[Dan]

How is your MPG doing and are you getting close to official figures?
According to this report it's unlikely:http://europe.autonews.com/article/20141106/ANE/141109896/mercedes-worst-manipulator-of-eu-fuel-economy-test-report-says
Mercedes-Benz is the worst offender in manipulating European fuel-efficiency tests, a move that costs the average car owner an additional 5,600 euros over the lifetime of a vehicle, the Brussels-based green lobby group Transport & Environment said today.
By 2020, motorists will have to pay one and a half times more than what they should for fuel, T&E concluded in its 2014 Mind the Gap report, which highlights what it calls abuses by carmakers and a failure of EU regulators to close testing loopholes.
"If your new Mercedes car swallows 40 percent more fuel than the brochure promised, it's not your heavy-footed driving. Rather it's because Mercedes are the current leaders at manipulating the way vehicles are tested, producing official fuel economy figures in the labs that cannot be replicated in the real world,” T&E said in a statement today.

 

[roytheboy]

I think that's unfair as the tests are carried out by independent authorities, and it's obvious that all the manufacturers are going to design their engines with those tests in mind - why wouldn't they! It also depends very much on how you drive, contrary to the above citation. I have a GLA250 petrol, and I drive 6 miles to a swimming pool most mornings, from a cold start (note). If I take it easy in these low temperatures, and coast where possible, I can achieve an indicated 40 or 41 mpg on this short run. But if I'm late and I put my foot down all the way, I only manage 24mpg. That is one hell of a difference, due solely to the way I drive.

Did you see Top Gear this week? Clarkson took a new hybrid BMW i8 for a long run from London to Whitby. BMW claimed an achievable 150mpg for the i8, but Clarkson managed only 34mpg on his journey!!!

 

[Oberst]

Please remember that the quoted figures are obtained in laboratory conditions and not in real daily driving. It is meant to give you an idea for comparison. They are issued by EU and not by individual car companies.

 

[BasilD]

They are no worse than any other manufacturer. I must say that my GLA250 like roytheboy can vary greatly on how I drive but I can if I drive sensibly achieve what MB claim as combined MPG.

Having said that the BMW I had did not achieve the quoted figures regardless of how I drove, neither did the golf mk6 GTD or Audi Q5 and A3 (new one). again they all varied greatly on how I drove, just none could achieve the actual combined figure.

Until the law changes and they use real world figures as manufacturer ficures I doubt they will ever be totally accurate.

 

[MercuryMan]

I feel it's also a marketing selling point as well.. They are going to test the MB under the most efficient conditions so that they can achieve the best MPG possible. It is definitely far from a fixed number. A lot comes down to the driver and quality of fuel.

 

[learoy]

I always look at the official mpg and minus 20% to get real world mpg never mind which manufacturer

 

[roytheboy]

MercuryMan - MB do not do the testing. All new engines are tested in EU labs, and it the EU that publishes the results, not MB.

 

[learoy]

MercuryMan - MB do not do the testing. All new engines are tested in EU labs, and it the EU that publishes the results, not MB.

this is true.well put roytheboy

 

[p0ppet]

I'm achieving 50-54mpg... This is the only reason I'm still hanging on to the rear of it - Despite all my electrical issues!

 

[Dan]

But have you heard about how some manufacturers do the testing?
They strip the interior out, they tape the drive in sealing all the joints up, take the wing mirrors off etc. - It's a big con to rip us all off.
http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/car-news/consumer-news/88320/eu-to-crack-down-on-unrealistic-car-mpg-figures