Real Suzuki Alto fuel consumption
Suzuki Alto real fuel consumption by user reviews is approximately 13% higher compared to official consumption. Above consumption difference is the average for all Suzuki Alto produced from 1988 to 2014. For Suzuki Alto produced up to 2001 the difference in real fuel consumption by user reviews is on average minor, while for those produced after 2001 it is on average +19%.
See below for the actual consumption of each generation and version.
Average difference between user reported and stated consumption
All carmakers average fuel economy difference between advertised and user reported
See below for the actual consumption of each generation and version.
2009
Suzuki Alto 2009
Average real petrol consumption difference: +24%
Real and specified fuel consumption and differences for specific Suzuki Alto versions are shown in the table below.
| Modification | Claimed consumption | Real consumption |
|---|---|---|
| 1.0Suzuki Alto 2009 1.0 MT | 4.4 l/100km | 5.4 l/100km+23% |
| 1.0Suzuki Alto 2009 1.0 AT | 5.2 l/100km | 6.5 l/100km+25% |
2002
Suzuki Alto 2002
Average real petrol consumption difference: +13%
Real and specified fuel consumption and differences for specific Suzuki Alto versions are shown in the table below.
| Modification | Claimed consumption | Real consumption |
|---|---|---|
| 1.1Suzuki Alto 2002 1.1 MT | 4.9 l/100km | 5.7 l/100km+16% |
| 1.1Suzuki Alto 2002 1.1 AT | 6.2 l/100km | 6.8 l/100km+10% |
1996
Suzuki Alto 1996
Average real petrol consumption difference: minor
Real and specified fuel consumption and differences for specific Suzuki Alto versions are shown in the table below.
| Modification | Claimed consumption | Real consumption |
|---|---|---|
| 1.0Suzuki Alto 1996 1.0 54 HP MT | 5.4 l/100km | |
| 1.0Suzuki Alto 1996 1.0 54 HP MT | 5.7 l/100km | 5.8 l/100km+2% |
| 1.0Suzuki Alto 1996 1.0 54 HP AT | 7.2 l/100km |
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.