Fuel consumption 320 vs C55
Thread Starter
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 2,469
Likes: 1
From: Hong Kong
C55AMG W203; 330i E90
Fuel consumption 320 vs C55
Some observations:
E320 has nearly the same fuel consumption as the C320 as shown on the spec. - this is true
Litre per 100km:
C320 - city - 16.7, extra urban - 8.2 , combined - 11.4
C55 AMG - city -17.8 , extra urban- 9.2 , combined 12.3
In HK , we could never have enough highways to achieve "extar urban" 's figure. The "combined" is best we can do.
Experience on my ex- E320 is
city:15-16
combined - 11-12.5
Experience on my C55 is
city: 17-20
combined - 13.5-14
So I would say the C55 consumes
25-30% more fuel at city traffic jam
20% more fuel at my normal day drive
comparing my ex-E320.
cnt
cnt
E320 has nearly the same fuel consumption as the C320 as shown on the spec. - this is true
Litre per 100km:
C320 - city - 16.7, extra urban - 8.2 , combined - 11.4
C55 AMG - city -17.8 , extra urban- 9.2 , combined 12.3
In HK , we could never have enough highways to achieve "extar urban" 's figure. The "combined" is best we can do.
Experience on my ex- E320 is
city:15-16
combined - 11-12.5
Experience on my C55 is
city: 17-20
combined - 13.5-14
So I would say the C55 consumes
25-30% more fuel at city traffic jam
20% more fuel at my normal day drive
comparing my ex-E320.
cnt
cnt
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 4,169
Likes: 2
From: HK (but constantly travelling)
98 W210 Advantgarde
Originally Posted by moa4r
wierd how v8 and v6 have almost the same consumption,, and you're actually doing better w/the v8... e320 is heavier though, that may have something to do w/it
Mods can be done to get better fuel economy anyways - I've certainly gotten 10%+ improvements with mine, I think his W210 was stock as a rock.
Thread Starter
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 2,469
Likes: 1
From: Hong Kong
C55AMG W203; 330i E90
Originally Posted by Whitey
I believe his measure is "volume (of fuel) per distance", not "distance per volume" (as it is commonly used on this board). Not surprizingly he's actually doing worst with the V8 and wider tires. However, that's surprisingly close to the E320 W210, which could just be explained by a more advanced, more efficient engine
Mods can be done to get better fuel economy anyways - I've certainly gotten 10%+ improvements with mine, I think his W210 was stock as a rock.
Mods can be done to get better fuel economy anyways - I've certainly gotten 10%+ improvements with mine, I think his W210 was stock as a rock.
Actually , my wife told me she did 11.4 litre per 100km this morning as her journey to work is 22km with little traffic and 80% highway. So this figure is better than 13.5 combined which I did the other day.
Be aware that in Hong Kong, our highways are not like USA , we still have jam on highway :p
cnt
Thread Starter
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 2,469
Likes: 1
From: Hong Kong
C55AMG W203; 330i E90
Originally Posted by moa4r
wierd how v8 and v6 have almost the same consumption,, and you're actually doing better w/the v8... e320 is heavier though, that may have something to do w/it
Ha ha , 'almost the same' , if you know the cost of fuel in HK comapring with USA , then it is not quite 'almost the same'
e320 is not that heavier than the C55 , it is about 100kg more only.
thanks
cnt
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 4,169
Likes: 2
From: HK (but constantly travelling)
98 W210 Advantgarde
Originally Posted by cntlaw
Be aware that in Hong Kong, our highways are not like USA , we still have jam on highway :p
cnt
cnt
Trending Topics
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 437
Likes: 0
From: SOUTH AFRICA
Nothing
CNT, it is quite interesting, I'm getting almost the same fuel consumption with my C32 as with your C55. Most of my driving is also in town, with a bit of highway driving. For the last 4000 or so km, my consumption is 13.3 l/100km, that is about 17.5 MPG for you US guys.
MB World Stories
The Best of Mercedes & AMG
Manual Mercedes? 6 Times Sindelfingen Let Drivers Have All The Fun
Verdad Gallardo
Mercedes SLR McLaren 722 S Is Extremely Rare Example Modified by McLaren
Verdad Gallardo
8 Classic Boxy Mercedes Designs That Have Aged Like Fine Wine
Verdad Gallardo
Flawlessly Restored Mercedes 190E Evo II Heads to Auction
Verdad Gallardo
Electric Mercedes C-Class Unveiled: 11 Things You Need to Know
Verdad Gallardo
Mercedes EQS Gets A Major Update: Everything You Need to Know
Verdad Gallardo
5 Underrated Mercedes-Benz Models That Don't Get the Love They Deserve
Verdad Gallardo
Mercedes 300D Has Pushed Well Past 1 Million Miles and It Ain't Stopping
Verdad Gallardo
10 Most Reliable Mercedes-Benz Models You Can Buy Used
Verdad Gallardo
Thread Starter
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 2,469
Likes: 1
From: Hong Kong
C55AMG W203; 330i E90
Originally Posted by AMG FANATIC
CNT, it is quite interesting, I'm getting almost the same fuel consumption with my C32 as with your C55. Most of my driving is also in town, with a bit of highway driving. For the last 4000 or so km, my consumption is 13.3 l/100km, that is about 17.5 MPG for you US guys.
I am not sure if I can maintain 13.3 on average with the C55. It will take me a while to keep track of the new readings as E has a much bigger fuel tank than the C. I heard that C55 owners can do 200miles per tank which is 300 km .....
Not sure if I remember correctly of the tank size, I need to get below formula right
E320 - 80 litre tank capacity - I can do ~450km
C55 - 62 litre tank capacity - 300km ?
cnt
Thread Starter
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 2,469
Likes: 1
From: Hong Kong
C55AMG W203; 330i E90
based on djx18's data
his C55: 62 litre tank capacity: 242 miles = 363 km
My ex-E320: 80 litre tank capacity: 450km
can someone verify above ?
cnt[/QUOTE]
his C55: 62 litre tank capacity: 242 miles = 363 km
My ex-E320: 80 litre tank capacity: 450km
can someone verify above ?
cnt[/QUOTE]
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 2,295
Likes: 0
From: McLean, VA
S4
Originally Posted by Whitey
I believe his measure is "volume (of fuel) per distance", not "distance per volume" (as it is commonly used on this board). Not surprizingly he's actually doing worst with the V8 and wider tires. However, that's surprisingly close to the E320 W210, which could just be explained by a more advanced, more efficient engine
Mods can be done to get better fuel economy anyways - I've certainly gotten 10%+ improvements with mine, I think his W210 was stock as a rock.
Mods can be done to get better fuel economy anyways - I've certainly gotten 10%+ improvements with mine, I think his W210 was stock as a rock.
how did you improve your fuel economy on your e320.... wider (and much heavier) wheels and tires made a noticable difference for the worse. with all stock, I cant do better than 15-17 mpg in mostly city driving, which is pretty bad IMO
Thread Starter
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 2,469
Likes: 1
From: Hong Kong
C55AMG W203; 330i E90
Originally Posted by moa4r
ok, I was totally off in everything i said... how did you improve your fuel economy on your e320.... wider (and much heavier) wheels and tires made a noticable difference for the worse. with all stock, I cant do better than 15-17 mpg in mostly city driving, which is pretty bad IMO
how did you improve your fuel economy on your e320.... wider (and much heavier) wheels and tires made a noticable difference for the worse. with all stock, I cant do better than 15-17 mpg in mostly city driving, which is pretty bad IMOI guess entirely 'driving style' of the two cars did make a lot of difference!
cnt
Thread Starter
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 2,469
Likes: 1
From: Hong Kong
C55AMG W203; 330i E90
Originally Posted by cntlaw
Some observations:
E320 has nearly the same fuel consumption as the C320 as shown on the spec. - this is true
Litre per 100km:
C320 - city - 16.7, extra urban - 8.2 , combined - 11.4
C55 AMG - city -17.8 , extra urban- 9.2 , combined 12.3
In HK , we could never have enough highways to achieve "extar urban" 's figure. The "combined" is best we can do.
Experience on my ex- E320 is
city:15-16
combined - 11-12.5
Experience on my C55 is
city: 17-20
combined - 13.5-14
So I would say the C55 consumes
25-30% more fuel at city traffic jam
20% more fuel at my normal day drive
comparing my ex-E320.
cnt
cnt
E320 has nearly the same fuel consumption as the C320 as shown on the spec. - this is true
Litre per 100km:
C320 - city - 16.7, extra urban - 8.2 , combined - 11.4
C55 AMG - city -17.8 , extra urban- 9.2 , combined 12.3
In HK , we could never have enough highways to achieve "extar urban" 's figure. The "combined" is best we can do.
Experience on my ex- E320 is
city:15-16
combined - 11-12.5
Experience on my C55 is
city: 17-20
combined - 13.5-14
So I would say the C55 consumes
25-30% more fuel at city traffic jam
20% more fuel at my normal day drive
comparing my ex-E320.
cnt
cnt
I been going to work on the same road (Lung Cheung Road , 25km , 80% are up down hills ) at speed of average 70-80kmh where I was driving the C55 with a even more gentle style than the E320 in order to reduce uncomfortness due to C55's much harder suspension.
The fuel meter shows 11.8 litre per 100km after 25km drive !! That is 10-12% more fuel than my ex E320.!! Not bad at all.
cnt
