2000 Toyota Celica MPG is between 20 MPG and 42 MPG depending on engine:
The 2000 Toyota Celica MPG to weight ratio is shown in the graph:
We calculated that 2000 Toyota Celica MPG is up to 3% better 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 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1.8 VT-i 16V |
23
/
38 MPG
(10.3 / 6.2 L per 100 km) |
1.4 L per 100 km to 100 kg | 3% worse |
311—559 miles
(500—900 km) |
1.9 L per 100 km / person |
1.8 VVTL-I T-Sport |
20
/
36 MPG
(11.5 / 6.6 L per 100 km) |
1.4 L per 100 km to 100 kg | 13% worse |
311—497 miles
(500—800 km) |
2.1 L per 100 km / person |
1.8 i GT- R |
27
/
42 MPG
(8.7 / 5.6 L per 100 km) |
1.7 L per 100 km to 100 kg | 3% better |
373—621 miles
(600—1000 km) |
1.8 L per 100 km / person |
Vehicle | 1.8 VT-i 16V |
---|---|
Consumption (city / highway) |
23
/
38 MPG
(10.3 / 6.2 L per 100 km) |
Consumption to weight ratio | 1.4 L per 100 km to 100 kg |
Difference from world average consumption | 3% worse |
Driving range (full tank) | 311—559 miles (500—900 km) |
Consumption per passenger | 1.9 L per 100 km / person |
Vehicle | 1.8 VVTL-I T-Sport |
Consumption (city / highway) |
20
/
36 MPG
(11.5 / 6.6 L per 100 km) |
Consumption to weight ratio | 1.4 L per 100 km to 100 kg |
Difference from world average consumption | 13% worse |
Driving range (full tank) | 311—497 miles (500—800 km) |
Consumption per passenger | 2.1 L per 100 km / person |
Vehicle | 1.8 i GT- R |
Consumption (city / highway) |
27
/
42 MPG
(8.7 / 5.6 L per 100 km) |
Consumption to weight ratio | 1.7 L per 100 km to 100 kg |
Difference from world average consumption | 3% better |
Driving range (full tank) | 373—621 miles (600—1000 km) |
Consumption per passenger | 1.8 L per 100 km / person |
1994 Toyota Celica MPG is between 22 MPG and 40 MPG depending on engine:
The 1994 Toyota Celica MPG to weight ratio is shown in the graph:
We calculated that 1994 Toyota Celica MPG is up to 22% 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 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1.8 i 16V |
28
/
40 MPG
(8.5 / 5.9 L per 100 km) |
1.6 L per 100 km to 100 kg | 0% |
435—621 miles
(700—1000 km) |
1.9 L per 100 km / person |
2.0 Turbo 4WD |
22
/
31 MPG
(10.9 / 7.6 L per 100 km) |
1.5 L per 100 km to 100 kg | 22% worse |
373—559 miles
(600—900 km) |
2.4 L per 100 km / person |
2.0 i 16V |
25
/
36 MPG
(9.4 / 6.6 L per 100 km) |
1.5 L per 100 km to 100 kg | 9% worse |
373—559 miles
(600—900 km) |
2.1 L per 100 km / person |
Vehicle | 1.8 i 16V |
---|---|
Consumption (city / highway) |
28
/
40 MPG
(8.5 / 5.9 L per 100 km) |
Consumption to weight ratio | 1.6 L per 100 km to 100 kg |
Difference from world average consumption | 0% better |
Driving range (full tank) | 435—621 miles (700—1000 km) |
Consumption per passenger | 1.9 L per 100 km / person |
Vehicle | 2.0 Turbo 4WD |
Consumption (city / highway) |
22
/
31 MPG
(10.9 / 7.6 L per 100 km) |
Consumption to weight ratio | 1.5 L per 100 km to 100 kg |
Difference from world average consumption | 22% worse |
Driving range (full tank) | 373—559 miles (600—900 km) |
Consumption per passenger | 2.4 L per 100 km / person |
Vehicle | 2.0 i 16V |
Consumption (city / highway) |
25
/
36 MPG
(9.4 / 6.6 L per 100 km) |
Consumption to weight ratio | 1.5 L per 100 km to 100 kg |
Difference from world average consumption | 9% worse |
Driving range (full tank) | 373—559 miles (600—900 km) |
Consumption per passenger | 2.1 L per 100 km / person |
1994 Toyota Celica MPG is 31 MPG on engine:
The 1994 Toyota Celica MPG to weight ratio is shown in the graph:
We calculated that 1994 Toyota Celica MPG is up to 22% 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 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
2.2i GT |
22
/
31 MPG
(10.9 / 7.6 L per 100 km) |
1.2 L per 100 km to 100 kg | 22% worse |
373—497 miles
(600—800 km) |
4.8 L per 100 km / person |
Vehicle | 2.2i GT |
---|---|
Consumption (city / highway) |
22
/
31 MPG
(10.9 / 7.6 L per 100 km) |
Consumption to weight ratio | 1.2 L per 100 km to 100 kg |
Difference from world average consumption | 22% worse |
Driving range (full tank) | 373—497 miles (600—800 km) |
Consumption per passenger | 4.8 L per 100 km / person |
1990 Toyota Celica MPG is between 18 MPG and 42 MPG depending on engine:
The 1990 Toyota Celica MPG to weight ratio is shown in the graph:
We calculated that 1990 Toyota Celica MPG is up to 6% better 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 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1.8i 16V |
21
/
34 MPG
(11 / 7 L per 100 km) |
1.3 L per 100 km to 100 kg | 19% worse |
311—559 miles
(500—900 km) |
1.8 L per 100 km / person |
1.6 STi |
27
/
42 MPG
(8.6 / 5.6 L per 100 km) |
1.7 L per 100 km to 100 kg | 6% better |
435—684 miles
(700—1100 km) |
1.8 L per 100 km / person |
2.0i 16V |
18
/
34 MPG
(13 / 7 L per 100 km) |
1.2 L per 100 km to 100 kg | 25% worse |
311—559 miles
(500—900 km) |
2 L per 100 km / person |
2.0 i 16V |
24
/
41 MPG
(9.9 / 5.8 L per 100 km) |
1.6 L per 100 km to 100 kg | 3% worse |
373—621 miles
(600—1000 km) |
1.5 L per 100 km / person |
2.0 i 16V Turbo 4WD |
19
/
32 MPG
(12.1 / 7.4 L per 100 km) |
1.5 L per 100 km to 100 kg | 22% worse |
311—497 miles
(500—800 km) |
1.9 L per 100 km / person |
Vehicle | 1.8i 16V |
---|---|
Consumption (city / highway) |
21
/
34 MPG
(11 / 7 L per 100 km) |
Consumption to weight ratio | 1.3 L per 100 km to 100 kg |
Difference from world average consumption | 19% worse |
Driving range (full tank) | 311—559 miles (500—900 km) |
Consumption per passenger | 1.8 L per 100 km / person |
Vehicle | 1.6 STi |
Consumption (city / highway) |
27
/
42 MPG
(8.6 / 5.6 L per 100 km) |
Consumption to weight ratio | 1.7 L per 100 km to 100 kg |
Difference from world average consumption | 6% better |
Driving range (full tank) | 435—684 miles (700—1100 km) |
Consumption per passenger | 1.8 L per 100 km / person |
Vehicle | 2.0i 16V |
Consumption (city / highway) |
18
/
34 MPG
(13 / 7 L per 100 km) |
Consumption to weight ratio | 1.2 L per 100 km to 100 kg |
Difference from world average consumption | 25% worse |
Driving range (full tank) | 311—559 miles (500—900 km) |
Consumption per passenger | 2 L per 100 km / person |
Vehicle | 2.0 i 16V |
Consumption (city / highway) |
24
/
41 MPG
(9.9 / 5.8 L per 100 km) |
Consumption to weight ratio | 1.6 L per 100 km to 100 kg |
Difference from world average consumption | 3% worse |
Driving range (full tank) | 373—621 miles (600—1000 km) |
Consumption per passenger | 1.5 L per 100 km / person |
Vehicle | 2.0 i 16V Turbo 4WD |
Consumption (city / highway) |
19
/
32 MPG
(12.1 / 7.4 L per 100 km) |
Consumption to weight ratio | 1.5 L per 100 km to 100 kg |
Difference from world average consumption | 22% worse |
Driving range (full tank) | 311—497 miles (500—800 km) |
Consumption per passenger | 1.9 L per 100 km / person |