No, then silly me would put a turbo on that and we would be back to 22 mpg again...

__________________
Did you just pass my 740 at 200 kmh in a 300SD?????

1978 300SD 'Phil' - 1,315,853 Miles And Counting - 1, 317,885 as of 12/27/2012 - 1,333,000 as of 05/10/2013, 1,337,850 as of July 15, 2013, 1,339,000 as of August 13, 2013



100,000 miles since June 2005 Overhaul - Sold January 25th, 2014 After 1,344,246 Miles & 20 Years of Ownership

You fellows will all be crying in your beer when I post the fuel economy results for the SD.

No BS numbers with regard to a single tank of fuel. FOUR CONSECUTIVE TANKS with the total mileage and the total fuel consumed. Each time............filled right to the top of the pipe.

I'm almost certain to crack 30 mpg with it.

Brian,
What do you attribute your good gas mileage to?
Actually, I've never checked the mileage on my own SD.

Jeff

__________________
1984 300SD 300,000 miles--two tank WVO setup
2.88 diff & 500SEL anti-squat rear end

It's a bunch of little things that all come together:

1) Proper air pressure in the tires.
2) Proper IP timing
3) Head reconditioned with new valves and seats less than 50K ago.
4) Maximum speed: 62 mph.
5) Minimum use of brakes
6) Acceleration at approx. 2100 rpm
7) no a/c
8) no winter fuel
9) 85% highway mileage (at 62 mph).
10) Use of 6 oz. Power Service per tank for the past three years


I do have a suspicion that the Power Service is working because there was a noticeable increase in mileage on the SD this year and no other variable has changed other than a slightly reduced speed (65 down to 62).

30 is good for a 240, but I've read that closer to 40 mpg is possible when everything is done right. I get 32 mpg with my '84 300D. I wish it had a 5 spd manual trans. instead of the automatic...could maybe get 35-40. I think fuel is going to be a real problem one if these days, like when Iran/Israel let loose on each other, or something similar.

__________________
Diesel-guy

The consensus on craigslist is that they all get 34 mpg!

Kurt

__________________
- '79 240D - engine swap complete! Engine broken in! 28-31 mpg! Lovin' the ride!
- '86 190D (W201-126) - 2.5 NA engine, 5 speed, cloth interior, manual climate controls, 33-34 mpg (sold to forum member).

I've never talked to anyone that actually got 40mpg, you see it all over craigslist though, but I don't believe it for a minute. You could do it on one tank going down a mountain probably, but 40 is not a number that I believe a 240D can maintain over several tanks. I could see someone maintaining a 32-35mpg average with a well tuned 240D and driving habits that promote good fuel mileage.

__________________

What I was basing this on was not Craigslist, it was a magazine type drive test/report that was done way back when a 123 was new. As I recall, it was a steady state 50 mph, probabably flat roads, with little or no stop and go. I think it was done in South Africa. Unrealistic conditions compared to most driving in the US, I know, but they were probably trying to get the highest number possible to help sell cars. I did qualify my statement with a"when everything is done right".
Another point to make- most people I see on the road don't know, or don't care, about driving for fuel efficiency. They tromp the pedal to get going and fly up to stop lights instead of letting off and coasting. I live in a small town area where there is usually no need to drive like that. They are just "brain dead" about fuel economy, or busy texting, or daddy is buying the gas.
I think I still have that road test somewhere,if I find it, I'll post it. Later.

__________________
Diesel-guy

Maybe not. The turboed 5 cylinder seems more efficient than the natual aspirated ones. Although this may be perhaps the higher rear end ratios used with n/a engines. There was one guy seriously fooling around that seemed to at least retain the fuel milage he had after the modifications on his 616. Of course how scientifically it all was is up in the air.