Chrysler Sebring 2007 fuel consumption
Chrysler Sebring from 2007 to 2010 real fuel consumption according to user reports is similar compared to advertised fuel consumption. Since 2007 the Chrysler Sebring 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
| Year | Gasoline cars | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| All carmakers | Chrysler Sebring | |||
| 2007 | +11% | +7% | ||
| Show all years | ||||
| 2008 | +12% | +7% | ||
| 2009 | +14% | +7% | ||
| 2010 | +16% | +7% | ||
See below for the actual consumption of generations and versions of Chrysler Sebring.
2007 - 2010
Chrysler Sebring 2007 cabrio fuel economy
| Average advertised fuel consumption for petrol engines | 22.7 MPG 10.4 l/100km |
| Average real-world fuel consumption for petrol engines | 21.0 MPG 11.2 l/100km |
| Average real gasoline consumption difference * | +7% |
| Average advertised fuel consumption for diesel engines | 34.6 MPG 6.8 l/100km |
The table below shows the real and claimed fuel consumption and the differences for specific versions.
| Modification | Claimed consumption | Real consumption |
|---|---|---|
| 2.0 liter diesel engine | ||
| Chrysler Sebring 2007 Hard Top 2.0 CRD 140 HP manual | 34.6 MPG 6.8 l/100km |
|
| Chrysler Sebring 2007 Soft Top 2.0 CRD 140 HP manual | 34.6 MPG 6.8 l/100km |
|
| 2.4 liter petrol engine | ||
| Chrysler Sebring 2007 2.4i 16V 172 HP automatic | 24.8 MPG 9.5 l/100km |
|
| 2.7 liter petrol engine | ||
| Chrysler Sebring 2007 2.7i V6 186 HP automatic | 22.4 MPG 10.5 l/100km |
21.0 MPG 11.2 l/100km+7% |
| 3.5 liter petrol engine | ||
| Chrysler Sebring 2007 3.5i V6 235 HP automatic | 21.2 MPG 11.1 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.