Puma 90 fuel consumption figures

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by n plus one

In my experience (2.4, 110) your accessories (roof rack and mud tyres in particular) load and driving style (and this is a biggee) can greatly affect your economy. Unless your snorkel is jammed up its unlikely to be the culprit (though maybe check the state of your air filter).

One thing you might want to consider is your servicing - I had my 110 serviced once and it's fuel consumption jumped around 2-3l/100km. After the next service (at a different dealer) things returned to normal - possibly it was just in the fuel mapping?

15l/100km in a 90 seams pretty high - I can get my 110 down to this on rad, but only if loaded to gvm and driven hard in difficult conditions (hills n' head winds).

---

Maybe you've hit the nail on the head with this one. Lagerfan are we not both at the 15000ish Km mark? maybe 20000km servicing is just too far, maybe it's time for a service.... or at least an oil change. I think I'm going to email my dealer and ask him what he thinks. I'll let you know what he says

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by debruiser

are we not both at the 15000ish Km mark?...I think I'm going to email my dealer and ask him what he thinks. I'll let you know what he says

---

Yeah spot on, we're right on 15k now, was going to call and book it in soon, not sure I want to wait for the full 20k for the very first service. Be interested in what your guy has to say.

Not a 90 sorry, but my 2.4 110 fuel consumption, (with ARB bar):

https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/im...013/10/951.jpg

and my current 2.2 110 fuel consumption, no external accessories:

https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/im...013/10/952.jpg

Cheers,

Tim

Got a reply from LR. They said that I would not see any improvement after a service and that those sorts of variation are within the normal operating range.

I did slide under mine the other day to find that there is diesel under the right rear! :o I think it was the fuel filter leaking. Spoke to the local LR service (private company) and they said that they sometimes leak, the plastic doover to get the water out strips etc. Might be something to check.

I like your fuel readout TimNZ, is that linked to the car? or you just input the data manual?

It's a manual input, (road trip app on iOS), debruiser.

I'm on my 3rd "Puma" now, they all improved after the first few thousand k's, but no change after that. The 2.4's both had the EGR programmed shut via a BAS remap, this, (and the remap), made a considerable improvement to fuel consumption.

All 3 vehicles have been worse on the open road, (110 km/h), than around town by about 1l/100km. Having the roof bars on costs roughly another 1l/100lm.

Cheers,

Tim

Edit: To look on the bright side, my offsider at work who does almost the exact amount of km/year I do owns a 4.8l petrol Patrol. Is fuel costs are practically double mine, and the Patrol is slower!

Off topic a bit,but my D4 i could not get under 10.5l/100 at all,no matter how carefully i drove it,even on a long run.My old TD5 D2 was way better.

Now it has just clocked over 26K,has just done a long trip of 7K,and on the last couple of tanks of the trip started to get 9.5l/100.The first few tanks on the trip were around 11.5l/100.Same weight,same gear on roof,similar speeds.

Two recent trips to Grafton and back,600km each,did 9.2l/100.

Got me stuffed what has happened,either the vehicle needed to get to around 26K to get the engine running correctly,which i doubt,or something to do with the electronics,engine ECU,etc has changed?

Hasn't had a service since 12k,so that is not the reason either.

Just to clarify, I don't think a service will change the economy in itself - its whether the ECU map is updated during a service. When I took mine in for the service which improved the economy I raised concern around the fuel consumption and the map was updated.

The difference in consumption was stark and reliably different - as I was mid trip when it occurred so load, driving conditions, usage and roof rack equip didn't change and I had 14,000k worth of data to base my calcs on.

FWIW, I found my economy (and engine 'feel') continued to improve up to the 40k mark - and then went rapidly downhill as the number of accessories increased :twisted: A BAS remap has since greatly improved power and (to a lessor extent) economy.

PS Tim is correct re speed - touring at 95kmh will save you a lot of fuel!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by n plus one

PS Tim is correct re speed - touring at 95kmh will save you a lot of fuel!

---

Agree 100% - They seem to have a "sweet spot" for cruising in the window between 95km/h and 105km/h.

If anything like a head wind make you work harder to maintain, just back off a bit...

Cheers,

Lou

With defenders your speed makes a difference,I've driven between Kal and Perth three times in the last 5 days and empty at 130 mine uses the same amount of fuel as towing at 100,mine doesn't seem to get more than 450-470k's out of a tank. Pat

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lagerfan

No worries, this is all good stuff!

I understand drag and the effect it has on economy, I'm just not convinced it would add 3l+/100km to a 90, especially when people are posting figures of 11/100 for fully loaded touring/towing in Puma 110/130's.

The jump in ours from 10.5l/100km (and steadily dropping) to 14l+/100 is quite dramatic.

---

I am surprised you're only losing 3 litres per hundred with a roof rack. They are quite simply the worst thing you can do for wind resistance and fuel economy.

A light trailer can use less fuel than a roof rack. I can still get 10km per litre towing an 8x4 with my diesel rangie. But towing here is 90km/h speed limit.