Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

howie/shoebox - those fuel consumption figures you both getting are quite high even for the mods given especially shoebox's since you got afc to adjust your air/fuel.

You'll find most of the 34 guys are getting between 13-14.5 litres. I was a bit worried at first, so i started a thread about it, and it looks like 90% of the 34 guys on this site are around this figure.

  • Replies 76
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

i figured the O2 sensor was in the AFM you still didnt anwser my question how much !?!?!

Need to know what you were talking about first mate.

Anyway the O2 sensor goes into your exhaust, just after the turbo on the dump & by measureing how much oxygen (ie O2) is in the exhaust gas it can determine if it is running rich/lean or ok. Over time they wear out & usually read less voltage meaning it thinks the gas is lean therefore the ECU enrichens the mixture to compensate.

Anyhow to answer your question, you shouldn't be looking at any more than about $120 (I'm not sure I got mine for special discount, old work friend :laugh: ) Even with that price though it will pay for itself within about 3 months & then you'll end up miles in front after a year.

Need to know what you were talking about first mate.

Anyway the O2 sensor goes into your exhaust, just after the turbo on the dump & by measureing how much oxygen (ie O2) is in the exhaust gas it can determine if it is running rich/lean or ok. Over time they wear out & usually read less voltage meaning it thinks the gas is lean therefore the ECU enrichens the mixture to compensate.

Anyhow to answer your question, you shouldn't be looking at any more than about $120 (I'm not sure I got mine for special discount, old work friend :laugh: ) Even with that price though it will pay for itself within about 3 months & then you'll end up miles in front after a year.

ah yes the O2 sensor i am now on the same page thanks to your lovely description cheers

So can anyone get a new O2 sensor for me for a good price? I get around 16.5-17l/100km :( .... but I do sit idling for 10 minute periods many times a day writing up notes with the a/c on (which is the big reason I am getting a new radiator shortly) .... still that shouldn't affect it that much!

$99 is deacent for retail, though it doesn't hurt to shop around. Maybe I could set up a small group buy with my old work mates if there were enough people interested, though I don't know how much cheaper u'd get it than that.

Edited by JazzaR33

thanks Luke - I should get one very soon to hopefully fix my fuel usage issues.

I take it you just ask for an RB O2 sensor?

Do they have a specific thread type or anything? I would imagine that R33 and R34s are the same?

Yep a group buy would be good Jared, but unless it was going to be a fair bit cheaper than $99 I wouldn't bother if I was you.

Make sure you specify model too, it may be different from 1 engine to another depending on series & model. I wouldn't be surprised if it's the same as an R33's but you have to make sure.

I think if there was enough interested with a group buy I could get them about $15 cheaper. Don't know if thats enough to sway people though.

even if it isnt... brand new parts dont hurt at all. they will cancel out any doubts u had about the source of problems.

Yes.. My problem some time ago wasn't the o2.. I replaced mine even though it appeared to be swinging within spec.

So out came the injectors in went the new and fuel consumption went from 350km's per tank back to its usual 450 to high 400's.

Andrew, I'd have the tune looked at first to be sure it is an oxy sensor that's causing your fuel use issues.

Although I guess in the realm of you and cars, a hundred bucks is about the cheapest thing you'll ever do!

The fuel consumption that Andrew is getting pretty is very high , I'd say replace the O2 first & then see if it fixes it, if not keep the old 1 as a spare. The more kays and the more hard driving it's suffered the more likely it's stuffed. Mine was screwed even with less than 50,000 on the dial & it probably should have been changed about 5,000 earlier as it was already chewing an extra litre per 100 to what it should have been.

Yes.. My problem some time ago wasn't the o2.. I replaced mine even though it appeared to be swinging within spec.

So out came the injectors in went the new and fuel consumption went from 350km's per tank back to its usual 450 to high 400's.

Common with older type injectors for this to happen, usually the spray pattern starts going a bit crappy & stops vapourising properly, instead you get almost a solid jet of fuel. Sometimes they would also not shut properly so would be flowing fuel all the time, but this was less common. Dual fuel cars are the worst, the crap building up from backfiring & oils mixed in with the gas collecting on them makes them stuff up eventually guranteed.

Cleaning usually fixed the problem, though if you wanted to go higher flowing injectors it was still better to put the money towards that.

Edited by JazzaR33

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

    • I know why it happened and I’m embarrassed to say but I was testing the polarity of one of the led bulb to see which side was positive with a 12v battery and that’s when it decided to fry hoping I didn’t damage anything else
    • I came here to note that is a zener diode too base on the info there. Based on that, I'd also be suspicious that replacing it, and it's likely to do the same. A lot of use cases will see it used as either voltage protection, or to create a cheap but relatively stable fixed voltage supply. That would mean it has seen more voltage than it should, and has gone into voltage melt down. If there is something else in the circuit dumping out higher than it should voltages, that needs to be found too. It's quite likely they're trying to use the Zener to limit the voltage that is hitting through to the transistor beside it, so what ever goes to the zener is likely a signal, and they're using the transistor in that circuit to amplify it. Especially as it seems they've also got a capacitor across the zener. Looks like there is meant to be something "noisy" to that zener, and what ever it was, had a melt down. Looking at that picture, it also looks like there's some solder joints that really need redoing, and it might be worth having the whole board properly inspected.  Unfortunately, without being able to stick a multimeter on it, and start tracing it all out, I'm pretty much at a loss now to help. I don't even believe I have a climate control board from an R33 around here to pull apart and see if any of the circuit appears similar to give some ideas.
    • Nah - but you won't find anything on dismantling the seats in any such thing anyway.
    • Could be. Could also be that they sit around broken more. To be fair, you almost never see one driving around. I see more R chassis GTRs than the Renault ones.
    • Yeah. Nah. This is why I said My bold for my double emphasis. We're not talking about cars tuned to the edge of det here. We're talking about normal cars. Flame propagation speed and the amount of energy required to ignite the fuel are not significant factors when running at 1500-4000 rpm, and medium to light loads, like nearly every car on the road (except twin cab utes which are driven at 6k and 100% load all the time). There is no shortage of ignition energy available in any petrol engine. If there was, we'd all be in deep shit. The calorific value, on a volume basis, is significantly different, between 98 and 91, and that turns up immediately in consumption numbers. You can see the signal easily if you control for the other variables well enough, and/or collect enough stats. As to not seeing any benefit - we had a couple of EF and EL Falcons in the company fleet back in the late 90s and early 2000s. The EEC IV ECU in those things was particularly good at adding in timing as soon as knock headroom improved, which typically came from putting in some 95 or 98. The responsiveness and power improved noticeably, and the fuel consumption dropped considerably, just from going to 95. Less delta from there to 98 - almost not noticeable, compared to the big differences seen between 91 and 95. Way back in the day, when supermarkets first started selling fuel from their own stations, I did thousands of km in FNQ in a small Toyota. I can't remember if it was a Starlet or an early Yaris. Anyway - the supermarket servos were bringing in cheap fuel from Indonesia, and the other servos were still using locally refined gear. The fuel consumption was typically at least 5%, often as much as 8% worse on the Indo shit, presumably because they had a lot more oxygenated component in the brew, and were probably barely meeting the octane spec. Around the same time or maybe a bit later (like 25 years ago), I could tell the difference between Shell 98 and BP 98, and typically preferred to only use Shell then because the Skyline ran so much better on it. Years later I found the realtionship between them had swapped, as a consequence of yet more refinery closures. So I've only used BP 98 since. Although, I must say that I could not fault the odd tank of United 98 that I've run. It's probably the same stuff. It is also very important to remember that these findings are often dependent on region. With most of the refineries in Oz now dead, there's less variability in local stuff, and he majority of our fuels are not even refined here any more anyway. It probably depends more on which SE Asian refinery is currently cheapest to operate.
×
×
  • Create New...