Pajero 4WD Club of Victoria Public Forum Pajero 4WD Club of Victoria Public Forum

Go Back   Pajero 4WD Club of Victoria Public Forum > Vehicles > Generation 4-3 Pajero

Generation 4-3 Pajero NW model 2011 - 2014

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 04-10-15
hakaboy hakaboy is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Western Suburbs, Melbourne
Posts: 44
Default fuel economy

just come back from a Melbourne-Wagga- Melbourne trip

one the freeway with a 100k speed limit, the onboard screen showed 8.6 litres per hundred, had cruise set for 100 kph

one the freeway with a 110k speed limit, the onboard screen showed 9.0 litres per hundred, had cruise set for 112 kph

all I had was the wife , two kids and a little luggage, nothing too much

so does anyone know how accurate the onboard displays are, I never actually worked it out from how many litres I put in at the servo, too busy with other things
__________________
2013 GLX R diesel, genuine MM towbar, aluminium rack, 50 litre fridge/freezer, General Grabber AT 2 tyres, Safari snorkel and heaps more to add when I have the funds!!

2016 23 ft Evolution Eclipse custom built semi off road van
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 04-10-15
Dicko1's Avatar
Dicko1 Dicko1 is offline
Valued Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: here
Posts: 4,717
Default

Reckon they are optimistic. I get about 10lts per 100 sitting on 100kph as shown by gps. Car speedo is out by 5kph at 100kph(only really doing 95kph. Sitting on 110kph (true gps reading) I would expect to be using at least 11lts per hundred k. Probably closer to 12 lts per hundred k. Only real figures are actual kilometres travelled by actual fuel put into a tank. Over 9500 ks my 2014 NW has averaged 10lts per 100k. City and highway.
__________________
Modified 2014 NW owner. All the usual fruit.
I hope this report helps you save a few bucks on diesel henceforth by understanding that the main ingredient, by volume, in premium diesel is in fact marketing bullshit.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 04-10-15
ticky's Avatar
ticky ticky is offline
Valued Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Adelaide
Posts: 1,282
Default

If you have the EGR mod, I would expect around 9/100 on the open rd, maybe a bit better at 100kph.

I agree with Dicko, the only way is to record Actual K's v Actual Lt's. My Speedo is out by 5kph pretty much across the range. Always reads 5kph slower than the GPS.

The trip computer is not that honest IMO, it tends to be a little Optimistic.

I get around 9.1/100 Metro driving nearly every tank. I can do better by not allowing the engine over 2000 RPM, in any gear, but life sometimes gets in the way of that.

Some times I do a country run on the same tank & it doesn't change much, but I havent done a long trip in mine yet.

The EGR mod is the best money you will ever spend on your Pajero.

Steve
__________________
2009 NT VRX, Rear Battery Pack, 18" Bridgestone D-697, SPVi EGR mod, BushSkinz Intercooler & Sump Plates. GME 3550, HID HB's and 22"LED Bar, Pioneer Avic F80DAB Audio/Coms/Nav system MM4x4 TC Lockup Mate. & 1/2 tank of Diesel

Pretty Stock but very Capable

Wish List: SMART Winch Bar & Winch, Snorkel, Diff Breathers, & 1/2 tank of Diesel
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 05-10-15
dhula dhula is offline
Valued Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Warnbro WA
Posts: 1,012
Default

I've found the in dash reading to be fairly close to actual so far.
I reset it each fill just for the fun of it and leave it alone till I refil next.
Each time the dash reading has been within 0.5ish of what I actually get when I work it out by litres into tank -v- kms driven.
__________________
2010 NT Activ, DiD+lazy shift. Bushskins+Boo's, Kings springs+Monroe shocks+Firestone Airbags, MM towbar, MM nudgebar.
2006 KJ Cherokee, CRD+lazy shift. Ironman springs and shocks, MoPar skids.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 05-10-15
erad erad is offline
Valued Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Cooma NSW
Posts: 2,124
Default

I have found the fuel cons display to be fairly accurate. Fuel consumption depends a lot on driving conditions - hills, curves and winds. Also altitude to a limited extent. On a run Cooma to Melbourne, the display showed consumption - 6.8 l/100 @ 100 km/h, increasing to 7.0 @110 km/h, both speeds using the GPS. That drive is flat, straight (and boring). When I got to Melbourne, I filled up and the overall consumption agreed with the indicated levels. I drive like an old grandpa (Hell - I am one!), but I have been amazed with the economy of this beast. Even around town, if you don't floor it at the traffic lights, you can achieve amazing economy, especially if you are travelling on the 80 km/h roads. Provided you don't spend lots of time idling, I often see figures in the low 6's around town - particularly at the end of a long run into town.

I have noted that the engine temperature seems to affect the consumption. When the oil is cold, even after the water temp has reached its level, the consumption is higher. It takes probably 50 km in winter and 25 km in summer before it really starts to get down to the above figures. Also, I tow a caravan a bit, and when the beast is released from its load, it FLIES! The above figures were taken direcltly after a 3000 km run with the van.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 14-10-15
JoeMcDermott JoeMcDermott is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Gold Coast
Posts: 103
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by erad View Post
I have noted that the engine temperature seems to affect the consumption. When the oil is cold, even after the water temp has reached its level, the consumption is higher.
I have noted that ambient temps also make a difference.

Travelling in the north of Australia in summer (ie, damned hot) the fuel consumption is very markedly worse than it is in more temperate climes.

I put it down to he Bushskinz bash plate not flowing enough air for the intercooler to bring the intake temps down, but I am only guessing.

I have NEVER seen consumption lower than the high 8's though, and it is more typically in the 10's - I have NFI how you'd get down to the 6's except by coasting down hills.

Then again, my 'jero is lifted, barred and carrying a fair amount of weight and all of that will affect fuel consumption.
__________________
2014 NW with OL bar, 9,500lb winch, Bushskinz, TJM dual battery kit, UHF, Outback drawers, ARB compressor, MSA fridge slide with Evakool fridge, 55mm lift and rear airbags, water tank and pump.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 19-10-15
erad erad is offline
Valued Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Cooma NSW
Posts: 2,124
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeMcDermott View Post
I have noted that ambient temps also make a difference.

Travelling in the north of Australia in summer (ie, damned hot) the fuel consumption is very markedly worse than it is in more temperate climes.

I put it down to he Bushskinz bash plate not flowing enough air for the intercooler to bring the intake temps down, but I am only guessing.

I have NEVER seen consumption lower than the high 8's though, and it is more typically in the 10's - I have NFI how you'd get down to the 6's except by coasting down hills.

Then again, my 'jero is lifted, barred and carrying a fair amount of weight and all of that will affect fuel consumption.

Interesting that you note the bushskinz. I just came back from the coast uo the Clyde Mountain, towing my 16 ft Jayco Poptop caravan. The intake air temperatures were significantly higher than I remember before I fitted the bushskinz intercooler bash plate. Previously I only got to 110 Deg C once, but this time it was 118 Deg C, and the ambient temp was 24 Deg C. OK - I have never towed my van up this road before (I normally use Brown Mountain), and the hill seemed quite steep, but I reckon the intake air temperatures are higher than ebfore fitting the bushskinz plates. I was concerned about this before i bought the plates, but now it seems I was right. Not sure what to do...
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 20-10-15
JoeMcDermott JoeMcDermott is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Gold Coast
Posts: 103
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by erad View Post
Interesting that you note the bushskinz. I just came back from the coast uo the Clyde Mountain, towing my 16 ft Jayco Poptop caravan. The intake air temperatures were significantly higher than I remember before I fitted the bushskinz intercooler bash plate. Previously I only got to 110 Deg C once, but this time it was 118 Deg C, and the ambient temp was 24 Deg C. OK - I have never towed my van up this road before (I normally use Brown Mountain), and the hill seemed quite steep, but I reckon the intake air temperatures are higher than ebfore fitting the bushskinz plates. I was concerned about this before i bought the plates, but now it seems I was right. Not sure what to do...
Well options are to drill more holes in the plate (reducing its strength), follow the upgraded inter cooler path (hopefully a more efficient inter cooler can cope with the apparently dodgy airflow) or just put up with it.

I'm still thinking about it too.
__________________
2014 NW with OL bar, 9,500lb winch, Bushskinz, TJM dual battery kit, UHF, Outback drawers, ARB compressor, MSA fridge slide with Evakool fridge, 55mm lift and rear airbags, water tank and pump.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 20-10-15
Jondalar Jondalar is offline
Valued Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 591
Default

I found the dashboard display to be optimistic by around 0.5 LPH before fitting chip, after chip it's more wildly optimistic. I've calibrated my Scangauge II and for regular running it's pretty spot on. Running down level highway on my run to work I regularly get 7.2 LPH but of course travelling further would encounter hills etc and so the highway average is around 8.5 for my Paj with chip and EGR mod. I've also got the V-Flux on the rear spoiler which I reckon gives about 0.5 to 1.0 LPH better economy.

I suspect the stock intercooler is not big enough because even on a 26C day just running down the highway the intake air temp is around 56C, tow a caravan up a range and it easily gets to 80C or more.

Cheers,
Karl
__________________
Pajero gone, driving something European and sexy now
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 20-10-15
spot01 spot01 is online now
Valued Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Adelaide
Posts: 2,842
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jondalar View Post
............. I've also got the V-Flux on the rear spoiler which I reckon gives about 0.5 to 1.0 LPH better economy........

Cheers,
Karl
What is "the V-Flux"?
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Fuel Economy stevespatrol Generation 4-3 Pajero 27 11-03-15 05:48 PM
Fuel Economy. dbomba Generation 2 Pajero 39 20-04-10 08:53 PM
Fuel Economy Again Rich Generation 4-1 Pajero 25 28-01-09 09:04 PM
Fuel Economy Doowrag Generation 1 Pajero 22 29-10-08 01:16 AM
Fuel Economy tunnel Generation 2 Pajero 9 15-04-08 09:56 PM


All times are GMT +10. The time now is 09:33 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.