re. factory instrumentation accuracy & mpg

Mike Del Tergo mdeltergo at
Sun Jan 26 21:28:56 EST 2003

Well, I'm pretty sure its not the weight diff since both car spec virtually
identical #'s.  I'm going with the chip.  I had the same mileage degradation
when I put a QLCC in my 5KTQ.  I just put 3300 miles
no a stock" 91 TQA, in temps from 75F to -10F and bumper to bumper traffic
to 130MPH.  It averaged 23+ MPG 95% highway.  130K miles, UFO's, 215 60 15.
The fuel computer "worked" about 20% of the time, other wise it was way off.
My S6 Avant averaged 22 MPH on the highway even when easy on the gas.
So far for the price/performance/looks differences, I'm in the 200 camp.If
you end up parting the Avant, and getting Fuchs spacers let me know.

From: ben swann <>
Yes - peeve # 2 on the new aquisition of the '91 200 20v tq avant.  Has
SJM chip with 2.5 bar pressure transducer AFAIK.  Gas mileage abysmal
on the way home - 20MPG and no I was not easy on the gas and probably
averageing over 70.  My '87 5000 tq would get an easy 28 mpg under the
same conditions.  I thought Motronic was supposed to be superior at
engine management, including economy, over CIS (CIS/motronic).

What's up with that?

Message: 9
From: Brett Dikeman <>

-wider(and different) tires
-several hundred pounds heavier
-flares probably don't help with airflow
-higher valvetrain resistance(probably negligible, but...)
-oil different viscosity, perhaps, that what you run?
-oh yes, and with the chip, did I mention "a lot more HP"?
Accelerating onto the highway full throttle can influence average
economy considerably if you have a chip.

The new MSN 8: advanced junk mail protection and 2 months FREE*

More information about the 200q20v mailing list