Well, I am considering between buying a GLK 250 and a GLK 350, with the main reason for considering the diesel being gas mileage. I am sure the gas mileage in the 250 will be good, but wasn't sure about the 350.

Can people please post what kind of actual gas mileage they experience with their GLK 350 and what kind of driving they do? (City, Hwy, etc.)

And yes, I have searched the topic and could not find a thread for just GLK 350 gas mileage (mainly interested in the newer models '13-'14 with the ECO feature).

 

GLK 350 data is pretty sparse. Fuelly.com has one 13 MY @ 24.8 mpg. There are 5 for the 12 MY @ avg of 19.9 mpg.

I have a 14 GLK 250 B/T, so I can't give you any anecdotal information on the 14 GLK 350.

 

Thanks. I guess only 250 owners must be active on this board.

I was really wondering how much gas is saved with the ECO feature. It would be nice to get about 20-21 mpg around town.

 

I always averaged 21.5 mpg on my 2011 GLK350. Mostly highway driving, around town on my days off. My 2012 E350 coupe is averaging 24.5 so far (a total 2 weeks of driving) kind of shocking that the GLK got as much as it did.

 

I'm at 23.8 mpg now on my 2014 GLK 350. My regular drive to work is about 90% highway.

 

I'm at 23.6 mpg on my 2014 GLK 350, with just over 2,000 miles; about 1/4 city, 1/4 highway, and 1/2 secondary roads.

 

2013 GLK350. 20.5 mpg consistent. Only use Shell 93 octane. Mixed highway/city. Drive it like i stole it, always. Never use ECO or Economy mode. Oil never down. maybe lucky.

 

My '11 GLK shows 14.5l/100 km on the cluster and that is 100% city driving. It rarely sees the open road. Compare it to my '09 C300 which gets 11.8l/100km on the exact same route.

The funny thing about this is when the GLK is on the highway it will show 11l/100km (9.8 was the best I got while driving 4 hours straight with the cruise control set to 100 kph) while the c300 will get the same reading travelling 100-110 kph. I think having the big motor on the highway is better as it won't work really hard.

I am scheduled to have a long test drive with a GLK250 on Friday and I will get to drive it for 3 days and I will see if I will be persuaded to be a diesel convert even though there are issues with the adblue thing.

One thing for sure is the 350 is willing to go up in speed in highway like it won't run out of juice when you press the pedal. So if you will do a lot of highway driving and likes to overtake big rigs without any drama the 350 might be best for you.

 

Turbo diesel at highway speeds. Press the pedal you are at 140, dont pay attention after passing you are at 180. The first day I got my 250 I drove it 300km to Fernie. I came back to Clagary four days later with 2000 kms on it and a cracked windshield. But on the highway, it is a beast.

I find the 250 is only slow of the light. If i were to do rolling starts, a lot of vehicles get raped

 

I have driven a few GAS(cars & SUVs) having lived/working in Germany& France over 5 yrs. I have however always liked the TORQUE vs POWER of DISEAL - and there is a Huge difference - which the ONLY way to see it, feel that REAL WORLD thing is to drive it over a longer time (like this one user is doing over 3 days!!)

So after you have driven the GLK250 & 350 for over 3-5 days on SAME ROADS & TIME (if at all possible) I feel anyone who is honest and NOT SHY ABOUT something new(lets face it in USA/Canada most people haven't seen or used much DISEAL CARS/SUVS unlike EUROPE or ASIA) would never pick the PETROL version of the same car. Like user "vol*" here - diesel version simply reacts acts lots better on or off highway without ANY EFFORT! @ highway speeds - especially when some sports car is trying to show off @you - just tap on the right foot - make that sports car "PADDLE" down two Gears to over take you :P:P lol

If you doing long distance driving (that's why most big rigs are Diesel) your Actual costs (silly that in USA/Canada you pay extra for DISEAL Versions) IMHO its the TOTAL COSTS of OWNERSHIP ie the costs of refuel+ Normal Service costs + Insurance Costs etc - The total Daily costs is more important than 'gas's / Diesel' costs. to my surprise in Canada the DISEAL PRICES are cheaper than Petrol (and if you have CosCo or Sam's Memberships its +10c per liter cheaper!!) when in USA side you more 10C more per gallon for DISEAL - sucks ! Best part is; the DISEAL SERVICE is nearly 1/4 or 1/3 less than petrol in USA/Canada (pity that the same engines used in Europe or Asia - the FIRST SERVICE is @ 100K Kms!!!)

I am recently Retired and We are on a Long ROAD TRIP (USA, Canada Alaska & parts of Mexico) with 6-7months trip -planned. We chose a smaller Diesel SUV for our trip.

Pity that Audi didn't release their Q5 with diesel a week after I ordered our GLK or we would have never got this POJ**. There are lots & lots of minor annoying issues with our GLK250. Even though lots of nice MB dealers we have been to - all of them are polite but we still left with issues like - switches inside don't work; fuel filler cap wont close/lock; BT suddenly cuts-off; etc etc ,,,,,, But (touches wood) we didn't have any of the now famous ADD_BLUE CEL issue and we done nearly 6800Miles since May14!
AND this GL:K = our 2nd one since our FIRST ORDER - I wouldn't accept the first one (dealer made a mistake on features and extras on our order) so MB USA had to get involved which resulted in them getting me a NEW NEW ORDER in a hurry....PLUS $$$ cash differences to us. For me - I would much rather got the car I ordered and not deal with MB USA ( they suck in a big way! sorry juz telling the truth) .... and got on with our stuff and life would be sweeter without getting Lawyers /State & Federal people involved etc ...in simple purchase of a CAR !!!!

So hope this is helpful ... UMHO ; if you get the DISEAL Version = you be one happy chappy!
Cheers and happy Motoring!

 

16mpg in city driving
On highway I get 20mpg, maybe 22 if traffic is at 50-60mph
That's for 2010 4Matic, I think newer models are slightly more fuel efficient.

 

I average 22 mpg on my 2013 GLK 350 driving around the Orlando Florida area but not in the heart of the city. AC is always on. Also use Shell 93 octane.

 

I didn't respond to your post, as it was clear to me what you were asking, aka GAS mileage. Upon reread and on the off chance you were using that term generically, in app 6,300 miles I really do not know for the 250 B/T aka diesel. I really have not driven that way with the (ECO/SPORT) comparison and contrast in mind. There are a host of reasons, but one of the MAIN reasons is it remains in break in mode. That being said, I just did a full tank (pen and ink and actual fill, aka SNAPSHOT) of 15 gals/15.6 gal capacity for 35.67 mpg. (535 miles)

This tanks mileage included Zero to 7,380 ft altitude and return, 418 miles. Stop and go city driving both @ zero altitude and at 6,250 ft, higher speed freeway travel (NTE 90 mph) and rolling parking lot freeway travel. Since it is still in break in, I did not maintain constant freeway speeds for more than 15 min at a time and used acceleration and deceleration scenarios (mountain road travel, on ramps, paddle shifting, etc.,) to hit close to red line. I am guessing the characterization would be moderately aggressively driven.

That being said, if you do the average US yearly miles of between 12,000 to 15,000 miles, then @ 35 mpg/429 gals and 21 mpg/714 gals works to 285 gals saved per year.

 

Thanks for the replies everyone. My wife will be the primary driver and she normally drives about 90% surburban driving and 10% highway. I imagine she would normally drive in ECO mode (but I would put it in Sport mode when I drive it).

Sounds like I could expect ~20 mpg around town and ~23-24 mpg on the highway (normally drive 70-75 mph).

 

Thanks for the added info. I like the idea of getting the diesel for the better fuel economy and maintenance doesn't seem to be much more over the life of the vehicle (keeping it 80-100,000 miles). Also, diesel fuel costs less than 93 octane gas in my area.

The main thing for me to consider the 350 over the 250 though is driving performance (don't want something that feels slow) and availability of models to choose from (not many on dealer lots around here).

 

As most people who owns the diesel version says that the diesel feels slow from a stop and feels overly powerful on rolling start might be best actually for city driving. Can't wait for tom to find out for myself. And since your wifey will be the user might as well bea good thing as she might never notice the difference just like when I gave a set of E550 keys to my wife and she said to me nothing feels different from our c300.

 

We went to drive both the BlueTec, and the gas powered 350 GLK's. I drove the diesel only, and bought it. We have driven it around 2500 miles and are averaging over 27 MPG. Our driving is about 2/3rds highway going from 5000 ft elevation to 1000 ft and back to 5000 ft going up and down hills. Diving at 70+ mph on level terrain we are getting close to 40 MPG. Using the prices for fuel around here and the combined MPG ratings for 4Matic Diesel, and gas powered GLK's it's 4.8 cents less to drive the diesel per mile.

 

Getting around 20.5 mpg in hilly seattle traffic. From Az to Seattle with a Thule box on top and speeds around 70-85, got 21-22. Pleased.

 

one thing to consider is keeping the Diesel version past warranty, the long term reliability of the DEF system is unknown. Being held hostage at the dealer each time "10 starts remaining" comes on could cost a fortune

 

Is there a Sport mode for the diesel? I agree that my wife would probably not know the difference. She is currently driving a minivan, so I think either model would feel faster to her. When I would be driving it, it would be mainly for highway road trips.

 

There is a sport mode. Upshifts and downshifts faster then Eco. That is about it.

 

just finished an 800 mile road trip across parts of California, I averaged 65 mph and with hills, valleys and lots of straights along the coast I averaged almost exactly 25 mpg using 91 premium.

Over the past year, I have averaged 19 mpg , with purely stop and go to work and home driving.

I was pleased with the 25 mpg on my trip this week and this car can pull the hills very well, I was always very confident passing vehicles on some pretty steep inclines. It was smooth as silk all the way up the 101 through the hills.

 

City driving on my 2010 GLK350 mostly, averaging about 18mpg (13L/100km) over the time I've had it.

 

Since the Benz tells you mileage from "start" -- seems to more or less coincide with trips over a period of time, where the car doesn't remain off for too long between stops/starts -- it's amazing too me how the low-mileage trips are really what kills me. We live 2 miles away "up a hill" from a grocery store. Round trip, I'll get 12-13 mpg. Main shopping area is maybe 10 miles round trip. I get 16-17-18 mpg.

I'm beginning to think that plug-in hybrids like the Chevy Volt are the way to go. Use battery only for 35-40 miles a day, and the rest gas. Wish Benz offered one!!

 

I will be a convert! Will be returning the loaner glk250 after 3 days of road test and I am in love! The thing pulls really strong. The gas needle barely moved compared to what I will see on my gas glk. The diesel is like a train....starts slowly and when it gets to it's momentum it will just pull and pull and pull some more. Drove it in the highway and one of the thing I noticed is that when you are at around 110 kph and want to pass a long rig you need to step on the gas a little bit harder to get up into speed not like on the v6 gas version that when you step on the gas it will just quickly sprint on the same speed but boy the torque of the diesel is just there when you need it. It is just when you are already driving fast and want to go even faster you just need to push the gas pedal a little harder. I also feel the diesel version a little lighter to steer while maneuvering on parking spots. I still like the pre-facelift interior though, boxy and nothing round inside. Other than that the feel and built is exactly the same as the gas version.