Fuel tank range?
05-03-2006, 10:25 AM
#1
Junior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fuel tank range?
I'm conssidering purchasing a CLK63 and am wondering what the projected mileage is on a full tank of fuel? I realize that this will be different from the CLK55, but what have owners been experiencing with their cars? I previously owned an M5 and it had a range of less than 200 miles, which was quite a drag.
05-03-2006, 02:22 PM
#3
MBWorld Fanatic!
If I have a tail wind, going down hill, I might get 275 mls per tank. But then I am not enjoying my car very much. Big perfomance = low gas mileage!
05-04-2006, 01:44 AM
#4
Junior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fuel tank range?
I don't have a problem with low gas mileage as I realize you buy into that with a high performance car (M5 got 12 mpg around town). I was specifically interested in the range on a full tank of fuel. It was definitely a detractor for my M5 to see the warning light come on at less than 200 miles - I was spending all of my time in gas stations. I was just wondering how the CLK55 (which hopefully will provide some info on the CLK63 faired in this area.
05-04-2006, 06:58 PM
#6
Super Member
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: living in Paris, France and San Diego ...
Posts: 528
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2002 CLK 55 AMG Coupé
On the highway I can get 20mpg or even better. In town or with a heavy foot the results naturally are less good, but I usually end up getting at least 15mpg on a trip.
I'm guessing the 63 will not have significnatly worse fuel economy than the 55 AMG. There is no weight penalty to speak of and the 7 speed tranmission will squeeze a little more juice out of the lemon.
Of course it is a bigger motor that also spins faster so if you push it it will slurp back.
The real problem with the CLK is the small size of the fuel tank. One of my fantasy mods is to swap in a reserve tank in lieu of the spare tire. That would add at least five gallons, maybe more. The old VW bugs had a knob on the dash allowing the driver to switch between fuel tanks. This made up for the lack of a fuel guage
Those Germans!
I'm guessing the 63 will not have significnatly worse fuel economy than the 55 AMG. There is no weight penalty to speak of and the 7 speed tranmission will squeeze a little more juice out of the lemon.
Of course it is a bigger motor that also spins faster so if you push it it will slurp back.
The real problem with the CLK is the small size of the fuel tank. One of my fantasy mods is to swap in a reserve tank in lieu of the spare tire. That would add at least five gallons, maybe more. The old VW bugs had a knob on the dash allowing the driver to switch between fuel tanks. This made up for the lack of a fuel guage
Those Germans!
Trending Topics
05-05-2006, 11:09 AM
#9
Member
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Folsom Ca.
Posts: 197
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
'06 C230, '02 CLK55 (sold)
Originally Posted by scrapes55
I didnt get 19mpg in city with my CLK320'02. What are you doing pushing the car :-)
I down shift when I accelerate, I don't use the gas peddle's kick down I ust the park amatic and let the tranny do the work. (Comes from driving a stick for years)
