Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 78
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

for the past month or two i have been getting 260kms to a tank! lol. had a new turbo on and it was running rich then, turbo decided to shit itself and so stocky is back on, havent been for a tune cuz im saving money to rebuild the turbo and then get it tuned. i go through a full tank every 4 days lol

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/174292-fuel-eco/page/4/#findComment-3283396
Share on other sites

Thought id update and say 750km from 1 tank!!! (was all highway, but still) Guess Skylines can be daily drivers if you live out in the country :(

750????? :D

You sure you were'nt in a barina dreaming of a skyline :bunny:

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/174292-fuel-eco/page/4/#findComment-3305512
Share on other sites

Thought id update and say 750km from 1 tank!!! (was all highway, but still) Guess Skylines can be daily drivers if you live out in the country :bunny:

Lets see if I can convince my dad to get a r34 to replace his toyota camry I4 2.2 (does around 600km a tank)

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/174292-fuel-eco/page/4/#findComment-3305571
Share on other sites

i thought myne was pretty thirsty but looks about right. a full tank on myne lasts between 350-400km/tank But i drive a mixed of spirited driving and crusing on the highway. I very rarely get above 400km. only once and that was from canb to syd of which i nearly reached 500km. Alot of the first posts seemed to state they were getting close to 500km's on a tank from a r33. Weird... maybe the fuel has changed or something?

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/174292-fuel-eco/page/4/#findComment-3311150
Share on other sites

I just dont think people are calculating their fuel usage properly..

they assume that E on the gauge means its empty..

If i went by my fuel gauge id be filling up every 250-300 kms

but i get closer to 450 from a tank of pure suburb driving

remember..

fill fuel tank to the top

reset trip

drive drive drive

fill fuel to top again..

Divide the litres of fuel you put in by your trip meter.. eg

42l/ 298kms = 0.140939

in other words.. 14.09l/per 100kms

Edited by MotoMan
Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/174292-fuel-eco/page/4/#findComment-3311575
Share on other sites

R33 GTS-t running 230-240rwkw on low boost.

I get about 200-220km/s per tank which i think is apalling despite not much of it being freeway driving.

I'm gonna get it re-tuned as my tuner says thats the problem. might get the O2 sensor checked also.

When it was stock i was only getting around 300km's to a tank also.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/174292-fuel-eco/page/4/#findComment-3314001
Share on other sites

R33 GTS-t running 230-240rwkw on low boost.

I get about 200-220km/s per tank which i think is apalling despite not much of it being freeway driving.

I'm gonna get it re-tuned as my tuner says thats the problem. might get the O2 sensor checked also.

When it was stock i was only getting around 300km's to a tank also.

I'd say it is the tune.

Mine is making 268rwkw on 15.5psi with a GT30 and has just returned 410km's to a tank (50litres) and that was with a heavy foot as you do when its just been tuned and you want to see what it goes like. :laugh:

I have the o2 sensor turned off.

Its running the RB26 base ignition map and hasn't had the ignition tweaked for light load/cruise (load points 12+ have only been tweaked)

Its running 15:1 up to load point 12 where it runs 13:1 during boost build.

So only fuel has been tweaked; no ignition and its returning fairly decent economy considering how it has been driven.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/174292-fuel-eco/page/4/#findComment-3314189
Share on other sites

I just dont think people are calculating their fuel usage properly..

they assume that E on the gauge means its empty..

If i went by my fuel gauge id be filling up every 250-300 kms

but i get closer to 450 from a tank of pure suburb driving

remember..

fill fuel tank to the top

reset trip

drive drive drive

fill fuel to top again..

Divide the litres of fuel you put in by your trip meter.. eg

42l/ 298kms = 0.140939

in other words.. 14.09l/per 100kms

Exactly what I was going to say too... To all these people posting "350km per tank" etc -- this is a completely inaccurate measurement because no-one runs their tank to empty so therefore every persons measurement (ie. "per tank") is a different size!! :)

As above, work out your L/per 100km usage as this is the only accurate measurement of fuel usage!

Oh yeah... I get about 380-400km per tank :)

My last fill was 47.69L divided by 380km = 12.5L/100km - Normal suburban driving

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/174292-fuel-eco/page/4/#findComment-3324706
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

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

    • Yeah, the latter. No diff should have a centre replaced without checking clearances because its unlikely to be the same as whatever came out. Not that that stops most people just checking a new centre in
    • Major thread necro but how bad of a job is it to DIY? Looking at it online it looks like if you reuse your ring and pinion as long as those are in good condition it should be fine to just pull the axles/front cover and replace the diff that way? Or should I be replacing everything and doing preload measurements/gear mesh testing like the factory service manual mentions for the rear diff?
    • in my list I had the R33 GTR as the best Skyline. Infact I had all GTR's (33>34=32), the NSX, the GTO, the 300ZX, the 180SX, the S15 better than the FD RX7. I had the MR2 and the A80 as 'just' better. I also think the DC5R Integra looks better but this is an 01 onwards car. I also think the FC>FD. It's almost like aesthetics are individual! The elements @GTSBoy likes about the FD and dislikes about the 180 are inverse in my eyes. I hate the rear end of the FD and it's weird tail lights that are bulbous and remind me of early hyundai excels. They are not striking, nor iconic, nor retro cool. The GTO has supercar proportions. I maintain these look much better in person (like the NSX) especially with nice wheels and suspension which is mandatory for all cars pretty much. Some (or all) of these you have to see in person to appreciate. You can't write a car off until you see one in the flesh IMO. Like most people we probably just like/dislike cars which represent certain eras of design or design styles in general. I also think the 60's Jag E type looks HORRIBLE, literally disgusting, and the 2000GT is nothing to write home about. FWIW I don't think the Dodge Viper Gen1's have aged very well either. You can probably see where I rate bubbly coupes like the FD. I know we're straying now but the C4 and C5 absolutely murder the Viper in the looks department as time goes on, for my eyes. Wouldn't surprise me if people who love the FD, also love the MX5, Dodge Viper, Jag E Type, etc etc.
    • I used to hate R31s, and any of the other Nissans that led up to it, and any of the Toyotas with similar styling, because of the boxiness. They were, and remain, childish, simplistic, and generally awful. I appreciate R31s a lot more now, but only the JDM 2 door. The ADM 4 door (and any other 4 door, even if they are unique compared to our local one) can eat a bowl of dicks. The Aussie R31 is also forever tarnished by their association with stereotypical bong clutching Aussie R31 owners of the 90s and early 2000s. I think the Nissans of the 70s (other than 120Y/180B/200B) are far superior looking to the 80s cars. The 240K era Skylines are boss. The same is broadly true of Toyotas. Hondas don't ever register in my thinking, from any era. Mitsus are all horrid shitboxen in any era, and so also don't register. Subarus are always awful, ditto. Daihatsus and Suzukis also don't generally register. They are all invisible. I think the SW20 MR2 looks fiddly. The 3000GT/GTO is like that but way worse. Too many silly plastic barnacles and fiddly gimmicks ruined what could have been a really nice base shape. Kinda-sorta looks like a big heavy ST165 Celica coupe (and I'm not sure if that's a good thing or a bad thing). I think the 180SX is dreadfully bland. It's not bad looking. But it has no excitement to it at all. It's just a liftback coupe thing with no interest in its lines, and bad graphical elements (ie wide expanses of taillight plastic on the rear garnish). The S13 Silvia is a little better - getting closer to R32 shapes. But still....bland. S14? Nope. Don't love it. S15...a little better. Probably a lot better, actually. Benefits from not being like a shrunk in the wash R34 (where the S13 was a shrunk in the wash R32 and the S14 looked like a Pulsar or something else from the stable on Nissan mid 90s horrors). The Z32 was hot as f**k when it came out but hasn't aged as well as the A80. Keep in mind that I think the R33 is the most disgusting looking thing - and out of all the previous cars mentioned is objectively closest to my precious R32. It's just....real bad, almost everywhere you look. And that is down to the majority of what was designed in the 90s being shit. All Nissans from that era look like shit. Most other brands ditto. In that context, the FD absolutely stands out as being by far the best looking car, for reasons already discussed. Going behind the aesthetics, the suspension alone makes it better than almost any other car.  
    • If they just called it the "Mazda Tiffany", it would have been spot on.
×
×
  • Create New...