Sentences with phrase «km fuel»

And we didn't come too close to the 4.8 L / 100 km fuel consumption claim with an average 6.1 L / 100 km recorded over a week of urban and freeway driving.

While the 6.1 l / 100 km fuel economy rating is first class for a car in this segment.

Otherwise, the engine is content pushing for its 7.3 L / 100 km fuel claim.

That's combined with a claimed 7.7 L / 100 km fuel consumption average.

It boasts a 5.5 - second 0 - 100 km / h acceleration time and an 8.9 L / 100 km fuel claim.

In gentle highway running, when you don't give the rev limiter an extended flogging, the turbo 2.0 - litre is capable of a 7.6 L / 100 km fuel figure, close to the overall 8.0 L / 100 km.

Vehicle: 2002 VW Golf (German) Engine: 1.4 liter, gasoline 75 hp Odometer: 60k miles / 100k km Fuel consumption: 29 - 33 MPG / 7 - 8 liters / 100 km Oil used: 5W30...

Tess, I would assume, like with any vehicle, the Chrysler Pacifica Hybrid will not get the 8.4 L per 100 km fuel prediction when towing.

2017 Tesla Model X P100D pricing and specifications: Price: $ 238,806 (plus on - road costs) Motors: Three - phase / four - pole AC induction Output: 447kW / 1074Nm (combined, not verified) Transmission: Reduction gear Electric Range: 542 km Energy Consumption: 226Wh / km Fuel Lifecycle CO2: 212g / km Safety Rating: N / A Warranty: Four years / 80,000 km

The ES 300h hybrid uses an Atkinson - cycle 2.5 - litre four - cylinder engine with electric motor that delivers a combined 215 horsepower, and an expected 5.3 L / 100 km fuel efficiency rating in combined driving.

On the slightly larger XF, the engine brings a 5.9 second time and 6.8 L / 100 km fuel use figure, while on the F - Pace, the engine notches triple figures in 6.0 seconds and uses a still - credible 7.7 L / 100 km combined.

We covered about 2000 Kms the fuel bill was only $ 412 around # 238.

The latter offer performance and efficiency benefits beyond their simple reduced mass — reduced frictional and rotational losses contribute up to 0.4 L / 100 km of the 3.2 L / 100 km fuel economy advantage Porsche claims the Panamera delivers in comparison to comparable «large luxury four - doors in the 400 and 500hp class».

Maybe the engine lacks some fizzy character, but most of us would take the real world 6.3 L / 100 km fuel consumption average we achieved over that any time.

Backing the Ingenium's 132kW / 430Nm engine and combined cycle 4.3 L / 100 km fuel figure is an eight - speed automatic transmission that includes shift paddles and Jaguar's all - surface progress control system.

«On - board this car we have e-tron technology with 515 kW of power and 2.5 l / 100 km fuel economy; laser headlights that leave all previous systems in the dark with its higher performance as well as new display and operating systems with cutting - edge electronic performance.

It is devoid of typical diesel clutter other than at idle levels, and also promises to go close to its claimed 4.8 L / 100 km fuel claim — impressive for a big five - seat car.

Five - star NCAP - tested safety, sub - 5.0 L / 100 km fuel economy, affordable pricing and enough kit in even base - grade form to sink a battleship are all points in the VW's favour.

Also, the AMG version announce a 10,1 l / 100 km fuel consumption, which mean 0,4 l / 100 km lower than old version despite 41 HP and 100 Nm more performance.

According to the certification issued by the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology (MIIT), the vehicle's 7.9 L / 100 km fuel consumption (29.8 mpg US) is one of the best in the segment.

With a fully - charged battery and a driver who can resist the urge to exploit 680 hp, Porsche says the Panamera Turbo S E-Hybrid is good for a 2.9 L / 100 km fuel consumption rating, according to the New European Driving Cycle (NEDC) measurement.

Do the same sums for the petrol LX 570 with its 14.4 L / 100 km fuel consumption average and 138 - litre tanks and the range is much the same as the diesel.

This is an area where the Golf GTI dominates with its 6.5 L / 100 km fuel consumption average, absolutely monstering the i30 N's 8.0 L / 100 km.

The Veloce accelerates to100km / h in 5.8 sec and claims a fuel consumption average of 6.8 L / 100 km, the Super diesel claims a 7.1 sec 0 - 100 km / h time and stellar 4.2 L / 100 km fuel consumption and the entry - level 2.0 claims a 6.6 sec 0 - 100 km / h and 6.0 L / 100 km.

Expected to be the top - seller is the 1.8 TFSI, which packs a 1798cc turbo - petrol four offering 132kW and 250Nm (1250 - 5000rpm), a 7.3 - second 0 - 100 km / h sprint time, 235km / h top speed and 5.6 L / 100 km fuel consumption, making it the thirstiest of a frugal bunch.

But it avoids the tax due to its sub - 7.0 L / 100 km fuel consumption, which earns it a «green car» dispensation from the tax.

Both cars are front - wheel drive (of course), have a matching MacPherson strut front and multi-link rear suspension concept, a combination of vented front and solid rear disc brakes, electric - assist power steering and even claim an identical 6.0 L / 100 km fuel consumption average (on the cheapest 91 RON fuel).

With all that performance, how can a GT2 RS owner possibly coax out the claimed 11.9 L / 100 km fuel consumption is anyone's guess.

OPC clams a 6.0 0 - 100 km / h time and 8.1 L / 100 km fuel consumption average with the help of auto stop - start.

Consider too the Range Rover Sport's sub - 11.0 L / 100 km fuel consumption during the week we tested it (10.2 by the time we handed it back), despite unconstrained use of its 250kW / 740Nm output and lack of an auto - stop facility.

Although it's somewhat uncharacteristic to hear a turbo engine working away in a Honda, the actual outcomes are pleasing: With a claimed 6.0 L / 100 km fuel consumption (better than the 6.4 L / 100 km claimed for 1.8 - litre versions of the Civic), and a 140g / km CO2 reading, it's at the top end of the class.

Speaking of economy, Porsche makes one pretty incredible claim for the Cayenne S E-Hybrid and that is its 3.4 L / 100 km fuel consumption average.

The 5 l / 100 km fuel consumption though is much too optimistic.

The new 2.0 liter 195 HP promise a 3.9 l / 100 km fuel consumption (102 g / km CO2 emissions), 0.6 l / 100 km less than the old 2.2 liter diesel which need 4.5 l / 100 km (117 g / km CO2 emissions).

And although its average consumption is still under 5.0 L / 100 km its fuel «costs per kilometre» are the greatest.

What Ford theoretically advertises as a 4.2 l / 100 km fuel consumption figure turns into 7.4 l / 100 km in the real world, which is below diesel territory but way better when it comes to CO2 emissions: 99 g / km.

As for the 218d, the necessary numbers are 150 hp at 4,000 rpm and 330 Nm at 1,750 - 2,250 rpm, a 205 km / h top speed and 0 - 100 km / h time of 8.8 seconds as well as a claimed 4.1 litres per 100 km fuel economy.

An even bigger achievement is the claimed 2.5 litre per 100 km fuel economy and CO2 emissions of 59 grams per kilometre.

Falcon facts — 12 - 13 litres / 100 km fuel consumption, most have 4.1 litre motors — 80 % are automatic.