yes, all done right:). that is good economy! my last tank was 660km for 70 litres, which equals 10.6l/100km. mix of open road, commute and some light towing.Quote:
Originally Posted by newhue
jc
Printable View
yes, all done right:). that is good economy! my last tank was 660km for 70 litres, which equals 10.6l/100km. mix of open road, commute and some light towing.Quote:
Originally Posted by newhue
jc
Doing the maths is easy.Quote:
Originally Posted by newhue
Making sure the tank is actually full each time is the tricky bit, especially with cab/chassis models. The low angle on the filler neck seems to be the problem. I can fit several more litres in the tank after it first appears full.
For example my last fill, at 25 litres, froth threatened to spill out onto the ground. I kept trickling fuel in and finally stopped at 33 litres without spilling any.
As I had done about 300km, my consumption might have looked like about 8.3 litres/100km if I had stopped when the tank first appeared full instead of the real figure of about 11 litres/100km. Even combined with the previous fill that mistake would have made about 10% difference to the fuel consumption figure.
Your figure looks about right for thoughtful driving. However unless great care is taken to ensure that the tank is actually full, it is very easy, especially with a cab/chassis to get inaccurate figures.
Quote:
Originally Posted by vnx205
It does seem low. When I first bought the car 11.5 was it's best, so I gave up trying to get the 10.5 often reported. I tend to drive at 90 to 100, and like a pop around town. Maybe having 33" tyres helped as it sits right on 2000rpm at 100km/h.
I didn't worry how much is in the fill. Just subtracted the speedo from previous fill, from the speedo of the new fill. Then divided the current fuel fill by the speedo figure and x 100.
Having Mulgo's sill tanks are great, but they slosh around filling each other up or vice versa. So filling the OE main tank to the brim is no good, cause after a few corners and a few hills it's at 3/4 in no time.
Quote:
Originally Posted by newhue
It also comes down to how accurate the odo is too.
I take most quoted Land Rover mpg figures with a bucket load of salt as it often seems a game of 'mines more frugal than yours' :D
A bit like rain measurements around here, you are always asked how much you got before the questioner tells you how much they got, and invariably it's substantially more ;)
Daily max/min temps are the same. :D
My Defender makes a great sail, I just read the weather forecast and plan the trip to take advantage of nothing but a tail wind.
That makes a huge difference to my fuel economy.
I've been driving the 130 (2008 2.4) for a couple of months now and I couldn't be happier with the fuel consumption, filled up this morning with 103 litres after 913km of commuting. Filling up every couple of weeks instead of every couple of days with the Rangie on LPG. My only gripe is that when the gauge reads empty and the light comes on I can only get 100 litres into the 120L longranger tank. Not game to push it and risk running out.
14.8 litres per 100kms fully loaded with 4 people, towing a 2 tonne van. Recorded over 5000kms from Brissie to Canberra (the long-way) via the Great Dividing Range, Snowies etc.
This in a few 40deg days, plenty of big climbs & often sitting on 100kph (occassionally a bit more).
TD5 with 120,000kms has been chipped (will easily sit on 110+ with the van), has safari snorkel as only engine related mods.
I was expecting 16's so pretty happy.
Guzziman, you'd have to be happy with that.
Towing my 2 tonne van plus loaded vehicle my 110 returns 14-14.5L/100klms.
Regards
Maggsie
2010 Defender 110
Chipped and 3" straight thru exhaust my 130 td5 with alloy roof over tub gets 10 lts /100 on a trip.:cool: