C400 4matic - Consumption
#1
Junior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
C400
C400 4matic - Consumption
Dear all,
The goal of this thread is to get a better idea of the C400 real consumption.
MB website say 9.9L in Canada, vs. 7.6L in Germany...
So what would be interesting is to listen at the C400 holders experience.
Rgds
The goal of this thread is to get a better idea of the C400 real consumption.
MB website say 9.9L in Canada, vs. 7.6L in Germany...
So what would be interesting is to listen at the C400 holders experience.
Rgds
#2
MBWorld Fanatic!
Im interested too. I suspect that the FE ratings are a little rosy. Of course, they will vary widely depending how its driven. I suspect that the FE ratings are based on ECO mode. I'm sure that if you drive it in Sport plus those ratings go straight down the sh*tter. Like all turbo cars full boost means very low fuel efficiency so light throttle is a must for best FE. Heck the whole idea of the blower is to allow more gas in !
#3
Super Moderator
The German ratings will be running the EEC/ECE/NEDC driving cycle by a computer on a rolling road dynamometer without aerodynamic influence, tyre size influence etc. The test conducted in this fashion is highly repeatable vs. actually driving the cycle on a flat road with no wind. It is however highly optimistic.
It should be used for comparative purposes only.
It should be used for comparative purposes only.
#4
MBWorld Fanatic!
The German ratings will be running the EEC/ECE/NEDC driving cycle by a computer on a rolling road dynamometer without aerodynamic influence, tyre size influence etc. The test conducted in this fashion is highly repeatable vs. actually driving the cycle on a flat road with no wind. It is however highly optimistic.
It should be used for comparative purposes only.
It should be used for comparative purposes only.
Ergo German manufacturers FE estimates are highly repeatable in the lab but otherwise useless, as has been widely reported. I always wonder why they don't simply use what has been proven to be better elsewhere. That doesn't apply only to the Germans (EU) but to other places too. Why does everyone have to reinvent the wheel everytime!
#5
Super Member
My first tank I got 540 kms for 65 litres is what I filled up with. 90% city. 11.97L/100km...20mpg
A lot better than the 16L/100km of my 507, 14.7mpg!
A lot better than the 16L/100km of my 507, 14.7mpg!
#7
Super Moderator
Ergo German manufacturers FE estimates are highly repeatable in the lab but otherwise useless, as has been widely reported. I always wonder why they don't simply use what has been proven to be better elsewhere. That doesn't apply only to the Germans (EU) but to other places too. Why does everyone have to reinvent the wheel everytime!
To relate to reality an index of 20% is usually added.
Trending Topics
#8
For mercedes and bmw 25% would be more accurate, and still optimistic, VW not lagging much behind.
EU norm is widely adapted to accomodate EU tax brackets. If actual consumption and Co2 emissions, were to form basis for the taxation, BMW , VW and Mercedes would go bankrupt. They would loose the all important business segment to less premium brands.
EU norm is widely adapted to accomodate EU tax brackets. If actual consumption and Co2 emissions, were to form basis for the taxation, BMW , VW and Mercedes would go bankrupt. They would loose the all important business segment to less premium brands.
#9
MBWorld Fanatic!
Well not really, what you can compare directly with the methodology described is different engines in the same car. Given the very marked difference in wind resistance between vehicles, you can't compare them very well at all. No estimate beats actual driving test within specified parameters in a preset course. Consumer Reports has been doing it for decades, in fact they were major contributors to the latest EPA standards. Of course its not perfect but its the closest they have gotten to "real world" averages.
#10
MBWorld Fanatic!
For mercedes and bmw 25% would be more accurate, and still optimistic, VW not lagging much behind.
EU norm is widely adapted to accomodate EU tax brackets. If actual consumption and Co2 emissions, were to form basis for the taxation, BMW , VW and Mercedes would go bankrupt. They would loose the all important business segment to less premium brands.
EU norm is widely adapted to accomodate EU tax brackets. If actual consumption and Co2 emissions, were to form basis for the taxation, BMW , VW and Mercedes would go bankrupt. They would loose the all important business segment to less premium brands.
Ergo the whole system is rigged from the get go as it used to be in the US. In the US the biggest "cheaters" were hybrid cars which weren't even close for almost a decade. The old EPA CAFE standards we so full of BS they were utter fantasy.
#11
Super Moderator
Well not really, what you can compare directly with the methodology described is different engines in the same car. Given the very marked difference in wind resistance between vehicles, you can't compare them very well at all. No estimate beats actual driving test within specified parameters in a preset course. Consumer Reports has been doing it for decades, in fact they were major contributors to the latest EPA standards. Of course its not perfect but its the closest they have gotten to "real world" averages.
EEC Cycle plus a correction factor is far more accurate. That's why it was set up. At one time in my career I was directly involved. cd of the vehicle can be included in the index.
BTW one is evaluating the entire drivetrain including transmission efficiency etc.
#12
MBWorld Fanatic!
Nonsense. On road driving results can vary as much as 40% (and worse). You can't control enough parameters. The biggest weakness being the driver who can't drive accurately to a HU display.
EEC Cycle plus a correction factor is far more accurate. That's why it was set up. At one time in my career I was directly involved. cd of the vehicle can be included in the index.
BTW one is evaluating the entire drivetrain including transmission efficiency etc.
EEC Cycle plus a correction factor is far more accurate. That's why it was set up. At one time in my career I was directly involved. cd of the vehicle can be included in the index.
BTW one is evaluating the entire drivetrain including transmission efficiency etc.
I guess.... That's why everyone in Europe takes it for granted that the estimate may be optimistic by up to 25% and the one here has been pretty darned accurate for 5 years. You can absolutely make a controlled drive test you just have to work at it and its already been done!
#13
Member
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Toronto Ontario Canada
Posts: 116
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
2015 C400 4Matic
Hi,
My Canadian spec C400 has 2700kms so far , and trip compute shows avg 10.20L (or 23mpg ish...)
Memory tells me that I have been driving 50% highway for the past 2 weeks to bring it down from 10.8 to 10.2.
my daily commute is 6.8km each way with moderate traffic, on this trip i avg 13L, on cold starts (below 0) I avg 15-18L according to trip computer.
Generally the local driving seems to avg around 11L and the lowest I ever got on a highway was 6.9L/100 over a 42km trip (hyper milling).
I do drive in sport plus once a week and that generally avg 13L/100km
My Canadian spec C400 has 2700kms so far , and trip compute shows avg 10.20L (or 23mpg ish...)
Memory tells me that I have been driving 50% highway for the past 2 weeks to bring it down from 10.8 to 10.2.
my daily commute is 6.8km each way with moderate traffic, on this trip i avg 13L, on cold starts (below 0) I avg 15-18L according to trip computer.
Generally the local driving seems to avg around 11L and the lowest I ever got on a highway was 6.9L/100 over a 42km trip (hyper milling).
I do drive in sport plus once a week and that generally avg 13L/100km
#14
Super Moderator
I guess.... That's why everyone in Europe takes it for granted that the estimate may be optimistic by up to 25% and the one here has been pretty darned accurate for 5 years. You can absolutely make a controlled drive test you just have to work at it and its already been done!
#16
Super Moderator
Indeed they are. Accurate lab testing plus a factor to correct for normal operating conditions. They have their methodology correct.
http://www.nrcan.gc.ca/energy/effici...ks/buying/7491
http://www.nrcan.gc.ca/energy/effici...ks/buying/7491
#17
Left Wing EU politicians are getting wise to the fact, and starting to make noise.
There is a huge untapped tax potential if the mpg figures were accurate.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/arti...ing-mpg-claims
There is a huge untapped tax potential if the mpg figures were accurate.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/arti...ing-mpg-claims
#19
The whole thing is based on rising fuel costs anyway.
High mpg figures became a selling point, only when fuel prices soared.
Here in Europe, cars dated around MY2003 and earlier, came with pretty much spot on mpg figures.
High mpg figures became a selling point, only when fuel prices soared.
Here in Europe, cars dated around MY2003 and earlier, came with pretty much spot on mpg figures.
#20
Super Moderator
Yep! The Canadians have added drive cycles to include AC, cold running & other factors that influence consumption.
Manufacturers have abused the EEC system for their own ends.
You are spot on with your comments. My W203 2003 C240 returned almost the exact mpg ~ l/100Km figures claimed.
Manufacturers have abused the EEC system for their own ends.
You are spot on with your comments. My W203 2003 C240 returned almost the exact mpg ~ l/100Km figures claimed.
#21
Junior Member
have been tracking the fuel consumption on my C400 using an app called road trip HD.. here are my stats for the past 3 months
so basically between 12.9L/100km and 13.7L/100km... mostly city driving, with the occasional short highway trip
so basically between 12.9L/100km and 13.7L/100km... mostly city driving, with the occasional short highway trip
#22
Super Moderator
Firstly the engine requires to run in before stable fuel consumption measurements can be taken. Any warm up open loop enriched running in a short cycle of driving completely ruins the consumption average.
In extra urban fully warmed up the Canadian figure of 9.9l/100 is probably about right.
If I do 40Km's with my CLK350 from cold the consumption will settle at around 9.3l/100Km
Of course a 4Matic will use a little more fuel than a RWD.
In extra urban fully warmed up the Canadian figure of 9.9l/100 is probably about right.
If I do 40Km's with my CLK350 from cold the consumption will settle at around 9.3l/100Km
Of course a 4Matic will use a little more fuel than a RWD.
Last edited by Glyn M Ruck; 12-05-2014 at 10:54 PM.
#23
MBWorld Fanatic!
As usual you overstate your expertise since those adjustment factors were prompted by this "actually driven test criteria". Maybe you should be a lot better informed before you pontificate outside of your weight category:
Enjoy
http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/m...-gap/index.htm
#24
Super Moderator
Yes ~ Yes. I've been involved in this while you were still in nappies. The Canadians have it right. They understand that changes in wind direction, air density, inlet air temperature etc. etc. ad nauseum render on road testing a waste of time & unrepeatable to say the least of driving inconsistencies.
Last edited by Glyn M Ruck; 12-06-2014 at 02:05 AM.
#25
Member
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Toronto Ontario Canada
Posts: 116
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
2015 C400 4Matic
I just got home from a 80km high way and 14km local driving in sport plus. My avg for the trip was 9.4L/100km. my highway was all in eco mode with very few braking or hard acceleration.