Porsche Macan Forum banner

Macan S fuel consumption

205K views 557 replies 293 participants last post by  Grey Coupe  
#1 ·
On Wednesday I had the pleasure to test drive Macan S for about 2 hours. After 1,5h I checked the average fuel consumption and I was shocked: 20.4 l/100km which is 11.53 miles/gallon with average speed 51km/h (32 mph).

Half of the ride was on the highway with speed ~130-170 km/h (80-105 mph), the other half was a city ride. I did 3 launch control starts and also went for max once. Nevertheless, the average fuel consumption is way over what I have expected.

I would love to hear from those who already received their Macans and what have they experienced.

Image
 
#434 ·
17 S. It's the wife's car more than mine, but I drive when we're together and I'm the only one who records mileage data. Likely at least 20 miles worth of fuel data (35k total).

Hand-calculated (Fuelio actually):
20.36 avg
23.88 Best
16.28 Worst (towing utility trailer with 2 dirt bikes)

Car computer mileage is occasionally the same as hand-calculated, but generally reads 0.5 - 2 mpg high.
 
#437 ·
Nice to see some people are correctly doing hand calculations, rather than relying on inaccurate computer, which overestimates mpg.
See most people who post do not indicate which Macan model they have, I wonder if S gets better mileage vs. Turbo?

The Porsche official EPA has them the same (at least they did for MY2016) Hard to believe that pushing the Turbo results in the same mpg as pushing an S.
 
#444 ·
Ditto
 
#443 ·
Do you use 'sport' or is this muddling around in 'comfort'? Best I see in around city driving with the Cobb is about 11.4 mpg. I use 'sport' because the car seems happier there. I can spring to 20+ on long trips also using 'sport' and the PACC, which doesn't like 'comfort'. This is a 'S' model.
 
#446 ·
My average over 33k of driving is 21.7 mpg's. 70% highway, 30% suburbs and city driving. I have somewhat of a heavy foot so I am really quite pleased with the mpg's.
 
#447 ·
Base vs S/GTS/Turbo MPG?

Scanning through this thread, it looks to me that the majority of owners with 6-cylinder Macans are averaging in the 19-20 mpg range.

After about 6000 miles, I, too am averaging in that range. This is compared to long term averages in my last two vehicles (same driving pattern over long periods) of about 24.5 mpg in both my first gen X1 and my GLC300 (so both roughly comparable size/weight--I know the X1 is a little smaller/lighter, but was also older tech.

I did not read this whole thread, and I saw a couple of responses from base Macan drivers, but most responses seem to be from 6-cylinder drivers. It strikes me that mileage (and actually more-importantly, RANGE) is an under-appreciated argument for looking at the base.

I know many people say, if you are driving a Porsche, you shouldn't be worrying about the mileage. But for me, the issue is not one so much of gasoline cost as it is the principle, but also the very practical matter of how often I have to fill up. In particular, I averaged about one fill up every 7 days in my last two cars, and about one fill up every 6 days in the Macan. Not a big deal, you may say, but still, over the long term a time drain that one could argue mitigates the benefits of a quicker 0-60.

Don't get me wrong, I absolutely love this car and budget allowing, I would stick with the GTS over a base. But, I wonder, base drivers, how are you doing mileage wise?
 
#449 ·
Scanning through this thread, it looks to me that the majority of owners with 6-cylinder Macans are averaging in the 19-20 mpg range.

After about 6000 miles, I, too am averaging in that range. This is compared to long term averages in my last two vehicles (same driving pattern over long periods) of about 24.5 mpg in both my first gen X1 and my GLC300 (so both roughly comparable size/weight--I know the X1 is a little smaller/lighter, but was also older tech.

I did not read this whole thread, and I saw a couple of responses from base Macan drivers, but most responses seem to be from 6-cylinder drivers. It strikes me that mileage (and actually more-importantly, RANGE) is an under-appreciated argument for looking at the base.

I know many people say, if you are driving a Porsche, you shouldn't be worrying about the mileage. But for me, the issue is not one so much of gasoline cost as it is the principle, but also the very practical matter of how often I have to fill up. In particular, I averaged about one fill up every 7 days in my last two cars, and about one fill up every 6 days in the Macan. Not a big deal, you may say, but still, over the long term a time drain that one could argue mitigates the benefits of a quicker 0-60.

Don't get me wrong, I absolutely love this car and budget allowing, I would stick with the GTS over a base. But, I wonder, base drivers, how are you doing mileage wise?
Base owner reporting in. After 21,000 miles of 90% suburban driving at an average speed of about 35 mph, I’ve averaged 21.8 mpg with one (winter) tank below 20 mpg. Very cold weather has a bigger effect than a heavy foot. That’s actual mileage —- the PCM estimate is 1-1.5 mpg higher than actual. On the highway I easily get 27-30 mpg. And as you noted, it’s easy to get over 400 miles on a tank.

Just for comparison, my wife’s Cayenne S averages 18.5 mpg for similar mixed suburban driving, with 23-24 mpg on road trips. But it has a huge 25.6 gallon tank. Both have outstanding highway range. I’ve heard of diesel Cayenne’s going 800 miles between fill-ups.
 
#448 ·
I set the computer for 1000 miles, got up to 987 today, close enough.

Avg consumption: 26.1 mpg
Avg speed: 39 mph

This is combined city and highway in really shitty winter conditions at high elevation with 91 octane gas. The vehicle has never seen 93.

I've had up to 32 mpg highway on a road trip to Cheyenne on a warm day with zero traffic.

2.0T
 
#451 ·
Just filled up today 15.7 MPG mixed 80% city 20% Highway. Turbo. Used Sport button ~10% of the time. I drive fast.
Manually calculated MPG as always.

BTW my PCM says I get 20.5 MPG, LOLOL.
 
#452 ·
I'm not improving my mileage... 14.8 mpg on average in the almost 3 years since I took delivery of the car –see picture, although the best mileage when for the Macan is wrong; I must have got the total car mileage wrong in one of my log entries. Compare that to the average and best mileage on my wife's pug-in hybrid Cayenne, 39.4 and 79.8 respectively –granted, ultra-high mileage is achieved at the expense of our household's electricity bill.
 

Attachments

#469 ·
Last 5 fills I’ve been getting around 14mpg (17l/100km). During the winter. Mostly city driving but not too agrressive. 30km trips.
Macan S. Manually calculated after fill up. Trip calculator seems to measure a different average as it usually shows just under 17mpg (14l/100km).
This is more like it for me. 2018 Macan S, driven 7500 miles till now, 80% city driving with Auto Start Stop activated. I have a heavy right foot so I do tend to pass/accelerate aggressively at times. The best has been 15.xx, the avg has most been 14.xx. Data from PCM. Maybe manual calculation will give less??! Hardly using Sport mode lately; if I do, it instantly drops to 13.xx.
 
#455 ·
18 w/auto start-stop turned off.
 
#456 ·
Averaged over 8300 miles since November '18, now 25.0 mpg. This is with 93 octane, weekly commutes to the mountains, passing when it is safe to do so, and normally running between 4 and 9 over the posted speed limit. The last 1000 miles or so I've been running a Race Chip in Sport mode.
 

Attachments

#472 ·
So the trip computers definitely seem off across different models....
I’ve had a loaner ‘17 Turbo for the last couple of weeks and was able to compare consumption with my ‘18 S.
My commute has been identical and the weather just a couple degrees warmer. I’ve had 2 fills with this car.
Turbo’s trip computer (1) typically shows between 15/16 mpg but my hand calc at fill up comes to 13 mpg.
Again approx 3 mpg off, same as with my S.
Interesting to note that the Turbo used approx 1 mpg more than my S.

For anyone posting please mention whether your figures came off the trip computer or manually calculated.