A160 Blue Efficiency - not that efficient!

[LeighW]

I've got one of these as a courtesy car at the moment. I've been watching the mpg with interest. Bearing in mind this is supposed to be fuel efficient, and even has the (irritating to me) stop/start facility, I have to say the fuel consumption is pretty woeful. I took this pic this morning, after using it for two days' commute:

31mpg? Granted, the car is brand new, so is pretty tight, but the Mitsi Colt that we normally use for the commute returns 45mpg+ on the same journey, even my 320 manages mid twenties. Is this 'Blue Efficiency' all marketing hype?

It also has one of the hardest driver's seats I've ever sat on! After only a few miles, I'm getting a 'numb bum', for want of a better way of putting it, and being a base model, the seat base has no tilt adjustment to help matters.

 

[A210AMG]

My wifes old shape 2.1 A210 does 40mpg, never seen less than 35mpg...

probably marketing hype on the lower models....once you have done enough miles for the engine to be lose its probably time to swap.

My dads E320CDi Estate does 40mpg on every journey he does now, granted its on 105K miles but it just gets better and better. With the space saver type on coming back from Dover @ 55mph he saw 63mpg and the range was over 1000 miles !!! Think I would rather have a big engined car as my dads and be more impressed. Surely that little A class needs to be doing 50mpg miniumum and up to 70mpg on a steady run so make people think?

 

[blondebier]

I would've thought the W169s would be loads more fuel efficient and the W168s. Particularly as "Efficiency" is in the model name...

Our W168 A160 cdi does 55MPG without any effort at all. On a long run it'll do over 60MPG.

 

[thefair1973]

I wish my ML did 40mpg!! I wish it did 30mpg!!! But that is shocking economy for a supposed ECO car. I'm balancing out the ML with a Fiat 500 1.3 M-Jet Diesel and it's 67.3mpg

 

[Sp!ke]

Thats shocking.

 

[horsesuitedfool]

Are you towing the 320 to work.......?? haha

 

[verytalldave]

My 2004 W203 does much better than that on a reasonable run. Usually around that figure around town, but on a motorway run rarely less than 40mpg - sometimes over 50 if I take it easy.

 

[LeighW]

I'll reset the computer before I go home later (assuming I can work out how... ), and I'll drive as steady as I can to see what mpg I get then. I've hardly been thrashing it either, my commute is pretty busy traffic wise, I rarely get above 50mph.

It also has another irritating 'feature', it tells you the gear you should be in for maximum efficiency. It's useless, telling you to change up to the next gear at 1700rpm. If you follow it's suggestion and change up, the engine labours in the next gear, and any attempt at increasing speed results in it telling you to change down again!

 

[Mactech]

I did quite a bit of 'out of town' testing in varoius Mercedes cars earlier this year and found that most types produced very similar figures. The A160 CDI was really not much better than the larger cars.
My finding here:

http://www.mbclub.co.uk/forums/general-discussion/66916-main-road-mercedes-motoring.html

 

[Apial]

I drove a new MINI Cooper Clubman D the other day. Its a 1600cc engine and it had only done a couple of thousand miles. I reset the computer and set off from cold on a 20 miles run and was amazed to see that the average fuel consumption was 68.2 mpg for the journey!
Swap the tyres from the 17" to 15" skinnies and I bet you could get nearer 80 mpg once the engine has been run in.

 

[elpeterol]

A180cdi 45mpg in town, 55mpg on a fast run and 38mpg with a big roof box!

 

[LeighW]

Well, that's much more impressive. Or not. Maybe it's because it's so new, it only has 48 miles on the clock?

 

[Sp!ke]

Are you sure the handbrake wasnt on?

 

[A210AMG]

That realy is poor. How much is that model?

simply no point at all in owning it.

A Golf TDi or BMW 1d would do nearly double that.

 

[HowardD]

That realy is poor. How much is that model?

simply no point at all in owning it.

A Golf TDi or BMW 1d would do nearly double that.

Yes. The 118d has never averaged under 52mpg, we never use the efficient dynamics stop start, or pay attention to the suggested gear.

And thats a combination of motorway runs and town trips with an averagely heavy right foot.

 

[Robbo]

there must be something wrong with it. Our petrol engined W169 can easily get over 40 mpg, so the diesel should better that.

 

[A210AMG]

Might as well have a A200 turbo although I think this has been dropped...

 

[Mudster]

Mrs M has an A150 auto(2008 model) it's average mpg is mid 30's without me going outside to check, about 36mpg I think.

I'ts covered just under 2000 miles and is less economical than my Saab.

The auto really doesn't help, plus most journeys are less than 15 minutes. (Mrs M has Multiple Sclerosis and this is her mobility vehicle).

I have to say I was expecting more.

I get he feeling when I drive it that anything over 30 mph I'm having to cane the thing to get it moving, it's that that's killing the economy.

We chose it simply for it's seating position, for someone with a diability the seat height makes life so much easier to get in and out.

 

[LeighW]

there must be something wrong with it. Our petrol engined W169 can easily get over 40 mpg, so the diesel should better that.

It's not diesel, it's petrol. It's pretty gutless too, our 1.1 Colt feels as quick, and that only has 74bhp!

 

[ROBB]

I think that the basic issue with small engined cars (i have found) is that you have to rev the nuts of them to go anywhere. more revs = less fuel economy.period

people are wooed by "ooooooooooooh - only 1.2l" ; basically its bobbins.
my C220CDI will happily do 50mpg every day unless stuck in traffic and upto 60 on long journeys.

Oh - and it has to be driven errr vociferously to get below 40mpg

rob