Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

The GTR fuel tank is actually 72l. Fuel economy is very dependant on modifications, tuning and of course driving style. around 350-400 is pretty normal around town and you should get well over 500 on a purely highway cruise with minimal boost.

Hope that helps

geez thats pretty good i didnt wxpect anything like that. thought it would drink pretty steadily. i'm thinking i should seriously think about getting one now.

The GTR fuel tank is actually 72l.

To be absolutely clear, the tank can _theoretically_ hold 72L, but the factory allows for about a 6L air/vapour space so the tank can never be completely filled. 65L is about the average practical fill for a GTR tank, but some will see more and some will see less.

To be absolutely clear, the tank can _theoretically_ hold 72L, but the factory allows for about a 6L air/vapour space so the tank can never be completely filled. 65L is about the average practical fill for a GTR tank, but some will see more and some will see less.

R33's and R34's have a 65 lt tank, i believe 32's have the bigger tank.

R33's and R34's have a 65 lt tank, i believe 32's have the bigger tank.

yes r32 gtr's do have a 72 litre tank BUT you wont fit that much in them by the time vapour lock is taken into consideration

fromtime fuel warning light comes on i have only ever fit 63 litres in mine and i doubt they would allow 9 litres of emergancy fuel in the tank

R33's and R34's have a 65 lt tank, i believe 32's have the bigger tank.

From the R32 GTR factory WS manual:

Fuel tank _nominal_ capacity = 72L

Intake air capacity = 5.5L

As I said, the air capacity is an allowance for vapour, expansion, etc and is deducted from the _nominal_ capacity of the tank, which gives a theoretical max for liquid of 66.5L. Again, some will get perhaps slightly more, some less, which gazza750 has just proven and is certainly my experience.

Edited by SteveL

Just on this, but a little to the side...

Ive noticed that when my R32GTR gets a little low on fuel, mabey 1/3 of a tank, the car seems to run a little rough/chuggy on idle when cold, almost stalls, until up to temp. Buggered if i know why? Any guesses, wouldnt be to do with vapour lock/pressure would it?

Cheers.

Oh i get about 23l/100km as well Beer Baron... :unsure:

Edited by mazgtr

in my 33 gtr i get about 14-15l/100 average with normal driving, although can be a bit higher or lower depending on how i drive it... when my GF drives it it chews quite A bit less than my 4l ford (city driving), seen it as low as 11l/100km. the r is basically stock.

Edited by marchGTR

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • So, the other thing I've sorted is a baseline dyno run up at Unigroup's new location. The auto trans was a little unco-operative by both shifting down when the throttle was floored on the dyno (so Mark had to ramp it up more slowly than in a manual) and also by shifting up at 6,000 even in sports mode instead of the indicated redline of 7,000 Still, on a hot day it made 240rwkw at 16psi which seems about right for 300kw (400hp) through an auto at the wheels.  The shape of the curve is not quite right because it was not full throttle to about 4,500 to stop it kicking down, but until I can get a tune on the auto trans control this was the best we could do.....full boost will be well below 5,000 once that is sorted, I'll get some data logs when I can to confirm For comparison, the R32 made 255 at 12psi (at 4,500) on the same dyno with tune, n1 turbos, cam gears, big exhaust but otherwise all standard so the v37 is likely a little better out of the box. One thing that is very clear is that the standard water to air intercoolers are not up to sustained use at full throttle in warm ambient temps. After about 5 runs (so only a few minutes full throttle), it was pulling boost and timing and dropping 10-15% power. Unfortunately I didn't get that printout and the Unigroup guys are away at the moment, will try and get hold of it on their return. So, looks like a healthy engine to start modifying and the only real area of concern is the w2a heat exchangers which the aftermarket has plenty of solutions for    
    • I maintain it actually looked really nice in person. So much so that I thought "No, this is illegal" but there it was, clear as day. I think we can easily call the wing and wheels/height to be transformative. Not saying it's better than the GR Whatever, or the 86, or the WRX STI or anything of that sort (the internet says it all bolts up so you can buy best of all worlds?) but it's still at least a thing and not nearly AS bad as people say.
    • That's less offensive than the previous gen.....except for all that ugly black tupperware around the edges. Blerck!
    • I leant out the window recently and took a picture of this new WRX. It looked real damn fine in person. It's faster around a track (stock) than a (stock) GR Yaris. It's much more practical despite being heavier. It's significantly cheaper. This gen tunes really well, much better than others. .... I think they're probably a lot better than people expect.
    • WRXs are a pure pleb boring car these days. You need to get an STI to even get close to what a WRX used to be.
×
×
  • Create New...