Real fuel consumption and economy logo

Mercedes SL 2006 fuel consumption

Mercedes SL from 2006 to 2008 real fuel consumption according to user reports is approximately 15% higher compared to advertised fuel consumption. Starting from 2006 Mercedes SL average difference between actual owner-reported fuel consumption and stated consumption was similar to average, at 2008 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

YearGasoline cars
All carmakersMercedes SL
2006+9%+10%
Show all years
2007+11%+10%
2008+12%+10%

See below for the actual consumption of generations and versions of Mercedes SL.

2006 - 2008

Mercedes SL 2006 fuel economy

Average advertised fuel consumption for petrol engines17.7 MPG
13.3 l/100km
Average real-world fuel consumption for petrol engines17.9 MPG
13.1 l/100km
Average real gasoline consumption difference *+10%
ModificationClaimed consumptionReal consumption
3.5 liter petrol engine
Mercedes SL 3.5 350 2006 272 HP automatic 22.8 MPG
10.3 l/100km
19.9 MPG
11.8 l/100km+15%
5.4 liter petrol engine
Mercedes SL 5.4 55 2006 AMG 517 HP automatic 17.4 MPG
13.5 l/100km
15.5 MPG
15.2 l/100km+13%
5.5 liter petrol engine
Mercedes SL 5.5 500 2006 388 HP automatic 19.3 MPG
12.2 l/100km
19.0 MPG
12.4 l/100km+2%
Mercedes SL 2006 5.5 SL 600 V12 517 HP automatic 16.4 MPG
14.3 l/100km
6.0 liter petrol engine
Mercedes SL 6.0 600 2006 517 HP automatic 16.4 MPG
14.3 l/100km
Mercedes SL 6.0 65 2006 AMG 612 HP automatic 15.6 MPG
15.1 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.