Real fuel consumption and economy logo

Suzuki Grand Vitara 2012 fuel consumption

Suzuki Grand Vitara from 2012 to 2015 real fuel consumption according to user reports is approximately 16% higher compared to advertised fuel consumption. For petrol engines real consumption is in average 18% higher, but for diesel engines is approximately 15% higher. Starting from 2012 Suzuki Grand Vitara average difference between actual owner-reported fuel consumption and stated consumption was significantly higher than average, at 2013 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 carsDiesel cars
All carmakersSuzuki Grand VitaraAll carmakersSuzuki Grand Vitara
2012+21%+27% +23%+16%
Show all years
2013+23%+27% +27%+16%
2014+26%+27% +30%+16%
2015+27%+27% +33%+16%

See below for the actual consumption of generations and versions of Suzuki Grand Vitara.

2012 - 2015

Suzuki Grand Vitara 2012 fuel economy

Average advertised fuel consumption for petrol engines26.6 MPG
8.8 l/100km
Average real-world fuel consumption for petrol engines21.8 MPG
10.8 l/100km
Average real gasoline consumption difference *+20%
Average advertised fuel consumption for diesel engines34.6 MPG
6.8 l/100km
Average real-world fuel consumption for diesel engines29.8 MPG
7.9 l/100km
Average real diesel consumption difference *+16%

According to advertised fuel consumption, a Suzuki Grand Vitara 2012 with automatic transmission consumes on average 0.6 liters per 100 km or 7% more fuel than similar versions with manual gearbox.

Compared to similar cars from other manufacturers, the Suzuki Grand Vitara fuel economy is one of the worst. Of all modifications the best advertised fuel economy in its class has Suzuki Grand Vitara with 2.4 petrol engine and manual transmission (Suzuki Grand Vitara 2012 2.4 169 HP 4x4), but despite this 80% of other similar cars have better fuel economy figures.

ModificationClaimed consumptionReal consumption
1.6 liter petrol engine
Suzuki Grand Vitara 2012 1.6 106 HP 4x4 manual 28.7 MPG
8.2 l/100km
1.9 liter diesel engine
Suzuki Grand Vitara 2012 1.9 129 HP 4x4 manual 34.6 MPG
6.8 l/100km
29.8 MPG
7.9 l/100km+16%
2.0 liter petrol engine
Suzuki Grand Vitara 2012 2.0 140 HP 4x4 manual 28.0 MPG
8.4 l/100km
Suzuki Grand Vitara 2012 2.0 140 HP 4x4 automatic 26.4 MPG
8.9 l/100km
2.4 liter petrol engine
Suzuki Grand Vitara 2012 2.4 169 HP 4x4 manual 26.1 MPG
9.0 l/100km
21.8 MPG
10.8 l/100km+20%
Suzuki Grand Vitara 2012 2.4 169 HP 4x4 automatic 24.2 MPG
9.7 l/100km
2012 - 2015

Suzuki Grand Vitara 2012 fuel economy

Average advertised fuel consumption for petrol engines27.0 MPG
8.7 l/100km
Average real-world fuel consumption for petrol engines20.1 MPG
11.7 l/100km
Average real gasoline consumption difference *+31%

According to advertised fuel consumption, a Suzuki Grand Vitara 2012 with automatic transmission consumes on average 0.5 liters per 100 km or 6% more fuel than similar versions with manual gearbox. Based on user-reported real-world fuel consumption, this generation Suzuki Grand Vitara with automatic transmission consumes around 1.8 litres per 100 km or 17% more fuel than a version with the same engine but a manual gearbox.

Of all modifications the best advertised fuel economy in its class has Suzuki Grand Vitara with 2.4 petrol engine and manual transmission (Suzuki Grand Vitara 2012 2.4 166 HP 4x4).

ModificationClaimed consumptionReal consumption
1.6 liter petrol engine
Suzuki Grand Vitara 2012 1.6 106 HP 4x4 manual 28.7 MPG
8.2 l/100km
2.4 liter petrol engine
Suzuki Grand Vitara 2012 2.4 166 HP 4x4 manual 27.0 MPG
8.7 l/100km
21.8 MPG
10.8 l/100km+24%
Suzuki Grand Vitara 2012 2.4 166 HP 4x4 automatic 25.6 MPG
9.2 l/100km
18.7 MPG
12.6 l/100km+37%

* - 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.