• The Forums are now open to new registrations, adverts are also being de-tuned.

MPG

Bigdrew

MB Enthusiast
Joined
Jun 26, 2016
Messages
1,000
Location
Scotland
Car
Ml350 bluetec clk220 CDi w209 amg styling 18in amg wheels cla 220cdi amg sport c class w205 amg line
Hi all
Quick Question i have a c class 250d cdi i put in £40 of diesel which I think was about 29 Litres the car only done 271 miles one that I wasn’t driving any motorway miles on that my question is what should this car be getting to the gallon and what is mine getting many thanks
 
Was that measured tank top to tank top? Anything else is not much better than a guess.
I would like to think is does rather better than 42mpg..
Yes but very rarely get in 9th gear unless I hit a long stretch of road
 
Hi all
Quick Question i have a c class 250d cdi i put in £40 of diesel which I think was about 29 Litres the car only done 271 miles one that I wasn’t driving any motorway miles on that my question is what should this car be getting to the gallon and what is mine getting many thanks
To come up with the mpg this is how I go about things ...

First I convert the number of litres into gallons and as one gallon is equal to 4.5461 Litres, depending on how accurate I want your results to be, I either stick with this actual figure, or round it up or down to give you a good estimate like the examples below:

a) 1 gal (UK) = 4.5461 Litre - accurate
b) 1 gal ≈ 4.55 Litre - rounded up
c) 1 gal ≈ 4.54 Litre - rounded down

Then to find the number of gallons involved I need to convert the 29 litres used by dividing that with one of the figures listed above. I just want a good estimate so tend to go with c) 4.54 when ever I to do a conversion for myself.
Putting that into the math gives us:

29 ÷ 4.54 = 6.39 gal (rounded up)


So, if you travelled 271 miles on 6.39 gallons of fuel, it means your mpg would be the miles covered divided by the number of gallons of fuel used:

271 ÷ 6.39 = 42.41 mpg (Rounded down)
 
See post 2.....and I didn't go through all that!
Of course I saw post 2, I'm not one for skipping posts in threads especially when there are only 3 of them.

Just wondering 2 things ALFAitalia firstly does it bother you that I put the information I did in my post and secondly can you think of any good reason why I took the time, trouble and effort to do so?
 
Lol..... since you ask....its the talking down to people in a condescending way thats a slightly annoying festure in your (usually way too long) posts..... which is why, as I mentioned before I thought you might be AI when you first joined. LIke anyone other than a compete retard could not convert litres to gallons and then to mpg. The OP has not even said whether he measured his mpg tank top to tank top yet.
Do feel free to block me...its real easy!:D
 
Litres divided by 4.5, then divide the miles covered by the figure obtained, gives a figure easily good enough for government work. One minute's work with a calculator, and with the example given, you get 42.05 mpg. Simple, innit? I suppose there are people who are bothered about accuracy to half a mile per gallon, but not many I think; certainly I'm not (just as well, as I drive an ML63...). It's not rocket science....
 
Lol..... since you ask....its the talking down to people in a condescending way thats a slightly annoying festure in your (usually way too long) posts..... which is why, as I mentioned before I thought you might be AI when you first joined. LIke anyone other than a compete retard could not convert litres to gallons and then to mpg. The OP has not even said whether he measured his mpg tank top to tank top yet.
Do feel free to block me...its real easy!:D
Thank you for your reply ALFAitalia and very enlightening, it's just a pity you came out with a lot of what I consider to be most unpleasant, rude and unnecessary rhetoric without answering either of my questions. and you think nothing about continuing to pass insults in my direction. May I remind you of the forum rules and in particular:
"Users of MBClub.co.uk
when posting

  1. must not submit libellous, insulting, antagonistic, racist, aggressive or otherwise abusive Content about any individual or company. ..."
I would like to put you wise as I have never in my life talked down to any one in in a condescending manner and I strongly resent you saying that I do, further more I find being labelled as AI highly offensive and now for a second time, so while you might think it is okay to say so, I certainly do not. I think you should be far more careful how you choose your words, as while some other members here might think you are funny and seem to back your retorts with emojis, maybe this is not so for all of us. You only have to look at the wider picture outside the forum as to how AI can have profound affects on people, so a bit of thought is what is needed here for sure, as words are strong and can have serious implications and consequences and should be used wisely.

Who do you think you are to say my posts are "usually way too long"? I can't see anything in the rules about the length we should be posting and to my mind if I were to be pedantic, I could quite easily say the same about your reply in post 2 which could have been answered by simply stating "42mpg" and not your long winded reply:
"Was that measured tank top to tank top? Anything else is not much better than a guess.
I would like to think is does rather better than 42mpg.."

On the other hand, I see a lot of one word or single sentence replies, not a lot of information contained in those I'm thinking and where is the help to fellow members in that 'little' lot I wonder all horses for courses right?

I may give full, detailed and comprehensive replies and they can take me a long time to research, compile, edit and write, adding them into my post, I do so at my own pleasure with the aim of helping fellow members as best I can. I don't get any accolades from it, and 99% of the time I barely even get an acknowledgement in the form of an emoji. Never no mind as the forum is not only here for the members like you ALFAitalia remember, but a lot of guests tap into it too, internationally I might add, so while you get a lot of stalwarts that are in a clique together on things like forums in various guises, all of whom like to support each other, on this one I guess they don't see or read my posts and probably you are one of those too I guess, which I get, but I'm fine with that. This isn't my first forum, it isn't even my first male orientated forum either, I've seen all this sort of thing before, you folks that know everything well that's great with me, and I don't mind if you don't want to see me or my posts, but maybe, just maybe, there are some members that do ... did that ever cross your mind ALFAitalia?

You assume an awful lot ALFAitalia, and may I politely remind you that there are a lot of members on the forum and a lot like I have already mentioned, guests that visit too, and not all have the same aptitude or ability to do something be it car mechanics, detailing, physical activities, or math etc. So rather than single anyone out as you have chosen to do, or label their lack of ability as being a retard, a label/word I have never liked, I gave the example of how 'I' work out mpg when knowing the number of litres used and miles covered to work with. You do realise ALFAitalia, that by taking on board the question posed by the OP and giving up the answer of 42mpg, you are taking ownership that the OP didn't know how to find the mpg and thus have also insulted them along with myself.

What might be a simple arithmetic sum for some, might require a little help for others, so what's the harm in putting up the explanation here, given that this presented as a prime opportunity? None as far as I could see, it didn't take me long to do, and I really don't know why you had to pick me up on it like I had done something wrong: are you trying to make me look small, foolish, be antagonistic or is it simply you have something personal against me?

Oh no ALFAitalia, I don't believe in blocking anyone, to me all members have something to say and even if I don't like it or disagree with it, that is no reason to shut them out, I don't like cliques, never have done, not as a child in school from the very earliest of ages, from clubs I've belonged to as an adult and now forums in my dotage, you can't stop 'em, but I'll be blowed if I have to go along with them. I've always been a lone thinker and happy to go along with that, my lovely old mum and dad taught me well and I know right from wrong, hasn't failed me yet so I will keep chugging along doing my best for those I can along the way ... simples.
 
Thank you for your reply ALFAitalia and very enlightening, it's just a pity you came out with a lot of what I consider to be most unpleasant, rude and unnecessary rhetoric without answering either of my questions. and you think nothing about continuing to pass insults in my direction. May I remind you of the forum rules and in particular:
"Users of MBClub.co.uk
when posting

  1. must not submit libellous, insulting, antagonistic, racist, aggressive or otherwise abusive Content about any individual or company. ..."
I would like to put you wise as I have never in my life talked down to any one in in a condescending manner and I strongly resent you saying that I do, further more I find being labelled as AI highly offensive and now for a second time, so while you might think it is okay to say so, I certainly do not. I think you should be far more careful how you choose your words, as while some other members here might think you are funny and seem to back your retorts with emojis, maybe this is not so for all of us. You only have to look at the wider picture outside the forum as to how AI can have profound affects on people, so a bit of thought is what is needed here for sure, as words are strong and can have serious implications and consequences and should be used wisely.

Who do you think you are to say my posts are "usually way too long"? I can't see anything in the rules about the length we should be posting and to my mind if I were to be pedantic, I could quite easily say the same about your reply in post 2 which could have been answered by simply stating "42mpg" and not your long winded reply:
"Was that measured tank top to tank top? Anything else is not much better than a guess.
I would like to think is does rather better than 42mpg.."

On the other hand, I see a lot of one word or single sentence replies, not a lot of information contained in those I'm thinking and where is the help to fellow members in that 'little' lot I wonder all horses for courses right?

I may give full, detailed and comprehensive replies and they can take me a long time to research, compile, edit and write, adding them into my post, I do so at my own pleasure with the aim of helping fellow members as best I can. I don't get any accolades from it, and 99% of the time I barely even get an acknowledgement in the form of an emoji. Never no mind as the forum is not only here for the members like you ALFAitalia remember, but a lot of guests tap into it too, internationally I might add, so while you get a lot of stalwarts that are in a clique together on things like forums in various guises, all of whom like to support each other, on this one I guess they don't see or read my posts and probably you are one of those too I guess, which I get, but I'm fine with that. This isn't my first forum, it isn't even my first male orientated forum either, I've seen all this sort of thing before, you folks that know everything well that's great with me, and I don't mind if you don't want to see me or my posts, but maybe, just maybe, there are some members that do ... did that ever cross your mind ALFAitalia?

You assume an awful lot ALFAitalia, and may I politely remind you that there are a lot of members on the forum and a lot like I have already mentioned, guests that visit too, and not all have the same aptitude or ability to do something be it car mechanics, detailing, physical activities, or math etc. So rather than single anyone out as you have chosen to do, or label their lack of ability as being a retard, a label/word I have never liked, I gave the example of how 'I' work out mpg when knowing the number of litres used and miles covered to work with. You do realise ALFAitalia, that by taking on board the question posed by the OP and giving up the answer of 42mpg, you are taking ownership that the OP didn't know how to find the mpg and thus have also insulted them along with myself.

What might be a simple arithmetic sum for some, might require a little help for others, so what's the harm in putting up the explanation here, given that this presented as a prime opportunity? None as far as I could see, it didn't take me long to do, and I really don't know why you had to pick me up on it like I had done something wrong: are you trying to make me look small, foolish, be antagonistic or is it simply you have something personal against me?

Oh no ALFAitalia, I don't believe in blocking anyone, to me all members have something to say and even if I don't like it or disagree with it, that is no reason to shut them out, I don't like cliques, never have done, not as a child in school from the very earliest of ages, from clubs I've belonged to as an adult and now forums in my dotage, you can't stop 'em, but I'll be blowed if I have to go along with them. I've always been a lone thinker and happy to go along with that, my lovely old mum and dad taught me well and I know right from wrong, hasn't failed me yet so I will keep chugging along doing my best for those I can along the way

Blaa blaa blaa ....get over yourself. I'm now blocking you so I wont have to read your waffly nonsense. Have a nice day!
 
As an addition.....as far as me being rude.....my golden rule is that before I hit the post button is that I ask myself "would I say that to his/her face?".....if it NO....then I wont post it. Others could do worse than adopt that idea!! Id like to think I'm a likeable and reasonable bloke in real life......hopefully that usually comes across in posts....equally, in real life I have no real time for idiots and I'm really not one for small talk about nothing TBH......no I'm not saying that @DesireeE is in anyway an idiot by the way.

Anyway.....lets get back on topic......yay!
 
First I convert the number of litres into gallons and as one gallon is equal to 4.5461 Litres, depending on how accurate I want your results to be, I either stick with this actual figure, or round it up or down to give you a good estimate like the examples below:

a) 1 gal (UK) = 4.5461 Litre - accurate
b) 1 gal ≈ 4.55 Litre - rounded up
c) 1 gal ≈ 4.54 Litre - rounded down
Nope, you do not get to choose to round up or round down. The decision as to which is contained in the number. In this case 4.5461 rounds up to 4.55. Anyone with a scientific training knows this.
 
Thank you for your reply ALFAitalia and very enlightening, it's just a pity you came out with a lot of what I consider to be most unpleasant, rude and unnecessary rhetoric without answering either of my questions. and you think nothing about continuing to pass insults in my direction. May I remind you of the forum rules and in particular:
"Users of MBClub.co.uk
when posting

  1. must not submit libellous, insulting, antagonistic, racist, aggressive or otherwise abusive Content about any individual or company. ..."
Nothing Alfaitalia said contravened the forum rules in my opinion and it is rather disingenuous of you to quote from from them when , as a new member, you were somewhat critical of them yourself.
 
Last edited:
Nope, you do not get to choose to round up or round down. The decision as to which is contained in the number. In this case 4.5461 rounds up to 4.55. Anyone with a scientific training knows this.

The figure 4.546 is so deeply imprinted in my brain and memorable that thinking about rounding doesn't occur. The missing 1 represents an error of 0.02 % so i'm not going to worry about it.

I had a boss once who was an Engineer. His telephone ext. number obviously chosen by him or a predecessor was 3142 so no one ever forgot it. There's rounding in that number too but no one worries about that either.
 
Last edited:

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom