1998 Chevrolet Omega MPG is 29 MPG on engine:
The 1998 Chevrolet Omega MPG to weight ratio is shown in the graph:
We calculated that 1998 Chevrolet Omega MPG is up to 31% worse than the world average consumption.
Vehicle | Consumption (city / highway) | Consumption to weight ratio | Difference from world average consumption | Driving range (full tank) | Consumption per passenger |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
3.8 i V6 |
17
/
29 MPG
(13.5 / 8.1 L per 100 km) |
1.5 L per 100 km to 100 kg | 31% worse |
373—559 miles
(600—900 km) |
2.2 L per 100 km / person |
Vehicle | 3.8 i V6 |
---|---|
Consumption (city / highway) |
17
/
29 MPG
(13.5 / 8.1 L per 100 km) |
Consumption to weight ratio | 1.5 L per 100 km to 100 kg |
Difference from world average consumption | 31% worse |
Driving range (full tank) | 373—559 miles (600—900 km) |
Consumption per passenger | 2.2 L per 100 km / person |
1992 Chevrolet Omega MPG is 27 MPG on engine:
The 1992 Chevrolet Omega MPG to weight ratio is shown in the graph:
We calculated that 1992 Chevrolet Omega MPG is up to 34% worse than the world average consumption.
Vehicle | Consumption (city / highway) | Consumption to weight ratio | Difference from world average consumption | Driving range (full tank) | Consumption per passenger |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
3.0 i |
19
/
27 MPG
(12.7 / 8.8 L per 100 km) |
1.4 L per 100 km to 100 kg | 34% worse |
373—497 miles
(600—800 km) |
2.2 L per 100 km / person |
Vehicle | 3.0 i |
---|---|
Consumption (city / highway) |
19
/
27 MPG
(12.7 / 8.8 L per 100 km) |
Consumption to weight ratio | 1.4 L per 100 km to 100 kg |
Difference from world average consumption | 34% worse |
Driving range (full tank) | 373—497 miles (600—800 km) |
Consumption per passenger | 2.2 L per 100 km / person |
1992 Chevrolet Omega MPG is between 19 MPG and 32 MPG depending on engine:
The 1992 Chevrolet Omega MPG to weight ratio is shown in the graph:
We calculated that 1992 Chevrolet Omega MPG is up to 34% worse than the world average consumption.
Vehicle | Consumption (city / highway) | Consumption to weight ratio | Difference from world average consumption | Driving range (full tank) | Consumption per passenger |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
3.0 i CD |
19
/
27 MPG
(12.7 / 8.8 L per 100 km) |
1.3 L per 100 km to 100 kg | 34% worse |
373—559 miles
(600—900 km) |
2.2 L per 100 km / person |
2.0 i GLS |
22
/
32 MPG
(10.7 / 7.4 L per 100 km) |
1.4 L per 100 km to 100 kg | 22% worse |
435—621 miles
(700—1000 km) |
1.9 L per 100 km / person |
4.1 i CD |
19
/
27 MPG
(12.7 / 8.8 L per 100 km) |
1.4 L per 100 km to 100 kg | 34% worse |
373—559 miles
(600—900 km) |
2.2 L per 100 km / person |
Vehicle | 3.0 i CD |
---|---|
Consumption (city / highway) |
19
/
27 MPG
(12.7 / 8.8 L per 100 km) |
Consumption to weight ratio | 1.3 L per 100 km to 100 kg |
Difference from world average consumption | 34% worse |
Driving range (full tank) | 373—559 miles (600—900 km) |
Consumption per passenger | 2.2 L per 100 km / person |
Vehicle | 2.0 i GLS |
Consumption (city / highway) |
22
/
32 MPG
(10.7 / 7.4 L per 100 km) |
Consumption to weight ratio | 1.4 L per 100 km to 100 kg |
Difference from world average consumption | 22% worse |
Driving range (full tank) | 435—621 miles (700—1000 km) |
Consumption per passenger | 1.9 L per 100 km / person |
Vehicle | 4.1 i CD |
Consumption (city / highway) |
19
/
27 MPG
(12.7 / 8.8 L per 100 km) |
Consumption to weight ratio | 1.4 L per 100 km to 100 kg |
Difference from world average consumption | 34% worse |
Driving range (full tank) | 373—559 miles (600—900 km) |
Consumption per passenger | 2.2 L per 100 km / person |