1999 Chevrolet Tracker MPG is between 17 MPG and 29 MPG depending on engine:
The 1999 Chevrolet Tracker MPG to weight ratio is shown in the graph:
We calculated that 1999 Chevrolet Tracker MPG is up to 41% 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 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
2.5 i V6 4WD |
18
/
20 MPG
(13.1 / 11.8 L per 100 km) |
1.1 L per 100 km to 100 kg | 41% worse |
311—373 miles
(500—600 km) |
2.5 L per 100 km / person |
2.5 i V6 |
19
/
21 MPG
(12.4 / 11.2 L per 100 km) |
1.1 L per 100 km to 100 kg | 37% worse |
311—373 miles
(500—600 km) |
2.4 L per 100 km / person |
1.6 i 16V |
17
/
29 MPG
(14 / 8 L per 100 km) |
1.2 L per 100 km to 100 kg | 34% worse |
249—435 miles
(400—700 km) |
2.2 L per 100 km / person |
2.0 i 16V |
17
/
29 MPG
(14 / 8 L per 100 km) |
1.2 L per 100 km to 100 kg | 34% worse |
249—435 miles
(400—700 km) |
2.2 L per 100 km / person |
2.5 i V6 24V |
19
/
21 MPG
(12.4 / 11.2 L per 100 km) |
1.1 L per 100 km to 100 kg | 37% worse |
311—373 miles
(500—600 km) |
2.4 L per 100 km / person |
2.0 i 16V 4 WD |
17
/
29 MPG
(14 / 8 L per 100 km) |
1.2 L per 100 km to 100 kg | 34% worse |
249—435 miles
(400—700 km) |
2.2 L per 100 km / person |
2.0 i 16V 4WD |
23
/
25 MPG
(10.2 / 9.4 L per 100 km) |
1.4 L per 100 km to 100 kg | 25% worse |
373—435 miles
(600—700 km) |
2 L per 100 km / person |
Vehicle | 2.5 i V6 4WD |
---|---|
Consumption (city / highway) |
18
/
20 MPG
(13.1 / 11.8 L per 100 km) |
Consumption to weight ratio | 1.1 L per 100 km to 100 kg |
Difference from world average consumption | 41% worse |
Driving range (full tank) | 311—373 miles (500—600 km) |
Consumption per passenger | 2.5 L per 100 km / person |
Vehicle | 2.5 i V6 |
Consumption (city / highway) |
19
/
21 MPG
(12.4 / 11.2 L per 100 km) |
Consumption to weight ratio | 1.1 L per 100 km to 100 kg |
Difference from world average consumption | 37% worse |
Driving range (full tank) | 311—373 miles (500—600 km) |
Consumption per passenger | 2.4 L per 100 km / person |
Vehicle | 1.6 i 16V |
Consumption (city / highway) |
17
/
29 MPG
(14 / 8 L per 100 km) |
Consumption to weight ratio | 1.2 L per 100 km to 100 kg |
Difference from world average consumption | 34% worse |
Driving range (full tank) | 249—435 miles (400—700 km) |
Consumption per passenger | 2.2 L per 100 km / person |
Vehicle | 2.0 i 16V |
Consumption (city / highway) |
17
/
29 MPG
(14 / 8 L per 100 km) |
Consumption to weight ratio | 1.2 L per 100 km to 100 kg |
Difference from world average consumption | 34% worse |
Driving range (full tank) | 249—435 miles (400—700 km) |
Consumption per passenger | 2.2 L per 100 km / person |
Vehicle | 2.5 i V6 24V |
Consumption (city / highway) |
19
/
21 MPG
(12.4 / 11.2 L per 100 km) |
Consumption to weight ratio | 1.1 L per 100 km to 100 kg |
Difference from world average consumption | 37% worse |
Driving range (full tank) | 311—373 miles (500—600 km) |
Consumption per passenger | 2.4 L per 100 km / person |
Vehicle | 2.0 i 16V 4 WD |
Consumption (city / highway) |
17
/
29 MPG
(14 / 8 L per 100 km) |
Consumption to weight ratio | 1.2 L per 100 km to 100 kg |
Difference from world average consumption | 34% worse |
Driving range (full tank) | 249—435 miles (400—700 km) |
Consumption per passenger | 2.2 L per 100 km / person |
Vehicle | 2.0 i 16V 4WD |
Consumption (city / highway) |
23
/
25 MPG
(10.2 / 9.4 L per 100 km) |
Consumption to weight ratio | 1.4 L per 100 km to 100 kg |
Difference from world average consumption | 25% worse |
Driving range (full tank) | 373—435 miles (600—700 km) |
Consumption per passenger | 2 L per 100 km / person |
1999 Chevrolet Tracker MPG is between 17 MPG and 29 MPG depending on engine:
The 1999 Chevrolet Tracker MPG to weight ratio is shown in the graph:
We calculated that 1999 Chevrolet Tracker 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 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1.6 i 16V 4WD |
17
/
29 MPG
(14 / 8 L per 100 km) |
1.1 L per 100 km to 100 kg | 34% worse |
249—435 miles
(400—700 km) |
2.2 L per 100 km / person |
1.6 i 16V |
20
/
27 MPG
(12 / 8.7 L per 100 km) |
1 L per 100 km to 100 kg | 28% worse |
249—311 miles
(400—500 km) |
2.1 L per 100 km / person |
2.0 i 16V |
18
/
25 MPG
(13 / 9.4 L per 100 km) |
1 L per 100 km to 100 kg | 34% worse |
249—373 miles
(400—600 km) |
2.3 L per 100 km / person |
2.0 i 16V 4WD |
21
/
29 MPG
(11 / 8 L per 100 km) |
1.3 L per 100 km to 100 kg | 22% worse |
311—435 miles
(500—700 km) |
1.9 L per 100 km / person |
Vehicle | 1.6 i 16V 4WD |
---|---|
Consumption (city / highway) |
17
/
29 MPG
(14 / 8 L per 100 km) |
Consumption to weight ratio | 1.1 L per 100 km to 100 kg |
Difference from world average consumption | 34% worse |
Driving range (full tank) | 249—435 miles (400—700 km) |
Consumption per passenger | 2.2 L per 100 km / person |
Vehicle | 1.6 i 16V |
Consumption (city / highway) |
20
/
27 MPG
(12 / 8.7 L per 100 km) |
Consumption to weight ratio | 1 L per 100 km to 100 kg |
Difference from world average consumption | 28% worse |
Driving range (full tank) | 249—311 miles (400—500 km) |
Consumption per passenger | 2.1 L per 100 km / person |
Vehicle | 2.0 i 16V |
Consumption (city / highway) |
18
/
25 MPG
(13 / 9.4 L per 100 km) |
Consumption to weight ratio | 1 L per 100 km to 100 kg |
Difference from world average consumption | 34% worse |
Driving range (full tank) | 249—373 miles (400—600 km) |
Consumption per passenger | 2.3 L per 100 km / person |
Vehicle | 2.0 i 16V 4WD |
Consumption (city / highway) |
21
/
29 MPG
(11 / 8 L per 100 km) |
Consumption to weight ratio | 1.3 L per 100 km to 100 kg |
Difference from world average consumption | 22% worse |
Driving range (full tank) | 311—435 miles (500—700 km) |
Consumption per passenger | 1.9 L per 100 km / person |