Jump to content
SAU Community

E85 Fuel Consumption


Recommended Posts

E85 Fuel Consumption

General question around what level of consumption people are seeing when running E85. 

I had a fairly full tank when I went for a cruise on the weekend through the hills, did about 175-200ks or so and had about quarter of a tank left (R34 GT-R with around 350rwkw). 

When I did a track day I had a full tank plus 80L with me and ended up with around half a tank left in the car and all jerries emptied after 5 or so 8 lap sessions of Winton, so 25 or so k's per session?

I can run the car on 98, but of course less power etc, but I'm just curious what others are seeing as I'd like to do some longer cruises and I'm thinking I might only be able to do so on 98. 

There's very little E85 around here too (Regional Victoria) so I keep a 200L barrel in the shed :D

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This was the main reason holding me back from going E85, a range of ~200km is frankly ridiculous. I know that flex fuel would address that but I'm too cheap to pay for all the required tuning.

It's crazy days when a Tesla is quicker off the mark and has better range than our cars ... once they address the weight and price, see you later. 5-10 years max.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Hadouken said:

My 33 got 12l/100 on the freeway. And about 20l/100 at the track.

Norm was 14 odd /100

I did 24 laps at Mallala yesterday, plus a couple more getting on and off the track. I used around 60 litres of E85, so almost 100L/100Kms.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, GeeDog said:

I did 24 laps at Mallala yesterday, plus a couple more getting on and off the track. I used around 60 litres of E85, so almost 100L/100Kms.

What sort of setup have you got?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, GeeDog said:

I did 24 laps at Mallala yesterday, plus a couple more getting on and off the track. I used around 60 litres of E85, so almost 100L/100Kms.

Mine's an economy car by comparison.  Seems to consistently run about 60l/100km.  Not running ethanol though. I'd expect that to increase by about 30 percent on E85.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Dale FZ1 said:

Mine's an economy car by comparison.  Seems to consistently run about 60l/100km.  Not running ethanol though. I'd expect that to increase by about 30 percent on E85.

If you consider that 4 of the 24 laps were "out" laps (so 1/2 pace to the start line), and 5 of the other 20 laps were on a wet track, the 15 laps at full noise probably used well over 100L/100Km. 

 

3 hours ago, Piggaz said:

What sort of setup have you got?

R33 GTST, highflow, ID1000s, Nistune, E85 etc

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's always 30-35% less range than equal driving on 98 ;)

If you really want to get sad, get a high stall torque converter, and then take *that* to the track!
When I was running my engine in, I managed to pay United something like $770 of fuel in 5-6 days.

Nowadays I am back on 98 because United's violent price gouging rustles my jimmies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

E85 I get 270-290km per tank (60-65L), general mix of daily driving with some cruising and some squirting. P98 I was getting around 400km per tank give or take a bit depending on heaviness of right foot. On the track with E85, 1l per kilometre isn't far off the mark when going full noise constantly. Agree with Greg about united violent price gouging, went from 119.9 to 139.9 in the space of 2 weeks. Carnts. I have flex but reluctant to poor 98 in. Stock RB25 with highflow, nismo 740cc dinosaurs making 312rwkw btw.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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
 Share




  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Well, yeah, the RB26 is definitely that far off the mark. From a pure technology point of view it is closer to the engines of the 60s than it is to the engines of the last 10 years. There is absolutely nothing special about an RB26 that wasn't present in engines going all the way back to the 60s, except probably the four valve head. The bottom end is just bog standard Japanese stuff. The head is nothing special. Celicas in the 70s were the same thing, in 4cyl 2 valve form. The ITBs are nothing special when you consider that the same Celicas had twin Solexes on them, and so had throttle plates in the exact same place. There's no variable valve timing, no variable inlet manifold, which even other RBs had either before the 26 came out or shortly afterward. The ECU is pretty rude and crude. The only things it has going for it are that the physical structure was pretty bloody tough for a mass produced engine, the twin-turbos and ITBs made for a bit of uniqueness against the competition (and even Toyota were ahead on the twin turbs thing, weren't they?) and the electronic controls and measuring devices (ie, AFMs, CAS, etc) were good enough to make it run well. Oh, and it sounds better than almost anything else, ever. The VR38 is absolutely halfway between the RB generation and the current generation, so it definitely has a massive increase in the sophistication of the electronics, allowing for a lot more dynamic optimisation of mapping. Then there's things like metal treatments and other coatings on things, adoption of variable cam stuff, and a bunch of other little improvements that mean it has to be a better thing than the RB26. But I otherwise agree with you that it is approximately the same thing as a 26. But, skip forward another 10 years from that engine and then the things that I mentioned in previous post come out to play. High compression, massively sophisticated computers, direct injection, clever measuring sensors, etc etc. They are the real difference between trying to make big power with a 26 and trying to make big power with a S/B50/54 (or whatever the preferred BMW engine of the week is).
    • Is the RB26 actually that far off the mark? Honestly from where I'm sitting a VR38DETT is not actually that much more advanced than the RB26. Yes, there is a scavenge pump on the VR38, it's smarter in a number of ways but it's not actually jumping out to me as alien technology. Something like a B58 or V35A-FTS on the other hand has so many surprising little design features that add up to be something that just isn't comparable. 
    • https://www.carsales.com.au/cars/details/2021-nissan-skyline-400r-auto-rv37/SSE-AD-17857548/ Well there you go 
    • Chris won't reply. He doesn't visit the forum much anymore. You can try these guys https://www.facebook.com/autotainment/ They did mine many years ago
×
×
  • Create New...