Slk230 Mpg

[jako999]

I have a 98 SLK230K 80% of my driving is urban and at the end of the day its a sports car so I do give a bit of a hard time but not that often I seem to get about 18mpg is this ok the book says higher but there again they always do if 18 is about right then fine but if not then it may be worth getting something done before fuel hits £4.00 a gallon which cant be far off.
Many thanks Jako.

 

[SLinKyjoe]

unless you are really driving badly you should exceed that by a fair number of miles......anywhere above 25mpg-30mpg should cover urban driving from hard to smooth.

but it really depends on your exact driving conditions....lots of sitting in traffic or real slow creeping forward will lower you mpg but only beacsue you are not driving at fuel efficient speeds...to be honest, with the 230k you could almost see 18mpg on a track day.

so give us more info on your driving style/conditons and what does the book say? You may need to give it a run up a smooth a road at 50ish for a few miles to generate whether the car is running fuel too rich for some reason. or maybes you have a fuel leak in the system.

how are you calculating your mpg?

The subaru wrx i had, is not a economy engine and would easily reach 30mpg in normal driving. it dropped to around 26mpg in heavy traffic. and with real booting around the dales you could see 23mpg....it of course would do less if you took it to a track and wrung its neck. on the other hand it did 42mpg on A roads to blackpool and back....once!

and with a 1001 miles in a week around scotland it averaged 33mpg for the whole trip.

so unless you have wedged your car in first gear we need further info.

 

[GrahamC230K]

My journey is what i would describe as mixed. Some short town, home to supermarket type runs, but for the most part, two 20 mile blasts a day on fairly uncongested national speed limit A road and some further enthusiastic B road fun after that. The car is driven for the most part HARD.

I average approx. 26mpg.

You sure about your sums? I mean fillin gup to the brim, how many miles are you actually getting out of a tank?

I cant remember but roughly my calcs are based on getting 340 miles out of 55 litres (someone is going to tell me this doesnt add up but you get the idea!).

 

[jako999]

SLK mpg

Thanks for getting back to me I get about 220 -240 miles out of 55L. I do around 6 miles to work and the same back with a bit of running round as well there are quite a few stop starts however I?m a paramedic this means I do shifts 6am-2pm 2pm-10pm and 10pm-6am so at either 6am or 10pm the roads are quiet and flow quite well and I can get up to a good speed and maintain it for longer.
As for a leak there is no smell so I think that?s ok, it drives well and the power seems fine and I had a problem with an air bag which meant it had to be plugged in all computers were rest the only thing it did say was that the was a problem with an open air flap? Also do you think it may be worth while changing air filter and plugs?
Paramedics earn far less then most people think and I had to save to get the car in the first place so till I can build my funds back up I don?t really want to take it to the garage if there?s something I can do.

Many thank Jako.
1998 SLK230K with 53000 miles.

 

[mlc]

It really does depend on how you drive. We have a 97 SLK. MrsC. gets around 25 for her motorway commute across south manchester to work, when I am trusted with the car my cross town journey is nearer 15 - 18mpg. Do you drive much with the roof down? that will use lots more fuel. On a run across north wales we get around 30, but that is normally roof down and too fast.

The problem ( I suspect) is that you use the power and performance. I dont know for a fact but I expect that the supercharger pumps £5 notes out the back everytime you put your foot down hard

Putting the above figures into context the same usage for me in a 2ltr petrol Mondeo produces about 22 mpg, but not quite the same fun.

Just enjoy the car.

Mark.

 

[wez.k]

I am in my second week of ownership of a Jan 2000 slk230. I have just calculated my mpg after a normal week of driving to work and back (around 50 miles per day mainly urban) and I find I am getting around 25/26 mpg. My driving style is mixed, sometimes I glide along, sometimes I floor it if I'm fed up with the (slow) driver in front and I get the opportunity.
The fuel gauge however is very confusing. The first time I filled up, I just left the nozzle in until it cut out, then stopped at that. When I switched on, the gauge went up to a fraction below the full mark. To my alarm, it dropped a quarter of a tank in the next 42 miles! The next quarter took around 100 miles, and then it continued to drop until I reached the same point at which I had previously filled up (about halfway down the illuminated bit). I had then covered 262 miles. This time I left the nozzle in until it cut out, this took 43 Ltrs, more or less the same as last time. I was using the same pump by the way. Then I continued to squirt the nozzle a few more times and managed to put in around 3 more Ltrs before it obviously wasn't going to take any more. This time when I switched on, the gauge went all the way to the top. So I had taken on 46.5 Ltrs in all. The tank takes 53 Ltrs so that means when the light is on and I am half way down the lighted section I have something like 13 Ltrs (2.8 Gall) still in the tank. At 25 mpg that means I can cover another 70 miles or so before I conk out.
I'm intrigued by a pervious post implying that the car uses more fuel with the top down, especially as the top was one of the reasons I bought the car. Is this because the drag is increased somehow?
One more thing, dont forget that the default setting for the Aircon is ON. I achieved the above results with it switched OFF.

 

[SLinKyjoe]

According to Merc the R170 uses an increase in fuel of 1.5% with the roof off.

 

[mlc]

Wez.k - I love the idea that MB put a light on to warn you that you have turned OFF the a/c, whilst the rest of the world tells you not be selfish and run around with cleaned air.

Uncle Slinky - whilst I would never argue with either my favourite uncle nor MB I find the 1.5% unlikely. We used to be told that driving with the windows down or god forbid the sun roof open cost 10% at motorway speeds, the SLK has got the biggest sunroof I have ever seen

joking apart smooth airflow of the car is very important to drag. Cars no longer have gutters on the roof and they have flush glass to reduce drag - to increase MPG. As you know driving with the roof down completley ruins that - its very windy in their. If you had quoted 20% at speed I could have agreed with that.

I could of course be wrong (as normal).

Mark.

 

[wez.k]

I'd happy to put all this to the test, but to do that I'd need a whole week of sunshine!!!

 

[Vangogh]

I have just been calculating my MPG for my 1998 SLK230K.
I travel 6 miles each way to work, in town traffic, and very rarely get the opportunity to boot it. I did a 60 mile round trip last Sunday with the top down, some motorway some fast A roads. I have just filled the car up and the results are... 253 miles covered the tank took 47.82 litres which is 10.51 gallons. Therefore the car returned 24.07 miles per gallon. Which I think is OK.
Vangogh
1998 SLK230K
2001 C Class

 

[SLinKyjoe]

Nephew...not wishing to cause an arugument.... I wrote to Merc and thats what they quoted...could be worse.......i would also assume that the drag would be affected more with the draughts stop inplace.....but i dont know....

if you could be bothered i suppose you could actaully test it....altho 10% for windows is often quoted you would find that you end up trapping the iar in the car which creates a more prounounced drag effect whereas removing the entire roof may create drag it would be less prounounced....stilll...thats what Merc said.....

 

[davidsl500]

Joe, Maybe the 1.5% quoted is for your new shape SLK and the older style is less efficient. Of course the other drag factor is the amount of hair the driver has....hmmm .. the wind just glides over Joe's head.......

 

[pascal]

And what % would Wez lose when he has his Tuba or Double Bass sticking up in the air :lol:

 

[mlc]

Well I certainly cant argue with my favourite uncle AND MB, so it must be 1.5%

It does mean that I am in trouble with MrsC. because I always claim that the 20 mpg I get from her car is because I always have the roof down and nothing to do with the way I drive it, still she wouldnt read this thread will she.

Mark.

PS so why do I only get 22mpg from the Mondeo, should I get the roof cut off rather than opening the sunroof?

 

[SLinKyjoe]

the 1.5% was for the R170. i think the drag factor of the new shape is the same if i remember the wording...in fact it tells you what it is with the roof off somewhere...but i will have slung that out with the post.

i wrote to merc as one of my collegues asked and i didnt know.....

if you look at it this way. if it was 20% worse you would cover a fifth less miles per tank which would prevent anyone buying them i think....10% maybe more realistic but i would still think that is on the high side...leaving the windows down on a saloon etc would create a an airbrake which would significantly affect the cleanliness of the car through the air. a soft top has drag with the roof up like any normal car...the only difference is when you remove the roof you get significant air turbulance generated where the roof should be, but that will only be a small amount greater than the drag generated from the roof being in place. so 1.5% may be about right. to be honest i have really noticed much differenc in feul with the roof on or off.....so i would assume it to be about correct. altho i do tend to crusie a bit more with the roof off as i like the fresh air and i like the feelling of my hair blowing in the wind....I refuse to chase it though!!!!!!!!


i was suprised about the 22mpg from the ford.....i originally put it done to sitting in traffic? do you have lots of hills you drive up?

what most people need to remember is the biggest effect on feul consupmtion is your right foot....a lot of people really dont know who to conserve fuel without thinking they are not driving the car....if you press just a bit more gentle you will travel almost as fast with a huge reduction in fuel useage.....try it....in fact i find some people who have yet to realise that smooth and accurate is the better way to drive....and i mean drive, fast. apply the same method to normal road speeds and your fuel consumptions drops but your speed stays similar to if you bang on....and its all down to your right foot....


altho the ford may not have this problem, some fords do.....if you have wide feet you often gently press the brake pedal while you are driving....it is because they shove the pedals in some models, noticeably the fiesta, too close and this may also infulence your fuel consumption.....then again it is a ford so maybes its just rubbish.

hope i have clarified things and not got into an argument.....

but if i have...you are all wrong, i am right...lalalalalallalal(with fingers in my ears)