C63 PPP MPG Difference?

[Diab2005]

I've been looking at a standard c63 for a while as was concerned about the potential increase in fuel costs a ppp may bring.

Recently though I've seen a ppp version that ticks most of the boxes so I was just wondering if anyone knows if the ppp actually does make the fuel consumption worse and if so how much worse?

I'm comfortable with the fact it's not going to be great on mpg but just dont want to make it twice as bad by opting for the ppp version.

I'll await the "if you're concerned about fuel consumption dont buy a c63" comments but hopefully there will be some informative comments mixed in there

 

[mark44]

Really depends on how and where you drive. I expect it would be pretty easy to get better mpg from a PPP/507 than a regular c63 if you drive gently. But make no mistake, the M156 does not encourage gentle driving. Personally, I've NEVER seen over 30mpg, but I've frequently seen 10mpg

...but if you're concerned about fuel consumption dont buy a c63

 

[Diab2005]

I would say mixed urban and motorway driving but only 6k miles a year. How would you get better fuel economy in a ppp if it's more powerful? I wouldnt say I would be driving it gently lol but then also wont be risking points on my licence constantly either

 

[Diab2005]

I think the main point is ...is the ppp worse for fuel economy than the standard edition. I can accept the mpg on the standard.

 

[mark44]

I would say mixed urban and motorway driving but only 6k miles a year. How would you get better fuel economy in a ppp if it's more powerful? I wouldnt say I would be driving it gently lol but then also wont be risking points on my licence constantly either

I meant a driver with a heavy foot in a standard 63 vs a light foot on a ppp.

Driven identically the ppp is going to be slightly worse on the mpg, but I reckon there next to nothing in it

 

[whitenemesis]

What mpg figures do MB give for each variant?
Yes, I know they're unlikely to be seen in real world driving but as a comparison...

 

[mark44]

Just had a look in the old 2012+2013 204 saloon/estate brochures.

No separate info for ppp, but fuel consumption on c63 + C63 507 is listed as identical - 'officially' 15.5-33.6 (23.5 combined) - as is CO2.

So there you have it, more power with no additional fuel consumption. It's a no-brainer

 

[Yex]

OP, buy the car that suits you and your budget and don’t worry about fuel consumption. As mentioned above I doubt there is any noticeable difference in MPG between a standard M156 engine and a Mercedes upgraded one. If there is any improvement in fuel consumption with the increased torque of the PPP car it will be negated by your use of your right foot when you just have to hear the exhaust bark at you

Buy one and enjoy it. I waited too long to buy my C63 but now just love it

 

[MrRight]

6000 miles at 13mpg will equate to roughly 2100 litres of petrol and with a rough shell v power price per litre of roughly 1.45 per litre equals 3k on petrol... gbp 250 per month

if you can get overall mpg up to 15 then it will only cost you gbp2600 in petrol or roughly gbp 215 per month which is a bargain if you ask me

best get loyalty points wherever you device to fill up

 

[Skd884]

I've been looking at a standard c63 for a while as was concerned about the potential increase in fuel costs a ppp may bring.

Recently though I've seen a ppp version that ticks most of the boxes so I was just wondering if anyone knows if the ppp actually does make the fuel consumption worse and if so how much worse?

I'm comfortable with the fact it's not going to be great on mpg but just dont want to make it twice as bad by opting for the ppp version.

I'll await the "if you're concerned about fuel consumption dont buy a c63" comments but hopefully there will be some informative comments mixed in there

No difference get it bought.

 

[GeeJayW]

If it has more performance and you use it, fuel consumption will be higher (fuel economy worse).

Over a standard test cycle which mandates a speed-time profile, speed and acceleration for both is the same for both versions. So for cars with a similar road load profile (weight, rolling resistance and aero drag) the power needed to complete the cycle is the same, the fuel used and CO2 produced is the same.

On the road, where additional available power and acceleration are used, more fuel is used as a result.

 

[Bobby Dazzler]

I've been looking at a standard c63 for a while as was concerned about the potential increase in fuel costs a ppp may bring.

Recently though I've seen a ppp version that ticks most of the boxes so I was just wondering if anyone knows if the ppp actually does make the fuel consumption worse and if so how much worse?

I'm comfortable with the fact it's not going to be great on mpg but just dont want to make it twice as bad by opting for the ppp version.

I'll await the "if you're concerned about fuel consumption dont buy a c63" comments but hopefully there will be some informative comments mixed in there

If the fuel consumption of the PPP concerns you then the standard C63 is not the right car for you. Both will consume fuel at the same rate if driven in the same way and on the same journey.

 

[sirius9]

PPP or not, you will most likely end up remapping it to 520bhp. Most of the C63 owners does anyways, with secondary cat delete as well.
Which technically negates the question of whether PPP cars will give you worse fuel economy.