Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 119
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

don't think its got anything to do with which series you got... I get on average 390-450 per tank.

I also did Adelaide to Perth when I first bought the car and the best it did was 520 with an eighth of a tank lef and doing 120kms/ph... and I'm guessing that was on stock boost as some twit had disconnected the EBC.

I have

SAFCII

Greddy EBC

Metal Cat

3" cat back

always run on BP 98 Ultimate

toyo tyres

running on 10psi

And I have fun sometimes. its hard to stay off boost. :laugh:

my 1st choice of fuel was bp ultimate but of late i've been using vpower i think i'ts improved economy & possibly performance,regulary get 450 to 500 plus

I switched from bp ultimate to shell vpower a few months ago and noticed my car ran richer, and not as smooth. It was ok at first but eventually I figured my car just didn't run as well as with bp. So I've since switched back to bp ultimate and couldn't be happier. I basically just wanted the savings from the fuel dockets to get 4c a litre off with shell, but noticed that bp was often about 2c a litre cheaper anyway where I live. I'm not a fan of the whole fuel discounts thing - it just means they bump up their prices to accommodate it, and therefore rip off those that dont have dockets on hand...

In my experience bp gives better performance and just makes the car run smoother and generally better all-round.

Fuel economy was about the same on both, couldn't really pick any difference there.

I had my car tuned on bp ultimate - not sure if that would make a difference...it could have affected timing I guess, which at that stage was not advanced at all.

Edited by pixel8r
I switched from bp ultimate to shell vpower a few months ago and noticed my car ran richer, and not as smooth. It was ok at first but eventually I figured my car just didn't run as well as with bp. So I've since switched back to bp ultimate and couldn't be happier. I basically just wanted the savings from the fuel dockets to get 4c a litre off with shell, but noticed that bp was often about 2c a litre cheaper anyway where I live. I'm not a fan of the whole fuel discounts thing - it just means they bump up their prices to accommodate it, and therefore rip off those that dont have dockets on hand...

In my experience bp gives better performance and just makes the car run smoother and generally better all-round.

Fuel economy was about the same on both, couldn't really pick any difference there.

I had my car tuned on bp ultimate - not sure if that would make a difference...it could have affected timing I guess, which at that stage was not advanced at all.

Yea me too. When i first got the car i tried 3 different fuel. Bp, shell and Mobil. I found mobil to be the best of all. It gave most power amongst the 3. My car was tuned on mobil98 . Ben from Rcepace gave me the option of using wither mobil or Bp and i chosed Mobil.After the tune i ran with boost 98 and i cant pick the difference other than the price.

With boost 98 with a/c pn 80% of the time mixed in city driving and HWY (30%-70%) im getting about 430-450km/tank). The car after tune is pumping out 236kw@wheels. So its not bad for the fuel consumption.

  • 6 months later...

i found with every car ive had that making sure ur engine is running as good as possible is the key to fuel economy. always check ur coils and spark plugs r in good order, ur tune is spot on and always use a quality filters (oil,air and fuel) always replacing them at required intervals (or a little sooner).

oh and dont carry around crap for no reason. always remember to keep weight as low as possible. depending on how bigger concern economy is u may want to stop using the drive thru window, u'll save fuel and wont get fat from junk food :)

Im using baldwon filters and i think repcos fuel filter. As for air filter im suing K&n drop in replacement filters which runs great with the car. Oil wise im using Castrol cos Ben from racpace wanted to use it. I personally like using Mobil synthetic. Im currently using Castrol 10w-70.

10W70 holy molasses batman !

yeah we are definately running thinner than that .. but I will check for sure.

now.. can someome educate me as to WHY the fuel filter could be causing poor consumption?

I am not saying that its not a valid possiblity but just want to know the reasoning behind it.

Im using baldwon filters and i think repcos fuel filter. As for air filter im suing K&n drop in replacement filters which runs great with the car. Oil wise im using Castrol cos Ben from racpace wanted to use it. I personally like using Mobil synthetic. Im currently using Castrol 10w-70.

yeah I too am debating the S2 myth that it gets better economy.

we have an s2 and can just get 400k till the fill light comes on

we ( stagea owners ) might need to get a bit more methodical about what fix made what fuel econ difference. ( ie start logging it all in this thread etc )

also doesnt really seem like anyone in here has confirmed the working operation of their o2 sensors.

I am close to finally getting off my ass and getting my consult to see if it can read the operation of the o2 sensor while moving etc.

S2 here as well and am only getting 400kms before the light goes up which is around 60L (15L/100km). I would be far happier with 450kms (13.5L/100km) before light if possible. Running hi flow panel filter with TT mbc @ 10psi as the only mods. That's with Boost98 too.

I replaced the O2 sensor with the NGK/NTK one and when the car was in the workshop the other day they tested the O2 levels (or was it CO2?) to check air fuel mixture by sticking a rod into the exhaust connected to a handheld electrical meter thingy while driving around and all the readings were fine. Does that mean the O2 sensor is alright?

Been quoted $500 and for a custom 3" mild steel catback exhaust, very tempting if it guarantees drop of 1-2L/100kms.

yeah I too am debating the S2 myth that it gets better economy.

we have an s2 and can just get 400k till the fill light comes on

we ( stagea owners ) might need to get a bit more methodical about what fix made what fuel econ difference. ( ie start logging it all in this thread etc )

also doesnt really seem like anyone in here has confirmed the working operation of their o2 sensors.

I am close to finally getting off my ass and getting my consult to see if it can read the operation of the o2 sensor while moving etc.

Edited by webng

Well.. i now know the car runs exactly 419.5kms on a full tank of Boost98... the missus couldn't start it this evening as it had run out of petrol. It equates to 15-16L/100kms which in my books is still disgracefull seeing she uses the car 90% of the time and it'd be lucky to see more then 2psi. That was with a bottle of Nulon Injector cleaner in it too.

yeah thats pretty damned poor hey?

One thing I cant seem to get out of anyone are a few things

how many people can categorically say they have a working o2 sensor ?

Ie .. its been checked by reading fluctiating values from the sensor etc.

Another thing I want to know is what is the supposed fuel economy of the stagea

when it came out of the factory? Maybe it was woeful from the very begining and

we are just chasing our tails?

Well.. i now know the car runs exactly 419.5kms on a full tank of Boost98... the missus couldn't start it this evening as it had run out of petrol. It equates to 15-16L/100kms which in my books is still disgracefull seeing she uses the car 90% of the time and it'd be lucky to see more then 2psi. That was with a bottle of Nulon Injector cleaner in it too.
Another thing I want to know is what is the supposed fuel economy of the stagea when it came out of the factory? Maybe it was woeful from the very begining and

we are just chasing our tails?

That's something that would be good to find out. Anyone here know the Stagea factory mileage?

ok....i have a page that i found i hope this helps a little

RS FOUR, PRODUCED FROM 1996 (SEPTEMBER)

-Fuel consumption l/100 = 12.9

RS FOUR, PRODUCED FROM 1997 (JANUARY)

-fuel consumption at 10-15 modes, l/100km = 12.9

25t RS FOUR, PRODUCED FROM 1997 (AUGUST)

-Fuel consumption at 10-15 modes, l/100km = 12.9

25RS FOUR, PRODUCED FROM 1997 (NOVEMBER)

-fuel consumption at 10-15 modes, l/100km = 12.1

25t RS FOUR V, PRODUCED FROM 1998 (AUGUST)

- Fuel consumption at 10-15 modes, l/100km= 11.3

25t RS FOUR S, produced from 1998 (august)

- Fuel consumption at 10-15 modes, l/100km = 10.6

25t RS FOUR V Produced from 2000 (june)

- Fuel consumption at 10-15 modes, l/100km =11.3

25t RS FOUR S, produced from 2000 (june)

- Fuel consumption at 10-15 modes, l/100km =10.6

25RRS FOUR, produced from 2001 (april)

- Fuel consumption at 10-15 modes, l/100km =11.1

ok....i have a page that i found i hope this helps a little

25t RS FOUR S, produced from 1998 (august)

- Fuel consumption at 10-15 modes, l/100km = 10.6

Harrah!!!.... I own the most ecconomical stagea possible..... :no:

420-460 repeatedable around town/short freeway/hills

10.5L/100 has been done on the GOR/Otways/FWY

worse economey when i am just using it for general running around coz its all short trips with speed humps/roundabouts.

now.. can someome educate me as to WHY the fuel filter could be causing poor consumption?

I am not saying that its not a valid possiblity but just want to know the reasoning behind it.

i've never seen any proof that a fuel filter can effect fuel economy. but its cheap insurance against leaning ur engine out.

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

    • This. As for your options - I suggest remote mounting the Nissan sensor further away on a length of steel tube. That tube to have a loop in it to handle vibration, etc etc. You will need to either put a tee and a bleed fitting near the sensor, or crack the fitting at the sensor to bleed it full of oil when you first set it up, otherwise you won't get the line filled. But this is a small problem. Just needs enough access to get it done.
    • The time is always correct. Only the date is wrong. It currently thinks it is January 19. Tomorrow it will say it is January 20. The date and time are ( should be ! ) retrieved from the GPS navigation system.
    • Buy yourself a set of easy outs. See if they will get a good bite in and unthread it.   Very very lucky the whole sender didn't let go while on the track and cost you a motor!
    • Well GTSBoy, prepare yourself further. I did a track day with 1/2 a day prep on Friday, inpromptu. The good news is that I got home, and didn't drive the car into a wall. Everything seemed mostly okay. The car was even a little faster than it was last time. I also got to get some good datalog data too. I also noticed a tiny bit of knock which was (luckily?) recorded. All I know is the knock sensors got recalibrated.... and are notorious for false knock. So I don't know if they are too sensitive, not sensitive enough... or some other third option. But I reduced timing anyway. It wasn't every pull through the session either. Think along the lines of -1 degree of timing for say, three instances while at the top of 4th in a 20 minute all-hot-lap session. Unfortunately at the end of session 2... I noticed a little oil. I borrowed some jack stands and a jack and took a look under there, but as is often the case, messing around with it kinda half cleaned it up, it was not conclusive where it was coming from. I decided to give it another go and see how it was. The amount of oil was maybe one/two small drops. I did another 20 minute session and car went well, and I was just starting to get into it and not be terrified of driving on track. I pulled over and checked in the pits and saw this: This is where I called it, packed up and went home as I live ~20 min from the track with a VERY VERY CLOSE EYE on Oil Pressure on the way home. The volume wasn't much but you never know. I checked it today when I had my own space/tools/time to find out what was going on, wanted to clean it up, run the car and see if any of the fittings from around the oil filter were causing it. I have like.. 5 fittings there, so I suspected one was (hopefully?) the culprit. It became immediately apparent as soon as I looked around more closely. 795d266d-a034-4b8c-89c9-d83860f5d00a.mp4       This is the R34 GTT oil sender connected via an adapter to an oil cooler block I have installed which runs AN lines to my cooler (and back). There's also an oil temp sensor on top.  Just after that video, I attempted to unthread the sensor to see if it's loose/worn and it disintegrated in my hand. So yes. I am glad I noticed that oil because it would appear that complete and utter catastrophic engine failure was about 1 second of engine runtime away. I did try to drill the fitting out, and only succeeded in drilling the middle hole much larger and now there's a... smooth hole in there with what looks like a damn sleeve still incredibly tight in there. Not really sure how to proceed from here. My options: 1) Find someone who can remove the stuck fitting, and use a steel adapter so it won't fatigue? (Female BSPT for the R34 sender to 1/8NPT male - HARD to find). IF it isn't possible to remove - Buy a new block ($320) and have someone tap a new 1/8NPT in the top of it ($????) and hope the steel adapter works better. 2) Buy a new block and give up on the OEM pressure sender for the dash entirely, and use the supplied 1/8 NPT for the oil temp sender. Having the oil pressure read 0 in the dash with the warning lamp will give me a lot of anxiety driving around. I do have the actual GM sensor/sender working, but it needs OBD2 as a gauge. If I'm datalogging I don't actually have a readout of what the gauge is currently displaying. 3) Other? Find a new location for the OEM sender? Though I don't know of anywhere that will work. I also don't know if a steel adapter is actually functionally smart here. It's clearly leveraged itself through vibration of the motor and snapped in half. This doesn't seem like a setup a smart person would replicate given the weight of the OEM sender. Still pretty happy being lucky for once and seeing this at the absolute last moment before bye bye motor in a big way, even if an adapter is apparently 6 weeks+ delivery and I have no way to free the current stuck/potentially destroyed threads in the current oil block.
×
×
  • Create New...