I have been following this post with much interest. I recently did a trip to Coffin Bay (SA), three 4x4 – NW (2013), NS (2016) & FJ Cruiser. All cars carried about the same weight and the same gear on the roof racks. None were towing. Both the NW and the NS were full at the start of trip. By the time we reached Port Lincoln my NW took about 9 litres more than the NS. We all travelled together and shared the lead. Coming back home both the NW & NS filled with diesel from the same pump at Port Augusta. Just outside of Port Wakefield we compared moving fuel usage over the 2 ways. I know these reading may not be accurate but never the less a good comparator. My NW could not get better than 10.4/100, while the NS was 9.3/100 for the range that we were testing. When we got back to Adelaide we both filled from the same pump, my NW took 5.5 litres more. For the overall trip I averaged 11.4/100km (measured from litres used and dist). I don't understand the difference!
Stats on 4x4s
NW
· 40mm Lift, OL Steel Bull bar, Rhino Pioneer Roof rack, Full length bash plates including rear bumper, Spot lights, Toyo open country AT tyres, EGR cut off (electronic), tow bar.
NS
· Rhino Cross Bar (3) Roof rack, Full length bash plates including rear bumper,Nudge bar, Std Road Tyres, EGR cut off (electronic), tow bar.
After the Coffin Bay trip I had a Roosystems Re-map (towing & touring) & 3" King Brown - Pacer exhaust, turbo back- Cat, Center muffler and the rear resonator installed/fitted. The NW drives very well now but having just completed a trip to Renmark and back to Adelaide I only got 11.51/100 (measured lit & dist.) The car had 3 adults and 2 teenagers plus packed in the back. I did about 4 hours at Loveday. I was very careful driving, trying not to accelerate hard for the trip up & back. My fuel run checks over 15 to 20 km on Port Wakefield Rd (SA). There was virtually no wind and the air was cool. I went up and back twice so that’s about 80 km in all. I re-set both manual & Auto fuel readouts on the centre console at each test interval (both read the same while testing). May it be noted I was driving like a “Nana in a car park” for these tests!
Here are my average readings
70 kph - 9.4 lit/100
75 kph - 9.5 lit/100
80 kph - 9.7 lit/100
85 kph - 9.8 lit/100
90 kph - 9.9 lit/100
95 kph - 10.0 lit/100
100 kph - 10.3 lit/100
105 kph - 10.4 lit/100
110 kph - 10.7 lit/100
I don’t understand when I hear people getting 8.5/100 km going 100kph. As my NW rpm goes up so does the fuel consumption. I understand I now have a Roosystems tune, but the general economy before and after is about the same. Are these figures reasonable or are they classified as high considering I am doing sort of controlled runs?
Cheers Geoff
Stats on 4x4s
NW
· 40mm Lift, OL Steel Bull bar, Rhino Pioneer Roof rack, Full length bash plates including rear bumper, Spot lights, Toyo open country AT tyres, EGR cut off (electronic), tow bar.
NS
· Rhino Cross Bar (3) Roof rack, Full length bash plates including rear bumper,Nudge bar, Std Road Tyres, EGR cut off (electronic), tow bar.
After the Coffin Bay trip I had a Roosystems Re-map (towing & touring) & 3" King Brown - Pacer exhaust, turbo back- Cat, Center muffler and the rear resonator installed/fitted. The NW drives very well now but having just completed a trip to Renmark and back to Adelaide I only got 11.51/100 (measured lit & dist.) The car had 3 adults and 2 teenagers plus packed in the back. I did about 4 hours at Loveday. I was very careful driving, trying not to accelerate hard for the trip up & back. My fuel run checks over 15 to 20 km on Port Wakefield Rd (SA). There was virtually no wind and the air was cool. I went up and back twice so that’s about 80 km in all. I re-set both manual & Auto fuel readouts on the centre console at each test interval (both read the same while testing). May it be noted I was driving like a “Nana in a car park” for these tests!
Here are my average readings
70 kph - 9.4 lit/100
75 kph - 9.5 lit/100
80 kph - 9.7 lit/100
85 kph - 9.8 lit/100
90 kph - 9.9 lit/100
95 kph - 10.0 lit/100
100 kph - 10.3 lit/100
105 kph - 10.4 lit/100
110 kph - 10.7 lit/100
I don’t understand when I hear people getting 8.5/100 km going 100kph. As my NW rpm goes up so does the fuel consumption. I understand I now have a Roosystems tune, but the general economy before and after is about the same. Are these figures reasonable or are they classified as high considering I am doing sort of controlled runs?
Cheers Geoff
Comment