Fuel consumption

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.

RichWeath

Active Member
Joined
Dec 22, 2010
Messages
80
Good evening everyone.

Can anyone share there experienced MPG with a r129 SL, mine is the1993 300-24, she seems a little thirsty, I've had a clk500 before, and I feel there isn't much difference in fuel consumption.

Hard to say exactly what I'm getting as mpg dial is only for that moment.
I would say my average is between 18 and 22mpg, on 70/30% motorway/street driving
 
That's a decade or 2 of efficiency development for you. The SL is heavier, has less efficient injection system, less efficient drivetrain and the sixes have to work harder to haul it around.

Over the last 20 years, I've averaged 20mpg in my 500. When I look in my owners book, the difference between quoted figures for the V8 and the sixes is a couple of mpg at best.
 
On a good run and driving like a someone has placed an electric shock generator on the accelerator, i can get around 28 MPG from my SL500 (R230), But it doesn't take too much of using the smile pedal to get right down in the MPG figures ....
 
The R129 is a heavy car and in stop/start driving the consumption is pretty bad. The official 'city' mpg figures (1997 models) were:

280 - 16.1
320 - 15.4
500 - 12.9
600 - 12.1
SL60 - 10.9
 
thanks for the responses everyone.

Took my girlfriends car to work today as needed a little run, for comparison doing 80mph on the motorway i was sitting at 3700/3800 revs, which is identical to my SL, my girlfriends car is a 1 litre Citroen C1.

I would have thought a car with 3x the engine power and size, would have done this speed at a much easier rev rate, even taking into account the extra weight.

I feel the SL really deserves that extra 5th gear it doesn't have
 
The M113 V8 in the CLK you had is a surprisingly frugal V8 on a run. Not so around town of course. In fact I seem to remember Mercedes having to meet certain US fuel consumption legislation at the time.
 
thanks for the responses everyone.

Took my girlfriends car to work today as needed a little run, for comparison doing 80mph on the motorway i was sitting at 3700/3800 revs, which is identical to my SL, my girlfriends car is a 1 litre Citroen C1.

I would have thought a car with 3x the engine power and size, would have done this speed at a much easier rev rate, even taking into account the extra weight.
They didn't worry about economy when the SL was being designed. Sitting in the powerband at cruising speed was considered much more desirable, and the 24v is a little peakier.
 
I feel the SL really deserves that extra 5th gear it doesn't have

It's an '80s design, so the 4-speed box was quite reasonable for its time (I think 3-speed autos were still quite common then). Not sure when a 5-speed box became an option but of course it was standard from the '96 facelift onwards.
 
They didn't worry about economy when the SL was being designed. Sitting in the powerband at cruising speed was considered much more desirable, and the 24v is a little peakier.
They certainly didn't :)

and i have to say, that readiness to give power between 60 and 90mph is awesome!
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom