Mercedes SL 2012 fuel consumption
Mercedes SL from 2012 to 2016 real fuel consumption according to user reports is approximately 15% higher compared to advertised fuel consumption. Since 2012 the Mercedes SL average difference between owner-reported real-world fuel consumption and declared fuel economy has been significantly higher than average.
Year-to-year deviations of actual owner-reported average fuel consumption from advertised values
| Year | Gasoline cars | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| All carmakers | Mercedes SL | |||
| 2012 | +21% | +53% | ||
| Show all years | ||||
| 2013 | +23% | +53% | ||
| 2014 | +26% | +53% | ||
| 2015 | +27% | +53% | ||
| 2016 | +28% | +53% | ||
See below for the actual consumption of generations and versions of Mercedes SL.
2012 - 2016
Mercedes SL 2012 fuel economy
| Average advertised fuel consumption for petrol engines | 28.1 MPG 8.4 l/100km |
| Average real-world fuel consumption for petrol engines | 19.6 MPG 12.0 l/100km |
| Average real gasoline consumption difference * | +53% |
The table below shows the real and claimed fuel consumption and the differences for specific versions.
| Modification | Claimed consumption | Real consumption |
|---|---|---|
| 3.0 liter petrol engine | ||
| MERCEDES BENZ SL-Klasse (R231) 400 BlueEFFICIENCY 335 HP automatic | 30.5 MPG 7.7 l/100km |
18.2 MPG 12.9 l/100km+68% |
| 3.5 liter petrol engine | ||
| Mercedes SL 3.5 350 2012 306 HP automatic | 34.6 MPG 6.8 l/100km |
23.1 MPG 10.2 l/100km+50% |
| 4.7 liter petrol engine | ||
| Mercedes SL 4.7 500 2012 435 HP automatic | 25.8 MPG 9.1 l/100km |
18.2 MPG 12.9 l/100km+42% |
| 5.5 liter petrol engine | ||
| Mercedes SL 2014 5.5 AMG SL 63 585 HP automatic | 23.8 MPG 9.9 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.