Fuel economy improvements this century

[Dewi 2]

I don't often talk about fuel economy, because unless we drive high mileages, depreciation remaims the expensive part of owning a car.
The motor industry never like to speak about that. -

Here is one example of an improvement.
Two cars with (coincidentally) identical acceleration and top speed performance.
Motorway journey petrol consumption figures.

2000 CLK 320 ......... = 35 mpg
2022 E200 ............... = 55 mpg

The improvement is obviously achieved by the smaller engine and using a turbocharger.
Think the engine speed at 70 mph might be lower, but not sure about that.

I do prefer the quieter V6 engine of the CLK, but a 6 cylinder option was not available in the UK for W213s.

[MustangGT]

I think the E200 is a mild hybrid so not totally reliant on the petrol engine. According to Honest John the real life mpg of a 2022 E200 petrol is 28.6 mpg. The diesel version is around 52.9 mpg. Are you mixing the fuels up?

[Dewi 2]

MustangGT said:

I think the E200 is a mild hybrid, so not totally reliant on the petrol engine.
According to Honest John the real life mpg of a 2022 E200 petrol is 28.6 mpg.
The diesel version is around 52.9 mpg.
Are you mixing the fuels up?

On the move, all that the electric motor does with regard to propelling the car, is provide an extra boost to fill in for turbo lag.
Rarely ever needed on a motorway journey, so we are really comparing two petrol only cars.
My post was just in reference to motorway journeys, so obviously that would be a best achievable mpg figure.
Likewise the CLK figure, hence a like-for-like comparison to notice that considerable improvement in 20 years.

Honest John would be providing an overall mpg figure.

If the diesel version gives 52.9 mpg overall, then it would achieve a huge number of miles on a long motorway journey.
I expect that is precisely the reason, why most E Class cars are still diesel powered. I had to wait ages for a petrol to appear on sale.

For me, one unexpected aspect of 'mild hybrids' (cannot move the car), is that at MoT time, no emissions test is required. I asked for the usual print out of figures and was then told.

[SL222]

The mild hybrid system really just allows the engine braking to recharge the battery and then release the excess power when you accelerate, and it lets the engine cut out in glide mode. It won't drive on electricity alone.

My E220D gets 50-55mpg on long runs (which is all I ever really do) so I'd be very surprised if the petrol version gets anywhere near that. I reckon it makes 5% - 10% difference to the mpg.

[Dewi 2]

SL222 said:

The mild hybrid system really just allows the engine braking to recharge the battery and then release the excess power when you accelerate, and it lets the engine cut out in glide mode. It won't drive on electricity alone.

My E220D gets 50-55mpg on long runs (which is all I ever really do) so I'd be very surprised if the petrol version gets anywhere near that. I reckon it makes 5% - 10% difference to the mpg.

The journey that I quoted (done frequently) is;
initial 1 mile on town roads,
170 miles continuous motorway (under 70 mph),
then 1 mile on a country road to destination.

That is obviously going to give a higher mpg than any other type of journey, but if the 55mpg figure is wrong, then it is the MBUX system that is wrong.
My point was simply to point out the considerable improvement over the 20 year old MB, which did exactly the same journey when the trip read out showed 35 mpg.

I would have thought your E220D would do better than 55 mpg, if you did the 170 plus 2 miles journey, which I have described.
If a greater proportion of that journey was non motorway, then of course it would soon reduce the average mpg.
I think the engine revs at a constant 68 mph, are only about 1,600 rpm in 9th gear.
Interestingly, MBUX shows the engine is only producing 20 bhp, to propel the car at a constant 68 mph on a level section of road.

I don't use start/stop or glide, but that is another story.