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

  Pattygtst said:
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

  Pattygtst said:
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.

  Scadtional said:
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

    • Great interview on damper settings and coil selection by HPA https://www.facebook.com/HPAcademy/videos/30284693841175196/?fs=e&s=TIeQ9V&fs=e
    • Yeah, it was a pretty deep dig.
    • The values for HID colour are also defined ~ see https://www.legislation.gov.au/F2006L02732/latest/text  ~ goto section 3.9 onwards ....
    • So, if the headlights' cutoff behaviour (angles, heights, etc) are not as per 6.2.6.1.1 without automatic levelling, then you have to have to have automatic** levelling. Also, if the headlight does not have the required markings, then neither automatic nor manual adjusters are going to be acceptable. That's because the base headlight itself does not meet the minimum requirement (which is the marking). ** with the option of manual levelling, if the headlight otherwise meets the same requirements as for the automatic case AND can be set to the "base" alignment at the headlight itself. So that's an additional requirement for the manual case. So, provided that the marking is on the headlight and there is a local manual adjustment back to "base" on the headlight, then yes, you could argue that they are code compliant. But if you are missing any single one of these things, then they are not. And unlike certain other standards that I work with, there does not seem to be scope to prepare a "fitness for purpose" report. Well, I guess there actually is. You might engage an automotive engineer to write a report stating that the lights meet the performance requirements of the standard even if they are missing, for example, the markings.  
    • Vertical orientation   6.2.6.1.1. The initial downward inclination of the cut off of the dipped-beam to be set in the unladen vehicle state with one person in the driver's seat shall be specified within an accuracy of 0.1 per cent by the manufacturer and indicated in a clearly legible and indelible manner on each vehicle close to either headlamp or the manufacturer's plate by the symbol shown in Annex 7.   The value of this indicated downward inclination shall be defined in accordance with paragraph 6.2.6.1.2.   6.2.6.1.2. Depending on the mounting height in metres (h) of the lower edge of the apparent surface in the direction of the reference axis of the dipped beam headlamp, measured on the unladen vehicles, the vertical inclination of the cut off of the dipped- beam shall, under all the static conditions of Annex 5, remain between the following limits and the initial aiming shall have the following values:   h < 0.8   Limits: between 0.5 per cent and 2.5 per cent   Initial aiming: between 1.0 per cent and 1.5 per cent   0.8 < h < 1.0   Limits: between 0.5 per cent and 2.5 per cent   Initial aiming: between 1.0 per cent and 1.5 per cent   Or, at the discretion of the manufacturer,   Limits: between 1.0 per cent and 3.0 per cent   Initial aiming: between 1.5 per cent and 2.0 per cent   The application for the vehicle type approval shall, in this case, contain information as to which of the two alternatives is to be used.   h > 1.0   Limits: between 1.0 per cent and 3.0 per cent   Initial aiming: between 1.5 per cent and 2.0 per cent   The above limits and the initial aiming values are summarized in the diagram below.   For category N3G (off-road) vehicles where the headlamps exceed a height of 1,200 mm, the limits for the vertical inclination of the cut-off shall be between: -1.5 per cent and -3.5 per cent.   The initial aim shall be set between: -2 per cent and -2.5 per cent.
×
×
  • Create New...