Miles per gallon

[iamamanc]

Hi
Just wondering if anyone knows the average mpg for a 1995 W124 300d 24valve jobby (non turbo) I think it has a 70L tank

Cheers
Adrian

 

[Dieselman]

Probably about 35 mpg.

 

[Ian B Walker]

Probably about 35 mpg.

Just a little ambitious, more like 19mpg sorry, just seen its an oil burner. My apologies.

 

[bolide]

Auto: 30-32 mpg all the time. Peaking at 33-34 mpg on long trips. Worst would be 27 mpg towing a big trailer

Manual: about 2-3 mpg better, I'd think

Nick Froome
www.w124.co.uk

 

[smeeeee]

and quite a bit worse around town I've noticed.

Haven't had a chance to fill up yet but the first half of the tank went really slowly on the run down from Preston (cheers Ian ) but the second half (running to Tesco's, lots of short town trips) has been much quicker, I expect my average to be closer to 25

 

[Roger Jones]

The figures I have in the MB Technical data passenger cars handbook are:

City 9.3 L per 100 km (30.37 mpg)
90 kph 6.0 (47.08 mpg)
120 kph 7.6 (37.17 mpg)

It goes up to 1993, but I'm guessing your chassis is 124.131 and the engine 606.910 and that it is an auto.

There's a handy conversion site at:

http://www.convert-me.com/en/convert/fuel

 

[iamamanc]

Thanks everyone
Ian: are you serious with 19mpg or are those Lancashire miles and US gallons???
Roger: I suppose that those specs are for a brandnew car under test conditions, now that would be nice

It seems 30-35 is the general estimate

The reason I'm asking is I have noticed, or should I say my wallet has noticed that compared to the 91 300D the milage is a lot worse.
Yes it is the 124.131 - 606.910 auto. One of the older mechanics at Merc Care in Leeds told me that mileage wise I would notice a big difference. I seem to be getting about 320-350 miles to a tank whereas I would usually get about 400 from the 91.
I have changed the fuel filters (o-rings as well!!), and runback pipes so I don't think leaks are an issue.
The car is a lot quicker, smoother and responsive when compared to the 91 300D so maybe it's just the price I will have to pay - It is nice though.

Is it a 70L - 18.5 gallon tank on this chasis??

Thanks
Adrian

 

[TVRTASMIN]

Maybe the cats are getting choked up with carbon. I've also noticed on mine that the inlet tract gets carboned up with the EGR connected.

As an aside, does anybody have a pair of downpipes with the cats to loan me.
I intend to fabricate a jig to produce a stainless steel catless downpipe system from the manifolds.
A good discount would be offered if anybody is interested.

Cheers

Ian

 

[Roger Jones]

Adrian

Yes, of course, valid for vehicles when new.

If the 1991 300D is the 124.130 chassis with the 603.912 engine, the figures given are:

City 30.37 mpg
90 kph 45.56 mpg
120 kph 35.76 mpg

That is, the later car should be more economical.

All W124s have a 70L fuel tank, including 9L "spare", unless the optional 90L tank was fitted or it is a T or long-wheelbase, in which case the capacity is 72L, or a 420 or 500, in which case it is 90L including 11L spare.

 

[Roger Jones]

Further on the new-car issue, the 120 kph figure for my 1991 W126 300SE is 25.22 mpg. At 140k I'm getting 24.53 mpg over the whole 10k since acquiring it and 26.36 on the latest six fill-up rolling average. I'm expecting those figures to rise, having recently fitted an engine preheater (as they did by 2 mpg on my E320 Coupé). I usually reckon the 120 kph figure to be the indicative one for overall use.

 

[Dieselman]

Thanks everyone
Ian: are you serious with 19mpg or are those Lancashire miles and US gallons???
Roger: I suppose that those specs are for a brandnew car under test conditions, now that would be nice

It seems 30-35 is the general estimate

The reason I'm asking is I have noticed, or should I say my wallet has noticed that compared to the 91 300D the milage is a lot worse.
Yes it is the 124.131 - 606.910 auto. One of the older mechanics at Merc Care in Leeds told me that mileage wise I would notice a big difference. I seem to be getting about 320-350 miles to a tank whereas I would usually get about 400 from the 91.
I have changed the fuel filters (o-rings as well!!), and runback pipes so I don't think leaks are an issue.
The car is a lot quicker, smoother and responsive when compared to the 91 300D so maybe it's just the price I will have to pay - It is nice though.

Is it a 70L - 18.5 gallon tank on this chasis??

Thanks
Adrian

350 miles from 70 litres is 22.75 mpg. Thats appalling, are you sure with your figures?
A W210 300 turbo will normally see about 30-32 with mainly town work.

 

[TonyVianoAmbiente]

I have been doing a careful check of fuel consumption since collecting my "new" 1995 E300 Diesel three weeks and 1800 miles ago. I'm getting 30-32 mpg around town, and 38 mpg on a run with 50% on the motorway at 80 mph and 50% on fast A roads at 60-70 mph.

I reckon that 40 mpg would be possible on fast A roads at 60-70 mph.

My W124 has the OM606 Multivalve engine with 134 bhp. It has covered 108,000 miles from new.

 

[iamamanc]

Hi
New fuel and air filters plus return pipes have been fitted, there are no obvious leaks. I had the air intake manifold off a couple of weeks ago when I did the return pipes - all ok. I have added a fuel system cleaner to the last five full tanks - no smoke when starting or at kickdown (well not noticable.)
No splutters or farts it's really responsive and seems to be running well.
Starts first click after 3-5 seconds pre heat even after standing for a week
I think I have covered all the easy stuff.
Where do I look next ??

Pump timing, injectors???

I've never been down this road before.

Could I just have a lead boot???

I think I'm gonna have to do a Sunday type motorway run and see how she does when I'm wearing a trilby

Thanks for the responses

Cheers
Adrian

PS Tony have you posted any pics of your car anywhere

 

[Dieselman]

Given your information and that the car starts Ok and goes well with no smoke, I think the car is Ok.
The pump timing can be checked, it should be 14 deg ATDC measured through the port in the rear side of the pump and viewed through the timing guide on the front timing case.

Check other things like binding brakes and that the gearbox is selecting 4th gear.
Oh, and take your space boots off..

 

[iamamanc]

Thanks

Brakes are fine. I've just had the trany rebuilt and it's bang on.
I think I will do a more scientific study of my usage like writing down the mileage when I fill up. 3 months of tedium and then do an averageing - sort of thingy

The problem with my lead boot is: I have never had an automatic where the kick down plus response is so good apart from a Honda Legend (petrol) back in the mid 80's. You have to admit - it is bloody good fun going up hills watching the car behind you getting smaller, I know I know it's no wonder I'm only getting 7 miles to the gallon

Anyway, cheers for now
Adrian

 

[TonyVianoAmbiente]

PS Tony have you posted any pics of your car anywhere

No, I haven't had the chance to take any yet! But when I do, I will post them on here.

Tony

 

[smeeeee]

avaerage is better than I supposed after filling up.

I'm getting 29 mixed 50% motorway and 50% to Tesco's

not bad I guess, I imagine it's not so hot on short trips because when it's cold it seems to hold onto the gears for longer, thus revving higher and consuming more fuel. I'm thinking of adjusting this down a bit actually, as I favour a more lazy style of driving and don't really like high revs in my barge...

 

[Dieselman]

Holding the gears when cold is normal, it's to warm the engine up quicker. Not really required onthe diesel so you could try adjusting thepressure cable to lower the shift point.

 

[smeeeee]

why's it not really so useful on a diesel Mr Dieselman?

 

[Dieselman]

Bacause a diesel doesn't suffer with fuel condensation giving reduced performance and oil dilution.
On a petrol some fuel condenses and hides in the outer regions of the cylinder eventually passing into the oil whereas a diesel injects the fuel directly into the swirling gas so burns nearly all of it with no condensation. This is why a diesel gives the same performance either hot or cold.