Thread: Awesome Fuel Economy NOT!!!!

Just fuelled up my second tank so thought I'd put my stats up. from a full tank I took it down to the 1/4 line surprisingly got 525 and took 56 litres to fill up again it worked out at 10.75 litres to the hundred with a mix of highway and scooting around town always sitting on the speed limit and going with traffic really happy after getting out of a v6 pajero

Hi All

My puma when I had it started of with bad figueres and i think it was a combination of tight engine and my driving style - about 13 l/100km

The figures were dropping to about 10.5 litres per 100 km at 15 to 20 000 km the vehicle was basically stock with a uhf aerial.

Things i noticed were that over 110 kmh the fuel usage started to climb and at 130 kmh constant my best guess is fuel usage of 18 lt per 100 km

The vehicle was basically stock and a 2.4 2010 year model

As an aside I used to suffer from fluid retention in my legs after twelve hours behind the wheel which became painful after 15 to 18 hours - i don't know if this is the car or age catching up with me or both

Regards Mark

Had a head wind going to Melbourne down the Hume at 110. 12.5/100

No wind coming back 10.5/100.

Moving a brick at high speed not recommended for economy. Drag goes up at the square of the speed, and after 80kph the drag does increase alarmingly.

For something like a Landy with its drag coefficient at around 0.6+, and its alarming frontal area, it needs about 3-4 times the power at 110 than it does at 80 just to overcome the drag.

ain't the retro luvverly

RF

Originally Posted by Blknight.aus

no, no you're not. (well not unless you particualarly feel like killing a perfectly good HP pump, and some injectors) Drive it till the warning light comes on and consider that empty

I have seen enough of those fuel systems karking it altogether, when they have been allowed to run dry.

Dont refuel from metal jerries use plastic ones and not blue or white ones.
(ok if you can afford them you can refuel from stainless steel jerries)

Maybe there should be an explanation to some of the new chums the problems that can occur with using the wrong type of containers.
.
.

And I've run EVERY LR I've owned including both modern injected motors dry and have never had a fuel system issue ever,I've fueled out of metal jerry cans for 20 years and never had an issue with them either. Pat

I don't much get into this because fuel usage is what it is. But today I did the sum and it appears 9.65lt/100. Thats some highway, several days of low range, highway again, and a week around town.

seems quite low, have I got my sum right?

122.12lt / 1265klm x 100 = 9.65

Originally Posted by Rick Fischer

Moving a brick at high speed not recommended for economy. Drag goes up at the square of the speed, and after 80kph the drag does increase alarmingly.

cheers Rick,

many years ago my father (interstate truckie) explained this in laymans terms, but its good to read a more technical description.

He was happy to cruise across the paddock at 95kmh (much to the Mack Munchers displeasure who did 160kmh standard practice- this was the 80's!) and save 50% of the fuel cost and spend the extra day or so driving to make it up. Had oversized drive tyres on his rig (volvo g88 single drive) which brought the revs down as well. Less revs, less wear. that truck did something like 1.5M k's before it needed any major work (from memory), always double clutched too (even though syncro box).

If it wasn't for the 'mafia' controlled freight yards, he may have made some money too...

Have enough data now for the spreadsheet to work properly over the past four months since the SVX arrived.

Across all conditions, city, hwy, severe off road, loads and sometimes pulling a boat overall average is 11.5 ltrs/100. Out of the ordinary figures are low as 10.5 and a couple of spikes as high as 12.8.

No complaints