How thirsty is thirsty? 3.5L vs 3.8L petrols

[seb7701]

Ladies and Gents,

I'm chasing some expertise regarding just how thirsty the 3.5 litre petrol is in a 2001 NM Pajero.

I'm in the strange position of having owned a 2005 3.2 diesel paj which had to be moved due to an unusual mechanical issue. That aside, we loved it and kind of still do. That said, I am toying with the purchase of a cheap 2001 Exceed which is at a trusted MM dealer with 150,000 km on the clock.

I love my diesels and know things are better in the land of glow plug, but for a lot less money, a petrol version might do us for quite a while.

From searching the forum, the 3.5 seems to have been possibly better than the 3.8. Is this true and was sort of fuel figures can I reasonably expect?
All help would be greatly appreciated with this one!

Cheers,
Seb

[puppy]

there is a recent thread in 'fuel and fuel systems' section ofthis forum titled 'nm v6 consumption'.

my 3.5 is good. dont think there will be a lot of difference between the 3.5 and the 3.8.

if the car your looking at is 'all good' then buy it. it can be a long wait till the next good one pops up. when i was looking there was plenty of substandard examples that would hang around for ages and every now and then a good one would pop up and be gone quicker than an india batting innings.

[Lazarus]

you will be using 14-16 liters per 100kms

low fuel light will come on after 450 kms approx (if automatic), in suburbian driving, and that's about 75 to 80 liters of fuel

[House]

you will be using 14-16 liters per 100kms

low fuel light will come on after 450 kms approx (if automatic), in suburbian driving, and that's about 75 to 80 liters of fuel

That's pretty much what I'm getting. I don't think it's that great but it does move well. I'm thinking about adding headers to mine I read on one of the posts on here that they help fuel consumption with a snorkel "apparently" don't know how true that is.

[seb7701]

Thank you all for the thoughts. At least the 3.5 is a well proven engine.
Whilst I take Red Book with a grain of salt, I noted their specs said the 3.5 was 12.3L / 100k and the 3.8 was 15.5L / 100k or something like that. Fair difference.

Will keep doing sums, but there will be nothing worse than fuelling up lamenting how good the diesel was. That aside, the purchase price looks convenient at around $16K.

Any mechanical issues I should know about at the 150,000km mark?

[Bundyk]

just refilled mine yesterday, took 68.95lt after 490.8km of driving. The driving was a mix of city, highway and about 3hrs of off road. That makes 14.1 l/100km.

[budgie]

went from Brissie to melb towing camper a/c on and car full 15.1ltr /100 not too bad

[seb7701]

Well, I did read the suggested thread on the MN fuel consumption and, along with you guys, they don't sound that frightening as far as petrol 4WD wagons go, particularly when you look at the size of the vehicle they're dragging through the breeze.

I do have to tow a horse float on occasion. Sounds like towing doesn't drive the consumption up any more than reasonably expected too.
Might have to look at the 'ol girl next week I think...

[Bundyk]

yeah go for it!!

[Dude]

My consumption agrees with others here.

If you are going to tow, I'd get the diesil. To me the 3.5 runs out of legs when towing.

Without towing, its ok.

dude.

[seb7701]

I should mentioned - occasional towing only really. At present I am using my 2.8 diesel MK triton for the horse float due to the 2T gross. I am thinking the 3.5 should do O.K. for what I have in mind.

Interestingly, the 3.5's do seem to benefit from exhaust/intake mods from what I can gather. Any ositive experiences out there?
Does a snorkel make a noticeable difference?

[Lazarus]

I have snorkel and did not notice noticeable improvement in fuel consumption

BUT there is huge improvement in my mud holes adventures and river crossings


chuck it on injected LPG, I have done mine recently and there is a HUGE improvement in how the engine sound, car drives, change or hold gears, and of course fuel saving

[seb7701]

Thanks Lazarus - have always been interested in the LPG idea, particularly as it is now not an unsual thing in areas such as out here. (Roma).
My concern is the 150,000km on the engine so far.
Is that a likely issue and what is the conversion cost now that the rebate doesn't exist (or so I thought....)?

[Lazarus]

gov rebate is $ 1250.00 at the moment

I have paid $ 3800.00 for apolo omega injected system minus grant, so $2600.00 out of my pocket. (includes sparks and leads)

install LPG, and couple of weeks later when you get your grant back, use that money to change timing belt, water pump, thermostat, seals, oil, etc, should be just enough

with that done, you should have car for a long time to drive - CHEAPLY

[Goodsy]

Well after I worked out why my PJ was doing 330km's to a tank!

All is good now. Last fill of 76L (ethanol) for 554km's. I'm pretty happy with 13.7L per 100k's.

Light comes on with 18L in the tank. Plenty of warning.