Diesel Diesel WLPT consumption now 19.2 l/100km!

[stickshifter]

Okay, I can do liters, meters, and kilometers, but when you start combining them (liters / 100 km) its just too much. Y'all are crazy.

 

[DaveB]

Okay, I can do liters, meters, and kilometers, but when you start combining them (liters / 100 km) its just too much. Y'all are crazy.

Crazy is working in MPG Miles Per Gallon. But which Gallon? Only 4 or 5 countries in the world use Gallons and yet they can't agree.
We can assume that Ineos is using Imperial Gallons in their figures but re they changing this to US Gallons for the North American websites.

 

[SilverNZ]

anyone know how to convert these figures to uk mpg

I was told a few years ago that you divide 284 by the l/100km figure and that gives you UK MPG. I've used it over the years but never actually checked the maths. It seems about right though.

So in this case 19.2 l/1000km would be around 14-15 UK MPG

 

[DaveB]

I was told a few years ago that you divide 284 by the l/100km figure and that gives you UK MPG. I've used it over the years but never actually checked the maths. It seems about right though.

So in this case 19.2 l/1000km would be around 14-15 UK MPG

I learnt years ago to open up google and type in XXL/100kmx to US MPG. and you have your answer
Or
Save this to favourites

Unit Converter

Quick, free, online unit converter that converts common units of measurement, along with 77 other converters covering an assortment of units. The site also includes a predictive tool that suggests possible conversions based on input, allowing for easier navigation while learning more about...

www.unitconverters.net

 

[stickshifter]

Crazy is working in MPG Miles Per Gallon. But which Gallon? Only 4 or 5 countries in the world use Gallons and yet they can't agree.
We can assume that Ineos is using Imperial Gallons in their figures but re they changing this to US Gallons for the North American websites.

It sounds like you thought I was being serious...

 

[DaveB]

It sounds like you thought I was being serious...

No. I don't take anything too serious anymore

 

[globalgregors]

I wouldn't overrate that.

There are two possible reasons: Either it's a bug, or it's true.

I think it's the first. Consuming +19l/100 km in the long run with a diesel is almost impossible.

But if it's the second cause, it will simply be the grenadier's death sentence. In that case, I would only be concerned about my refund. For the money saved I then had many resources to buy and/or restore or have restored a classic Defender.

Yup, noting you’re talking the long run. Short run is another matter… managed to average 33l/100km in the Karakum Desert (Turkmenistan) in a 2.2l SD4, sand was like talc. Thought we were going to have a long walk on more than one occasion.

 

[Davman]

The worst fuel consumption I have had on a long run is in my Landcruiser 200 V8 TTD running up the centre of OZ getting buffeted with all kinds of headwinds etc. I averaged around the 25l/100km mark over a couple of thousand kilometers.
Mind you at the time I was driving at around the 110 kph mark towing a 3000kg Caravan.
Towing the same caravan with a 3lt V6 Amarok netted me around the 18l/100km mark.

Without any towing the Landcruiser would average around the 13lt/100km, the Amarok around the 11lt/100km.
Sorry, but I cannot see in what real world testing environment that the Grenadier would even get close to 19.1lt/100km - Even if it is built like a brick on wheels.

 

[emax]

So do I.

Even if I 'beat' my C220 CDI over the Autobahn at 230 Km/h: At top-speed, if I measure, clearly above 12 L/100Km. But this is absolutely a peak value. It's anyway impossible to bring the average much above 8 L/100 Km.

Regular consumption (i.e. driving 'normal') is below 6 L / 100 Km.

 

[mhensch]

according to my local sales agent (who had direct communication with Ineos Germany), the ridiculous WLTP numbers must be a software bug.

He received appearently reliable and updated information for internal use about the WLTP measures:

The fuel consumption for the diesel will be in a range between 276 and 319g CO2; depending on optional features like differential locks, snorkel, BFG tyres etc.

 

[Davman]

I noticed that the ability to print off the ORDER SUMMARY of previous orders, as well as the PDF SUMMARY in the configurator - is not working. Hopefully they are fixing the WLTP issues.

 

[emax]

I have saved my previous order (from June) and it tells the same nonsense. Exactly identical (wrong) numbers.

 

[DaveB]

So do I.

Even if I 'beat' my C220 CDI over the Autobahn at 230 Km/h: At top-speed, if I measure, clearly above 12 L/100Km. But this is absolutely a peak value. It's anyway impossible to bring the average much above 8 L/100 Km.

Regular consumption (i.e. driving 'normal') is below 6 L / 100 Km.

My C250 CDI at 140KMH returns 4.2l/100km. Unfortunately in Australia I am risking prison doing 140kmh
I have once pushed 200kmh but the drivers here have poor road skills so it is very risky

 

[WhiteBear]

My C250 CDI at 140KMH returns 4.2l/100km....

Sry, I dont believe that. Think you make a miscalculation like Ineos does with WLPT consumption.

 

[emax]

> My C250 CDI at 140KMH returns 4.2l/100km

That would be extraordinary. But mine is 22 years old and driving in Germany in densely populated areas like ours this is simply an obstacle course. Traffic lights, 30 Kmh areas, traffic jams, it's a mess.

My wife was recently in Mannheim, about 65 Km from here and two thirds were Autobahn: 4.8 L / 100 Kmh. And if I intentionally try to safe fuel on some country roads here, I as well have around 4.8 to 4.9 liters - but not at 140 Kmh. And that's no carefree way of driving, I then concentrate to avoid any superfluous braking.

 

[DaveB]

> My C250 CDI at 140KMH returns 4.2l/100km

That would be extraordinary. But mine is 22 years old and driving in Germany in densely populated areas like ours this is simply an obstacle course. Traffic lights, 30 Kmh areas, traffic jams, it's a mess.

My wife was recently in Mannheim, about 65 Km from here and two thirds were Autobahn: 4.8 L / 100 Kmh. And if I intentionally try to safe fuel on some country roads here, I as well have around 4.8 to 4.9 liters but not a 140 Kmh. And that's no carefree way of driving, I then concentrate to avoid any superfluous braking.

That is the figure on long highway runs. 5.2 is common on 80% highway. It is a 2014 model with 101,000 on the clock. 6.7 around town. I run it on sport mode not economy.

 

[emax]

@blueTdi
The C-class diesels are incredibly economic. 4.2 is really astonishing, but between 4 and 5 liters per 100 Kmh is not impossible if you don't have to brake too often and you maintain an increased tire pressure. And concerning the air-drag, the current C-class have excellent values.

 

[emax]

@DaveB
I guess, you would not rate 4.2 Liters @140Kmh a 'usual' result, I guess. ;-)

 

[DaveB]

@DaveB
I guess, you would not rate 4.2 Liters @140Kmh a 'usual' result, I guess. ;-)

No. That is on a long run over 5 or 6 hours non-stop. Varying between 110 and 145. I would normally sit at around 130-135 when the spped limit is 110

 

[emax]

Well that makes sense.

I have a driver here which has (partially) similiar values. From the biggest database of fuel consumption.

This one is however the best in his class with a long range average of 4.6 L/100 Km.

But have a look at the graph, it shows similiar (and even clearly better) fuel economicy if you look at the subsequent pages (English version see button upper right corner):

Dieselverbrauch: 4,61 l/100km - Mercedes-Benz, C-Klasse, C 250 CDI T

Mercedes-Benz, C-Klasse, C 250 CDI T

www.spritmonitor.de