Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

ok 2 things,

first: USE THE FUCKING SEARCH FUNCTION!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! sorry but this has been covered 432.6 million times already on this forum and about every week a new fuel economy thread pops up.

secondly: "a tank" is not a unit of measure unless you are running it until the car stalls then filling up to the top. unless you post up how many litres you are actually putting in we will not know if you are getting shit fuel economy or have a dodgy fuel sender or if you consider just under half a tank to be empty. to find out if you have bad economy, reset the trip meter next time you fill up, then the next time after that when you fill up divide how many litres you have used by how many hundred kms you have done and then you will get a fuel economy reading in L/100kms. the higher the number the worse it is.

for example, lets say you used 45L to do 368km

45 diveded 3.86 (because you are diving by lots of 100kms, not just kms) = 12.22L/100kms

as to give you an indication of what is good, and what is bad, for highway/motorway driving anything down around 10 is good. for city driving, 13 or so is good. i was getting around 17L/100kms but i am a leadfoot and the type of driving i was doing wasn't going to allow me as good fuel economy as some others even if i wasn't a lead foot. on long trips though i was getting around 10L/100kms. if you are getting 13 or 14 from highway driving, get a new o2 sensor (again, sarch for info on that). also the more time you spend boosting up when acceleration, the more fuel you will us. accelerate a bit easier and keep the boost lower and you will use less fuel.

petrol has energy in it that burns to make powahhh :) if you get 17l/100km from a standard rb25 thats bad. if your making 11ty kw then 17l/100km seems reasonable. as mad said, info please :)

Sorry to hijack your threat, but thought i'd ask how many of you guys fill up with premium? Cuz ever since I bought my 33 I've always used premium only.. Infact (this is stupid and you're more then welcomed to say how dumb I am) I don't actually know if I'm allowed to use reg for turbo..

Sorry to hijack your threat, but thought i'd ask how many of you guys fill up with premium? Cuz ever since I bought my 33 I've always used premium only.. Infact (this is stupid and you're more then welcomed to say how dumb I am) I don't actually know if I'm allowed to use reg for turbo..

I always use premium, with regular (91RON) it pings too much.

'Around town' driving, which includes a lot of pointless boosting and acceleration :), I'm using around the 13-14L/100km mark... just went on a road trip to Sydney on the weekend, so lots of 110km/h cruising, and averaged about 10.8L/100km.

Sorry to hijack your threat, but thought i'd ask how many of you guys fill up with premium? Cuz ever since I bought my 33 I've always used premium only.. Infact (this is stupid and you're more then welcomed to say how dumb I am) I don't actually know if I'm allowed to use reg for turbo..

don't ever fill up a turbo car with 91. that's bad, mmmmkay. so you are doing the right thing by only using premium. even running it on 95 octane premium isn't the best idea. they are designed to run on high octane fuel from factory, and running it on lower can make them run poorly as also cause damage if done long term.

cefiro gets 9km/l (95 octane, stock RB20DET)

r32 gets 6 km/l (98 octane, modded RB20DET)

camaro gets 4 km/l (91 octane, err 5.7l V8)

i looked at that and thought WOW. then i realised it was KM/L and not L/100km

so in L/100kms you are using:

11L/100km

16L/100km

25/100km

wow that's some errr... impressive fuel usage by the camaro. i'm guessing it's an old carby 350 then?

bah! you guys need RB20's... im getting 11L/100km (city) and im a bit of a lead foot.

And you need some torque muhahahaha.

OP as Marc said it's the length of a piece of string depending on your vehicle and perceptions. It has also been covered many times before. I'll be nice and suggest that your fuel economy sounds pretty shit anyway. Replace the oxygen sensor if it hasn't been replaced in the last 50,000km or if you have no history of it being replaced. Will make a significant difference to mileage. I average about 12.8-13.2 L/100KM suburban driving and I spend a good deal of time on boost.

also what some people class as city driving is totally different to other peoples city driving. for example some people might drive through the city on a motorway at 80 or 100kmh for half of their trip and the rest might be on a 60kmh road where you go for ages without stopping at trafic lights or anything like that. that will give much better economy than someone who has to drive along a stretch of road where they have to stop lots. both driving in the city yet 1 person is going to get much better economy than the other. a prime example of this is my drive to work. i have to stop as much as 6 times in 2km in the worst case scenario, but even on the best case scenario i'm still accelerating 5 times from turning at intersections, 2 of which are up hill and close to home so the car is still cold and running richer. coming home from work i have to accellerate up a long hill not far from the carpark. plus it is such a short trip that even if i drive like a granny i'm never going to get as good fuel economy as other people who drive further to work than me and have better routes where they don't have to stop as much.

what model is it? brother-in-law used to have an old z28.

Gen 2, 1973 body, not sure on spec, its a bit of a Frankenstein... doing a resto on it atm.

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

    • Or just wire a multimeter in, sit it up like it's a gauge, go for a drive, read temp gauge, read multimeter, speak to phone and tell it to take notes.
    • This is the other log file, if only we had exhaust manifold pressure - would understand what's going on a bit better   Can you take a screenshot of your wastegate setup in the Kebabtech?   Engine Functions --> Boost Control (looks like this):  
    • You just need a datalogger of some sort. A handheld oscilloscope could do it, because it will make the trace visible on screen, so you can look at the peak, or whatever you need to look at. And there are cheap USB voltage loggers available too. You could get a 2 channel one and press a button to feed voltage to the second channel at points that you want to check the sensor voltage, when you knew what the guage was saying, for example.
    • it's not the issue with making power, it's the issue with controlling boost, and this isn't the first time I've seen a 6Boost having issue with controlling boost down low.   The boost control here looks interesting.   Looking at your logs, looks like it's set to open loop boost control strategy (which is fine). We can see VCT being kept on till about 6600RPM (no issue with that). Ignition timing (I'm assuming this is E85, seems within reason too, nothing too low, causing hot EGTS and boost spiking). There's about 15 degrees of advance when your boost shoots up, however can't be this as the timing isn't single digits. I'm assuming there's no EMAP data, as I wasn't able to find it in the logs. We can see your tuner sets the WG DC to 0% after 4300RPM, trying to control boost.   My thoughts, what frequency is your wastegate set to?  AND why aren't you using both ports for better control?
    • While that sounds reasonable, this is definitely a boost control problem, but the real question is why are you having the boost control problem? Which is why I pondered the idea that there's a problem at ~4000rpm related to head flow. In that instance, you are not yet under boost control - it's still ramping up and the wastegate is yet to gain authority. So, I'm thinking that if the wastegate is not yet open enough to execute control, but the compressor has somehow managed ot make a lot of flow, and the intake side of the head doesn't flow as well as the exhaust side (more on that later), then presto, high MAP (read that as boost overshoot). I have a number of further thoughts. I use butterfly valves in industrial applications ALL THE TIME. They have a very non-linear flow curve. That is to say that there is a linear-ish region in the middle of their opening range, where a 1% change in opening will cause a reasonably similar change in flow rate, from one place to another. So, maybe between 30% open and 60% open, that 1% change in opening gives you a similar 2% change in flow. (That 2% is pulled out of my bum, and is 2% of the maximum flow capacity of the valve, not 2% of the flow that happens to be going through the valve at that moment). That means that at 30% open, a 1% change in opening will give you a larger relative flow increase (relative to the flow going through the valve right then) compared to the same increment in opening giving you the same increment in flow in outright flow units. But at 60% opening, that extra 2% of max flow is relatively less than 1/2 the increase at 30% opening. Does that make sense? It doesn't matter if it doesn't because it's not the main point anyway. Below and above the linear-ish range in the middle, the opening-flow curve becomes quite...curved. Here's a typical butterfy valve flow curve. Note that there is a very low slope at the bottom end, quite steep linear-ish slope in the middle, then it rolls off to a low slope at the top. This curve shows the "gain" that you get from a butterfly valve as a function of opening%. Note the massive spike in the curve at 30%. That's the point I was making above that could be hard to understand. So here's the point I'm trying to make. I don't know if a butterfly valve is actually a good candiate for a wastegate. A poppet valve of some sort has a very linear flow curve as a function of opening %. It can't be anyelse but linear. It moves linearly and the flow area increases linearly with opening %. I can't find a useful enough CV curve for a poppet valve that you could compare against the one I showed for the butterfly, but you can pretty much imagine that it will not have that lazy, slow increase in flow as it comes off the seat. It will start flowing straight away and increase flow very noticeably with every increase in opening%. So, in your application, you're coming up onto boost, the wastegate is closed. Boost ramps up quite quickly, because that's really what we want, and all of a sudden it is approaching target boost and the thing needs to open. So it starts opening, and ... bugger all flow. And it opens some more, and bugger all more flow. And all the while time is passing, boost is overshooting further, and then finally the WG opens to the point where the curve starts to slope upwards and it gains authority amd the overshoot is brought under control and goes away, but now the bloody thing is too open and it has to go back the other way and that's hy you get that bathtub curve in your boost plot. My position here is that the straight gate is perhaps not teh good idea it looks like. It might work fine in some cases, and it might struggle in others. Now, back to the head flow. I worry that the pissy little NA Neo inlet ports, coupled with the not-very-aggressive Neo turbo cam, mean that the inlet side is simply not matched to the slightly ported exhaust side coupled with somewhat longer duration cam. And that is not even beginning to address the possibility that the overlap/relative timing of those two mismatched cams might make that all the worse at around 4000rpm, and not be quite so bad at high rpm. I would be dropping in at least a 260 cam in the inlet, if not larger, see what happens. I'd also be thinking very hard about pulling the straight gate off, banging a normal gate on there and letting it vent to the wild, just as an experiment.
×
×
  • Create New...