NausetLight

hi,

19 city/24 hwy/21 combined.

3.5L

My 2012 GLK 350 shows 21.5 MPG for the last 4000+ miles. That's covers a very fair combination of city and highway driving.

3.5L

ble2716

3.5L
Didn't you get like 25mpg on a long trip?

So to me, 2012 and 2013 are not much difference in term of gas consumption.

3.5L

Yes, my GLK got 25 MPG on a 1400 mile round trip, and that is part of the 4000+ mile MPG quote. But since that trip I've done a ton of city driving.

In my 7000 miles since new experience (as of yesterday), my GLK has exceeded the EPA ratings quite handily. I'm very pleased.

As to the 2013 GLK, I guess we'll have to wait and see what the real world MPG is.

3.5L

420tee

3.5L-I see your wish list of a Nash Metro. I have a neighbor who restores them and has a black and white one on his lawn for sale. Neat little cars, way ahead of their time.

3.5L

I think the Metro is so ugly, it's cute. Heh!

Of the three machines on my wish list, the Cobra is the most likely to happen. My son and I want to build one from a popular kit. As to the P-51 Mustang, getting a ride will have to do. In fact, I plan to do that next year. It's on my bucket list. At $1.5 million+, I'll never own one.

3.5L

420tee

I've ridden in a T-6 Texan and a Stearman. The open cockpit is the greatest although a P-51 would be awesome. Enjoy.

MBNA109

Up from 16/21/18.5 for '10-'12 or 13%.

Hmmm...not worth losing sleep over the 13's vs. -pre-13's.

Some fool actually wrote earlier this year he was expecting 26 combined out of the 3.5V6 DI...

Very hard to get that kind of efficiency in a full petrol car.

NausetLight

it sure would be nice if it was 26..ha ha

DCubed

Don't know where you saw this but the ones I have in the showroom are showing 25 on the highway.

iwinit

25 is for FWD. 4Matic is 24.

NausetLight

RWD

DCubed

4 What? Just kidding, we do not see a lot of 4Matics here in so cal. Good to see its still not a massive penalty. Hopefully we can crack that magic 30MPG barrier with the Bluetec. I am hoping for ~33-34 HWY but with the GLK rated almost the same as an ML it shows how aerodynamics are at play when it comes to fuel mileage for the GLK. But then again my '11 E BTC was rated for 33 HWY and would routinely get 36-37 on the highway.

GLKKa2H

This rating in accordance with EPA (laboratory) testing.

The "außerorts" (highway) milage specification listed by MB, in accordance with "Verordnung (EG) Nr. 715/2007" (Regulation (EC) No 715/2007 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 June 2007) is 42 - 45 MPG for the E 350 BlueTEC!

The MB "außerorts" rating for the GLK 250 (and 220 -) BlueTEC 4MATIC is 40 - 43 MPG, this with the 7G-TRONIC PLUS transmission, believed to improve the mileage in comparison with the 7G-TRONIC.

Three (empirical) recordings from our 220 CDI BlueEFFICIENCY with 7G-TRONIC, are: Distance 1193 miles / avg. speed 48 mph / 39 MPG, 1723 miles / 41 mph / 39 MPG and 214 miles / 47 mph / 41 MPG.

Should we, from this, see the GLK 250 BlueTEC 4MATIC crack the 40+ MPG barrier?

DCubed

Per the EPA testing I would be surprised to see anything beyond 35 on the highway, the EPA has about an 18% penalty for Diesel models just from the testing method.

iwinit

So far, I've got average 24.50 MPG on my 2013 GLK350 4Matic in Economy mode. 70% highway and 30% city. In Sport mode, it is about 22 MPG. I drive moderately. I'm sure the fuel economy will improve a little bit after engine break-in.

GLKKa2H

I suppose "testing" is the key word here, whether it refers to one or the other test procedure.

Given your 350 BlueTEC had been tested in accordance with how EPA estimated fuel economy before the "2008 Rating Changes", the rating for your highway driving most likely would have been 36 MPG, i.e. closer to your empirical data.

The mileages we've got is certainly not on roads like the I5 or the I10, but more like parts of the Pacific Coast Highway (wonderful trip that one, and the free seafood soup awaiting a table in Monterey).

Those who lives shall see.