Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

hey guys :)

I got my non turbo r33 recently (downgraded from gtst for my P plates :() and my mums been complaining about the fuel and that its not much different to the GTST...

After filling in 50$ which iwas 38 L to get to the bottom empty Line it took approx 250kms..

thats only 6.6kms a L, and this is with normal driving, although really occasional accelerations.

ive been hearing numbers like 9kms so i was wondering if it could possibily be an issue with the car?

thanks in advance

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/352876-rb25de-fuel-consumption/
Share on other sites

  • Replies 71
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I got better fuel consumption when my car was converted to turbo with all the factory turbo bits then I did when it was n/a... motor doesn't have the turbo helping it get up to speed/under load etc...

should be 300-400 a tank... do a full tank on 98, not 95 or 91, that will make a difference too...

98 will help it mate. put a filter in it new sparkes and get the o2 sensor changed should help her out a bit with fuel for some strange reason i managed an 174kms a quarter the other day with the a/c on with a 26 highway after i changed to splitfire coilpacks and new plugs :) i was dam happy and now i am getting 140ish round town driving :)

You should be getting at least 500kms a tank when driving (including stop and go, freeway, and flooring)

This.

Out of a complete tank I'd get 520+.

Out of general just filling up, I'd fill up every 480km.

R34 25DE NEO, auto, using BP ultimate

Results are from ECUTalk unit installed in the car.

Freeway/Highway = 9L/100km (best 8.5L/100km, worst 11L/100km)

Mixed (normal day-to-day) = 12L/100km (best 10L/100km, worst 13L/100km)

Heavy traffic = 13.5L/100km (best 12L/100km, worst 16L/100km)

I got better fuel consumption when my car was converted to turbo with all the factory turbo bits then I did when it was n/a...

Ditto, heaps better - halved the revs and just rode the boost torque :P.

I'd be checking/replacing your O2 sensor as a minimum, then get an SAFC and get it tuned to like 13:1 low throttle (<~40%), 12.5:1 heavy throttle and run 98ron (but even tuned to 12 will be huge improvement if your shy). Find a tuner that will do it, I used to run 12.5:1 fuel mixtures on an N/A+T, those on an N/A should handle it fine.

To move an N/A skyline anywhere above walking pace will load up the engine enough to push it out of closed loop, which means 11 down to 10:1 fuel mixtures (I had/have an afr gauge, its disgusting to watch) so a tune will give about 15-20% better city economy. Then there's highway/cruise (when your maintaining speed), with a functioning O2 sensor your mixtures ramble between 14:1 & 15:1 but without it the best you'll see is 12's. With mine unplugged it pretty much just sits in the 10's and 11's, even at idle...

Those things, bit of a $ outlay but totally worth it :P (and you'll pickup smoother delivery and some torque down low and at part throttle).

As for legalities for P Platers, just don’t have it on display...

I found my A/C is sucking some major fuel usage, when it was broken (& hence never used, just windows down + a cigarette lighter powered fan :laugh:) I get over 450km per tank (~13L/100km), but now I have got it fixed (replaced A/C compressor & receiver dryer) I'm struggling to get even 400km per tank.

I lol hard at you guys. My beamer is a 2.5L inline 6 and, with a 60L fuel tank, and i average 600+kms per tank in city driving. Highway driving i average around 850-900kms.

And my car would whoop a non-turbo skyline. In every aspect. End of story.

I lol hard at you guys. My beamer is a 2.5L inline 6 and, with a 60L fuel tank, and i average 600+kms per tank in city driving. Highway driving i average around 850-900kms.

And my car would whoop a non-turbo skyline. In every aspect. End of story.

What happened to the 34/33 GTR Jason??

Gotta say I agree with all the guys here that have got better efficiency after going turbo. I used to get about 300-350kms to a full tank when my car was NA, but now I have the new engine in with 300rwhp and a shocking tune I am still getting 400-450kms a tank. Hitting boost frequently as well... It does struggle with hwy kms though, I get 450 driving around town but only about 350-380 cruising on the freeway. Damn diff ratio :(

I lol hard at you guys. My beamer is a 2.5L inline 6 and, with a 60L fuel tank, and i average 600+kms per tank in city driving. Highway driving i average around 850-900kms.

And my car would whoop a non-turbo skyline. In every aspect. End of story.

I love teh beemers.

Mums got a E39 528i and best I've got out of it on the freeway was 6.2L/100km with AC ON! Has 70L tank, thereotical 1130kms :worship: .

If I ever need a long distance car...

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 decent bit of kit. Definitely black it out I reckon.  
    • Because people who want that are buying euros. The people with the money to buy the aftermarket heads and blocks aren’t interested in efficiency or making -7 power, they’re making well over 1,000hp and pretty much only drive them at full throttle  best way to way make money is know your customer base and what they want and don’t spend money making things they don’t want. 
    • It's not, but it does feel like a bit of a missed opportunity regardless. For example, what if the cylinder head was redesigned to fit a GDI fuel system? It's worth like two full points of compression ratio when looking at modern GDI turbo vs PFI turbo. I'm pretty reliably surprised at how much less turbo it takes to make similar power out of a modern engine vs something like an RB26. Something with roughly the same dimensions as a -7 on an S55 is making absolutely silly power numbers compared to an RB26. I know there's a ton of power loss from things like high tension rings, high viscosity oil, clutch fan, AWD standby loss, etc but it's something like 700 whp in an F80 M3 vs 400 whp in an R33 GTR. The stock TF035HL4W turbos in an F80 M3 are really rather dinky little things and that's enough to get 400 whp at 18 psi. This just seems unwise no? I thought the general approach is if you aren't knock limited the MFB50 should be held constant through the RPM range. So more timing with RPM, but less timing with more cylinder filling. A VE-based table should accordingly inverse the VE curve of the engine.
    • I've seen tunes from big name workshops with cars making in excess of 700kW and one thing that stood out to me, is that noone is bothering with torque management. Everyone is throwing in as much timing as the motor can take for a pull. Sure that yields pretty numbers on a dyno, but it's not keeping these motors together for more than a few squirts down the straight without blowing coolant or head gaskets. If tuners, paid a bit more attention and took timing out in the mid range, managed boost a bit better, you'll probably see less motors grenading. Not to name names, or anything like that, but I've seen a tune, from a pretty wild GT-R from a big name tuner and I was but perplexed on the amount of timing jammed into it. You would have expected a quite a bit less timing at peak torque versus near the limiter, but there was literally 3 degrees of difference. Sure you want to make as much as possible throughout the RPM range, but why? At the expense of blowing motors? Anyhow I think we've gone off topic enough once again lol.
    • Because that’s not what any of them are building these heads or blocks for. It’s to hold over over 1000hp at the wheels without breaking and none of that stuff is required to make power 
×
×
  • Create New...