CLK320 and CLK500: Average miles per tank?
Thing is, I'm having a real difficult time deciding between the 320 and 500. One of the main issues with my car is the lack of HP, so I have a feeling I'm going to feel the same way with the 320. I'm just a wee bit concerned with fuel economy of the 500, considering gas is over $1.40/L these days.
So, what do you guys average per tank?
My A4 gives me 280 miles (450kms) in the city, 375 miles (600kms) on the highway, which isn't all that great, especially for a 4 cyl.
The more I think of it, the 500 is the way to go. It has the AMG bumpers, updated climate controls, and more than enough power to satisfy my dark side. I'm sure I'll be spending a bit more $ on gas compared to my A4, but I think the difference is negligible considering how much happier I'll be with this ride.
Shame I can't change my username... lol
Last edited by CLK320skr; May 1, 2012 at 02:05 AM.




Mixed driving was about 26-27 mpg.
Most of my driving was highway where I could easily average 29-30 mpg.
The 350 has plenty of power for most. At 50+ I was more than happy with it.
I have post several cluster shots of miles per tank and fuel mileages. Was a very economical Benz.
driving conservatively i get ~16 mpg lurking about locally and high 24s- low 25 on the freeway.
driving more aggressively i get ~13 local and 23 highway.
I only get like 10-11 mpg on my 5 minute commute to/from school though, as it's the period in which my car is cold.
can't push it during then or anything either. in any case, have you looked into the newer 350(?) engines? those v6s put out almost the same hp the m113 put out a decade ago with the efficiency of a v6. granted it'll probably cost more and it won't have the ferocious bellow of our 5.0l behemoth nor the torque




As for MPG, I care about that mostly when I have one gallon of fuel (i.e. not much). Miles per tank is more useful when judging your overall economy, and dollars per mile is even more useful than a static snapshot of MPG. 10 mpg is really only significant if it leads to 160 miles per tank, as is 25mpg highway if it leads to 400 miles per tank (which I'd love to know who, other than Mike, gets.)
edit: MPG is important over a long range of miles, like such:

In a couple of years of driving a little more than an hour a day, I average 19.6 MPG. Still, I've never seen a 400 mile tank (62 liters/16.35 gal).
Last edited by eddieo45; May 1, 2012 at 11:27 AM.
Trending Topics
The Best of Mercedes & AMG




OT Mike, but have you joined a Caddy forum yet?
OT Mike, but have you joined a Caddy forum yet?
The KC roads are not bad to travel. Not a lot of stop and go highway situations like those I have seen and be witness to in the Boston area. I can only assume Jersey is the same.
I have joined the Caddy group. Not much activity or fun so far. I have posted like 8-10 times since joining and have a higher post count than some that have been members 3-5 years. What's that tell you?




Another great aspect of that old thread you linked is the global reach of this W209 Forum. I'm the kind of MB driver that turns my head to look at nearly every other MB on the road, as if we're related, and it nearly always disappoints me that the other drivers aren't looking back. I need the global reach to find other enthusatics like myself. I assume that Caddy drivers would tend toward the aloof. Caddie mods? I'd guess you're pretty lonely in that world!
<p> </p>
<p>there's gotta be more people who know what they avg per tank.. I don't keep notes or anything, but after a year of driving this car, I've been able to determine what I avg per tank.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Oh, and id love to get the 350, but it's still out of my price range.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>I think maybe I'll take the 320 out for a spin when I have some free time and see if I'd be content with its performance.</p>
Last edited by CLK320skr; May 1, 2012 at 03:40 PM.




Another great aspect of that old thread you linked is the global reach of this W209 Forum. I'm the kind of MB driver that turns my head to look at nearly every other MB on the road, as if we're related, and it nearly always disappoints me that the other drivers aren't looking back. I need the global reach to find other enthusatics like myself. I assume that Caddy drivers would tend toward the aloof. Caddie mods? I'd guess you're pretty lonely in that world!
When I feel like I have nothing left to constructively contribute when it comes to the W209, then I may. But until then.....




I own a 2005 CLK500 - and use it for a daily commute - of around 80km (50 miles)
my average fuel consumption for the past 6 months - equates to 10.862 L/100 km - ( computer indicated 10.723 ) - in UK MPG ( 4.5liter / gal ) the fuel consumption figures are 25.732 MPG - and using the US base of 3.8 liters per Gallon - 21.732 MPG
in general - our highway speeds in South Africa - are 70MPH - so on occasion we push the limits towards 80 MPH -
the CLK is a phenomenal vehicle - and returns good fuel economy if driven well.




I own a 2005 CLK500 - and use it for a daily commute - of around 80km (50 miles)
my average fuel consumption for the past 6 months - equates to 10.862 L/100 km - ( computer indicated 10.723 ) - in UK MPG ( 4.5liter / gal ) the fuel consumption figures are 25.732 MPG - and using the US base of 3.8 liters per Gallon - 21.732 MPG
in general - our highway speeds in South Africa - are 70MPH - so on occasion we push the limits towards 80 MPH





All I know is I get poor mileage from my car because it's underpowered so I gotta push it to get it to go.. I'd prefer to have a car that accelerates effortlessly, and without all the drama (lots of noise and vibration from the 1.8T - it's not a quiet motor).
I'm sure I'd get better mileage from my car if I drove like everyone else on the road (asleep), but I'm a car enthusiast, I'm in my car because I love to drive. I rarely drive slower than 80mph (130km) on the highway.
Last edited by CLK320skr; May 1, 2012 at 07:00 PM.
Great info you have shared. Welcome to the W209 insanity.


