Fuel Consumption Survey!
08-19-2007, 10:00 AM
#127
Night Rider
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 981
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
cause leaving it in nuetral is as gd as letting the engine idle. this engine drinks more during idling. must make it work for its meal.
08-19-2007, 08:40 PM
#130
Yikes, I drive a lot and America is full of mountainous terrain especially when you're traveling from one State to another, every time I hit a downhill section, I always leave it in neutral. I'm going to start leaving it in gear now, I also need to change my brakes too.... thanks for the tip.
08-20-2007, 06:53 AM
#131
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I generally do 75%-80% highway driving during off-peak hours, and so usually average 8 - 8.5km/l. Best was 8.991 = 9km/l.
At the 1/4 mark it's usually anything from 380km to 400km.
And oh, I'm light-footed as well!
At the 1/4 mark it's usually anything from 380km to 400km.
And oh, I'm light-footed as well!
08-20-2007, 07:16 AM
#132
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Singapore
Posts: 320
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
08-20-2007, 10:18 AM
#133
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Anyone currently using fuel saving devices on their 8? How's the FC after that? Great if can share your experience.
Seriously considering one after my 6km/l FC. Not much difference whether I drive light footed or slightly heavy on my 6AT...
Seriously considering one after my 6km/l FC. Not much difference whether I drive light footed or slightly heavy on my 6AT...
08-24-2007, 12:44 PM
#135
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi all bros, i am pretty new in this forum, getting my 8 in Sept. I understand that keeping smaller rims enables better FC but Just wondering if keeping a 16/17 inch rim will actually big diff in the FC .
08-24-2007, 07:43 PM
#136
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My experience with my current 18" tells me there's little or no difference using them; lighter rims lower profile tyres COULD possibly mean less weight and mass, or otherwise just a negligible increase.
I mean, I've yet to hit anything less than 7.5km/l (but I do mostly highway driving!)
I mean, I've yet to hit anything less than 7.5km/l (but I do mostly highway driving!)
08-24-2007, 09:41 PM
#138
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Anyway, i'm 90% city driving so i think 5.5 is still acceptable to me...
08-24-2007, 10:00 PM
#139
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My experience with my current 18" tells me there's little or no difference using them; lighter rims lower profile tyres COULD possibly mean less weight and mass, or otherwise just a negligible increase.
I mean, I've yet to hit anything less than 7.5km/l (but I do mostly highway driving!)
I mean, I've yet to hit anything less than 7.5km/l (but I do mostly highway driving!)
08-25-2007, 03:06 AM
#141
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Singapore
Posts: 320
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
just did my second tank, 445km with 54.3 litres Shell 98. 1 year old 4AT stock. But something strange. I did 250km up to the halfway mark shown on the fuel meter, so that means I only did 195km on the remaining half. Driving profile didnt change much other than slightly poorer FC on a SAT with city driving while doing errands. Perhaps that means what is shown on the fuel meter is not exactly proportional?
08-25-2007, 11:47 AM
#142
White Rotary
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Somewhere I Belong...
Posts: 405
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
just did my second tank, 445km with 54.3 litres Shell 98. 1 year old 4AT stock. But something strange. I did 250km up to the halfway mark shown on the fuel meter, so that means I only did 195km on the remaining half. Driving profile didnt change much other than slightly poorer FC on a SAT with city driving while doing errands. Perhaps that means what is shown on the fuel meter is not exactly proportional?
08-26-2007, 10:59 PM
#143
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Singapore
Posts: 78
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
just did my second tank, 445km with 54.3 litres Shell 98. 1 year old 4AT stock. But something strange. I did 250km up to the halfway mark shown on the fuel meter, so that means I only did 195km on the remaining half. Driving profile didnt change much other than slightly poorer FC on a SAT with city driving while doing errands. Perhaps that means what is shown on the fuel meter is not exactly proportional?
The top part is usually larger then the bottom and thus you can drive more distance.
I believe the fuel tank look something similar to a cone.
Anyway i am getting between 6-7km/l.
never rev much. but give up on asking abt petrol anymore.
08-29-2007, 11:09 PM
#146
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 40
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All along i thought Fuel tank is from big to small.
The top part is usually larger then the bottom and thus you can drive more distance.
I believe the fuel tank look something similar to a cone.
Anyway i am getting between 6-7km/l.
never rev much. but give up on asking abt petrol anymore.
The top part is usually larger then the bottom and thus you can drive more distance.
I believe the fuel tank look something similar to a cone.
Anyway i am getting between 6-7km/l.
never rev much. but give up on asking abt petrol anymore.
The needle drops much faster in the first quater than last quarter for me...
when u drive on a full tank with 60 litre of petrol which is equivalent of 60 kg, the fuel efficiency is poorer than when there is less petrol in the fuel tank after the second half. Hence the fuel efficiency is slightly better in the second half, thus the needle drops slower in second half than the first half...
my 2 cents worth...
08-30-2007, 02:03 AM
#147
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
About the disproportionate mileage/litre of petrol on the fuel gauge...
The needle drops much faster in the first quater than last quarter for me...
when u drive on a full tank with 60 litre of petrol which is equivalent of 60 kg, the fuel efficiency is poorer than when there is less petrol in the fuel tank after the second half. Hence the fuel efficiency is slightly better in the second half, thus the needle drops slower in second half than the first half...
my 2 cents worth...
The needle drops much faster in the first quater than last quarter for me...
when u drive on a full tank with 60 litre of petrol which is equivalent of 60 kg, the fuel efficiency is poorer than when there is less petrol in the fuel tank after the second half. Hence the fuel efficiency is slightly better in the second half, thus the needle drops slower in second half than the first half...
my 2 cents worth...
If what you said is true, maybe someone can try topping up to only half tank everytime or even just $20 of fuel daily and share with us if your fuel efficiency improve?
08-31-2007, 05:56 AM
#148
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Singapore
Posts: 320
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mine really plunge really fast on the last QTR. But its strange that fuel efficiency is higher when u are heavier? It should be the other way round? My first QTR I can do 120-150km, second QTR 100km. third 110km, last one 85km. hmmm?
Another observation, i was stationary on a slope (about 30 deg upwards) and tank was 1/8. within the 1 min I saw the needle go from 1/8 to zero. Cool.. But when got moving again on level ground it bounced back to 1/8. nevertheless still quite a big fluctuation.
Another observation, i was stationary on a slope (about 30 deg upwards) and tank was 1/8. within the 1 min I saw the needle go from 1/8 to zero. Cool.. But when got moving again on level ground it bounced back to 1/8. nevertheless still quite a big fluctuation.