Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 71
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I was on the lower half of empty yesterday and the car kept dieing down and then surging forward like it was about to die.

No light came on, where is it supposed to be on 33's?

Edited by miguelegant

when does the fuel light come on? when theres 20L left in the tank, are stock tanks 65L for the r34?

i refuelled today, with city driving and heavy right foot i average 16L per 100kms, today i can proudly say there is nothing wrong with the fuel consumption of my car as it averages 11.40L/100km WITH city driving, a restricted right foot and the once off flooring!

yes they all have a fuel light. it may be blown though (or there is a short in the system or issue with the sender). but they generally all come on with about 10L left in the tank, so if you are filling up with less than around 55L then you aren't getting the tank low enough for the light to come on. there are a few ways to test if the light is working. 1 is to pull the return line off the injector rail and run it into a bucket then run the car until it either runs out of fuel or the light comes on (best to do when the car is low on fuel). another would be to pull the fuel gauge sender out of the tank. yet another would be to figure out which wire in the fuel sender wiring is the one that sends the signal to the dash and short it out and see if the light comes on. or you could simply drive around with a few litres of fuel in a jerry can and just keep driving until either the light comes on or you run out of fuel.

i also have a feeling that in the 33's it doesn't come on until below the line. i don't think mine came on until it was at the top of the E

cheers for that, shall have a look on the weekend. ive had the fuel guage sit dead on the E line without the light coming on. then again i only got 49L into it on fill up

Yep also gotta say today with it real low in the tank, going around corner the car started to splutter and almost stall as the fuel sloshed around in the tank, don't know if that's got to do with the fuel pump not pulling enough or not but no fuel light came on thats for sure.

i know it's not a commodore, but i'd posted in here before about the fuel economy of my VT commodore and how the best i'd gotten was 8.74L/100kms. this was on E10. i put a tank of 91 octane in it last week. filled up tonight on my way home. 8.24L/100kms. that tank was only driving to and from work, which is mostly highway driving. if the mornings weren't quite so cold (been a few 5 degree mornings) or the car was kept in a garage and not out in the front yard then the economy would be a bit better since the car would come up to temp a little bit quicker. as it is, on the way to work the car doesn't come to temp until i reach the edge of town (about 7 kms away), so the part of the trip that is start/stop is also the part of the trip where the car is running the richest.

  • 1 month later...

Just had a pod filter installed and changed the coilpacks about 1 month ago, after the pod filter change and controlled sensible driving, I managed 11.03L/100km. O2 sensor working fine, I'm happy, I could perhaps even turn it down more and become a granny driver and maybe I'll get 9-10L per 100km who knows

Full tank estimate: 700km

I get constantly 12.5 - 13.5L/100km for normal driving (mix of city & high/freeway)

Lowest I have seen is ~10L/100km & that is country driving & sitting at 110-120km for ~400kms.

Car is an automatic so that probably chews more fuel compared to the manual counter parts.

Might go & change the spark plugs (haven't being changed for ~35,000kms) & give the POD a clean as it is covered with shit & dirt atm... :whistling:

  • 3 weeks later...

when does the fuel light come on? when theres 20L left in the tank, are stock tanks 65L for the r34?

i refuelled today, with city driving and heavy right foot i average 16L per 100kms, today i can proudly say there is nothing wrong with the fuel consumption of my car as it averages 11.40L/100km WITH city driving, a restricted right foot and the once off flooring!

R34 sedans (not sure about coupes) have 65L fuel tanks.

If you change your O2 sensor, clean the AFM and have a new air filter - you should be able to have economy around 10.5L to 11L/100km urban.

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...