Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

I have to say, I've never driven mine until the fuel light comes on. I usually fuel up when it gets to a quarter tank or just below.

Here's a few figures I've kept:

49.98litres, 341.9kms, 14.62l/100kms

46.40litres, 333.3kms, 13.92l/100kms

48.04litres, 332.9kms, 14.43l/100kms

47.22litres, 304.0kms, 15.53l/100kms

44.31litres, 304.6kms, 14.55l/100kms

And on a trip to Canberra late last year:

42.54litres, 311.4kms, 13.6l/100kms heading down

48.75litres, 367.7kms, 13.2l/100kms heading home (driving less conservatively, mind you!)

So a rough average since I bought the car in October is around 14.6l/100kms. But I'm sure mine is running typically rich, just like a majority of basically standard Skylines and Stageas out there...

+

  • Replies 216
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I check the economy on each tank fill and I have tried every brand of 98 ron fuel, makes no difference. Gunna try some 100 ron next week.

I get about 450 - 480kms out of a full tank. About 12.5L/100Km. That's in Canberra with a lot of open roads.

I've been testing the Shell Unleaded 95, Optimax (98) and the new Optimax Extreme (100). I have actually found the Unleaded 95 offers the best fuel economy, about an extra 20-30 kms per tank.

The Optimax Extreme did very little in terms of fuel consumption, but it feels better in the higher rev range (especially on the redline). It actually feels like a should be able to keep revving it out to about 8500rpm.

I've also found the Caltex fuel doesn't agree with the engine. I only get between 360 - 380kms out of a tank - about 16L/100Km.

I'm yet to try the BP fuels.

I've been testing the Shell Unleaded 95, Optimax (98) and the new Optimax Extreme (100). I have actually found the Unleaded 95 offers the best fuel economy, about an extra 20-30 kms per tank.

Interesting - it stills goes ok on the 95 if you put your foot down a bit??

I've also found the Caltex fuel doesn't agree with the engine. I only get between 360 - 380kms out of a tank - about 16L/100Km.

Strong advice after lots of nissans - NEVER put anything except the shell or BP fuel in them! :/

I've update my starting post to summarise what everyone has said.

Ian

Interesting thing about higher octane vs fuel economy.

Recently the AA here in NZ did a real world driving test with a Nissan Maxima. They drove as real people would, not as someone trying to conserve fuel. They drove around some of the roads in the North Island one way using BP 96, and returned the same route using BP 98.

They found that using 98 gave them better economy, but it still worked out more expensive (not by much ) to run on 98.

I generally run my Stagea on BP 98, it feels like the wagon runs smoother and is less hesitant. It doesn't seem to make any difference to fuel economy when I compared it to 96.

Well Ladies & Gentlemen, lend me your ears;

I've just come back from a tour of NSW with the misses & kids plus all of their shit from Toowoomba to Aulbury, to Canberra, to Sydney, to Coffs Harbour, & lastly home to Toowoomba. Most of time i did about 85% highway driving (around 110-120km/h, 150 around trucks) & 15% city. On average I'd get 400-450km per tank (around 58L) on premium unleaded.

BUT in Canberra i filled up with premium E10 from United petrolium (they call it Boost 98 & it was only 3c more than regular unleaded). From this stuff i got 550km out of the tank going from canberra to sydeny! :D

I was pritty stoked with it, so i tried it again in sydney & got the same 100km extra out of a tank. The car ran smoothly with no hesitations or pinging.

I would recommend it to anyone, just to try it out!

You cant drive a dream and not pay the price.

Sometimes the price of happyness is simply worth it.... I know it is for me :O

Agreed :O

Should the fuel consumption improve greatly once I install the Jaycar gear? Which I have sitting on my table :) Too lazy to build it

SK reported improvements of around 1L/100 after the DFA was installed.

I am certain it would make a massive difference. I think I might give the DFA a quick tune for the time being after I install the turbo, until I can afford to get the cams/unichip done. At least I will get a bit more power and better economy until I can afford it.

DAMH

must be sumthin bout the way i drive.

i filled up on wednesday mornin (optimax)

and i got 270k's out of that tank (highway drivin and round town)

i feel bad considering the k's you guys get out of a tank

DAMH

must be sumthin bout the way i drive.

i filled up on wednesday mornin (optimax)

and i got 270k's out of that tank (highway drivin and round town)

i feel bad considering the k's you guys get out of a tank

Your not alone! :whistling:

on trips to both brisbane and Melbourne I have seen 10.5 consistently (including coming out of bris and up over the ranges, where I had a bit of a play), better that the in laws XR6 AU, I am still pretty sure I can get it under 10 too, but I would have to fill up at the start of a really flat/ downhill long highway section (need to be long to make up for pulling out of servo) and then get another servo at the end of that :), Normal cruising speed is 10 over on the speedo (which reads about 2-3% over)

Strong advice after lots of nissans - NEVER put anything except the shell or BP fuel in them! :rolleyes:

Ian

Why is that Ian? I never use Shell (only like 96ron here in Adelaide for premium unleaded), and generally fill up with Mobile 8000 (98ron) rather than BP Ultimate (98ron).

I find the mobile to be absolutely fine, and my car is tuned for that fuel..........

Why is that Ian? I never use Shell (only like 96ron here in Adelaide for premium unleaded), and generally fill up with Mobile 8000 (98ron) rather than BP Ultimate (98ron).

I find the mobile to be absolutely fine, and my car is tuned for that fuel..........

It could have improved, but years ago I tried all of them in a range of nissan cars and had various problems. Mobile was the best by a long way (ie no problems, just not as good as shell or BP), but all the 'independant' ones were a real pain. One car I had to drain the petrol out of the tank (engine miss firing etc etc..) after filling it up...

Ian

Just went down to Aireys Inlet for the weekend with the Mrs. Drove heaps around the GOR/mountains there

Here are some figures

From east side Melbourne to Angelsea, so city/hwy, 16.5L for 155km = 10.64 L/100km

Drive around the GOR, up and down and side to side...not too slowly 45L for 360km = 12.5 L/100km

More GOR/Highway/City 27L for 230km = 11.73 L/100km

Now, for the surprize. After my turbo install wednesday night, I forgot to hook up my O2 sensor... so that was all with O2 sensor UNPLUGGED. HMMMMM

Just went down to Aireys Inlet for the weekend with the Mrs. Drove heaps around the GOR/mountains there

Here are some figures

From east side Melbourne to Angelsea, so city/hwy, 16.5L for 155km = 10.64 L/100km

Drive around the GOR, up and down and side to side...not too slowly 45L for 360km = 12.5 L/100km

More GOR/Highway/City 27L for 230km = 11.73 L/100km

Now, for the surprize. After my turbo install wednesday night, I forgot to hook up my O2 sensor... so that was all with O2 sensor UNPLUGGED. HMMMMM

oooo :)

I know this doesnt really count, but just racked up ~450 kms on my works new Holden Crewman (I know, I know) anyway I got ~450kms out of the tank (~50L I think...?) on the dash it said 12.3L/100kms.

Just thought I'd give everyone some comparison. About 400kms of that was highway driving too, with the cruise control on......

God I hate crewmans, they suck, but this is nor the time nor the place to winge about them :dry:

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



  • Latest Posts

    • Have a look at that (shitty) pic I posted. You can see AN -4 braided line coming to a -4 to 1/8 BSPT adapter, into a 1/8 BSPT T piece. The Haltech pressure sender is screwed into the long arm of the sender and factory sender (pre your pic) into the T side. You can also see the cable tie holding the whole contraption in place. Is it better than mounting the sender direct to your engine fitting......yes because it removes that vibration as the engine revs out 50 times every lap and that factory sender is pretty big. Is it necessary for you......well I've got no idea, I just don't like something important failing twice so over-engineer it to the moon!
    • Yup. You can get creative and make a sort of "bracket" with cable ties. Put 2 around the sender with a third passing underneath them strapped down against the sender. Then that third one is able to be passed through some hole at right angles to the orientation of the sender. Or some variation on the theme. Yes.... ummm, with caveats? I mean, the sender is BSP and you would likely have AN stuff on the hose, so yes, there would be the adapter you mention. But the block end will either be 1/8 NPT if that thread is still OK in there, or you can drill and tap it out to 1/4 BSP or NPT and use appropriate adapter there. As it stands, your mention of 1/8 BSPT male seems... wrong for the 1/8 NPT female it has to go into. The hose will be better, because even with the bush, the mass of the sender will be "hanging" off a hard threaded connection and will add some stress/strain to that. It might fail in the future. The hose eliminates almost all such risk - but adds in several more threaded connections to leak from! It really should be tapered, but it looks very long in that photo with no taper visible. If you have it in hand you should be able to see if it tapered or not. There technically is no possibility of a mechanical seal with a parallel male in a parallel female, so it is hard to believe that it is parallel male, but weirder things have happened. Maybe it's meant to seat on some surface when screwed in on the original installation? Anyway, at that thread size, parallel in parallel, with tape and goop, will seal just fine.
    • How do you propose I cable tie this: To something securely? Is it really just a case of finding a couple of holes and ziptying it there so it never goes flying or starts dangling around, more or less? Then run a 1/8 BSP Female to [hose adapter of choice?/AN?] and then the opposing fitting at the bush-into-oil-block end? being the hose-into-realistically likely a 1/8 BSPT male) Is this going to provide any real benefit over using a stainless/steel 1/4 to 1/8 BSPT reducing bush? I am making the assumption the OEM sender is BSPT not BSPP/BSP
    • I fashioned a ramp out of a couple of pieces of 140x35 lumber, to get the bumper up slightly, and then one of these is what I use
    • I wouldn't worry about dissimilar metal corrosion, should you just buy/make a steel replacement. There will be thread tape and sealant compound between the metals. The few little spots where they touch each other will be deep inside the joint, unable to get wet. And the alloy block is much much larger than a small steel fitting, so there is plenty of "sacrificial" capacity there. Any bush you put in there will be dissimilar anyway. Either steel or brass. Maybe stainless. All of them are different to the other parts in the chain. But what I said above still applies.
×
×
  • Create New...