Real fuel consumption and economy logo

Fiat Croma fuel consumption

Of all Fiat Croma modifications produced from 1986 to 2011 real fuel consumption according to user ratings is approximately 3% higher compared to advertised consumption. For petrol engines real consumption is similar to manufacturer's stated consumption, but for diesel engines is approximately 6% higher. Since 1990 the Fiat Croma average difference between owner-reported real-world fuel consumption and declared fuel economy has been less than industry average.

Year-to-year deviations of actual owner-reported average fuel consumption from advertised values

YearGasoline carsDiesel cars
All carmakersFiat CromaAll carmakersFiat Croma
1990+5%insignificant+5%-
Show all years
1991+5%insignificant+4%-
2005+8%insignificant+10%+5%
2006+9%insignificant+11%+5%
2007+11%insignificant+12%+5%
2008+12%+9% +13%+7%
2009+14%+9% +14%+7%
2010+16%+9% +16%+7%
2011+19%+9% +19%+7%

See below for the actual consumption of generations and versions of Fiat Croma.

2008 - 2011

Fiat Croma 2008 fuel economy

Average advertised fuel consumption for petrol engines29.5 MPG
8.0 l/100km
Average real-world fuel consumption for petrol engines29.0 MPG
8.1 l/100km
Average real gasoline consumption difference *+9%
Average advertised fuel consumption for diesel engines37.1 MPG
6.3 l/100km
Average real-world fuel consumption for diesel engines34.6 MPG
6.8 l/100km
Average real diesel consumption difference *+7%

According to advertised fuel consumption, a Fiat Croma 2008 with automatic transmission consumes on average 0.8 liters per 100 km or 13% more fuel than similar versions with manual gearbox. Based on user-reported real-world fuel consumption, this generation Fiat Croma with automatic transmission consumes around 0.8 litres per 100 km or 12% more fuel than a version with the same engine but a manual gearbox.

The best real fuel economy in its class according to user reviews of all the modifications has modification with 1.8 petrol engine and manual transmission (Fiat Croma 2008 1.8 140 HP). However, of all modifications the best advertised fuel economy in its class has Fiat Croma with 2.4 petrol engine and automatic transmission (Fiat Croma 2008 2.4 TD 200 HP).

ModificationClaimed consumptionReal consumption
1.8 liter petrol engine
Fiat Croma 2008 1.8 140 HP manual 31.8 MPG
7.4 l/100km
29.0 MPG
8.1 l/100km+9%
1.9 liter diesel engine
Fiat Croma 2008 1.9 TD 120 HP manual 39.2 MPG
6.0 l/100km
37.9 MPG
6.2 l/100km+3%
Fiat Croma 2008 1.9 TD 150 HP manual 38.6 MPG
6.1 l/100km
35.1 MPG
6.7 l/100km+10%
Fiat Croma 2008 1.9 TD 150 HP automatic 34.1 MPG
6.9 l/100km
31.4 MPG
7.5 l/100km+9%
2.2 liter petrol engine
Fiat Croma 2008 2.2 147 HP automatic 25.3 MPG
9.3 l/100km
2.4 liter petrol engine
Fiat Croma 2008 2.4 TD 200 HP automatic 32.7 MPG
7.2 l/100km
2005 - 2008

Fiat Croma 2005 fuel economy

Average advertised fuel consumption for petrol engines27.4 MPG
8.6 l/100km
Average real-world fuel consumption for petrol engines27.2 MPG
8.7 l/100km
Average real gasoline consumption difference *insignificant
Average advertised fuel consumption for diesel engines34.5 MPG
6.8 l/100km
Average real-world fuel consumption for diesel engines32.8 MPG
7.2 l/100km
Average real diesel consumption difference *+5%

According to advertised fuel consumption, a Fiat Croma 2005 with automatic transmission consumes on average 1.1 liters per 100 km or 15% more fuel than similar versions with manual gearbox. Based on user-reported real-world fuel consumption, this generation Fiat Croma with automatic transmission consumes around 0.8 litres per 100 km or 12% more fuel than a version with the same engine but a manual gearbox.

The best real fuel economy in its class according to user reviews of all the modifications has modification with 1.9 diesel engine and manual transmission (Fiat Croma 2005 1.9 Multijet 16v 150 150 HP). However, of all modifications the best advertised fuel economy in its class has Fiat Croma with 1.8 petrol engine and manual transmission (Fiat Croma 2006 1.8 16v 140 HP).

ModificationClaimed consumptionReal consumption
1.8 liter petrol engine
Fiat Croma 2006 1.8 16v 140 HP manual 31.4 MPG
7.5 l/100km
1.9 liter diesel engine
Fiat Croma 2005 1.9 Multijet 8v 120 120 HP manual 38.6 MPG
6.1 l/100km
36.8 MPG
6.4 l/100km+5%
Fiat Croma 2005 1.9 Multijet 16v 150 150 HP manual 38.6 MPG
6.1 l/100km
36.8 MPG
6.4 l/100km+5%
Fiat Croma 2005 1.9 Multijet 16v 150 150 HP automatic 33.1 MPG
7.1 l/100km
30.9 MPG
7.6 l/100km+7%
2.2 liter petrol engine
Fiat Croma 2005 2.2 16v 147 HP manual 27.4 MPG
8.6 l/100km
27.7 MPG
8.5 l/100km-1%
Fiat Croma 2005 2.2 16v 147 HP automatic 24.2 MPG
9.7 l/100km
24.2 MPG
9.7 l/100km0%
2.4 liter diesel engine
Fiat Croma 2005 2.4 Multijet 20v 200 200 HP automatic 29.4 MPG
8.0 l/100km
28.3 MPG
8.3 l/100km+4%
1986 - 1991

Fiat Croma 1986 fuel economy

Average advertised fuel consumption for petrol engines29.8 MPG
7.9 l/100km
Average real-world fuel consumption for petrol engines29.0 MPG
8.1 l/100km
Average real gasoline consumption difference *insignificant
Average advertised fuel consumption for diesel engines37.3 MPG
6.3 l/100km
ModificationClaimed consumptionReal consumption
1.9 liter diesel engine
Fiat Croma 1989 1.9 Turbo D.i.d. 90 HP manual 46.1 MPG
5.1 l/100km
2.0 liter petrol engine
Fiat Croma 1986 2.0 CHT 90 HP manual 33.1 MPG
7.1 l/100km
Fiat Croma 1987 2.0 I.e. 116 HP manual 28.3 MPG
8.3 l/100km
29.0 MPG
8.1 l/100km-2%
Fiat Croma 1986 2.0 I.e. 120 HP manual 30.9 MPG
7.6 l/100km
Fiat Croma 1987 2.0 Turbo I.e. 150 HP manual 28.3 MPG
8.3 l/100km
Fiat Croma 1986 2.0 Turbo I.e. 155 HP manual 28.7 MPG
8.2 l/100km
2.4 liter diesel engine
Fiat Croma 1986 2.4 Turbo D 101 HP manual 34.1 MPG
6.9 l/100km
2.5 liter diesel engine
Fiat Croma 1986 2.5 Diesel 75 HP manual 37.9 MPG
6.2 l/100km
Fiat Croma 1989 2.5 Turbo D 116 HP manual 33.6 MPG
7.0 l/100km

* - Difference between advertised and user reported fuel economy has been calculated taking into account only those car versions for which information is available both on the fuel consumption specified by the manufacturer and reported by users.

User-reported fuel consumption may not accurately represent all users' experiences due to variables such as driving conditions, driving style, technical condition of the vehicle, and other circumstances. Thus, it should not be relied upon as a representative indicator.