Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

I use BP Ultimate, when i get down to just above a quarter i have about 270 on the clock and this is while driving normal, no thrashing. I got the car tuned about 6 months back and everything was fine, i was getting this same KM amount even before i got the car tuned. I don't really want to let the fuel get to almost empty, so i'm thinking i would get around the 350 mark if i almost let it go to empty.

Could it be my 02 sensor or AFM?, or do the KM sound ok?

thanks

the mods i have are:

PFC

FMIC

3" Turbo exhaust

11 pounds

Pod CAI

also got some irridium spark plugs put in

Edited by Hulk1010
Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/148232-how-much-im-getting-each-tank/
Share on other sites

^^^ that is the big thing. there is no point saying 3/4 of a tank, as to 1 person it may be 30L, to another it may be 40L.

work it out as L/100k's. so if you get 270k to 40L then you divide 40 by 2.7, which gives you 14.8L/100ks.

also if you have a pfc then it should be due to the tune, not anything else if it hasn't changed after the tune.

also it depends on what you class as normal driving. if you class it as changing gears at 4000rpm after using 90% throttle to get to 4000rpm, then you will get different economy to someone who may rev to 5000rpm but only use 40% throttle.

I too get crap fuel economy from my R34 GT-t, around 300-350 max around the city. Doesn't seem to make much difference if I drive like a granny. I'm thinking of changing my O2 sensor as I'm putting in a new dump pipe next week anyway.

What is the general consensus on O2 sensors to suit this? I know several people have been using the Falcon I6 ones successfully. Should I get one of these? Whats the part number?

Thanks!

What you can do is fill your tank, record how many kilometers you have gone before you fill up again (use the odometer thing) I usually use 60 or 100km and take note of how many litres it takes to fill the tank at that 60 or 100km mark. So say 100km ended up taking 19L, then divide the size of your tank by the 19L, and then take that number and mulyiply it by 100 and you will get a number that is near the amount of kilometers you would get to a tank. sorry if any of that is worded wierd, it's 3am where I am.

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

    • 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...