Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Say you call "a tank" 50lt to be conservative as 200km is ridiculous anyway you swing it... That's 25lt/100km

What modifications have you got mechanically to achieve such a stupid result? Larger injectors and unburnt fuel running out the exhaust?

I suggest you check the "gas" tank for holes there boy! I'm sure driving "style" is a contributing factor...

http://www.skylinesaustralia.com/forums/in...945&hl=fuel

main factor is i have a half failed coilpack that is intermittent, 550s in without a tune yet, and a 3inch straightpipe exhaust from teh turbo back.

im waiting on my turbo to get in so i can tune it.

its my fault im getting horrid gas mileage.....and yes driving style has alot to do with it

main factor is i have a half failed coilpack that is intermittent, 550s in without a tune yet, and a 3inch straightpipe exhaust from teh turbo back.

im waiting on my turbo to get in so i can tune it.

its my fault im getting horrid gas mileage.....and yes driving style has alot to do with it

yea but stil not 200km/tanks :(

my car is just emo

every car i get is emo

btw, my car is stock, apart from a blitz muffler (not cat back, just a muffler)

i dont drive it hard, it is in traffic, so that could be a contribution, but f**k me dead, ~280kms to a tank is ridiculous. if i thrashed my old r32, id still get more than that.

end /rant :(

I wasn't happy with my S2 when I first got it. But once I decided that I didn't have to use the boost all the time, it made a huge difference to the economy. The worst that I had was 360kms per tank, the best (on highway at 110) was 525km this equated to 9.47l/100km. Pretty good. I am now getting 420km per tank around town. I changed spark plugs, (cos I had a nasty misfire at 4500 rpm), and I have run two treatments of fuel injector cleaner through. I do run 98 octane, but not all the time. The highway run was done on 95 octane. Car (engine) is stock 'cept for exhaust.

BTW, if you are going to replace your RB25DET lambda sensor, the part number is NTK OZA395-E2. This one has the same wiring connector as standard... easy!

Correct, and it's the same part as in the SR20-powered N14 Pulsar. I wonder if they'd charge more if you asked for the Pulsar part instead of the Skyline/Stagea part... It DOES happen sometimes.

boost 98 will not give you better fuel econmy. it will however increase your power. it contains 10% ethonol wich is an alcohol it means it burns hotter and can fit more in the chamber (cos alchol compress more) wich in turn gives you less fuel consumption and can lean out your mixture hence ethonol not being good for hih performance cars. if you have a reasaonably stock tune it will not harm your engine. united boasts that they have added more chemicals to there boost 98 to prevent detanation which also makes it use more fuel. use bp ultimate or mobil 8000 both come with a cleaner to clean carbon from ur injectors and don't contain ethonol giving you better fuel econmy. tryit if you don't belive me i did all the experments about a year ago to find what fuels where the best and that's my results.

happy fueling :sorcerer:

boost 98 will not give you better fuel econmy. it will however increase your power. it contains 10% ethonol wich is an alcohol it means it burns hotter and can fit more in the chamber (cos alchol compress more) wich in turn gives you less fuel consumption and can lean out your mixture hence ethonol not being good for hih performance cars. if you have a reasaonably stock tune it will not harm your engine. united boasts that they have added more chemicals to there boost 98 to prevent detanation which also makes it use more fuel. use bp ultimate or mobil 8000 both come with a cleaner to clean carbon from ur injectors and don't contain ethonol giving you better fuel econmy. tryit if you don't belive me i did all the experments about a year ago to find what fuels where the best and that's my results.

happy fueling :sorcerer:

thats not really true.

a study made by university of California, Berkely found that a corn based ethanol produces 10-15% less emmission and 1/3 worae interms of milage. Because of its poor energy density.

However, Boost 98 is a cellulosic based (sugarcane) which is much better than a starch based ethanol. Ethanol based from cellulosic performs much better in terms of economics. Thats why corn based which is starch based ethanol never really took of outside the cornbelt.

All bio fuels (ethanol and diesel) are naturallu corrosive. In small emount present in the fuel (E10) actually cleans the engine, fuel ines and injectors without having to add any additives into the fuel which translate into a cost saving. Sa,e thing with bio diesel. Its also been known when using 100% biodiesel or a high %tage of biodiesel it was reocmmended to change the fuel filter after the first tank use of the bio duesel. why? Cos all the shit from lines being cleaned out.

How much is Bp 98 and Mobil 8000 at the pump right now? And how much is Boost 98? From memory the cost difference is about A$6/tank comparing a normall 98 and with boost 98? And how much milage differences when using the normall gasoliine and boost 98? I have personally done the comparison myself by filling mobil and boost 98. But think of the less carbon emmision though and the difference in costs.

Benno from racepace who tunes my car says that go for the Boost 98 after the tune. It doesnt really makes a difference. But he says dont use shell and especially the optimax extreme which is a ripp off.

thats just my 2c worth.

Edited by stasis

i have a habit of doing it so i can use all the gas, and there is never any left over (in case it wasnt all well blended from my spirited driving) Normally i do Half offbase gas since its almost 170 a liter of High octane and half of onbase gas at 2.90 a gallon

i have a habit of doing it so i can use all the gas, and there is never any left over (in case it wasnt all well blended from my spirited driving) Normally i do Half offbase gas since its almost 170 a liter of High octane and half of onbase gas at 2.90 a gallon

Hei grant tell me do you use any of the jet fuel laying arounf the base? :(

Edited by stasis

it depends what type of jet fuel, if you are talking about the fuel they use in prop driven planes, yes, it works great, only problem is that it burns a billion times hotter then normal fuel and it is ~114RON and since 911 vehicles other than those authorised are not allowed onto light aircraft airfield aprons to access the fuel, I know i used to run it. Was awesome, pity to cause now Aviation Gas is only about 10c a litre more than 98RON at the pump here in Rocky :( I just cant get to it now :(

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...