Real fuel consumption and economy logo

Kia Clarus fuel consumption

Of all Kia Clarus modifications produced from 1996 to 2001 real fuel consumption according to user ratings is similar compared to advertised consumption. Since 1997 the Kia Clarus 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 cars
All carmakersKia Clarus
1997+3%insignificant
Show all years
1998+3%insignificant
1999+3%insignificant

See below for the actual consumption of generations and versions of Kia Clarus.

1999 - 2001

Kia Clarus 1999 sedan fuel economy

Average advertised fuel consumption for petrol engines22.6 MPG
10.4 l/100km
Average real-world fuel consumption for petrol engines26.3 MPG
9.0 l/100km
Average real gasoline consumption difference *insignificant

According to advertised fuel consumption, a Kia Clarus 1999 with automatic transmission consumes on average 1.2 liters per 100 km or 13% more fuel than similar versions with manual gearbox.

Of all modifications the best advertised fuel economy in its class has Kia Clarus with 1.8 petrol engine and manual transmission (Kia Clarus 1999 1.8 116 HP), but despite this 85% of other similar cars have better fuel economy figures.

ModificationClaimed consumptionReal consumption
1.8 liter petrol engine
Kia Clarus 1999 1.8 116 HP manual 25.3 MPG
9.3 l/100km
24.8 MPG
9.5 l/100km+2%
Kia Clarus 1999 1.8 116 HP automatic 21.6 MPG
10.9 l/100km
2.0 liter petrol engine
Kia Clarus 1999 2.0 133 HP manual 22.8 MPG
10.3 l/100km
23.1 MPG
10.2 l/100km-1%
Kia Clarus 1999 2.0 133 HP automatic 21.2 MPG
11.1 l/100km
1999 - 2001

Kia Clarus 1999 wagon fuel economy

Average advertised fuel consumption for petrol engines22.6 MPG
10.4 l/100km
Average real-world fuel consumption for petrol engines26.1 MPG
9.0 l/100km
Average real gasoline consumption difference *insignificant

According to advertised fuel consumption, a Kia Clarus 1999 with automatic transmission consumes on average 1.2 liters per 100 km or 13% more fuel than similar versions with manual gearbox.

Of all modifications the best advertised fuel economy in its class has Kia Clarus with 1.8 petrol engine and manual transmission (Kia Clarus 1999 Wagon 1.8 116 HP), but despite this 85% of other similar cars have better fuel economy figures.

ModificationClaimed consumptionReal consumption
1.8 liter petrol engine
Kia Clarus 1999 Wagon 1.8 116 HP manual 25.3 MPG
9.3 l/100km
24.8 MPG
9.5 l/100km+2%
Kia Clarus 1999 Wagon 1.8 116 HP automatic 21.6 MPG
10.9 l/100km
2.0 liter petrol engine
Kia Clarus 1999 Wagon 2.0 133 HP manual 22.8 MPG
10.3 l/100km
22.8 MPG
10.3 l/100km0%
Kia Clarus 1999 Wagon 2.0 133 HP automatic 21.2 MPG
11.1 l/100km
1996 - 1999

Kia Clarus 1996 sedan fuel economy

Average advertised fuel consumption for petrol engines22.5 MPG
10.5 l/100km
Average real-world fuel consumption for petrol engines26.4 MPG
8.9 l/100km
Average real gasoline consumption difference *insignificant

According to advertised fuel consumption, a Kia Clarus 1996 with automatic transmission consumes on average 2 liters per 100 km or 21% more fuel than similar versions with manual gearbox.

Of all modifications the best advertised fuel economy in its class has Kia Clarus with 2.0 petrol engine and manual transmission (Kia Clarus 1997 2.0 133 HP), but despite this 80% of other similar cars have better fuel economy figures.

ModificationClaimed consumptionReal consumption
1.8 liter petrol engine
Kia Clarus 1996 1.8 116 HP manual 25.3 MPG
9.3 l/100km
25.8 MPG
9.1 l/100km-2%
Kia Clarus 1996 1.8 116 HP automatic 21.6 MPG
10.9 l/100km
2.0 liter petrol engine
Kia Clarus 1997 2.0 133 HP manual 24.2 MPG
9.7 l/100km
24.8 MPG
9.5 l/100km-2%
Kia Clarus 1997 2.0 133 HP automatic 19.6 MPG
12.0 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.