Dodgy Or What !

[Eric Tilley]

Being of a generous nature I am not casting aspersions BUT!!!.
In my A class sales brochure before buying the car:-

The petrol consumption for the A170 Autotronic is given as
U. 32.8 mpg
E-U 51.4
C 42.8

On having bought the car the consumption data in the vehicle handbook gives.

All in metric,no MPG figures given. Converting these at www.teaching-english-in-japan.net/conversion/mpg or http://www.pege.org/fuel/convert.htm

The owners manual gives converted :-
U. 27.mpg
E-U 43
C 35.

This is averaging out the range shown.

Can someone restore my faith!!! how can 20% innacuracy be a salesmans license or genuine error ? I HAVE NOT CHECKED ALL THE FIGURES BUT SPOT CHECKS SHOW SOME EVEN GREATER PORKIES.

 

[Eric Tilley]

On the reality front the computer says after 2.5k the A 170 is doing 37.8mpg . So the bad news is don`t expect to get anything like the mpg figures in the sales brochure and the good news is expect to do a bit better than the figures in the car handbook

 

[DC_insider]

I think that the websites you have used have converted litres per 100km into miles per US gallon rather than miles per imperial gallon.

8.6 litres per 100 km = 1.89 imperial gallons per 100 km (4.546 litre = 1 imperial gallon)

1.89 imperial gallons per 100 km = 0.0189 imperial gallons per km

0.0189 imperial gallons per km = 52.86 km per imperial gallon (1/0.0189 to turn the ration over)

52.86 km per imperial gallon = 32.77 miles per imperial gallon (52.86*62/100 to convert km to miles)

Therefore, 8.6 litres per 100 km = 32.8 miles per gallon. The vehicle handbook and the sales brochure are both correct.


Please note that the Urban, Extra Urban and Combined figures are produced to a set program on a rolling road in a laboratory. They are not real figures as they do not account of things like wind resistance. The only purpose of the figures is to provide a comparison of one vehicle against another. Manufacturers cannot quote any other figures for fuel consumption for their cars.