Real Seat Arosa fuel consumption
Seat Arosa real fuel consumption by user reviews is approximately 7% higher compared to official consumption.
See below for the actual consumption of each generation and version.
See below for the actual consumption of each generation and version.
2000
Seat Arosa 2000
Average real petrol consumption difference: +8% Average real diesel consumption difference: +7%
Real and specified fuel consumption and differences for specific Seat Arosa versions are shown in the table below.
| Modification | Fuel | Claimed consumption | Real consumption |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1.0Seat Arosa 2001 1.0 MT | Petrol | 5.8 l/100km | 6.4 l/100km+10% |
| 1.2Seat Arosa 2000 1.2 TDI 3L AT | Diesel | 3.0 l/100km | |
| 1.4Seat Arosa 2001 1.4 60 HP MT | Petrol | 6.1 l/100km | 6.6 l/100km+8% |
| 1.4Seat Arosa 2001 1.4 Automatic 60 HP AT | Petrol | 7.4 l/100km | |
| 1.4Seat Arosa 2001 1.4 16V 100 HP MT | Petrol | 6.6 l/100km | 7.0 l/100km+6% |
| 1.4Seat Arosa 2001 1.4 TDi MT | Diesel | 4.3 l/100km | 4.6 l/100km+7% |
| 1.7Seat Arosa 2001 1.7 SDi MT | Diesel | 4.4 l/100km | 4.7 l/100km+7% |
1997
Seat Arosa 1997
Average real petrol consumption difference: +4% Average real diesel consumption difference: +7%
Real and specified fuel consumption and differences for specific Seat Arosa versions are shown in the table below.
| Modification | Fuel | Claimed consumption | Real consumption |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1.0Seat Arosa 1997 1.0 MT | Petrol | 5.8 l/100km | 6.4 l/100km+10% |
| 1.4Seat Arosa 1997 1.4 60 HP MT | Petrol | 6.2 l/100km | 6.5 l/100km+5% |
| 1.4Seat Arosa 1997 1.4 Automatic 60 HP AT | Petrol | 7.6 l/100km | 8.0 l/100km+5% |
| 1.4Seat Arosa 1999 1.4 16V 100 HP MT | Petrol | 6.6 l/100km | 7.0 l/100km+6% |
| 1.4Seat Arosa 2000 1.4 TDi MT | Diesel | 4.3 l/100km | 4.7 l/100km+9% |
| 1.7Seat Arosa 1998 1.7 SDi MT | Diesel | 4.4 l/100km | 4.6 l/100km+5% |
Real fuel consumption of other carmakers
The fuel consumption reported by users does not reflect the experience of all users, may be selective (depending on the driving conditions, driving style, technical condition of the car and other circumstances) and should therefore not be taken as a representative indicator.