[wmo168]

I fill up with 87 and the most I got out of a tank is 280 miles.
With 93 Octane, I am not sure if I can get 300 miles, but it cost $6 more to fillup per tank. $.60 more per gallon which is almost 2 gallons,.. I think is cost effective way is to use 87 octane.

Thoughts?

 

[Oceansol]

Don't use 87! The car is designed for 91 minimum. It will run OK for a tank, but it isn't intended for regular fuel, and who knows long-term what it might do to the engine. I took my GLA250 on an extended road trip, and my fuel range was over 500 miles according to the dash info.

 

[Kcgla]

I average between 400 and 420 miles per tank on my daily highway commute with my 4matic

 

[SSBGLA45]

Agree with Oceansol… here is verbatim from the owners manual:

! Only refuel using unleaded premium
grade gasoline with at least 91 AKI/
95 RON.

! Only use the fuel recommended. Operating
the vehicle with other fuels can lead to
engine failure.


! To ensure the longevity and full performance
of the engine, only premium-grade
unleaded gasoline must be used.

If standard unleaded gasoline is unavailable
and you have to refuel with unleaded
gasoline of a lower grade, observe the following
precautions:

>Only fill the fuel tank to half full with regular
unleaded gasoline and fill the rest
with premium-grade unleaded gasoline
as soon as possible.

>Do not drive at the maximum speed.

>Avoid sudden acceleration and engine
speeds over 3,000 rpm.

 

[crabman]

Your static compression, forced induction, and the resulting dynamic cylinder pressures are too high to run without detonation with 87 octane. What happens is your car starts pulling timing when it detects knock to prevent damage and that reduces your economy because your efficiency drops. Whether the loss is greater or less than the price differential I don't know. In the Corvette world there is some evidence to show that while knock sensors work the first punch has already landed and engines running chronically up against the knock sensors will have reduced lifespans. Gas is a commodity and getting the cheaper stuff wont hurt (think Costco and similar) but using a lower than recommended octane is slippery slope. You will hear of people who have been doing it for years and I cant comment objectively or anecdotally on that experience as I've never tried it or seen any documentation of good results. I wouldn't do it just because of the power loss which is substantial when your timing gets pulled even if I knew there was no accelerated engine wear/damage.

 

[wmo168]

Thanks for all the reply, I don't plan on keeping the car long time (lease) and I had run 87 on my M3 before as well. I know this would be a long discussion. However, where I live in South Florida they only have 87, 89, 93. $2.48, $2.68, $3.08 There is no 91 octane. I am suprise some of you got 400-420 miles per tank.

Maybe we are too hot in South Florida and the AC kick in rather frequent... I don't mind putting in 93 Octane if I can get at least 380+ per tank.. but my 3 weeks old GLA250 only get 268-280 per tank before the critcal fuel message show up.

I did lite foot last fill up and didnt floor the car and still get that figure...

 

[crabman]

Wow, if it was an E9X you were losing a lot of power because your timing was pulled the first time you got into the throttle after filling up and they don't reset till the next fill up is detected because the manufacturer is assuming the knock sensors were tripped after getting a bad tank of gas which in a way the car did. I'm kinda curious about the money angle, leased or buying you have a fairly significant spend per month when getting into cars of that price and the extra at fill up isn't comparatively very much. Doesn't make much sense to me but I'm admittedly a gear head type and I see things through that bias.

 

[bellermb]

Reminder to self....never buy someones lease
I use 93 and average 9.5L/100KM combined city/freeway driving thats 24.76 mpg in US gallons the tank is 56 litres or 14.8 US gallons that gives me 366.4 miles per tank.

 

[wmo168]

Thanks,

I know some of you not in US, but the gas here at least have 10% ethanol in it, I did european delivery in a BMW before and when I drive in europe, the gas is ethonal free and the car did get at least 30 miles more per tank. Maybe that is why we see the difference...

Pure gas here is rare and cost at least $.30 cents more and those are for boat engine.... Only few selected gas station near the ocean has those. (Marine Gas) since boat engine can't run with any ethanol

I will fill up with 93 the next two tank and see the mpg difference.

 

[Oceansol]

Another thing ALL should obey: Use ONLY Top Tier gas. Arco, Costco, Shell, Chevron, 76, etc. Here's a complete list: Top Tier Gasoline

 

[Kcgla]

I am in the U.S. I only fill up with 93 gas usually BP or Shell. Driving 75 mph in highway I normally average 29-31 mpg. I read somewhere that the GLA has a pretty good drag coefficient (0.29) which apparently is really good for an SUV.

 

[crabman]

lol I recall when C6 was coming out they were touting its "amazing" CD which was advertised as under .29 which is kinda like saying under 10 when the number is actually 9.99. In other words it just barely made it and they may as well have said .29. Anyhow it's impressive to me that these vehicles are as slippery as they are when you consider the numbers on dedicated sports cars.

 

[ebilchicken]

I'm getting an average of 525km which converts to 326 miles.

We have access to 91, 95 and 98 RON here in Melbourne, Australia and I only ever fill up with 98.

 

[Tim]

My best tank 391 miles. But on Fuelly there is a person who regularly gets over 400 with a best of 449 miles.

 

[crabman]

Some people prowl these forums paying attention to only the best numbers but the miracle tanks are not really the best ones to use in estimating a cars potential mileage. You have to consider driving style, there are those who will always get better mileage than average in any car and those like me who will find themselves at the bottom of the pack in any car. In my case I have to be realistic when I read the numbers and recognize that I'm likely to get less. You also have the problem of some people giving numbers from the instant readout as actual mileage who have never done the math at the pump, a sure way to skew the numbers since folks tend to see what they expect for better or worse while all the other numbers displayed are deemed outliers and dismissed. To say nothing of the fact that those numbers are dithered anyways.

I'm not speaking out against any of the numbers posted, just saying a person needs to make a realistic evaluation of the numbers available and their source combined with an honest assessment of their own driving style or disappointment is a likely outcome.

 

[AMGz]

Some people prowl these forums paying attention to only the best numbers but the miracle tanks are not really the best ones to use in estimating a cars potential mileage. You have to consider driving style, there are those who will always get better mileage than average in any car and those like me who will find themselves at the bottom of the pack in any car. In my case I have to be realistic when I read the numbers and recognize that I'm likely to get less. You also have the problem of some people giving numbers from the instant readout as actual mileage who have never done the math at the pump, a sure way to skew the numbers since folks tend to see what they expect for better or worse while all the other numbers displayed are deemed outliers and dismissed. To say nothing of the fact that those numbers are dithered anyways.

I'm not speaking out against any of the numbers posted, just saying a person needs to make a realistic evaluation of the numbers available and their source combined with an honest assessment of their own driving style or disappointment is a likely outcome.

This is a good point because seeing how bad it could potentially get is where real concern should be which could expose bigger problems and bring on a lot of questions as to why.

 

[SSBGLA45]

I am one of those that drives pretty much as it strikes me which usually more 'sporty' (I keep it in the M mode) and simply take whatever the mileage is as it is. I guess once you own performance GT cars the price of admission is gas mileage, thus having a AMG model that gets over 20 mpg and higher is a bonus for me.

 

[crabman]

I am one of those that drives pretty much as it strikes me which usually more 'sporty' (I keep it in the M mode) and simply take whatever the mileage is as it is. I guess once you own performance GT cars the price of admission is gas mileage, thus having a AMG model that gets over 20 mpg and higher is a bonus for me.

Yeah, same. I usually stay in manual with my DCT cars except when I'm stuck in traffic or on the highway.

This car is not bad compared to some others. As an example I use an app on my phone to track my mileage for the entire time I own a car and my E92 M3 averaged 11.41 MPG for my ownership. Combine that with a small tank and I would be looking for a gas station in 150 miles which irritated me just from having to stop for gas so often. On those forums you would occasionally read of young folks who had picked one up on lease but then couldn't drive it because premium at the time was 5 bucks and someone who can barely scrape the lease payment is going to have a hard time forking out double that for gas.

 

[m-type]

Mines gonna be a daily driver, commute close to 50miles a day, getting 10mpg (stop and go, stop lights from 50mph, hills) with a c63 is a deal breaker. Hoping to get at least 21mpg with the 45

 

[crabman]

I think the 45 would make a great commuter in those conditions, nimble, athletic, relatively comfortable, hatchback for the groceries grabbed on the way home. Every review I read implies you could average 21 per if you keep your foot out of it. They also say you wont, it seems the call to the inner hooligan is strong with this one.