Thread: Fuel consumption

Originally Posted by Traveler

How inappropriate...

Not really!

what "IS" your point?
The whole thread from the start appears to be without substance.

I drive my Disco V8 at 108 to 118 kph, dependind on QLD speed limits. Yes it will only do 14 ltr per 100km, but I could not give a flying **** about it.
If I want to save money, I'll drive the Falcon that does 8.3 ltr per 100 km at the same speed.

So what was the point in this strange thread?

Ron

Originally Posted by RonMcGr

Not really!

what "IS" your point?
The whole thread from the start appears to be without substance.

I drive my Disco V8 at 108 to 118 kph, dependind on QLD speed limits. Yes it will only do 14 ltr per 100km, but I could not give a flying **** about it.
If I want to save money, I'll drive the Falcon that does 8.3 ltr per 100 km at the same speed.

So what was the point in this strange thread?

Ron

First things first...
it would appear that you and others have a very small attention span, not unlike a little child. as well, you seem to think it is your right to hijack a thread with a temper tantrum because you cannot find a "point". very clearly i asked in the beginning, was their a way to work out which vehicle would use more fuel. instead i get woeful answers from i assume grown men who lack basic communication skills. you were not asked a question about your flying f***en falcon. and if the thread is to much for you to handle, what are you doing here?

Sometimes a thread is purely for the intellectual stimulation, just like a joke thread could be considered pointless except of course it provides comic relief.

At the end of the day if you don't have an interest in the topic why read it, move on and find something else to read....

One of the things I love about this forum is we don't usually get this sort of cr** if people don't want to read about it they move on and don't feel the need to criticise others.... If that is what your looking for perhaps pay a visit to the 4wdmonthly forum, lots of people to disagree with there

Originally Posted by Traveler

How do you work this out...
2 identical 93 Disco's 3.5l
both travelling from point A to B at same time
one doing 2500rpm and arriving at B in 7 minutes
the other doing 2000 rpm and arriving in 10 minutes
car 1 has done 17500rpm using more fuel to maintain rpm but in less time
car 2 has done 20000rpm using less fuel to maintain rpm but taken longer time...
which vehicle uses more fuel?
are their any other considerations?

Traveler, I think your initial question is confusing.

Example - car 1 has done 17500rpm, car 2 has done 20000rpm

You have confused the question right there. I don't know of any standard Rover engine that would handle 17,500rpm etc.

I think what you should have said was car 1 has done 17,500 revolutions to cover a given distance.

Please correct me if I'm wrong. I am a trade teacher so I believe I know a good question from one that needs rewording.

Of course as academic as all this is should any of us find ourselve's in a situation where reducing consumption but getting somewhere as quickly as possible is important I bet this thread comes to mind.... Eg need to get someone to medical assistance and the nearest help is not where you had planned to be heading (or based your refueling around)......

Originally Posted by barryj

Traveler, I think your initial question is confusing.

Example - car 1 has done 17500rpm, car 2 has done 20000rpm

You have confused the question right there. I don't know of any standard Rover engine that would handle 17,500rpm etc.

I think what you should have said was car 1 has done 17,500 revolutions to cover a given distance.

Please correct me if I'm wrong. I am a trade teacher so I believe I know a good question from one that needs rewording.

Yes i am talking about 17500rpm for total distance. not engine revving at that figure.
the actual figures are speculative.
and i stand corrected in another post.

Originally Posted by Traveler

Yes i am talking about 17500rpm for total distance. not engine revving at that figure.
the actual figures are speculative.
and i stand corrected in another post.

err ..... I still think it should read revolutions per distance or time span.

Originally Posted by Traveler

Yes i am talking about 17500rpm for total distance. not engine revving at that figure.
the actual figures are speculative.
and i stand corrected in another post.

Originally Posted by barryj

err ..... I still think it should read revolutions per distance or time span.

Just to poke my nose back into this one....

Hes actually asking 2 questions and managed to cross relate them. In the interests of (hopefully) pointing all interested parties in what I assumed are the right general directions

Im going to re-write this as the 2 seperate questions as I interpeted it and think he intended it( I havent done the math to make them bullet proof but ballparked it for the general outline.) Ignoring all minor variations and assuming that both vehicles operate in exactly the same situational circumstance and other than the differences specified in the statements are identical vehicles in all relevent ways. For the purposes of the question assume that both vehicles are 3.9l EFI manual discoverys in good mechanical order



I have 2 vehicles that travel the same distance the first covers the distance in 7 minutes maintaining 2500 RPM using a greater throttle setting to maintain speed

The second vehicle covers the same trip in 10 minutes maintaing 2000 RPM and a lesser throttle setting to maintain speed.

Which vehicle uses the most fuel?

the second part of the question should read

the same vehicles one with a gearing change do the same trip in the same time.. Vehicle A's engine turns 17500 times whereas vehicle B's engine turns 20000 times. Given that vehicle A's engine required a higher throttle setting than Vehcile B's to maintian constant RPM's for the duration of the trip Which vehicle used the most fuel?


Bonus marks....

Exiting the hypotetical world detail factors (environmental + terrain excluded at this stage) that have the potential to cause additional variation.


Hope that helps demmudy the waters.