Real fuel consumption and economy logo

Seat Cordoba 1996 fuel consumption

Seat Cordoba from 1996 to 1999 real fuel consumption according to user reports is approximately 7% higher compared to advertised fuel consumption. For petrol engines real consumption is in average 5% higher, but for diesel engines is approximately 8% higher. Since 1996 the Seat Cordoba average difference between owner-reported real-world fuel consumption and declared fuel economy has been similar to average.

Year-to-year deviations of actual owner-reported average fuel consumption from advertised values

YearGasoline carsDiesel cars
All carmakersSeat CordobaAll carmakersSeat Cordoba
1996+4%+3% +2%+7%
Show all years
1997+3%+3% +3%+5%
1998+3%+3% +4%+7%
1999+3%+3% +5%+10%

See below for the actual consumption of generations and versions of Seat Cordoba.

1996 - 1999

Seat Cordoba 1996 sedan fuel economy

Average advertised fuel consumption for petrol engines29.3 MPG
8.0 l/100km
Average real-world fuel consumption for petrol engines31.2 MPG
7.5 l/100km
Average real gasoline consumption difference *+3%
Average advertised fuel consumption for diesel engines45.7 MPG
5.2 l/100km
Average real-world fuel consumption for diesel engines45.9 MPG
5.1 l/100km

According to advertised fuel consumption, a Seat Cordoba 1996 with automatic transmission consumes on average 1.5 liters per 100 km or 20% more fuel than similar versions with manual gearbox.

Compared to similar cars from other manufacturers, the Seat Cordoba fuel economy is significantly above average. The best fuel economy in its class of all the modifications has one with 1.9 diesel engine and manual transmission (Seat Cordoba 1997 1.9 TDi 110 HP).

ModificationClaimed consumptionReal consumption
1.4 liter petrol engine
Seat Cordoba 1996 1.4i 60 HP manual 35.6 MPG
6.6 l/100km
34.1 MPG
6.9 l/100km+5%
1.6 liter petrol engine
Seat Cordoba 1996 1.6i 75 HP manual 30.9 MPG
7.6 l/100km
31.4 MPG
7.5 l/100km-1%
Seat Cordoba 1997 1.6i 75 HP automatic 25.8 MPG
9.1 l/100km
Seat Cordoba 1996 1.6i 101 HP manual 30.2 MPG
7.8 l/100km
28.7 MPG
8.2 l/100km+5%
1.8 liter petrol engine
Seat Cordoba 1996 1.8i 90 HP automatic 25.6 MPG
9.2 l/100km
1.9 liter diesel engine
Seat Cordoba 1996 1.9 D 64 HP manual 40.6 MPG
5.8 l/100km
40.6 MPG
5.8 l/100km0%
Seat Cordoba 1996 1.9 SDi 64 HP manual 47.0 MPG
5.0 l/100km
44.4 MPG
5.3 l/100km+6%
Seat Cordoba 1996 1.9 TDi 90 HP manual 48.0 MPG
4.9 l/100km
45.2 MPG
5.2 l/100km+6%
Seat Cordoba 1997 1.9 TDi 110 HP manual 48.0 MPG
4.9 l/100km
45.2 MPG
5.2 l/100km+6%
2.0 liter petrol engine
Seat Cordoba 1996 2.0 GTi 116 HP manual 29.8 MPG
7.9 l/100km
1996 - 1999

Seat Cordoba 1996 coupe fuel economy

Average advertised fuel consumption for petrol engines29.7 MPG
7.9 l/100km
Average real-world fuel consumption for petrol engines29.2 MPG
8.1 l/100km
Average real gasoline consumption difference *+3%
Average advertised fuel consumption for diesel engines48.5 MPG
4.9 l/100km
Average real-world fuel consumption for diesel engines42.4 MPG
5.6 l/100km
Average real diesel consumption difference *+14%
ModificationClaimed consumptionReal consumption
1.6 liter petrol engine
Seat Cordoba 1997 SX 1.6i 75 HP manual 30.9 MPG
7.6 l/100km
29.8 MPG
7.9 l/100km+4%
Seat Cordoba 1997 SX 1.6i 75 HP manual 30.9 MPG
7.6 l/100km
31.4 MPG
7.5 l/100km-1%
Seat Cordoba 1996 SX 1.6i 101 HP manual 30.2 MPG
7.8 l/100km
28.7 MPG
8.2 l/100km+5%
1.8 liter petrol engine
Seat Cordoba 1996 SX 1.8i 16V 129 HP manual 28.7 MPG
8.2 l/100km
1.9 liter diesel engine
Seat Cordoba 1996 SX 1.9 TDi 90 HP manual 48.0 MPG
4.9 l/100km
43.6 MPG
5.4 l/100km+10%
Seat Cordoba 1998 SX 1.9 TDi 110 HP manual 49.0 MPG
4.8 l/100km
41.3 MPG
5.7 l/100km+19%
2.0 liter petrol engine
Seat Cordoba 1996 SX 2.0i 116 HP manual 29.8 MPG
7.9 l/100km
Seat Cordoba 1996 SX 2.0i 16V 150 HP manual 28.0 MPG
8.4 l/100km
27.4 MPG
8.6 l/100km+2%

* - 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.