Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

I know the economy topics have been done to death but none of them answer this specific question.

Right so my rb25det has a fuel capacity of 65L with 9.8l/100km

I fill it up to the top and i average about 47 litres when my tank appears empty (on the bottom line)

I get roughly about 400km for about 47litres of fuel it vary's

now i am guessing that there is a large reserve in there or something, but i am not willing to test it out.

Can any shed some light as to why i appear to be emoty after about 47 litres?

Also BP ultimate 98 sucks i get much better economy off Caltex vortex 98

Also BP ultimate 98 sucks i get much better economy off Caltex vortex 98

I 110% AGREE that BP Ultimate f*kn sux!!!!!!!! when it comes to better economy. But i think its cuz BP ultimate are better for performance, thus why it burns easier. :D

Yeah my car chews through BP Ultimate in no time if I'm leadfooted.

But I have driven my GTR quite sedately (the first few days I got it) and managed to get 450km out of one tank (I can fill to just over 50L) , so it's not too bad.

Haven't tried Shell V2 Racing yet, not that I have any petrol stations near my house which offer it.

I had driven to phillip island last night and back to melbourne with one tank. Got back to Melbourne on E, drove to work today, then home, then to the servo, had 464k's on the odo. Filled up (Synergy 8000 Mobil) and it was full on 51 litres. So there was heaps of reserve left. I reckon I could of cracked 500 if I wanted to, not game enough to run empty tho :D

Ev.

The other day i drove my car with the light on to uni, i thought i may as well fill it up on the way back home but decided to park on a hill (cars front facing up hill). I couldent start the car because the fuel went away from the pick up. so after pushing the car around, it started, went stright to the petrol station and filled up. Managed to get 54.4L into it or something like that and had 530km on the clock. I drive a RB20DET r32. i have done 550km on freeway driving but now looking back i was probably on the edge of stoping on the freeway.

Synergy 8000 gets the most k's as well

Bp ultimate lasts the longest in my car, drove to qld and back caltex lasted about 20km before the needle dropped bp needle was on full for a good 100km before the needle moved. Used bp on the way back and only filled up 100L or less for the whole trip back i.e 950km

I know the economy topics have been done to death but none of them answer this specific question.

Right so my rb25det has a fuel capacity of 65L with 9.8l/100km

I fill it up to the top and i average about 47 litres when my tank appears empty (on the bottom line)

I get roughly about 400km for about 47litres of fuel it vary's

now i am guessing that there is a large reserve in there or something, but i am not willing to test it out.

Can any shed some light as to why i appear to be emoty after about 47 litres?

Also BP ultimate 98 sucks i get much better economy off Caltex vortex 98

the reason is, with every late model car they always have a 10-15l reserve in the tank, so when on empty you can

1. still get to a service station and not run out of fuel

2. if you get lost you can get some where that has fuel or phone service.

3. you don't pick up debris in the filter or pump. which you should try not running on empty(i always try and fill up at 1/4 tank where possible)

once its on E you should get about 100-200kms depending on driving.

If you look at the shape of the tank and wher the pump sits in the well,,,, and then look at where the fuel gauge pick up is, you'll notice that the fule gauge only measures the slab block part of the tank, not the well.

The well would hold a considerable reserve, around 10 litres would be my guess.

I can usually get 500km before I have to fill up. Guyra to Gilgandra highway miles, 520km, I put 52.7 litres in. R33 Gtst 18psi and 290+rwkw, but you don't boost much unless overtaking. Who says you can't have [a bit of] performance and economy.

I ran it on E for a while and got 440k's / 58.5L with BP ultimate.

Is there really a difference going to Caltex vortex 98?

I truly believe so, i found i had a bit more power too. I hear that bp are dodgey for mixing other less octane fuels in too. But i have no proof so take out of it what you want.

I get around 450km b4 the the needle hits the bottom of E, but I think I still have around 10L left.

My stock R33 uses 13-14L/100km, thats mainly city driving. The only fuel I have filled the car to full is Vortex 98, since its usually the cheapest RON98 around my area (with 4c off thing).

I originally used caltex vortex until I was told it is actually only 96 RON! I then changed to Shell V-Power and noticed a difference in power and economy. Have never used BP ultimate (4c thing) but heard good about it. I get 430 - 450 kms down to empty (roughly 45 - 47ltrs) out of my R32 RB20DET 4-Door and thats only giving it the occational squirt as I drive it daily and need to save $$ and demerit points (one left due to two 80 in 60 zone busts in one week :) ) Only had it a year now and really impressed with the economy verses power ratio, big thumbs up to nissan!!

Edited by partyboy73

I was using Shell Vpower 98 and was getting about 400km with still 1/4 tank remaining. And I always pump full full tank till it startz clicking. This is for R32 GTR.

Then i switched over to BP Ultimate for the past 2-3 weeks, Im only getting like 150-170km from half a tank. n im like WTF.

Im switchin bak over to Shell 98 lol.

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 have no hard data to report, but I have to say, having driven it to work and back all week, mostly on wet roads (and therefore mostly not able to contemplate anything too outrageous anywhere)..... it is real good. I turned the boost controller on, with duty cycle set to 10% (which may not be enough to actually increase the boost), and the start boost set to 15 psi. That should keep the gate unpressurised until at least 15 psi. And rolling at 80 in 5th, which is <2k rpm, going to WOT sees the MAP go +ve even before it crosses 2k and it has >5 psi by the time it hits 90 km/h. That's still <<2.5k rpm, so I think it's actually doing really well. Because of all the not-quite-ideal things that have been in place since the turbo first went on, it felt laggy. It's actually not. The response appears to be as good as you could hope for with a highflow.
    • Or just put in a 1JZ, and sell me the NEO head 😎
    • Oh, it's been done. You just run a wire out there and back. But they have been known to do coolant temp sensors, MAP sensors, etc. They're not silly (at Regency Park) and know what's what with all the different cars.
    • Please ignore I found the right way of installing it thanks
    • There are advantages, and disadvantages to remapping the factory.   The factory runs billions of different maps, to account for sooooo many variables, especially when you bring in things like constantly variable cams etc. By remapping all those maps appropriately, you can get the car to drive so damn nicely, and very much so like it does from the factory. This means it can utilise a LOT of weird things in the maps, to alter how it drives in situations like cruise on a freeway, and how that will get your fuel economy right down.   I haven't seen an aftermarket ECU that truly has THAT MANY adjustable parameters. EG, the VAG ECUs are somewhere around 2,000 different tables for it to work out what to do at any one point in time. So for a vehicle being daily driven etc, I see this as a great advantage, but it does mean spending a bit more time, and with a tuner who really knows that ECU.   On the flip side, an aftermarket ECU, in something like a weekender, or a proper race car, torque based tuning IMO doesn't make that much sense. In those scenarios you're not out there hunting down stuff like "the best way to minimise fuel usage at minor power so that we can go from 8L/100km to 7.3L/100km. You're more worried about it being ready to make as much freaking power as possible when you step back on the loud pedal as you come out of turn 2, not waiting the extra 100ms for all the cams to adjust etc. So in this scenario, realistically you tune the motor to make power, based on the load. People will then play with things like throttle response, and drive by wire mapping to get it more "driveable".   Funnily enough, I was watching something Finnegans Garage, and he has a huge blown Hemi in a 9 second 1955 Chev that is road registered. To make it more driveable on the road recently, they started testing blocking up the intake with kids footballs, to effectively reduce air flow when they're on the road, and make the throttle less touchy and more driveable. Plus some other weird shit the yankee aftermarket ECUs do. Made me think of Kinks R34...
×
×
  • Create New...