Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 75
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Full exhaust with tuned length front pipes, and an ECU with the speed limited and I assume a few other things altered, and that is it power wise.

But your right one tap of the throttle and shes right on boost, I guess it's because I'm still in the early part of the ownership cycle where you notice every little thing about the way your car drives, what the gauges are doing and when etc.

At the moment I have done a mix of highway and stop start driving and I have done ~260K's on half a tank so thats about 12.5L/100K's with normal driving.

I find that not fanging it when cold does wonders for the fuel consumption. Generally I try to avoid giving it to the car when the oil temp gauge is below 70c, that way things are up to operating temp.

You will get poor fuel ecconomy if you use 5th gear at speeds slower than 90km/h, I know some people who use it at 50/60kmh!

Not necessarily - I use 5th gear at 60km/h if I'm holding speed and/or the road is going downhill. The motor isn't labouring at all, in fact it cruises along quite nicely. It's actually pretty surprising how little throttle is needed to hold it at 60 in top gear, unless of course the road rises, in which case you use 4th (or 3rd if it's a hill rather than a rise). Personally, I've found as a general rule of thumb, if I can go another gear higher and not use any more throttle (or even less sometimes, as it doesn't need as many revs) then it'll use less fuel. You can sort of just tell when the engine is happy at a particular rev - do what the car feels like it likes. That's just the way I drive though, it won't work for everyone.

Mine gets given the herbs fairly regularly, and it's very unusual for it not to get at least 450-500km out of a tank, with the majority of that being ligth city driving (driving in the city but not much traffic). Most I've ever got from 65L is around 950km... all highway driving, and it was on the Xmas/NY holiday, on the way to the North Coast, up one of the most ridiculously over-policed highways in the state (Bruce H'way).

hehe that was me who used 5th at 50-60km/h. I stopped doin that now, but still didn't really improve economy. A new 02 sensor and i got about 30km more and still to do a new crank angle sensor. Currently gettin 330-350km from a tank with cat back, bov and filter.....stock boost.

  • 3 weeks later...

I've been keeping a log recently and have got the following figures:

DATE | PRICE PER LITRE | NO. LITRES | TOTAL $ | DISTANCE | L/100km

22/10/02 | 96.7c/L | 26.75L | $25.87 | 218.3km | 12.254

26/10/02 | 97.7c/L | 47.41L | $46.32 | 384km | 12.346

29/10/02 | 93.7c/L | 47.29L | $44.31 | 395.0km | 11.972

All distances include heavy trafic, while the last entry included the cruise down the wollongong on the 27th.

What sort of figures are people getting with tuned Power FCs under similar conditions? I'm aiming at getting one in december after my final exam ever at uni (if I pass).

I have a air filter, exhaust, razo sticker, and standard boost.

Mark

sir ricelot you forgot to tell everyone you get those economy figures on *REGULAR UNLEADED*

*gasp*

i got 400 easily per tank, sometimes 500..........even got 700 once and i drive like a frigging maniac, go the s15s :D (this is on 12psi too)

you perth boys must remember that city driving in perth (or canberra etc) is about the same as highway driving in sydney, the same level of traffic stop start etc.

there is no comparison for peak hour traffic in sydney, unless you're comparing speeds with the push bike weaving thru traffic, in which he eaaaaaaaaaaasily wins........damn onarun and his bike.

  • 2 months later...

can i just add here, yes after 3 months...a powerfc has made no difference to fuel efficiency, however, i do have 500nm of torque over the whole rev range!? :P

for the sake of the original question asked....reset your ecu, try and use the same petrol brand, bp ultimate or whatever and manage your right foot....

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

    • Very nice - I also have a 92 GTST and hardly see any others around these days
    • When I need something else to edit, I use Movavi. A friend who does video editing on a daily basis recommended me) it's an easy video cutter to use for beginners
    • I need to edit some videos for work but I'm not good at all this. Which video editor can you recommend?
    • I think you're really missing the point. The spec is just the minimum spec that the fuel has to meet. The additive packages can, and do, go above that minimum if the fuel brand feels they need/want to. And so you get BP Ultimate or Shell Ultra (or whatever they call it) making promises to clean your engine better than the standard stuff....simply because they do actually put better additive packages in there. They do not waste special sauce on the plebian fuel if they can avoid it. I didn't say "energy density". I just said "density". That's right, the specific gravity (if you want to use a really shit old imperial description for mass per unit volume). The density being higher indicates a number of things, from reduces oxygen content, to increased numbers of double bonds or cyclic components. That then just happens to flow on to the calorific value on a volume basis being correspondingly higher. The calorific value on a mass basis barely changes, because almost all hydrocarbon materials have a very similar CV per kg. But whatever - the end result is that you do get a bit more energy per litre, which helps to offset some of the sting of the massive price bump over 91. I can go you one better than "I used to work at a fuel station". I had uni lecturers who worked at the Pt Stanvac refinery (at the time they were lecturing, as industry specialist lecturers) who were quite candid about the business. And granted, that was 30+ years ago, and you might note that I have stated above that I think the industry has since collected together near the bottom (quite like ISPs, when you think about it). Oh, did I mention that I am quite literally a combustion engineer? I'm designing (well, actually, trying to avoid designing and trying to make the junior engineer do it) a heavy fuel oil firing system for a cement plant in fricking Iraq, this week. Last week it was natural gas fired this-that. The week before it was LPG fired anode furnaces for a copper smelter (well, the burners for them, not the actual furnaces, which are just big dumb steel). I'm kinda all over fuels.
    • Well my freshly rebuilt RB25DET Neo went bang 1000kms in, completely fried big end bearing in cylinder 1 so bad my engine seized. No knocking or oil pressure issue prior to this happening, all happened within less than a second. Had Nitto oil pump, 8L baffled sump, head drain, oil restrictors, the lot put in to prevent me spinning a bearing like i did to need the rebuild. Mechanic that looked after the works has no idea what caused it. Reckoned it may have been bearing clearance wrong in cylinder 1 we have no idea. Machinist who did the work reckoned it was something on the mechanic. Anyway thats between them, i had no part in it, just paid the money Curiosity question, does the oil system on RB’s go sump > oil pump > filter > around engine? If so, if you had a leak on an oil filter relocation plate, say sump > oil pump > filter > LEAK > around engine would this cause a low oil pressure reading if the sensors was before the filter?   TIA
×
×
  • Create New...