Mercedes G class 2000 fuel consumption
Mercedes G class from 2000 to 2012 real fuel consumption according to user reports is approximately 11% higher compared to advertised fuel consumption. For petrol engines real consumption is in average 10% higher, but for diesel engines is approximately 13% higher. Starting from 2000 Mercedes G class average difference between actual owner-reported fuel consumption and stated consumption was similar to average, at 2012 difference between owner-reported and advertised fuel economy became less than industry average. For more details, see the table below.
Year-to-year deviations of actual owner-reported average fuel consumption from advertised values
Year | Gasoline cars | Diesel cars | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
All carmakers | Mercedes G class | All carmakers | Mercedes G class | |
2000 | +4% | +3% | +5% | +10% |
Show all years | ||||
2001 | +5% | +3% | +6% | +10% |
2002 | +6% | +3% | +7% | +13% |
2003 | +6% | +3% | +8% | +13% |
2004 | +7% | +3% | +9% | +13% |
2005 | +8% | +3% | +10% | +13% |
2006 | +9% | +3% | +11% | +13% |
2007 | +11% | - | +12% | +22% |
2008 | +12% | +15% | +13% | +22% |
2009 | +14% | +15% | +14% | +22% |
2010 | +16% | +15% | +16% | +22% |
2011 | +19% | +15% | +19% | +22% |
2012 | +21% | +15% | +23% | +22% |
See below for the actual consumption of generations and versions of Mercedes G class.
2000 - 2012
Mercedes G class 2000 fuel economy
Average advertised fuel consumption for petrol engines | 14.7 MPG 16.0 l/100km |
Average real-world fuel consumption for petrol engines | 13.8 MPG 17.1 l/100km |
Average real gasoline consumption difference * | +8% |
Average advertised fuel consumption for diesel engines | 20.2 MPG 11.7 l/100km |
Average real-world fuel consumption for diesel engines | 17.6 MPG 13.4 l/100km |
Average real diesel consumption difference * | +15% |
Mercedes G class 2000 specs
Mercedes G class 2000 owner reviewsMercedes G class service info and schedule
The table below shows the real and claimed fuel consumption and the differences for specific versions.
Modification | Claimed consumption | Real consumption |
---|---|---|
2.7 liter diesel engine | ||
Mercedes G 270 2002 CDI 156 HP 4x4 automatic | 21.4 MPG 11.0 l/100km |
18.1 MPG 13.0 l/100km+18% |
3.0 liter diesel engine | ||
Mercedes G 320 2000 CDI Lang 4MATIC 224 HP 4x4 automatic | 21.4 MPG 11.0 l/100km |
17.6 MPG 13.4 l/100km+22% |
Mercedes G 320 2006 CDI 224 HP 4x4 automatic | 17.6 MPG 13.4 l/100km |
|
3.2 liter petrol engine | ||
Mercedes G 320 2000 215 HP 4x4 automatic | 15.7 MPG 15.0 l/100km |
|
4.0 liter diesel engine | ||
Mercedes G 400 2000 CDI 250 HP 4x4 automatic | 18.1 MPG 13.0 l/100km |
17.2 MPG 13.7 l/100km+5% |
5.0 liter petrol engine | ||
Mercedes G 500 2000 296 HP 4x4 automatic | 13.8 MPG 17.0 l/100km |
13.6 MPG 17.3 l/100km+2% |
Mercedes G 500 2006 296 HP 4x4 automatic | 14.1 MPG 16.7 l/100km |
|
5.4 liter petrol engine | ||
Mercedes G 55 2003 AMG 354 HP 4x4 automatic | 14.7 MPG 16.0 l/100km |
|
Mercedes G 55 2004 AMG Kompressor 476 HP 4x4 automatic | 14.4 MPG 16.3 l/100km |
|
Mercedes G 55 2006 AMG Kompressor 500 HP 4x4 automatic | 14.4 MPG 16.3 l/100km |
|
5.5 liter petrol engine | ||
Mercedes G 500 2008 Lang 4MATIC 388 HP 4x4 automatic | 16.0 MPG 14.7 l/100km |
13.9 MPG 16.9 l/100km+15% |
2000 - 2008
Mercedes G class 2000 3 doors fuel economy
Average advertised fuel consumption for petrol engines | 14.5 MPG 16.2 l/100km |
Average real-world fuel consumption for petrol engines | 13.6 MPG 17.3 l/100km |
Average real gasoline consumption difference * | +4% |
Average advertised fuel consumption for diesel engines | 19.8 MPG 11.9 l/100km |
Average real-world fuel consumption for diesel engines | 17.5 MPG 13.5 l/100km |
Average real diesel consumption difference * | +13% |
The table below shows the real and claimed fuel consumption and the differences for specific versions.
Modification | Claimed consumption | Real consumption |
---|---|---|
2.7 liter diesel engine | ||
Mercedes G 270 2002 CDI 156 HP 4x4 automatic | 21.6 MPG 10.9 l/100km |
18.1 MPG 13.0 l/100km+19% |
3.0 liter diesel engine | ||
Mercedes G 320 2006 CDI 224 HP 4x4 automatic | 17.2 MPG 13.7 l/100km |
|
3.2 liter petrol engine | ||
Mercedes G 320 2000 215 HP 4x4 automatic | 15.4 MPG 15.3 l/100km |
|
4.0 liter diesel engine | ||
Mercedes G 400 2000 CDI 250 HP 4x4 automatic | 18.4 MPG 12.8 l/100km |
17.2 MPG 13.7 l/100km+7% |
5.0 liter petrol engine | ||
Mercedes G 500 2000 296 HP 4x4 automatic | 14.1 MPG 16.7 l/100km |
13.6 MPG 17.3 l/100km+4% |
Mercedes G 500 2006 296 HP 4x4 automatic | 14.1 MPG 16.7 l/100km |
2000 - 2012
Mercedes G class 2000 Cabrio fuel economy
Average advertised fuel consumption for petrol engines | 14.5 MPG 16.2 l/100km |
Average real-world fuel consumption for petrol engines | 13.6 MPG 17.3 l/100km |
Average real gasoline consumption difference * | +4% |
Average advertised fuel consumption for diesel engines | 18.4 MPG 12.8 l/100km |
Average real-world fuel consumption for diesel engines | 17.4 MPG 13.6 l/100km |
Average real diesel consumption difference * | +7% |
Mercedes G class 2000 specs
Mercedes G class 2000 owner reviewsMercedes G class service info and schedule
The table below shows the real and claimed fuel consumption and the differences for specific versions.
Modification | Claimed consumption | Real consumption |
---|---|---|
3.0 liter diesel engine | ||
Mercedes G 320 2006 CDI Cabriolet 224 HP 4x4 automatic | 17.6 MPG 13.4 l/100km |
|
3.2 liter petrol engine | ||
Mercedes G 320 2000 Cabriolet 215 HP 4x4 automatic | 15.4 MPG 15.3 l/100km |
|
4.0 liter diesel engine | ||
Mercedes G 400 2000 CDI Cabriolet 250 HP 4x4 automatic | 18.4 MPG 12.8 l/100km |
17.2 MPG 13.7 l/100km+7% |
5.0 liter petrol engine | ||
Mercedes G 500 2000 Cabriolet 296 HP 4x4 automatic | 14.1 MPG 16.7 l/100km |
13.6 MPG 17.3 l/100km+4% |
Mercedes G 500 2006 Cabriolet 296 HP 4x4 automatic | 14.1 MPG 16.7 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.