C250cdi real world fuel consumption

[robtt]

Just ordered a C250cdi coupe with delivery in March. Sales guy said to expect 50 plus mpg.Anyone on here got this car/engine and if so what real world consumption is ? Presumably C250 saloon will be similar if anyone has one as well.

 

[Frugal]

Have just completed 2000 miles from new in c250cdi saloon manual at just over 50mpg brim-to-brim. 60%+ motorway driving and have not yet driven it hard. Engine is still quite tight so hope MPG results will improve further with some more miles on the clock.

 

[stroudwaterboy]

I have just completed my first 1000 miles and have averaged 53.3 both on the dashboard computer and at the pump. I have been driving as per the manual so no doubt it will go down now but I suspect by not a lot as it is plenty quick enough or so the speed limiter in the passenger seat reckons.

 

[Red C220]

A manual box will make quite a bit of difference.

You won't see 50mpg if it's an auto unless you are doing 75% + motorway miles.

 

[robtt]

Yup its an auto ! But high 40s mpg would be great after present car 33mpg average. Ordered dynamic handling pack so will be interesting to compare mpg using it against standard settings

 

[Frugal]

I have just completed my first 1000 miles and have averaged 53.3 both on the dashboard computer and at the pump. I have been driving as per the manual so no doubt it will go down now but I suspect by not a lot as it is plenty quick enough or so the speed limiter in the passenger seat reckons.

My dash computer reads about 3-4% better than actual but within reasonable tolerance - maybe need to deflate the tyres a bit ...

Having given the auto box a longish test drive I agree with Red that the transmission can make quite a difference.

 

[@MARK]

A manual box will make quite a bit of difference.

You won't see 50mpg if it's an auto unless you are doing 75% + motorway miles.

According to the MB website, you should be seeing better MPG out of the auto compared to the manual!

Urban (mpg) 41.5 (43.5)
Extra-urban (mpg) EUDC: extra-urban driving cycle. Testing procedures adhere to EU Directive 93/116. 61.4
Combined (mpg) 52.3 (53.3)

Auto in brackets

Also noticed a wonderful foot note

Fuel consumption The figures shown were obtained in accordance with the prescribed measuring process (Directive 80/1268/EEC in the currently applicable version). The figures are based on an individual vehicle and do not constitute part of the product offer; they are provided solely for the purposes of comparison between different vehicle models.

Do you think somebody has said something?

 

[Frugal]

The Vehicle Certification Agency repeats these combined figure 52.3 (53.3) for the coupe but shows better economy for the saloon with 17" wheels (both auto and manual are identical MPG) Select a search : Directgov - Car fuel data, CO2 and vehicle tax tools

 

[corned]

Fuel consumption The figures shown were obtained in accordance with the prescribed measuring process (Directive 80/1268/EEC in the currently applicable version). The figures are based on an individual vehicle and do not constitute part of the product offer; they are provided solely for the purposes of comparison between different vehicle models.

Reminds me of a car I went to see many years ago. A Vx Carlton CDi with 53,000 miles or thereabouts on the clock. Only there was a sticker on the speedometer which said that the mileage could not be relied upon. Then there was the threadbare driver's side carpet, the steering wheel worn smooth all the way round, the worn-through leather gear knob, the sagging driver's seat...

Basically these disclaimers are simply a dodge against being rightfully taken to task over a blatant lie to the general public.

 

[Red C220]

According to the MB website, you should be seeing better MPG out of the auto compared to the manual!

Urban (mpg) 41.5 (43.5)
Extra-urban (mpg) EUDC: extra-urban driving cycle. Testing procedures adhere to EU Directive 93/116. 61.4
Combined (mpg) 52.3 (53.3)

Auto in brackets

Also noticed a wonderful foot note



Do you think somebody has said something?

The figures quoted are utter bo11ox and I have 17" wheels!

Still I can't complain at 40mpg plus as I do a lot of local short trips and running Mrs Red C220 wherever she needs to be which is the entire purpose of this vehicle.

 

[@MARK]

The figures quoted are utter bo11ox and I have 17" wheels!
.

No there not because

Fuel consumption The figures shown were obtained in accordance with the prescribed measuring process (Directive 80/1268/EEC in the currently applicable version). The figures are based on an individual vehicle and do not constitute part of the product offer; they are provided solely for the purposes of comparison between different vehicle models.

So it's perfectly OK for them to quote the figure they do and at no time did they claim that YOU would get anywhere near them

So that's all fine then

 

[pjs]

Had mine nearly 2 months and done nearly 5k. Best tank 43mpg, worst 38mpg, measured brim to brim, ave 41.5mpg. Comp says ave of 43.5 since I got it. Only time you will get over 50mpg is at a 70-75mph cruise where it does 55mpg. 70% of my driving is motorway, rest is mixed. Good car, enjoy

 

[ace571]

These cars are definitely capable of pretty impressive figures, depends on how you drive them. My journey home today was a 60/65mph cruise with traffic for 50 mins:

That's a blurry 56.5mpg.

Comand consumption read out:

And this is on a 350 CDI, so a 250 will be significantly better.

Trouble is the power and torque are addictive, so your average will be hit when you're having fun

Like I said, all depends on how disciplined your driving is. Either way it's great having the best of both world's in one package

 

[Dieselman]

ace571.
your fuelly figure disagrees with your OBD, which one is correct? 56mopg sounds great, but your best fuelly figure is 39mpg.

 

[@MARK]

ace571.
your fuelly figure disagrees with your OBD, which one is correct? 56mopg sounds great, but your best fuelly figure is 39mpg.

The fuelly figure is over a tank. The above figure is over a 46 mile journey.

Of course they are different.

 

[Red C220]

ace571.
your fuelly figure disagrees with your OBD, which one is correct? 56mopg sounds great, but your best fuelly figure is 39mpg.

I've had numbers in the 60's on the dashboard after long motorway runs, but they are all a lie which is why I don't get excited when I see them (and also why I don't post piccys of them on here).

However, 600 + miles on a 60 litre tank on long trips is easily possible.

Hitman's numbers look good on fuelly, he does a lot of motorway and is knocking on the door of a 50mpg average, that is impressive.

 

[Dieselman]

The fuelly figure is over a tank. The above figure is over a 46 mile journey.

Of course they are different.

I worked that one out, but if the car is really capable of 56mpg over a regular 50+ mile journey, I would have thought it would maintain a higher tank to tank figure.
The best tank is only over 278 miles and only 20% city driving, so should in some way be reflective of the general consumption of the car, so likewise should be close to the OBD figure if that is reasonably accurate.

 

[ace571]

Hi Dieselman. A fair comment ^^. The only reason why I posted the picture above was to illustrate what the car is capable of if droven in a frugal way.

A tankful will clearly take in a much more diverse range of driving and conditions and in truth my driving style is pretty varied and I do enjoy the performance the car gives, as well as driving pretty sensibly other times.

The fuelly overall figure is as you say a much clearer guide of what the car is actually doing with all driving taken as a whole picture.

Also worth bearing in mind the car is only 5 weeks/3 odd k miles old.

Time will tell through fuelly how the car does long term. Overall I am very happy, the mpg for the performance on tap is pretty amazing. The shove this engine gives is awesome.

 

[@MARK]

I worked that one out, but if the car is really capable of 56mpg over a regular 50+ mile journey, I would have thought it would maintain a higher tank to tank figure.
The best tank is only over 278 miles and only 20% city driving, so should in some way be reflective of the general consumption of the car, so likewise should be close to the OBD figure if that is reasonably accurate.

On fuelly, the % of city driving is a number you put in yourself (you note on my figures I never bother with it at all).

But I have seen on drives back from Heathrow on an evening, a nice steady cruise round the M25 and up the A1 can see numbers close to 50mpg yet once I get off the A1 at Peterborough for that last 25 mile, it is very easy to run that number right down on the final cross country sprint.

Add a typical Saturday of driving into town followed by the local farm shop then butchers etc and before you know it the tank average is soon back down to 35ish.

Indeed I believe we have had this very conversation before where I posted a high number then you questioned the fuelly numbers

Fuelly gives a tank to tank average only and normally, you get many different journeys out of a tank of fuel over a number of days.

That number below this post which right now shows 35.7 is the average since the car was new. The tool also shows me the average on the last 10 tanks (you can't see this) which is actually 36.1. I am sure the average for my last journey (which was a 2 mile drive to the doctors this morning) will be much much lower.

An average is just that. A mathematical equation used to interpret data for comparison purposes and should be used with care.

Oh and one more thing.

As for the mileage per tank only being 278 miles, I see he only needed 30 litres to fill after 278 miles so 278 miles out of half a tank sounds fair to me.

If you are going to call out the numbers, you need to look beyond the headline figures and look at the whole picture. I would expect you of all people to be more thorough than that.

 

[Dieselman]

If you are going to call out the numbers, you need to look beyond the headline figures and look at the whole picture. I would expect you of all people to be more thorough than that.

I am being, but unfortunately you are missing the point of what I am saying, possibly I'm not being clear in my wording.

I deliberately chose a low mileage fill-up because given that ace had indicated that only 1/5th of that tank was urban driving and that on steady cruise the car can give fairly high mpg according to the OBD, then I thought that fill may be a reasonable indication of how the OBD is calculating the fuel used.

Lets say that 50% of the fill was at steady cruising and gave 50+mpg indicated. Not unreasonable if only 20% was urban and the car really can achieve good mpg when cruising. (which is actually the whole question)
So 140 miles at 50mpg, but the whole fill at only 39mpg average.
that means the other 140 miles were at 28mpg, which seems pretty low if only 40% of those miles were urban, the rest cruising.

Bear in mind, this is the best tank to tank fill so far.

The only way I can see these figures adding up is if the OBD is incorrect by some margin, as it appears that the car isn't really giving the high mpg figures that are being reported when cruising.


I had kind of worked out what "average" means and that the OBD is over a specific journey and the tank to tank fill is over the compete tank...

We did have the discussion previously and I had accepted that these cars are just not that good on juice, but then ace reports that his is very good as displayed on the OBD.