Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hmmm dosent sound right to me, is the car running very rich for some reason???(is the rear bumper just above your muffler stained black?)

Or possibly your factory petrol level sensor is faulty or something, could also be your oxygen sensors, i would get it checked out at nissan or some other performance shop.

are you sure it wasnt constant spirited driving? i got around 200km's outa my first tank when i first got my R33 GTST. I gave it hell, everytime i put my foot down it went all the way to the floor.

next few tanks i was able to get over 400km's as i started driving it normally, so the fuel usage lies heavily on how you drive the car

firstly, how much fuel are you talking about when you say a full tank? there is no point saying 'full tank' since when some peoples gauge shows empty it has used 45L, others 55L.

convert it into L/100k's. e.g. if you get 217k's to 50L you are getting 23L/100k's. if you only used 20L/100k, and if you only used 40L thats 18L/100k's.

also, what mods does the car have? that could be the key to answering your problems. otherwise it may be either your AFM or o2 sensors.

yeah mine has now started the same problem, I don't drive mine often (maybe once a week if I'm lucky) so a tank lasts a while, but i manage about 260km out of a 40L so i get about 15~16L\100km. When i first got the car i got almost 560km out of a tank (not sure how many litres, was a damn while ago) on the highway coming home from the compliancer. Whats th best way to check if its afm or O2 besides get new ones?

I get 12.5 around town! :O ~360kms from ~45L (as much as I can fit in at the time for the last three tanks). Bloody stoked with that consumption, I expected around 14-15L around town. Worst I have gotten was 350kms out of 47L which is 13.4/100kms. Still bloody good given performance for around town driving IMO.

Before mine was tuned it was going through a tank every few days, it was really bad, but after the tune its fine, average 350-400k's per tank, or way less at trackdays etc ovbiously

Have a check of:

AFM's if your not running a MAP sensor ECU (which it doesnt sound like you are)

02 sensors

Spark plugs

An idea would be to use a MAP sensor ECU, i was advised to do this, and im very glad i did, tuning was a bit more expensive, but the AFM's arent used anymore eliminating that from ever being an issue - something worth thinking about :dry:

EDIT: Also i didnt think an ECU would be worth it for how my car was back then, it paid for itself VERY quickly, but aswel as that, the timing was all fixed up, and there was no more surging - just power where-ever and when-ever :P

For some reason mine eats O2 sensors and runs super rich with them plugged in so I run them unplugged. Might be worth giving that a try.

See how it goes after new turbos, PFC, 044 and 600cc injectors. As it is now it pulls 260rwkw on stock computer with steel wheel stock turbos.

I get 12.5 around town! :laugh: ~360kms from ~45L (as much as I can fit in at the time for the last three tanks). Bloody stoked with that consumption, I expected around 14-15L around town. Worst I have gotten was 350kms out of 47L which is 13.4/100kms. Still bloody good given performance for around town driving IMO.

That's pretty good....

I get between 16-17......

no real difference on the highway (I have got as good as14.6) as it still sucks the juice

car is basically standard

That's pretty good....

I get between 16-17......

no real difference on the highway (I have got as good as14.6) as it still sucks the juice

car is basically standard

By the sounds of it you have a gts-t? I found my last gts-t wasn;t that bad on fuel even tough i was running 270 degree cams and pushing 270rwkw, did have a map sensor ecu which as said above may make a difference. My stock gtr is worse :mellow:

By the sounds of it you have a gts-t? I found my last gts-t wasn;t that bad on fuel even tough i was running 270 degree cams and pushing 270rwkw, did have a map sensor ecu which as said above may make a difference. My stock gtr is worse :)

LOL :laugh:

yeah it's a gts-t....

pig on fuel, but you get that :ermm:

i have done a lot better with this tank. Cruise back from cooktown to cairns sitting on or around 100-120kph and then a few runs around town and the light has just come on. 445kms so far. that is a little better :)

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


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Welcome to Skyline ownership. Yes, it is entirely possible parts websites get things wrong. There's a whole world of inaccuracies out there when it comes to R34 stuff (and probably 33 and 32). Lots of things that are 'just bolt on, entirely interchangable' aren't. Even between S1 and S2 R34's. Yes they have a GTT item supposedly being 296mm. This is incorrect. I would call whoever you got them from and return them and let them know the GTT actually uses 310mm rotors. Depending on where you got them from your experience and success will obviously vary.
    • Hi...a bit a "development" on the brakes. I spoke to the guys where i get brakes from...and they are saying that 296mm EBC are for R34 GT-T. I then went to their site: https://www.ebcbrakes.com/vehicle/uk-row/NISSAN/Skyline (R34)/ and search for my car(R34 GT 1998 - it has GTT brakes) and it show me this USR1229 number and they are rly 296mm rotors... So now iam rly confused... The rotors i have now on the car are 310mm asi shown... So where is the problem? Does the whole EBC got it wrong or my calipers are just...idk know what?  
    • Oh What the hell, I used to get a "are you sure you want to reply, this thread is XX months old" message. Maybe a software update remove that. My bad.
    • This is a recipe for disaster* Note: Disaster is relative. The thing that often gets lost in threads like this is what is considered acceptable poke and compromise between what one person considers 'good' looks and what someone else does. The quoted specs would sit absurdly outside the guards with the spacers mentioned and need  REALLY thin tyres and a LOT of camber AND rolling the guards to fit. Some people love this. Some people consider this a ruined car. One thing is for certain though, rolling the guards is pretty much mandatory for any 'good' fitment (of either variety). It is often the difference between any fitment remotely close to the guards. "Not to mention the rears were like a mm from hitting the coilovers." I have a question though - This spec is VERY close to what I was planning to buy relative to the inboard suspension - I have an offset measuring tool on the way to confirm it. When you say "like a mm" do you mean literally 1mm? Or 2mm? Cause that's enough clearance for me in the rear :p I actually found the more limiting factor ISNT the coilover but the actual suspension arms. Did you take a look at how close those were?
    • @GTSBoy yeah sorry i know thery are known for colors bud those DBA are too in colors 🙂 Green will be good enough for me  
×
×
  • Create New...