- Messages
- 10,047
I might be. I'm not at home enough to find out.
Reviews The Fuel Consumption Thread
- Thread starter Betty Swollocks
- Start date
I might be. I'm not at home enough to find out.
Well, all my travel is leisure. I get a lot of time off work and I like to spend time traveling and seeing the World. Cars and traveling. My two biggest passions!
I assumed it was mostly business, then I do envy your lifestyle after all. lol
Gianclaudio
Aerodynamic Artisan
- Messages
- 3,954
Betty, I'll be in Buenos Aires at november too, from 14 to 24. May be we can iron out our differences and talk cars with a good steak and some wine. Let me know if you like the idea
- Messages
- 10,047
Actually, that might work. I have a few other factors at play but there's a good chance I'll be in Buenos Aires at least during those times. Will keep you informed.
This could be a fun thing. Meeting other people from GCF all over the world. I'm going to be in Doha in February so I could tick off @Tumbo then.
- Messages
- 10,047
That would be so cool! But unfortunately I am in Europe Jan-March next year
Oh. Shame.
I'm sure I'll be in Europe during January to March. I have to go to work at some point.- Messages
- 10,047
That's one place I've never been.
Great place mate, where men are men and sheep are nervous. lol
If you ever do get the opportunity to come give me a bell and I'd be only to happy to meet up.
- Messages
- 10,047
Mercedes-Benz C 220 BlueTEC (W205)
55.9 mpg
5.05 l/100km
Notes:
1) There is a big difference between the two legs in terms of observed figures. I'm happy that the results are accurate though, especially when you take the average between the two legs and get the final figure of 55.9 mpg. I think maybe there was a bit of a headwind for the first leg, and the second leg had a tailwind.
2) As with all my tests, the figures are measured by driving mostly at 120 km/h (74 mph), and using any "efficient" settings if available. Tyre pressures were verified before driving also.
3) The on-board computer figures are rather inaccurate. I have experienced this with other Mercedes-Benz vehicles before.
55.9 mpg
5.05 l/100km
Notes:
1) There is a big difference between the two legs in terms of observed figures. I'm happy that the results are accurate though, especially when you take the average between the two legs and get the final figure of 55.9 mpg. I think maybe there was a bit of a headwind for the first leg, and the second leg had a tailwind.
2) As with all my tests, the figures are measured by driving mostly at 120 km/h (74 mph), and using any "efficient" settings if available. Tyre pressures were verified before driving also.
3) The on-board computer figures are rather inaccurate. I have experienced this with other Mercedes-Benz vehicles before.
- Messages
- 10,047
For comparison, here are two tests I've previously performed.
Mercedes-Benz C 200 CDI BlueEFFICIENCY (W204)
48.1 mpg
5.87 l/100km
BMW 320d (F30)
56.9 mpg
4.96 l/100km
Mick Briesgau
Tire Trailblazer
- Messages
- 6,822
Very precise figures, up to two digits behind the . I like that.
Thanks Betty.
PS if that's an excel sheet, I'd be very interested in it. Perhaps you care to share it .
Thanks Betty.
PS if that's an excel sheet, I'd be very interested in it. Perhaps you care to share it .
- Messages
- 10,047
That is an Excel sheet. I'm happy to share it but I don't know how to. I converted it into a PDF and then a jpeg in order to display here.
- Messages
- 18,001
- Name
- Giannis
- Messages
- 10,047
I've tried uploading the resource but it won't let me upload an Excel file. Only a PDF.
Similar threads
Trending content
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
-
Easy, Lazy, "Creativity Stifling" AI Prompt Generated Automotive Design
- Latest: Design FIRST