Hesaputz is correct. In a manual transmission, you let off the gas to shift, then apply the gas again to back to the same acceleration. Doing this 4-6 times, opposed to 2-4 times is less efficient, especially with an engine that has all of its torque on tap from 1800rpms. If you keep a light gas pedal and shift much later in the revs, skipping a gear or two and "casually" coming to speed, then you will save on gas. The DSG just shifts gears up quickly because it is so efficient and the driver doesn't have to modulate the pedal during the shifts. Hence, the DSG obtains a 1mpg or so better efficiency than the MT.

Cheers!

Thanks for the feedback. It makes sense. When there is high and low option, the best route is often somewhere in the middle....

By the way, I tried the skipping 2nd to 6th andit is a little weird to go from 6K rpm down to 2K but the car still sped up with no problem. Not my driving style though.

- added -
BTW, let me see if my math is correct, but if on average the MT goes 27 miles per gallon, for every 10K milers, it will approximately need 370 gallons while the DSG will only need 357 gallons to go the same distance, saving a whopping 13 and some gallons per 10K miles.
Rounding to 15 gallons saving at a price of $4 a gallon (I would have $5 but some people will say it will never happen but we can see at the same time next year how $5 a gallon actually sounds) and a factory cost of $1480 for the DSG, a DSG driver will need to drive close to 250K in order to make up for the DSG cost – this is purely theoretical and obviously the DSG are going to complain that it is about the style, speed, comfort, actual price of the DSG, whatever, money talks and [sm=bs.gif]walks.

Actually, I didn't think my answer through thoroughly. I have both cars - my DSG and my daughter's 6MT. With DSG, the best technique is as described; accelerate moderately but briskly with a pretty constant throttle. Let the DSG choose it's most efficient shift points. Get up pretty quickly to a steady cruise, and ease off; don't accelerate slowly and constantly from light to light.
With the MT, it's probablybest to err on the side of early shifting; it feels natural to run the car out a bit more than DSG does in each gear, but the DSG truly does know best. For best mileage, though, don't shift quite as early as the DSG would.
As far as DSG vs manual, they're both nice;I don't think many people considerit as an economicchoice.With 80%or so of the A3's sold with DSG, a manual only offering wouldn't get the car off the ground in the US. I prefer the DSG, but I have several manual cars to drive when I need a fix. If I only had one car, I'd likely go for the MT.

nice feedback and congrats on the cars, now you are a devoted Audi Man! If you do not have a son, would you like to adopt me? I have all the advantages -over 30, own place, married, good job- and none of the disadvantages –out of diapers, does not need money although it is always welcomed, live far away, so????

I would like mine a 3.2 to try the DSG...

and your reasoning behind that would be....?

Well, it's a feel thing I've noticed between my two cars; no real data to back it up. Seems like the ECU programming is different betweem DSG and MT cars, and even between different DSG modes. The DSG, since it doesn't let off throttle to shift, seems to maintain boost a little better through low RPM shifts. The MT seems happier going up 200- 300 RPM higher. DSG usually shifts at 1900 - 2200 rpm under moderate loads in D, amazingly early to me.