60 mpg

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
I've got a much older 1.4tdi polo and I average 55mpg most of the time, it never falls below 52mpg no matter how I drive it. If I do motorways only this goes to 58-60mpg. Its also worth nothing that these german diesels do hold their value very well so even if you do buy one you won't lose as much as a petrol on resale. I'm VERY surprised you are getting 45mpg in a C180, almost doesn't sound right, they aren't renowned for their economy.

Oh an I forgot to add that mine's remaped, so you will see better mpg then what I've stated if you keep it unmapped. Another thing that surprised me was the ride quality of the little polo (and this was a car I bought after being in a 5 series and before that a C-class), its very very impressive for what it is. But if I was doing motorway miles all the time i'd rather crash in a Golf.
 
Last edited:
When considering what to buy, always remember that the mpg figures claimed by manufacturers are at best optimistic and you would have little chance of achieving anything like them in the real world.

A car which is claimed to have a figure in the range of 55-60 mpg would probably return the same or little better than the 45mpg that you achieve in your current petrol vehicle and diesel is more expensive at the pump of course.


Heard that many many times, bit of a cliche - as 99% of drivers i find easily beat manufacturers figures with ease :dk:- some of the miracle figures:eek: i have seen are something you would expect in the 23rd century.
If i were a car maker i would be publishing owners mpg figures -they are far superior to official ones.
 
My 450 sl averages 18 - 20 mpg , that should make you feel better !
My new Ford Focus 1.6 tdci only averages 52mpg and certainly does not look, feel or drive like a Merc . As others have said , unless you really want/need to change , it is unlikely that you will get much short term saving by making a trade-off.
 
I have a W203 (2004 vintage) C200 cdi auto estate. The long-term average according to the onboard computicle is 49.5 mpg, that's a good mixture of town, city and motorway mileage. On a motorway I can easily get better than 60 mpg, with a best of 68. As others have said, how you drive it has the greatest effect on consumption. If you stay below 70 you'll be in the 50s, if you go above the consumption rises quite a lot. Smooth driving, anticipation so you avoid having to pull away from rest (a big killer of economy) and judicious use of cruise control on the motorway will go a long way to achieving your goal.
 
For what it's worth, I'm routinely getting 55mpg (tank to tank) out of my 206 2.0 HDi daily driver on a commute of 15 miles of mixed motorway and single-carriageway roads. Not german but could be a cheap 'n' cheerful option alongside the Merc....
 
i have a c220 cdi coupe (manual) i get, at best 65mpg (motorway 70mpg) and as low as 40mpg (short trips) the average over 16,000 miles is 48mpg, they are cheap to buy second hand, i saw a 2002 with 130,000 mile on the clock go for as little as £2800, tyres are around £45, and a service (12,000 mile) can cost as little as £40 to £50 (if you do it yourself), if i try i can normally get 700 mile to a tank (i think its 65 litre)....road tax is £165 per year btw

Very interesting, im slightly tempted..

But I wonder why the extra urban mpg figures for that car are 49.6.. these figures are generally almost impossible to obtain, never mind to better them! The petrol C180 states 45.6 which I can just about do! With a feather light foot.
 
So my new job is further away than I would like, but thats life.. I can hit 45mpg on my petrol c180 which is outstanding I think, but I want a little more!

Looking at the diesel versions of my car they can squeeze 50mpg.. Thats OK I suppose..

But then I look at the Audi (A3) and BMW (3) variants, both of which do over 60MPG!! This is for 2.0 litre diesels, the Mercs are ~2.1 I think.

Its a shame.. Are there ANY Mercs that will do 60MPG? (except A/B class)
Im in the £6k car market.
edit: General or Engine? Thats a tough one :)

If it has to me a MB I'd buy a £2k diesel A-class for the commute and a £4k 190 16v for the week-end. But if you're after one car that ticks all the boxes I can't see a Mercedes doing what you're after. Fuel economy is one area where MB having been lagging behind for quite a while.
 
Surely you have to look at the figures and saftey if buying another 'daily'

I know I would rather be in my E class than a 206 if either were to crash.....

Plus having another car = insurance, tax, mot, service,

I agree at your value I'm supprised without going down the A class A180Cdi say your not going to get 60mpg on a regular basis.
 
Intresting that some people question other peoples post on here. Maybe they should be asking how such a mpg is achieved.
Must admit I was seriously considering a remap to increase the mpg and reduce my traveling cost. The car has enought power for me. I spoke to a few people and after following the advice given, my car mpg increased from 45mpg to the current 55mpg. I am happy with the mpg I am getting and after doing a lot of work and replacing a lot of parts it is becomming a dependable car. I am actually starting to like it a lot.
2002 220CDI, 145,000 miles on the clock, Serviced every 10,000 miles, 55mpg:bannana:
 
I've just seen a tv ad for a new kia rio offering 88mpg ! Oh if only these things fit inside a minibus i wouldn't even car if it went slower !!
 
I haven't seen much evidence of the "scientific" mpg figures from what I can manage! so would be more inclined to real world real peoples figures.
 
I haven't seen much evidence of the "scientific" mpg figures from what I can manage! so would be more inclined to real world real peoples figures.

Which suggests that you also find manufacturers' claims to be generally unachievable ?
 
Gentle driving on the motorway on Friday saw me getting just over 70mpg...

What car is that with Nick? Your profile shows a forklift, I doubt that obtains 70mpg! ;)
 
Far too many variable here;driving style,types of roads etc
If you want better mpg -diesel in general will clearly return more-but it depends on how many miles per year you do-as you will in general pay more for diesel than an equivalent petrol model in the first place.
Having said all this amazed by the Volvo XC90 D5 auto-took it to London with the family-stayed Hilton Metropole then went to visit Cousins in Woolwich and then returned to Winchester via a very busy slow M25/M3 friday afternoon(serves me right) and it returned an average for this journey of 39mpg :thumb:
 
Which suggests that you also find manufacturers' claims to be generally unachievable ?

Well Jag claim 11mpg urban of XJ V12 - all owners are hitting 18mpg:dk:
I've heard owners of V6 petrol cars claiming 45 mpg on a cruise - just don't see that happening even in a 4 cylinder 2 .0 litre :confused:
Heard of several Corvette owners are claiming from 25mpg 34 mpg:eek:
Merc E55 average is 21 mpg - which seems to be easily beaten by majority of owners
The figure to avoid is the extra urban or old at steady 56 mph -that is unrealistic - a bit like believing 140 mph speedometers on mid range family saloons. I always go by the average MPG figure
Of course this is all anectodal , but from my experience only a very few get below makers claims (me being one of them btw)

I have a W203 (2004 vintage) C200 cdi auto estate. The long-term average according to the onboard computicle is 49.5 mpg, that's a good mixture of town, city and motorway mileage. On a motorway I can easily get better than 60 mpg, with a best of 68. As others have said, how you drive it has the greatest effect on consumption. If you stay below 70 you'll be in the 50s, if you go above the consumption rises quite a lot. Smooth driving, anticipation so you avoid having to pull away from rest (a big killer of economy) and judicious use of cruise control on the motorway will go a long way to achieving your goal.

Heard that cruise control should only be used on flat roads as it is inefficient on hills and uses more fuel ?
 
Last edited:
tali;1281933 Heard that cruise control should only be used on flat roads as it is inefficient on hills and uses more fuel ?[/QUOTE said:
It seems that way, but the CC maintains the desired speed, rather than slowing down slightly as the human CC does up hills. My experience is that CC makes no measurable difference, based on around 400 return trips from J4 to J36 on the M6....
 
Just living up to my name here, :rolleyes: but I think I'm right in saying what many forget is that diesels will do no fewer mpg from start (cold) than when running (hot).

Where as a petrol :doh: like mine is, well, it must be terrible mpg while cold despite the 45 mpg (when hot). I think maybe the choke (or control functions) must really open the tap when cold for smoother running?? Who knows, but you would probably have a better overall mpg (not just the figure when hyper milage-ing) if you get going straight away and into cruise asap.

But make sure the car is tuned up well also, clean plugs, remove carbon, tyre pressures etc. it all helps. ;)
 
Cruise control can use a lot of fuel trying to maintain speed up a steep incline, so it would be better from an economy point of view to disengage it and use your right foot as desired.
When using on motorways it can give better consumption because of the smaller speed hysteresis loop. By this I mean CC will pretty much maintain the desired speed whereas with the best will in the world, driving by foot the speed can vary around the desired value by 5-10mph, using extra fuel to reach the higher speed, then wasting more by letting the speed drop too low and having to accelerate back to the desired speed once again. Of course I could drive by foot and really concentrate on maintaining a set speed, but isn't that what cruise control is for? And wouldn't my time be better spent concentrating on the traffic around me on the road, instead of on something the car can do better?
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom