LPG & K's Per 100

If you have a working venturi system, then I'd say, based on my experience no, it's not worth conversion to sequential in terms of fuel economy. You would take forever to save the money spent.

I'm using more fuel on my 4.6 P38A with the sequential system than with the venturi system. However, I don't have any backfire problems and there is more power from the sequential system owing to the better fuel mixtures.

With sequential, there is no difference in power whereas with the venturi system I sometimes had to change back to petrol on some hills.

.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by timberwolf_302

Anyone tried BBQ gas in their vehicle?

---

Yes it does work and is much the same in small doses. It also depends on what your local gas place is filling it with as the mix of propane/butane changes depending on stocks etc.
CraigE

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PLR

G`day Allan ,

i understand now that you have a passion for the subject after reading the link and why you responded the way you did .

The heading is MPG v L/100 and i don`t think LPG was thought of in the discussion .

It didn`t convince me one way or the other or that i should change how i work it out .

One thing that differs , i think with LPG is that you do need to have an idea of the distance you can cover because you need a pump to fill as in can`t do it on the side of the road etc with ease .


The way i read was that ltrs per 100 km is used here and maybe a couple of other places so is it actually an International Standard and if so what does this actually mean if only used by a limited number ?

Or maybe this has changed inthe last 12 mths ?

I know i said i`d had enough but if you could just clear this up for me , then i`ll be done .

Cheers , Peter .

---

I can't offer you a complete list of countries that use litres/100km.
Ron suggested that Europe and Canada use it as well as Australia.
There is no question that it is the official standard in those places.
I believe that Asia uses km/litre.
I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong and maybe someone else has a complete list.
That pattern of usage might mean that countries that have converted to metric (like some of the EU, Canada and Aust) have actually thought about what constitutes a sensible way of expressing fuel consumption and made it the standard. Whereas countries that have just continued with what they have developed over time have something illogical like km/litre or mpg.:p
In my attempts to get a definite answer I came across this site:
Fuel Economy Database: Search and Compare Vehicle Fuel Economy Ratings
I thought it was interesting that even though it appears to be a US site (it mentions automobiles and gas) it converts mpg to litres/100km, not km/litre.
So even the Yanks seem to think that litres/100km is the standard metric measure.

Maybe we shouldn't place too much faith in what they think though. After all they have this funny idea that 3.7854118 litres are enough to make up a gallon when the rest of the world knows you need 4.54609188 litres.:p

I haven't been avoiding answering your question. I have just been enjoying three relaxing days at one of the best camping spots in NSW, Bendethra Valley in Deua NP. There were two other groups camped there when we arrived and two different groups when we left but because the available camping spots stretch along 4km of the valley, we were over 1km away from the closest group.
It seems someone has been sharing the well kept secret of what a great spot this is though because on our previous 6 or 8 trips there we usually saw one one vehicle if any. This time we passed 5 on the way in as we left.

Ok, today I was talking to a bloke at work who volunteers at the club and waters tree's and weeds the gardens etc but he recons his Falcon on LPG has lost about 50kms of range in the last month or so.

He normally gets 390km's/60ltrs (15.38ltrs/100kms, 17.77 mpg) but in the last couple of weeks he has got 50kms less (340km's/60ltrs, 17.65ltrs/100kms, 15.5 mpg).

Now the car is kept in tip top shape, we pulled the plugs and they looked fine and were all gapped evenly at about .8mm but looking a little old so they are getting changed anyway and as far as my nose goes, it didnt smell like it was running rich.

I did find with my dedicated gas AU that the economy was very fickle and all I could put it down to was the fuel mix that I was using as I got it at different servo's all the time and of course they servo doesnt know what they are getting in most cases and most of the operators wouldnt know/care anyway if they could find out so LPG owners are pretty much at the whim of the fuel companies.

I was told by a fuel tech (that we used with the sprint car) that LPG was made of Propane and butane mix and it depends on what they have more of at any one time to what the blend is and if it is mainly propane then it will burn quicker and make more power but butane will burn slower but with less power.

Im pretty sure this is correct (as he was used by most of the racing teams in victoria at the time) but maybe someone else might be able to confirm or blow this out of the water.

Was a long time ago so if I have it the wrong way around or Ive got it a bit wrong, please forgive me but I thought it was interesting and worth comment.

And there had been comments regarding ignition, see my first post.....:D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mcrover

Ok, today I was talking to a bloke at work who volunteers at the club and waters tree's and weeds the gardens etc but he recons his Falcon on LPG has lost about 50kms of range in the last month or so.

He normally gets 390km's/60ltrs (15.38ltrs/100kms, 17.77 mpg) but in the last couple of weeks he has got 50kms less (340km's/60ltrs, 17.65ltrs/100kms, 15.5 mpg).

Now the car is kept in tip top shape, we pulled the plugs and they looked fine and were all gapped evenly at about .8mm but looking a little old so they are getting changed anyway and as far as my nose goes, it didnt smell like it was running rich.

I did find with my dedicated gas AU that the economy was very fickle and all I could put it down to was the fuel mix that I was using as I got it at different servo's all the time and of course they servo doesnt know what they are getting in most cases and most of the operators wouldnt know/care anyway if they could find out so LPG owners are pretty much at the whim of the fuel companies.

I was told by a fuel tech (that we used with the sprint car) that LPG was made of Propane and butane mix and it depends on what they have more of at any one time to what the blend is and if it is mainly propane then it will burn quicker and make more power but butane will burn slower but with less power.

Im pretty sure this is correct (as he was used by most of the racing teams in victoria at the time) but maybe someone else might be able to confirm or blow this out of the water.

Was a long time ago so if I have it the wrong way around or Ive got it a bit wrong, please forgive me but I thought it was interesting and worth comment.

And there had been comments regarding ignition, see my first post.....:D

---

Funny you should say that, ours has plummeted recently too. It used to consistently get low 5's but is now down to mid to low 4's!
I serviced it on the weekend and thought the plugs were in good shape, maybe a bit wide, so have closed them up a bit this time. I've also fitted a battery right smack in front of the airbox, so that may be the culprit.

BUT, I wonder with the rise in popularity of LPG, just what am I buying??

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by vnx205

I can't offer you a complete list of countries that use litres/100km.
Ron suggested that Europe and Canada use it as well as Australia.
There is no question that it is the official standard in those places.
I believe that Asia uses km/litre.
I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong and maybe someone else has a complete list.
That pattern of usage might mean that countries that have converted to metric (like some of the EU, Canada and Aust) have actually thought about what constitutes a sensible way of expressing fuel consumption and made it the standard. Whereas countries that have just continued with what they have developed over time have something illogical like km/litre or mpg.:p
In my attempts to get a definite answer I came across this site:
Fuel Economy Database: Search and Compare Vehicle Fuel Economy Ratings
I thought it was interesting that even though it appears to be a US site (it mentions automobiles and gas) it converts mpg to litres/100km, not km/litre.
So even the Yanks seem to think that litres/100km is the standard metric measure.

Maybe we shouldn't place too much faith in what they think though. After all they have this funny idea that 3.7854118 litres are enough to make up a gallon when the rest of the world knows you need 4.54609188 litres.:p

I haven't been avoiding answering your question. I have just been enjoying three relaxing days at one of the best camping spots in NSW, Bendethra Valley in Deua NP. There were two other groups camped there when we arrived and two different groups when we left but because the available camping spots stretch along 4km of the valley, we were over 1km away from the closest group.
It seems someone has been sharing the well kept secret of what a great spot this is though because on our previous 6 or 8 trips there we usually saw one one vehicle if any. This time we passed 5 on the way in as we left.

---

G`day Allan

Sounds like you had good time and no i fully expected you`d get back to me .

I did a bit of search for ISOs , think i`ve seen a reference to everything fuel related but not petrol , i did find 1 that had what may have been the right type but i do understand Russian and i think that what is was .

I did another search , consumption and economy and tied in all the relevant words i could think of , i didn`t find any ISOs but did find some EEC and some different country standards but boy there`s alot to work through .

I sure there will be something somewhere that sets it out clearly but i couldn`t find it .
Plenty of calculators that will convert using any method but even with the number of calculators there was no main single method .

I think i`ll have to leave it up to you because i`m sure when you find something you`ll post it up .

Good luck with it .

Cheers

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mcrover

.

And there had been comments regarding ignition, see my first post.....:D

---

G`day ,

yes , i looked a your post thinking i`d missed something and i saw " recurve the dissy " i guess that`s what your refering to ?

My fault i suppose , i should be clearer .

What i meant was that nobody seems to be actually doing anything .

Like nobody has actually had their dissy recurved after using the same in the same vehicle and reported back what if any difference .

Nobody has fitted any electronic ignition advance/retard module with an LPG curve and reported back the results .

Nobody has bought and built , eg , an electronic Jcar kit that has the ability to set the curve as you like supposedly by entering codes . ( Haven`t looked closely at this as i only saw it yesterday while doing ISO searches and we all know what happens when one goes off on a tangent when searching )

Anyhow that was what i mean`t about ignition not that the options weren`t mentioned but that nobody has physically done anything or they`re not talking about it at least .

Cheers