thing that pisses me off on my 2018 Atlas is small tank, and deceiving fuel gauge. 

There is no way tank is any bigger then 16, I would say even smaller. 
My Audi A6 has 20 gallon tank, and I can fill 19 gallons when showing 10km range. 

Atlas is a joke, especially that it guzzles gas, and I can't get over 350km on a tank, best case scenario


----------



## Alpinweiss2 (Jan 9, 2017)

I was told the fuel capacity increased from 18.6 to 19.5 gallons with the facelift (2021). So owners of the newer Atlas gained 0.9 gallons. So far, the wild celebrations have been limited. 

On the other hand, the 2.0T engine gets about 25% better fuel economy than the 3.6 VR6. This may be a more reasonable solution for those people concerned about range per tankful.

🍺


----------



## G-CAN (Sep 25, 2013)

Luckily it takes regular gas. If it was premium, it would cost more to tank it a month then pay for a lease.


----------



## anorine (Jul 29, 2019)

I don’t 100% trust the manuals. Search for Passat GT oil spec in the B7 forum 😂. Arguments all over the place on that because the sticker under the hood says one thing, the manual says another. I think the website is the most accurate source on this one but to each their own 👍


----------



## Puphayden851 (Mar 27, 2019)

Yeah my 17 Passat says 19.3Gallon but I only get close to 16.500 Gallon. Gone 20 miles on 0 range before. I wonder if it’s a reserve somewhere. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## anorine (Jul 29, 2019)

Puphayden851 said:


> Yeah my 17 Passat says 19.3Gallon but I only get close to 16.500 Gallon. Gone 20 miles on 0 range before. I wonder if it’s a reserve somewhere.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


There is a 2 or 3 gallon reserve if I remember correctly. My wife was the queen of giving me anxiety by driving on 0 range before refilling.


----------



## speed51133! (Aug 5, 2002)

there have been misprints before Who knows. I drive it until the needle is pegged at zero, and then drive it some more. The most I have been able to get in there is 17.5.


----------



## gti_addict (Nov 22, 2000)

I know there's already a long thread on this subject in the Atlas forum and many across all the models. Like the manual states _"there is an indeterminate reserve quantity..."_ Just because you've only been able to refill the tank with 16 or so gallons does not mean that is the actual tank size. On my 2020 4motion I've managed to 18 gallons into the tank when I refuel although it's rare I let my tank get that empty. 

On a side note, the Builder on the VW website that lists the specs has recently changed and nowhere near as accurate as it was in the past. I've seen different trims of the same model list different mechanical specs, capacities, and requirements, etc. when there is no major mechanical difference between an S, SE, SEL, R-Lines, or SEL Premium.


----------



## speed51133! (Aug 5, 2002)

I realize that. I just don't want to run it dry because the pump picks up crap. When I run it real low, it will hesitate on turns.


----------



## Savvv (Apr 22, 2009)

For those that have gotten 18 gallons pumped in, do you regularly skydive, have staring contests with king cobras, or play human frogged across the interstate also? 

I’m not saying I haven’t driven an extra 10-15 miles when the range says 0. But if the range says 0 and you’re betting you can go another 50 miles that’s pretty gutsy.


----------



## Alpinweiss2 (Jan 9, 2017)

Savvv said:


> For those that have gotten 18 gallons pumped in, do you regularly skydive, have staring contests with king cobras, or play human frogged across the interstate also?
> 
> I’m not saying I haven’t driven an extra 10-15 miles when the range says 0. But if the range says 0 and you’re betting you can go another 50 miles that’s pretty gutsy.


I think all that is required is to always wear comfortable walking shoes. 

Seriously, I never let my fuel quantity get really low. Many manufacturers state that it can cause problems with the fuel system. The in-tank fuel pump can overheat when there is insufficient fuel to cool it. Also, the fuel filter picks up more debris from the bottom of the tank.

🍺


----------



## Savvv (Apr 22, 2009)

Don’t get me wrong as I very much appreciate that at 0 range I can make it to the next gas station. The only time I ever ran out of gas driving was in a Nissan Pathfinder. When that read 0 you better be rolling into the gas station. But like you I’m not looking to get to the bottom of the barrel.


----------



## The Road Warrior (May 23, 2006)

gti_addict said:


> I know there's already a long thread on this subject in the Atlas forum and many across all the models. Like the manual states _"there is an indeterminate reserve quantity..."_ Just because you've only been able to refill the tank with 16 or so gallons does not mean that is the actual tank size. On my 2020 4motion I've managed to 18 gallons into the tank when I refuel although it's rare I let my tank get that empty.
> 
> On a side note, the Builder on the VW website that lists the specs has recently changed and nowhere near as accurate as it was in the past. I've seen different trims of the same model list different mechanical specs, capacities, and requirements, etc. when there is no major mechanical difference between an S, SE, SEL, R-Lines, or SEL Premium.


I think some of the people in this thread, OP included, must either be new to cars or the planet in general or something. 

They can set the reserve at whatever they want. It’s set like that because people will run it down to “0” range and they don’t want people running out of gas. 

If you pump 16 gal in on “0” that means there’s only about 2.5 gal remaining in the tank. The Atlas averages what…about 20mpg? So, if you do the math, there’s roughly a 50 mile reserve. It isn’t that much man…

I’ve owned a lot of cars, it’s just how they work…. I feel like a 50 mile reserve is pretty standard on a modern vehicle. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## anorine (Jul 29, 2019)

Well for poop and laugher I contacted VW customer care. They confirmed the 2021.5 has a 19.5 gallon tank - from my chat:



> I can already see on the tech specs it states 19.5, so I would trust that the most, but Im going to double check a couple other sources as well. Heres a link to the tech specs!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## MK7_JSW (Jun 10, 2015)

G-CAN said:


> One thing that pisses me off on my 2018 Atlas is small tank, and deceiving fuel gauge.
> 
> There is no way tank is any bigger then 16, I would say even smaller.
> My Audi A6 has 20 gallon tank, and I can fill 19 gallons when showing 10km range.
> ...


lol youd be a hard man to please when everyone goes electric when even the best ones wont go farther then that, my 2003 4Runner had a 23 gallon tank and equipped with a 4.7L V8 and 4WD it was comical range for something "offroad worthy" far from any gas stations and avging like 15 city and 19 ish highway combined. The stupid guess o meter says 379 mile range but i always ran close to empty around the 305 mile of driving.


----------



## G-CAN (Sep 25, 2013)

MK7_JSW said:


> lol youd be a hard man to please when everyone goes electric when even the best ones wont go farther then that, my 2003 4Runner had a 23 gallon tank and equipped with a 4.7L V8 and 4WD it was comical range for something "offroad worthy" far from any gas stations and avging like 15 city and 19 ish highway combined. The stupid guess o meter says 379 mile range but i always ran close to empty around the 305 mile of driving.


I just find it frustrating. And I was generous when I said 350km, not miles. It's mostly at tops 300. That's less then 200miles. 

No car should have small tanks that it can't do 500km on a tank on open road


----------



## MK7_JSW (Jun 10, 2015)

G-CAN said:


> I just find it frustrating. And I was generous when I said 350km, not miles. It's mostly at tops 300. That's less then 200miles.
> 
> No car should have small tanks that it can't do 500km on a tank on open road


Whoa whoa why so bad? I rented a 2018 Atlas to drive 3800 miles road trip it was a awd v6 and it drove over 350 miles on a tank yes miles. It had zero problems getting past 300 easy with a 1/4 left, at 353 miles I have gas light on.


----------



## G-CAN (Sep 25, 2013)

I'm wondering the same. Mine (3.6) is among first ones sold in Canada, and it's been terrible on gas. There is no driving style that would get it bellow 11L/100km (21mpg) 
Maybe if I pushed it off the cliff freefall  

And fuel gauge is even dumber, I'll fill it to the max, gun clicks, then I'll squeeze another 2L in on top, sit in car, shows full. 
10km down the road gauge is already moved up


----------



## MK7_JSW (Jun 10, 2015)

G-CAN said:


> I'm wondering the same. Mine (3.6) is among first ones sold in Canada, and it's been terrible on gas. There is no driving style that would get it bellow 11L/100km (21mpg)
> Maybe if I pushed it off the cliff freefall
> 
> And fuel gauge is even dumber, I'll fill it to the max, gun clicks, then I'll squeeze another 2L in on top, sit in car, shows full.
> 10km down the road gauge is already moved up


During my drive the car was loaded to the gills with my nieces college move in stuff and all sorts of hills and mountain climbs and still avg was around 22-23mpg doing 80mph most of the time.


----------



## G-CAN (Sep 25, 2013)

I got a lemon haha 

Mine is identical looking to that one.


----------



## Chimera21 (May 10, 2021)

anorine said:


> Well for poop and laugher I contacted VW customer care. They confirmed the 2021.5 has a 19.5 gallon tank - from my chat:


my 21.5 owners book says 18.6 but my last fill up was17.8 gal and needle was still 1 hash mark above empty so 19.5 would appear to be right for the 21.5 model

I have found a few other out of date 411 on the owners book. ie Homelink set up. My buttons are on mirror, not overhead console

it would appear print material is behind the .5 updates


----------



## skydaman (Dec 16, 2005)

MK7_JSW said:


> Whoa whoa why so bad? I rented a 2018 Atlas to drive 3800 miles road trip it was a awd v6 and it drove over 350 miles on a tank yes miles. It had zero problems getting past 300 easy with a 1/4 left, at 353 miles I have gas light on.


Seriously I dont know why so many people get bad gas mileage, I've gone over 400 miles per tank on road trips and I've never put more than 16 gallons in.


----------



## OG16vRocket (Jul 5, 2016)

G-CAN said:


> Atlas is a joke, especially that it guzzles gas


I don’t get these types of comments... it’s a 4500lb large SUV, not a golf and fuel economy is on-par with its competition... I’m unsure what the fuel consumption expectation is. I average mid-19MPG primarily city driving.

Edit: Just to contribute, my manual says 70L fuel capacity. I can stuff about 55-56L just after the light comes on.


----------



## The Road Warrior (May 23, 2006)

speed51133! said:


> When I run it real low, it will hesitate on turns.


Huh?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## anorine (Jul 29, 2019)

OG16vRocket said:


> I don’t get these types of comments... it’s a 4500lb large SUV, not a golf and fuel economy is on-par with its competition... I’m unsure what the fuel consumption expectation is. I average mid-19MPG primarily city driving.
> 
> Edit: Just to contribute, my manual says 70L fuel capacity. I can stuff about 55-56L just after the light comes on.


Not sure what that equates to in 'Murican freedom units, but I'll do my best. ...2 bald eagles, carry the cheeseburger....

So if I did the conversion correctly and if your Atlas is a 2021.5, you should have a 4 moose 74L (not sure if they would round that number up for marketing) tank based on the info VW Customer Care provided (post #25)

Edit: added caveat on the 74L due to marketing unknowns and if they round up on capacity.


----------



## mtbsteve (Dec 6, 2011)

skydaman said:


> Seriously I dont know why so many people get bad gas mileage, I've gone over 400 miles per tank on road trips and I've never put more than 16 gallons in.


Good to hear. My wife took it to NH this past weekend. We were reading 17.6 for lifetime mpgs (a few months, ~ 2,500 miles on the odo), unfortunately I think she reset the long term mpgs by mistake. True mix of driving over those 2,500 miles but really nothing greater than 60 miles at a time, most trips under 10 miles and some slow commuting. This was the first >150 mile trip each way and she managed to pull down 26.7 mpgs (indicated). That includes maybe a little more elevation loss than gain but over half the miles were in rain/ light headwind. 
I hope to stretch its legs in the next few weeks and see what I can get pure highway. I have a couple of Maine trips scheduled. One will be under 180 miles, the other should be around 700 miles roundtrip.
Either way, although rated the same as the Enclave it replaced, that Atlas has done better on gas. It is doing better than expected but my expectations are grounded in the reality that any of these larger 3 row crossovers are not that fuel efficient, especially around town and when never given the chance to really warm up.


----------



## skydaman (Dec 16, 2005)

mtbsteve said:


> Good to hear. My wife took it to NH this past weekend. We were reading 17.6 for lifetime mpgs (a few months, ~ 2,500 miles on the odo), unfortunately I think she reset the long term mpgs by mistake. True mix of driving over those 2,500 miles but really nothing greater than 60 miles at a time, most trips under 10 miles and some slow commuting. This was the first >150 mile trip each way and she managed to pull down 26.7 mpgs (indicated). That includes maybe a little more elevation loss than gain but over half the miles were in rain/ light headwind.
> I hope to stretch its legs in the next few weeks and see what I can get pure highway. I have a couple of Maine trips scheduled. One will be under 180 miles, the other should be around 700 miles roundtrip.
> Either way, although rated the same as the Enclave it replaced, that Atlas has done better on gas. It is doing better than expected but my expectations are grounded in the reality that any of these larger 3 row crossovers are not that fuel efficient, especially around town and when never given the chance to really warm up.


Nice! I'm coming up on 10k on mine. I know these 3 rows aren't the greatest fuel sippers, but I find it funny people claim the 4 cyl gets 25+% better MPG but nobody has shown 33-39MPG.


----------



## OG16vRocket (Jul 5, 2016)

anorine said:


> Not sure what that equates to in 'Murican freedom units, but I'll do my best. ...2 bald eagles, carry the cheeseburger....
> 
> So if I did the conversion correctly and if your Atlas is a 2021.5, you should have a 4 moose 74L (not sure if they would round that number up for marketing) tank based on the info VW Customer Care provided (post #25)
> 
> Edit: added caveat on the 74L due to marketing unknowns and if they round up on capacity.


Just to clarify, mine is a 2019. Looking at the manual (they never have mis-prints 😁 ) it says “About 18.6 Gallons (about 70.4 l)” even if it is 74l, an extra few litres isn’t going to be a huge difference. That’s only what... maybe a quarter moose?


----------



## anorine (Jul 29, 2019)

OG16vRocket said:


> Just to clarify, mine is a 2019. Looking at the manual (they never have mis-prints 😁 ) it says “About 18.6 Gallons (about 70.4 l)” even if it is 74l, an extra few litres isn’t going to be a huge difference. That’s only what... maybe a quarter moose?


Quarter moose and a loonie for sure. All I'm saying is we have the best neighbors to the north! 🍻


----------



## speed51133! (Aug 5, 2002)

the light coming on means nothing I have driven the well past that. At least 45 miles. I have filled it 17.some gallons after. The end.


----------



## Chimera21 (May 10, 2021)

it is better not to run any car with a in tank fuel pump to the point the "low fuel" light comes on. Fuel pumps are cooled by being submerged in gas. Constant use with a low fuel light on typically shortens the fuel pumps life. "Generally" when low fuel light comes on there is about 2 gallons of fuel left and at that point the fuel pump is just partially submerged in fuel (pick up is submerged)

Also with low fuel in tank and cornering under speed the gas will move away from fuel pickup temporarily and cause a "stumble"


----------



## G-CAN (Sep 25, 2013)

OG16vRocket said:


> I don’t get these types of comments... it’s a 4500lb large SUV, not a golf and fuel economy is on-par with its competition... I’m unsure what the fuel consumption expectation is. I average mid-19MPG primarily city driving.
> 
> Edit: Just to contribute, my manual says 70L fuel capacity. I can stuff about 55-56L just after the light comes on.


We are expressing our experience, right? 

I am comparing it to many other vehicles I drive and drove, and Atlas is by far the worst. 
If one Jeep Liberty 3.7l v6 can have better mileage, or a Chevy work truck XYL V8, or a Lexus 5.0l V8, or pretty much anything, then I am comfortable saying that Atlas is terrible on gas. 

I'm not comparing to small low cars, I'm comparing to similar vehicles in size and weight. 
It is a junk of an engine from 20 years ago.


----------



## mtbsteve (Dec 6, 2011)

G-CAN said:


> We are expressing our experience, right?
> 
> I am comparing it to many other vehicles I drive and drove, and Atlas is by far the worst.
> If one Jeep Liberty 3.7l v6 can have better mileage, or a Chevy work truck XYL V8, or a Lexus 5.0l V8, or pretty much anything, then I am comfortable saying that Atlas is terrible on gas.
> ...


There are really no direct competitors that do much or any better. Size-wise, the Palisade and Telluride are similar as well as Traverse and Enclave. You are going to see similar real world mpgs in these models. We are seeing better mpgs than the 2014 Enclave AWD that we replaced, not by much, but better, even though they are rated the same. I drove the latest Enclave with updated 3.6 and 9 speed trans for a long weekend and saw better power and mpgs but the mpgs were on par with the Atlas based on the 400-500 miles I drove. The Enclave/Traverse have a bit more power but not enough to make the deal.

Sure, go with the 3 row Pilot, CX-9, Highlander, Acadia, Ascent, Tiguan, etc and you will pick up a few mpgs but at the expense of real world usable space for passengers or cargo. If I can't actually fit people comfortably and cargo instead (or both), then what is the point? I would bet most people who bought the Atlas did it for the same reasons, the desire for more space for people and cargo that you can't get in the smaller 3 row suvs. If you don't need the extra cubic feet of cargo and human space, then go ahead and buy one of the smaller competitors but don't complain when you can't stow a cooler and gear behind a third row that also can't actually fit adults either. Poorer mileage is typically the tradeoff for space. If the Highlander hybrid was closer to Atlas size (we would miss those few extra cubes of space - have spent some time in the latest gen Highlander and it was tighter all around), that would have been a clear choice. I (and most others) don't tow more than the 3,500 lb tow rating of the hybrid so that would be fine too.


----------



## TXAtlasCS (May 3, 2021)

I had a V6 launch edition (FWD) and put 34k miles on it over 3 years. On long distance mostly fwy driving I got roughly 20mpg and mixed driving normally gave me around 16-17mpg. That 20/17 mix squares pretty well with the claimed figures. I now have a 2.0t 4motion Cross Sport and get 25/21mpg. I know they're not exactly comparable (V6 FWD vs 4cyl 4motion and different vehicle weights) but the 4cyl is definitely using less fuel while being more fun to drive. For me at least. YMMV.


----------



## skydaman (Dec 16, 2005)

G-CAN said:


> We are expressing our experience, right?
> 
> I am comparing it to many other vehicles I drive and drove, and Atlas is by far the worst.
> If one Jeep Liberty 3.7l v6 can have better mileage, or a Chevy work truck XYL V8, or a Lexus 5.0l V8, or pretty much anything, then I am comfortable saying that Atlas is terrible on gas.
> ...


Welcome to your opinion but I have no idea who cross shops a Jeep Liberty or a work truck with a 3 row SUV. If you don't like it, please sell it instead of complain about it. 



mtbsteve said:


> There are really no direct competitors that do much or any better. Size-wise, the Palisade and Telluride are similar as well as Traverse and Enclave. You are going to see similar real world mpgs in these models. We are seeing better mpgs than the 2014 Enclave AWD that we replaced, not by much, but better, even though they are rated the same. I drove the latest Enclave with updated 3.6 and 9 speed trans for a long weekend and saw better power and mpgs but the mpgs were on par with the Atlas based on the 400-500 miles I drove. The Enclave/Traverse have a bit more power but not enough to make the deal.
> 
> Sure, go with the 3 row Pilot, CX-9, Highlander, Acadia, Ascent, Tiguan, etc and you will pick up a few mpgs but at the expense of real world usable space for passengers or cargo. If I can't actually fit people comfortably and cargo instead (or both), then what is the point? I would bet most people who bought the Atlas did it for the same reasons, the desire for more space for people and cargo that you can't get in the smaller 3 row suvs. If you don't need the extra cubic feet of cargo and human space, then go ahead and buy one of the smaller competitors but don't complain when you can't stow a cooler and gear behind a third row that also can't actually fit adults either. Poorer mileage is typically the tradeoff for space. If the Highlander hybrid was closer to Atlas size (we would miss those few extra cubes of space - have spent some time in the latest gen Highlander and it was tighter all around), that would have been a clear choice. I (and most others) don't tow more than the 3,500 lb tow rating of the hybrid so that would be fine too.


Exactly, I cross shopped the Telluride and Tahoe with the Atlas all right in the same mix of usable 3 rows and MPG ratings. But the Kia was $12k more expensive and the Tahoe was almost $30k more, that buys a LOT of fuel so I'm not complaining!


----------



## Savvv (Apr 22, 2009)

Chimera21 said:


> it is better not to run any car with a in tank fuel pump to the point the "low fuel" light comes on. Fuel pumps are cooled by being submerged in gas. Constant use with a low fuel light on typically shortens the fuel pumps life. "Generally" when low fuel light comes on there is about 2 gallons of fuel left and at that point the fuel pump is just partially submerged in fuel (pick up is submerged)
> 
> Also with low fuel in tank and cornering under speed the gas will move away from fuel pickup temporarily and cause a "stumble"


See people are stating that the 2 gallons of extra fuel exist once the range is at 0 and the needle is essentially as low as it goes. You stating that there’s still 2 gallons left in the tank when the light comes on is only correct if the fuel tank is a 16 gallon tank. Whenever I’ve filled up with the needle on E, I get ~16 gallons into it. People are saying the tank is actually 18 gallon so you have about 4 gallons left when the light comes on. 

Also, the way VW designs their fuel pumps (atleast the ones I’ve seen from Mk4’s back in the early 2000’s) is they bring the return line back into the pump. The pump itself sits within its own reservoir. The assembly has 2 pick up points. One is within this reservoir and the other is at the bottom of the tank. When you’re getting low on fuel and it flows to one side of the tank, there is still fuel in the reservoir for the pump to draw from and there’s also return fuel being dumped into the reservoir. Thus the pump stays cool all the time. Since you’re not constantly pulling right hand turns eventually the fuel comes back to the pump pickup and the reservoir starts getting topped back off.


----------



## Chimera21 (May 10, 2021)

FWIW my 21.5 3.6 AWD got 20.6 mpg mixed use after putting about 900 mi on it so far. As good as my previous 4 cyl Ford Escape got.....YMMV


----------



## mellofello9 (May 7, 2003)

G-CAN said:


> It is a junk of an engine from 20 years ago.


Disagree on both points:

The VR6 is not junk. It has it's detriments, but not to a degree befitting a 'junk' classification
It's actually from *30* years ago (First VR6 motor was introduced in 1991)
That is all...😁


----------



## KarstGeo (Jan 19, 2018)

When your light comes on, it should have about 2.5 gallons or so left so about 16 gal used. This is based on my data/info having the "gallons to fill" option on using OBDEleven/VCDS which is really handy for all those folks that lose their minds about this issue/driving the thing to empty. Your "miles to empty" will zero out at about 17 gal used so about 1.5 left to go or about 30 miles assuming avg. mpgs of 18.


----------



## G-CAN (Sep 25, 2013)

mellofello9 said:


> Disagree on both points:
> 
> The VR6 is not junk. It has it's detriments, but not to a degree befitting a 'junk' classification
> It's actually from *30* years ago (First VR6 motor was introduced in 1991)
> That is all...


So, took it in this morning, cause this junk: 

-engine vibrates at low rpm, causing whole car to shake on highway cruising speeds at those revs
-gearbox at slowing down to almost stop, stays in third gear, or all the way to first
-valve cover gaskets leaking oil out, car has 21000 km 

P.s. I had old VR6 12V, it was a gem of an engine. This 3.6 is junk, and combined with this trash Aisin 8speed, it's just crap. 

Well, gotta live with it now. 

Sorry for the rant.


----------



## mellofello9 (May 7, 2003)

G-CAN said:


> So, took it in this morning, cause this junk:
> 
> -engine vibrates at low rpm, causing whole car to shake on highway cruising speeds at those revs
> -gearbox at slowing down to almost stop, stays in third gear, or all the way to first
> ...


Rant on...better than keeping it all pent up!

Full transparency, I'm a VR6 fan through and through.😁 Have owned the 2.8 12/24v and the 3.6 and do like the 3.6 a LOT. Like you, not a fan of the Aisin box but my stuff is older ('13 CC 3.6, 6-speed Aisin box) and maybe therein lies the difference. No fluid leaks, vibrations, hesitations...just wookie.

Sorry you are not having a good time with yours, though, and hoping most issues can be tended to through the dealer/warranty.


----------



## anorine (Jul 29, 2019)

mellofello9 said:


> Rant on...better than keeping it all pent up!
> 
> Full transparency, I'm a VR6 fan through and through.😁 Have owned the 2.8 12/24v and the 3.6 and do like the 3.6 a LOT. Like you, not a fan of the Aisin box but my stuff is older ('13 CC 3.6, 6-speed Aisin box) and maybe therein lies the difference. No fluid leaks, vibrations, hesitations...just wookie.
> 
> Sorry you are not having a good time with yours, though, and hoping most issues can be tended to through the dealer/warranty.


I'll second the VR6 love - my Passat GT is an absolute riot. I do think the Aisin 8 speed is.. not great. The 7 speed DSG from the Golf R would be my preference for pairings. I have the 6 speed DSG in the Passat and it is leaps and bounds better than the Aisin 6 or 8.


----------



## mellofello9 (May 7, 2003)

anorine said:


> I'll second the VR6 love - my Passat GT is an absolute riot. I do think the Aisin 8 speed is.. not great. The 7 speed DSG from the Golf R would be my preference for pairings. I have the 6 speed DSG in the Passat and it is leaps and bounds better than the Aisin 6 or 8.


Was mad when I realized the only way to get 4Motion in the CC was via the Aisin box...but I wanted the VR6 and I wanted the 4Motion so the transmission became akin to 'baggage' brought to a new relationship. You aren't happy about it but you're not walking away, either.

Don't get me wrong, it's not horrible, but it's also not great. 'Manuel' or 'Sport' modes make it tolerable while the motor makes it workable. 

Sorry to hijack, @G-CAN, you started on gas tanks, we moved to motors and now we're on trannys...wait, wut??😁


----------



## Alpinweiss2 (Jan 9, 2017)

mellofello9 said:


> …..
> Sorry to hijack, @G-CAN, you started on gas tanks, we moved to motors and now we're on trannys...wait, wut??😁


I think I am the guilty party for getting this thread off track. Mea culpa. It moved from a discussion on fuel capacity to a discussion on fuel economy; and that led to my suggestion of the 2.0T engine for better economy. This could partially address the concern about limited range due to a small fuel tank.

FWIW, I don’t think the 3.6 VR6 is a bad engine, even though I don’t have it in my Atlas. I absolutely love the beautiful sound it makes. But for my use, the 2.0T engine is the clear choice here at high altitude.

🍺


----------



## skydaman (Dec 16, 2005)

G-CAN said:


> So, took it in this morning, cause this junk:
> 
> -engine vibrates at low rpm, causing whole car to shake on highway cruising speeds at those revs
> -gearbox at slowing down to almost stop, stays in third gear, or all the way to first
> ...


In the current time of high used car prices you aren't stuck with it at all, if you don't like it sell it! 

Assume you mean took it to the dealer since its under warranty! Oil leak should be a simple fix. I've never had any vibrations so hopefully they can isolate something amiss on your vehicle. 

Gearbox, not sure what you are complaining about. Yes the vehicle downshifts from 3rd to 1st coming to stop, if you don't like it you can use manual mode to shift 3-2-1. I almost always use sport or manual mode, makes the driving experience a ton better.

I too had multiple 2.8 VR's and they made 180hp on a good day, I would hate to have that lump in a 4000lb SUV. The 280+hp from the 3.6 seems like a much better fit to me.


----------



## skydaman (Dec 16, 2005)

mellofello9 said:


> Was mad when I realized the only way to get 4Motion in the CC was via the Aisin box...but I wanted the VR6 and I wanted the 4Motion so the transmission became akin to 'baggage' brought to a new relationship. You aren't happy about it but you're not walking away, either.
> 
> Don't get me wrong, it's not horrible, but it's also not great. 'Manuel' or 'Sport' modes make it tolerable while the motor makes it workable.
> 
> Sorry to hijack, @G-CAN, you started on gas tanks, we moved to motors and now we're on trannys...wait, wut??😁


True, the Aisin unit isnt great around town left to its own decisions, sometimes seems confused. But anytime I'm in manual mode it up and down shifts nicely so doesn't seem to be any problem with the mechanicals its VW's crappy programming which is why I wish we had a tune! 



Alpinweiss2 said:


> suggestion of the 2.0T engine for better economy.


Still waiting on a 2.0 owner to post this claimed better fuel economy. Curious what they can get, especially modded.


----------



## mellofello9 (May 7, 2003)

skydaman said:


> Still waiting on a 2.0 owner to post this claimed better fuel economy. Curious what they can get, especially modded.


I'm sure it can beat the fuel economy of the six...if you can stay off boost. Problem is, with 4500 LBS to drag around, I can't imagine that happens much, if at all.

I just remember when I purchased my '04 GTI chuckling at the highway mileage numbers...30 mpg for the VR6 -vs- 29 mpg for the 1.8T....which neither would achieve in 'normal' driving conditions. 😁


----------



## Alpinweiss2 (Jan 9, 2017)

skydaman said:


> .......
> Still waiting on a 2.0 owner to post this claimed better fuel economy. Curious what they can get, especially modded.


On our 2021 Atlas 2.0T 4-Motion we are averaging about 25 mpg around town and about 28 mpg on the highway (75+ mph). By today's standards, it is not great fuel economy; but the Atlas is a large vehicle. This is almost exactly the same fuel economy as our Tiguan Mk1 4-Motion with 2.0T. Ironically, the EPA ratings are identical for the two vehicles, 20 mpg city and 24 mpg highway. We have no powertrain modifications on either vehicle. I drive the Atlas in sport mode a lot of the time.

🍺


----------



## Alpinweiss2 (Jan 9, 2017)

mellofello9 said:


> I'm sure it can beat the fuel economy of the six...if you can stay off boost. Problem is, with 4500 LBS to drag around, I can't imagine that happens much, if at all.
> 
> I just remember when I purchased my '04 GTI chuckling at the highway mileage numbers...30 mpg for the VR6 -vs- 29 mpg for the 1.8T....which neither would achieve in 'normal' driving conditions. 😁


Here in the Rocky Mountains, I am sure our Atlas uses the turbo boost a lot. But, I do not have a boost gauge to verify that. The oil temperature runs fairly hot on the digital readout.

I think the only non-boost times are when the engine is at idle, or when coming down a hill (frequent around here).

🍺


----------



## *DesertFox* (Sep 26, 2017)

Gotta live with it! Dump that POS!





G-CAN said:


> So, took it in this morning, cause this junk:
> 
> -engine vibrates at low rpm, causing whole car to shake on highway cruising speeds at those revs
> -gearbox at slowing down to almost stop, stays in third gear, or all the way to first
> ...


----------



## skydaman (Dec 16, 2005)

mellofello9 said:


> I'm sure it can beat the fuel economy of the six...if you can stay off boost. Problem is, with 4500 LBS to drag around, I can't imagine that happens much, if at all.
> 
> I just remember when I purchased my '04 GTI chuckling at the highway mileage numbers...30 mpg for the VR6 -vs- 29 mpg for the 1.8T....which neither would achieve in 'normal' driving conditions. 😁


I think it could too, everyone mentions it but not many provide actual data. I would think the 2.0 is a bit lighter to start and I know its easy to take some decent weight out of them between exhaust, wheels, removing spare, etc... 

My old 2.8 VR and 1.8T GTI's would get good highway MPG granted they were pretty well modded/tuned. 



Alpinweiss2 said:


> On our 2021 Atlas 2.0T 4-Motion we are averaging about 25 mpg around town and about 28 mpg on the highway (75+ mph). By today's standards, it is not great fuel economy; but the Atlas is a large vehicle. This is almost exactly the same fuel economy as our Tiguan Mk1 4-Motion with 2.0T. Ironically, the EPA ratings are identical for the two vehicles, 20 mpg city and 24 mpg highway. We have no powertrain modifications on either vehicle. I drive the Atlas in sport mode a lot of the time.
> 
> 🍺


That's about what I see with my 21 4motion 3.6. Cruising to and from work I generally get between 23 and 29 depending how I drive, cooler days with AC off I've seen 30. Fully loaded down with the family, dog, luggage, etc for vacation I got 27 highway on cruise 80-85MPH granted that was along the east coast and slightly modded. 



Alpinweiss2 said:


> Here in the Rocky Mountains, I am sure our Atlas uses the turbo boost a lot. But, I do not have a boost gauge to verify that. The oil temperature runs fairly hot on the digital readout.
> 
> I think the only non-boost times are when the engine is at idle, or when coming down a hill (frequent around here).
> 
> 🍺


Ya I bet it does with those hills. What's your oil temp? I have to really beat on mine to really even get it up to temp, ie 200 but then hardly ever seen it over 205.


----------



## mellofello9 (May 7, 2003)

skydaman said:


> I too had multiple 2.8 VR's and they made 180hp on a good day, I would hate to have that lump in a 4000lb SUV. The 280+hp from the 3.6 seems like a much better fit to me.


They installed the 3.2 in the Touareg (T1 - 250hp, maybe?) and that didn't end well...of course, the T'reg is even heavier than the Atlas so that's hardly a surprise.


----------



## shadytheatlas (Jul 5, 2018)

Last 2 fillups 100% city driving, 12 mpg. I might win the lowest gas mileage award.


----------



## anorine (Jul 29, 2019)

Controversial opinion time: if great gas mileage was a buying point, an SUV was probably a bad choice. There is a Prius for that. I didn’t buy one to break mileage records, I bought one to haul kids and anything else I can stuff in it.


----------



## KarstGeo (Jan 19, 2018)

anorine said:


> Controversial opinion time: if great gas mileage was a buying point, an SUV was probably a bad choice. There is a Prius for that. I didn’t buy one to break mileage records, I bought one to haul kids and anything else I can stuff in it.


Yep. I can't believe folks even care. It's a huge 3 row SUV. You don't buy this to commute in.

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk


----------



## Alpinweiss2 (Jan 9, 2017)

skydaman said:


> ….
> Ya I bet it does with those hills. What's your oil temp? I have to really beat on mine to really even get it up to temp, ie 200 but then hardly ever seen it over 205.


Yesterday, my 2.0T engine oil temperature was staying around 230° Fahrenheit. This was for some local driving with no major climbs. Also, no major traffic jams. Outside air temperature was about 88°F. The Relative Humidity was roughly 12%.

Our Atlas is still fairly new, so I have not driven it during the hot summer months. Also, our travel has been limited due to the pandemic, so I have not yet climbed any mountain passes above 10,000 ft. msl. I would anticipate substantially higher oil temperatures. Yes, I maintain an aggressive oil change schedule on all of our turbocharged vehicles.

🍺


----------



## KarstGeo (Jan 19, 2018)

The 3.6 VR6 will barely get above 200; the turbo EA888 gen 3 2.0 can easily get into the mid-220s when the ambient temps reach into the 90s.


----------



## G-CAN (Sep 25, 2013)

anorine said:


> Controversial opinion time: if great gas mileage was a buying point, an SUV was probably a bad choice. There is a Prius for that. I didn’t buy one to break mileage records, I bought one to haul kids and anything else I can stuff in it.


Bull**** 

12mpg is ridicolous. Big block Hemi doesn't waste that much gas. 

I know you guys a VW lovers and it's hard to hear a critique on VW's account, but let's be real.


----------



## Alpinweiss2 (Jan 9, 2017)

KarstGeo said:


> The 3.6 VR6 will barely get above 200; the turbo EA888 gen 3 2.0 can easily get into the mid-220s when the ambient temps reach into the 90s.


This summer, I will have the opportunity to observe the oil temperature on our 2.0T Atlas under the following conditions:
1. High ambient temperature. 100°F is not unusual for this area during the summer heat.
2. Long climbs up mountain passes.
3. High altitudes. Many passes are above 8,000 feet msl (mean sea level), and some are above 10,000 ft msl.

I am predicting oil temperatures above 250°F. Anybody else want to make a guess?

As I have stated previously, a turbocharged engine can produce 100% horsepower at high altitude. But it is working hard to produce that power. The turbocharger is spinning very fast, and it is under a lot of load.  

🍺


----------



## KarstGeo (Jan 19, 2018)

Alpinweiss2 said:


> This summer, I will have the opportunity to observe the oil temperature on our 2.0T Atlas under the following conditions:
> 1. High ambient temperature. 100°F is not unusual for this area during the summer heat.
> 2. Long climbs up mountain passes.
> 3. High altitudes. Many passes are above 8,000 feet msl (mean sea level), and some are above 10,000 ft msl.
> ...


I have tracked my wagon with the 1.8 (same motor as the 2.0 effectively) and only got it up to about 240 with ambient in the 80s.


----------



## skydaman (Dec 16, 2005)

anorine said:


> Controversial opinion time: if great gas mileage was a buying point, an SUV was probably a bad choice. There is a Prius for that. I didn’t buy one to break mileage records, I bought one to haul kids and anything else I can stuff in it.


Agree, I didnt expect anything over 20 when I first purchased it. Just a nice perk that it regularly does much better. 



KarstGeo said:


> Yep. I can't believe folks even care. It's a huge 3 row SUV. You don't buy this to commute in.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk


Totally commute in mine, have other cars for fun weekend drives that might get 10MPG on a good day. 




Alpinweiss2 said:


> Yesterday, my 2.0T engine oil temperature was staying around 230° Fahrenheit. This was for some local driving with no major climbs. Also, no major traffic jams. Outside air temperature was about 88°F. The Relative Humidity was roughly 12%.
> 
> Our Atlas is still fairly new, so I have not driven it during the hot summer months. Also, our travel has been limited due to the pandemic, so I have not yet climbed any mountain passes above 10,000 ft. msl. I would anticipate substantially higher oil temperatures. Yes, I maintain an aggressive oil change schedule on all of our turbocharged vehicles.
> 
> 🍺


Gotcha ya thats a good bit warmer. Highest elevation in my normal driving is a whopping 1500'. I've been running the LiquiMoly 5w-40 seems fine.



KarstGeo said:


> The 3.6 VR6 will barely get above 200; the turbo EA888 gen 3 2.0 can easily get into the mid-220s when the ambient temps reach into the 90s.


I see the same, I can flog mine and it only gets to 205.


----------



## skydaman (Dec 16, 2005)

G-CAN said:


> Bull****
> 
> 12mpg is ridicolous. Big block Hemi doesn't waste that much gas.
> 
> I know you guys a VW lovers and it's hard to hear a critique on VW's account, but let's be real.


Obviously you havent driven a big block Hemi, my turbo LS doesnt even get 12MPG and its 100+ci smaller.


----------



## anorine (Jul 29, 2019)

G-CAN said:


> Bull****
> 
> 12mpg is ridicolous. Big block Hemi doesn't waste that much gas.
> 
> I know you guys a VW lovers and it's hard to hear a critique on VW's account, but let's be real.


Maybe take it easy on the long skinny pedal. Even driving in town I have never seen 12 mpg… I don’t think not having delusions of grandeur regarding mpg in an SUV makes me a fan boy. Plain and simple if it doesn’t meet your expectations get rid of it.


----------



## G-CAN (Sep 25, 2013)

Ok, I see fanboism at large here. 

All good. Let us enjoy our 12mpg car. My point is that a car in 2020 with that fuel consumption is just a bad engine. I don't care if it's an atlas or a Tahoe or BMW x7. 

Sorry for OT , I'm out. PEACE.


----------



## The Road Warrior (May 23, 2006)

anorine said:


> Maybe take it easy on the long skinny pedal. Even driving in town I have never seen 12 mpg… I don’t think not having delusions of grandeur regarding mpg in an SUV makes me a fan boy. Plain and simple if it doesn’t meet your expectations get rid of it.


Yeah, 12mpg….

I’m guessing he’s one of those “on or off” drivers I see every day. Maybe use a little pedal modulation once in a while? 

It isn’t hard at all to hit the EPA numbers in this vehicle. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Puphayden851 (Mar 27, 2019)

Someone should carry a gallon of gas in a gas can and run there Passat or atlas dead empty and come here to report then we’ll talk some more about this! 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## KarstGeo (Jan 19, 2018)

No need to be a fanboi - just have a look at Fuelly...millions of miles of real-world use. 12 is way low but you can certainly get a tank like that if you try. On average, we have seen about 17 or so combined for the last 3 years with 70/30 city/hwy split in our 3.6 4Mo Atlas. I've seen a solid 24 on a 500 mile highway drive. I've seen 14 or so on a winter tank for all short trips around town. The average person doesn't seem to understand how average mpg work and looses their mind when they see a dash readout number that they expect to always match what the manufacturer says. Folks also don't seem to understand city vs. highway. Basically, unless you are cruising at 60 with the cruise on, you are not getting the stated highway mpgs. Ours is right where it should be and matches the mileage pretty closely of our prev. minivan. See below...looks spot-on to me. I will also say that if you look at that chart, it's skewed to the left a bit so while it's a somewhat normal distribution, you are more likely to get less than the upper range vs. more. I have an exhaustive write-up I'll find and post on mpgs etc.


----------



## KarstGeo (Jan 19, 2018)

From the Atlas Enthusiasts FB group:

MPGs. A hot topic here. Long post warning.
Summer/winter. Your mpgs are lower in the winter. This is due to several factors but one of the large ones is winter-blend fuels and longer warm-up periods for your car to reach operating temp (cars run more gas per unit air volume when cold – “richer”). People also tend to idle their cars longer in the winter to warm them up which eats gas. The manual has a nice graph showing the lower mpgs in the winter vs. summer.s driven by the gallons and you get mpg. The vehicle also calculates this for you (and an associated estimated range/miles to empty) based on the fuel being used but this is often not accurate and seems to be a sticking point with many owners. It works great when the driving is all the same (i.e. highway cruising) but not so great around town when the mpgs can vary wildly over a single drive – should it calculate the fuel usage based on the consumption when you gunned it at the last stop light or cruising at 35 on a secondary road? What about excessive idling in traffic where you are making zero mpg? It does it’s best but it’s an estimate and you should always hand-calc for accuracy.

You shouldn’t even bother with mpg discussions until you have a few thousand miles on your Atlas; the engine internals are new and tight and the vehicle’s mpgs will improve over that period – this is with all cars.

Looking at single tanks or single drives isn’t the way to look at mpgs – it’s just as snapshot. Long term (1000 miles) or over an oil change interval is the way to do this and will give you much more accurate assessment of your vehicle’s mpgs. Again, fuelly is a great resource for this.

The motor oil you use will have some impact - lighter weight oils will net a little better mpgs. The Atlas is typically using a 5W40 VW502.00 approved oil. You may find an 0W30 that is thinner overall and meets the same approval but it’s expensive and hard to find. I call this a waste of time in terms of improving mpgs. The manual does call this out as a way to maximize mpgs.

Summer/winter. Your mpgs are lower in the winter. This is due to several factors but one of the large ones is winter-blend fuels and longer warm-up periods for your car to reach operating temp (cars run more gas per unit air volume when cold – “richer”). People also tend to idle their cars longer in the winter to warm them up which eats gas. The manual has a nice graph showing the lower mpgs in the winter vs. summer.

The air pressure in your tires will have a huge impact. 35 psi is the factory recommended setting. If you are driving around on lower pressures you will drop your mpgs. You should check the air in your tires once a month. Running a little more may help out but you start trading off uneven tire wear in the center at v. high pressures. The Atlas has an indirect TPMS – it won’t tell you the pressures, you need to check them old-school. A digital tire pressure gauge is $10 on the Amazon and you can top off a tire in a minute with your kid’s bicycle floor pump for a few psi. The tires you run will also impact this based on the compound/tread/weight of the tire. Most modern all-season passenger vehicle tires will be about the same but if your un high-performance summer tires or larger all-terrain tires, you mpgs will drop. Larger wheels are often heavier and will impact mpgs.

How you drive. This it the #1 impact to mpgs. In stop/go if you are heavy on the throttle, you are killing your mpgs. On the highway, speeding will kill your mpgs. You will get much better mpgs at 65 than 75. Higher rpm = more gas to the cylinders = worse mpgs. The faster you go, the more air resistance you get the worse your mpgs. Using cruise control will substantially improve your mpgs on the highway. Anticipate stops so you gradually slow down/speed up will be much better around town. This is old-school knowledge stuff here that my dad taught me and is actually listed in the owner’s manual as ways to maximize mpgs.
Eco mode. The Atlas has an eco mode but honestly, how you drive will impact mpgs more. If you aren't an efficient driver eco mode isn't going to help you.
Short trips kill mpgs. My Golf with a 1.8 will see ~19mpg for short trips….it gets up to the mid-30s on the highway and is only rated to average ~25 overall.
Engine start/stop. This is more for reduction in emissions while idling but could provide _some_ mpg improvements. I'd call this somewhat worthless or on-par with the motor oil discussion above.

A/C. Using your a/c puts a load on the engine and equates to lower mpgs. On modern cars, the HVAC systems are so good that you actually get worse mpgs driving with the windows down from the aero-loss which has been proven many times. Just leave you car on auto if you have the Climatronic system. Running the a/c compressor is better (summer and winter - remember, a/c is drying the air even if you have the heat on and does provide de-fogging) and reduces the likelihood of stinky/moldy smells from not using the ac and moisture not getting cleared off the evaporator under the dash which is the source of the smell.
You can enable a handy tool using OBDEleven that will tell you how many gallons you will need to fill it up. The tank is ~18.5 gal. So if it says 12 gallons, you have ~6.5 left. 6.5 x avg mpg from the “since refuel” screen will tell you roughly what your remaining range is. For example: 15 gal on “gal to refuel” screen, avg since refuel = 24 mpg, 18.5-15=3.5x24=~86 miles left. Until empty. Your light may be on but the Atlas has a reserve that it doesn’t want you to tap so it is saying fill up with 86 miles to go!

Gallons of gas to full tweak
Long coding
Control unit: 17 Dash Board
Values:
Volume to be replenished:
Old value: No
New value: Yes

Another observation I've made is that the stated mpgs you see in the car are ~8% overstated vs. hand-calcs. You can adjust this using OBDEleven:
Adaptation
Control unit: 17 Dash Board
Name: Display correction of consumptions and operating range
Values:
Old value: 100 %
New value: 108 %

This is a big 3-row SUV and if you have the 3.6 VR6, it’s an older motor that isn’t particularly fuel efficient to make that 276hp/266 lb-ft. The difference on mpgs between those in the class getting better mpgs (Honda Pilot for example) for the average person driving ~12K miles/year is a few hundred bucks a year….certainly not worth trading your Atlas in and eating thousands in depreciation to save a few hundred a year.

The bottom line is that the Atlas can achieve the stated mpgs of 17-24 for the VR6 (17-23 4Mo/18-24 2wd). Fuelly data clearly shows this but the curve is biased to the low side looking at it suggesting, as many have noticed here, that it gets close to the stated highway mileage but lower than the stated city mileage. I have nabbed 25+ on the highway over long distances (1000 miles) and have seen as low as a 14 around town on 100% short trip tanks. The tank is small. This vehicle should have a 20 gal tank at a min to improve the range (range and mpgs are independent discussions and shouldn’t be confused with on another). The gas light comes on way too early. Nearly 3 gal left when the light comes on is a bit much. I believe that if the tank was larger and the gas light came on later many folks wouldn’t be as concerned. The average mpgs stated are just that, averages meaning there will be those on the bad side of the tail with lower mpgs and those on the good side with better b/c there is just no way to deal with all of the variables of the individual drivers/conditions.


----------



## Alpinweiss2 (Jan 9, 2017)

Thank you for the very thorough discussion on Atlas mileage. And thank you for putting us back on topic. The Atlas is not a perfect vehicle, but it does a lot of things really well. It is very comfortable, and carries a lot of people and/or cargo. My wife and I have so far been happy with it.

As previously stated, there are better vehicles available than the Atlas. Most of them cost substantially more money. But, I am confident that a BMW X7 has a larger fuel tank than the Atlas; so if this fits the budget…..

🍺


----------



## skydaman (Dec 16, 2005)

Alpinweiss2 said:


> Thank you for the very thorough discussion on Atlas mileage. And thank you for putting us back on topic. The Atlas is not a perfect vehicle, but it does a lot of things really well. It is very comfortable, and carries a lot of people and/or cargo. My wife and I have so far been happy with it.
> 
> As previously stated, there are better vehicles available than the Atlas. Most of them cost substantially more money. But, I am confident that a BMW X7 has a larger fuel tank than the Atlas; so if this fits the budget…..
> 
> 🍺


Larger tank but lower MPG and almost 3 times the cost:
2020 BMW X7 $113,845
*Months in Fleet:* 10 months *Current Mileage:* 30,182 miles
*Average Fuel Economy:* 17 mpg
*Fuel Tank Size:* 21.9 gal *Observed Fuel Range:* 370 miles


----------



## kazimir80 (Mar 15, 2019)

I believe the VR6 3.6L is the VWs reply to DieselGate. It is not fancy effective but is heavy duty reliable comapring to all "small" 2.0L turbo engines. But need to express, that consumption of VW Multivan 2.0TDI in europe is comparable with Atlas VR6, but double the price.

So well, yes everyone would like to safe on gas but still, go figure with the other costs... especially Turbo, Injectors, DPF, EGR, flywheel....


----------



## G-CAN (Sep 25, 2013)

Well, mine has 21000km on odometer, and needed valve cover gaskets replaced as it was spitting oil. Luckily I caught it 5 months before warranty ends. 

Car runs rough at around 1500 to 1800rpm, causing shaking on highway at slight acceleration. 
VW says it's normal. Tried another new one, does the same thing. Such an amazing feature. 

Who says that 20tdi consumes same fuel as VR6 must be drinking some good stuff and I'd like some. 

I still say worst part is gearbox.


----------



## mtbsteve (Dec 6, 2011)

Quick update on my mpgs. 700+ round mile trip up to the edge of Baxter State Park in Maine over the last few days. 4 people, gear/supplies for a few days and 70s - 80s and clear for weather. Some heavy traffic (Boston) and construction (in Maine) combined for20-25 total miles (1 hour) of the trip up. 24 mpgs on the way up (computer and hand calculated). Filled up at 325 miles, 13.5 gallons (I fill until I think it is going to overfill). 23 (computer only) on the way back with almost no heavy traffic but higher speeds, was mostly at 80+ (a lot of Maine has 70 or 75 mph limits once you get away from the downeast area). If I was driving slower, which is more normal for my highway drives, I expect I will do even better. Still pretty good for the speeds I was traveling at with all of the space. Around 4k miles on the 3.6 Atlas so far.

Based on those mpgs, the highway range @24 mpgs = approximately 425+/- miles, based on the computer. After about 340 miles, I am showing 85 remaining. If it is 19.5 gallons, then the range calculation leaves out around 2 gallons of reserve, on top of the ominous red gauge which is a gallon or 2 from empty.

As for sections of the logging company maintained road, the Golden Road, that is a rough surface, sort of paved in spots, mostly dirt, along with dirt roads leading up to some hiking, saw around 20-21 mpgs over 50-60 miles of that rough road. Plenty of washboard, rocks and holes in the road to keep you on your toes to avoid, can see wrecking these 21" tires/wheels easily. More sidewall would have been nice but since it is only for a few miles that this Atlas will ever see, no complaints from me. Wish I would have had time to install my mud flaps, will do in the next few weeks.


----------



## Alpinweiss2 (Jan 9, 2017)

Thank you mtbsteve for the great update. And we always welcome more beautiful mountain vacation photos. 

Here is my interim update for our 2021 Atlas 2.0T 4-Motion. We have not yet done a long trip, so my numbers are for local driving. 

We are entering summer in Nuevo México. The outside air temperature was 107° F when these photos were taken. The temperature was confirmed by the weather readout on my mobile smart phone. Around town, we seem to be averaging about 25 mpg.











There was an earlier discussion about oil temperature on the turbo engine. It was holding between 210° and 220° F that day. I was using light throttle, and not adding much stress to the turbocharger; no mountain passes or hill climbs. The elevation was about 5800 feet above sea level. I did not calculate density altitude.









The air conditioning was maintaining a comfortable cabin temperature.

So far, it appears our Atlas is well adapted to the desert summer. I will continue to monitor everything.

🍺


----------



## kazimir80 (Mar 15, 2019)

G-CAN said:


> Well, mine has 21000km on odometer, and needed valve cover gaskets replaced as it was spitting oil. Luckily I caught it 5 months before warranty ends.
> 
> Car runs rough at around 1500 to 1800rpm, causing shaking on highway at slight acceleration.
> VW says it's normal. Tried another new one, does the same thing. Such an amazing feature.
> ...


I didnt say, it is immortable, but most reliable. Be lucky, you really dont have to service modern diesels 

TDI vs TSI in the same application sure, however Multivan is bigger, higher and heavier, DSG 7 speed, Atlas is the opposite and Tiptronic 8 speed. So the consumption is almost the same but you have much more service problems with modern Euro6 TDIs.


----------



## Alpinweiss2 (Jan 9, 2017)

kazimir80 said:


> I didnt say, it is immortable, but most reliable. Be lucky, you really dont have to service modern diesels
> 
> TDI vs TSI in the same application sure, however Multivan is bigger, higher and heavier, DSG 7 speed, Atlas is the opposite and Tiptronic 8 speed. So the consumption is almost the same but you have much more service problems with modern Euro6 TDIs.


Diesels seem to have fallen out of favor for passenger cars in the North American market. The trend was already downward several years ago; and the Diesel emissions scandal at Volkswagen (and others) pushed the demand to almost zero.

In addition to the emissions issue, Diesels are difficult to justify economically for passenger cars in the US. Diesel engines are more costly to build and maintain than an equivalent gasoline engine. But Diesel fuel is not substantially cheaper (more expensive in many cases), and the Diesel fuel economy is not much better than a modern high-tech gas engine.

Diesel engines will continue to have a significant role in long distance heavy trucks and buses, for the immediate future.

🍺


----------

