I'll like to hear people's experience with 2.6 Lt TRs and fuel usage.

I currently drive a 2002 VX SS Commodore 5.7 Lt 6 speed AND a 1981 Mazda 323 1.5 Lt 4 speed.

I recently bought a 1991 2.6 Lt to replace the 323.
The 323 isn't air conditioned and so it doesn't get driven much in the summer, and the SS uses a bit more fuel than the 323. :confused:

The thinking was that, an air-con Magna was both big enough and cool (temp) enough to replace the 323 for the many 1 one person shorter trips as well as the longer family outings.

This would leave the SS for fun.

The problem is that, I've been reading on here of people's less than good fuel economy and would like to know if they're in the minority, or if the 2.6 Lt is NOT so good.

For comparison:

The 5.7 Lt 6 speed VX Commodore has averaged 12.61 L/100Km over the 110,000 km I have had it. (213 Kw at the wheels, 13.9sec @ 101.95MPH 1/4 mile)
The 1.5 Lt 4 speed 323 has averaged 7.79 L/100Km over the 250,000 odd km I have had it. (3.12 Kw at the wheels, 80.9sec @ 25MPH 1/4 mile)

(Power and strip times estimated for the 323, actual for the VX.)

I would like to think that the 2.6 Lt 5 speed Magna would return figures closer to the 323 than the VX (9 to 10 L/100Km). But some of the tales here have me worried.

Some feed-back please from 2.6 manual owners who keep accurate figures.

Please. :bowdown:

on highway my v6 gets 7.5l per 100 and about 10-12 in the city, i dont think a 4banger could top that there getting a bit old, mine is good because of breathing mods and me being conservative, i dont think these model magnas are good for fuel consumption, i'd go a barina or swift or pulsar, 3rd gen v6's are generally much better on fuel

I have a 93 TR 2.6L manual and it averages 11l/100km for a mixture of highway driving and city. not a very good figure as compared to GTRICE's V6. I belive most TR 2.6 owners would be in my range i guess.

The difference between a magna 4cyl and your SS at 12.6L/100 ks is prob nothing, if not worse. (thats what ive come to understand from reading peoples post here)

Well to ge the ball rolling, myne is on gas an it eats 16.6L/100 ks lol but ay

On petrol its round 12L/100 Ks but havnt done alot of testing on petrol to back that up 100%

Thanks guys.

Any more?

I have a 93 TR 2.6L manual and it averages 11l/100km for a mixture of highway driving and city. not a very good figure as compared to GTRICE's V6. I belive most TR 2.6 owners would be in my range i guess. I'm 90% rural roads so I hope I get the same or a bit better than you. :cool:

My V6 verada uses about the same amount of fuel on the highway as my 5.0 VN Calais does around town!, the calais tells me about 14L/100k on the trip meter which I believe is correct & the magna uses that on the highway if not more, every 400 highway k's I need to re fill the verada & around town it is absolutely disgusting (I might now mention my verada has no overdrive).

Gee, this is looking like I should have just bought another VX SS. :cry:

i have a 91 2.6 litre tr magna auto recently did a trip to mt gambier in se of sa. cruising between 110klmh with occasional burst to 150 ( overtaking b -doubles ) i got 468klm out of 52.5litres of petrol. is this anygood. i run elf 10w40 semi synthetic oil with justice bros oil concentrate and a pure one puralator oil filter. also use fpc fuel catalyst

tr1

thats 11.2L/100km's not good on highway,

i averaged 9l/100km with 300km of 450km on highway and the rest rural hills etc and 2 trips to 180km/h....

my fuel consumption was ok, then injectors cleaned (220$ off car) and cai + a few weeks for computer to adjust or something,(it took a while) ****ing good economy.

Thanks guys, seems that the autos are quite a bit worse than the manuals.

There maybe some hope yet. :)

Hey rice, where did you get your injectors cleaned? By "off car" do you mean you provided them removed, or they removed them for you? (I was just quoted $300ish). And yeah I'm in brisvegas.

they removed them, and put them on the machine in his van and 45minutes later all done... 220$ he didnt bother taking off the inlet manifold which they still charge for. I reckon i got about 10kw back and .7seconds off my 1/4 mile

So who'd you get it done by? (last semi-ofs-topic post, sorry for hijacking the thread richard)

How about pulling them out and wiping them down with a cloth? :bowrofl:

oh you asked the question so it could be answered, sorry i was at uni and sleepy....

anyway Electronic Injector Services; north side; dude is jamie, he was good and has a ridiculously quick rotory....its a mobile service too. They have other guys in other areas but i only have jamies card.
mob jamie-0412 007 207

i just got a TR 91 auto and noticed how bad my fuel consumption is.

i filled up on friday to the brim, drove twice to the city and back and some general errands to the local shops. all up about around 150kms and my gauge shows half empty already.
what the ?

my 2.6l 5spd manual gets about 11.2l/100km city, and about 8l/100km Highway. Thats on PULP with advanced ignition timing.

i just got a TR 91 auto and noticed how bad my fuel consumption is.

i filled up on friday to the brim, drove twice to the city and back and some general errands to the local shops. all up about around 150kms and my gauge shows half empty already.
what the ?Thanks for your comment, but don't go too much by the gauge.
Note exactly how far you've gone and exactly how much it takes to re-fill the tank and work it out from that.

My 323, for example, will travel 90 Km with the gauge not moving from full then it drops to half full for about 10 Km then straight to empty.
I then can travel another 250 Km before it runs out. :confused:

my 2.6l 5spd manual gets about 11.2l/100km city, and about 8l/100km Highway. Thats on PULP with advanced ignition timing.Thanks Samurai, I hope I get somthing like that. :)

These figures are based off 1st gens, but the engine/box is still similar.
Current car: TN Elante Manual 2.6L EFI
Highway: 10L/100Km
Town: 13L/100Km (Pathetic)

Old car: TP Exec Auto 2.6L EFI
Highway: 8.1L/100Km
Town: 10L/100Km
Here's the funny part - that was with the shot engine in the TP and an extra 100,000Km over the TN :redface:

Weird cartman02au. :confused:
You'd also think the the auto would be worse than the manual. Better state of tune maybe?

I recently drove my car from canberra to geelong (and back), about 750km each way, and i got there (just) on one full tank of petrol (64L so thats an average of about 8.5L/100kms) I was surprised actually... :shock:

Around town...not so good, usually about 500-550kms from a tank (11.6-12.8L/100kms) Strange how the two are so very different :confused:

Weird cartman02au. :confused:
You'd also think the the auto would be worse than the manual. Better state of tune maybe?

what do you mean by "tune"? what is tuned ?
iam thinking changing my O2 sensor like someone suggested in past threads...

what do you mean by "tune"? what is tuned ?...Er.... Tuned.


As in "had a tune-up".

Gone to an "Automotive Mechanical Person " (often found in a "Garage" or "Workshop") and had the timing set, plugs & leads replaced, air filter cleaned/replaced, O2 sensors checked, air/fuel ratio checked, tested for air/vacuum/exhaust leaks, etc etc.

You know.

Tuned.

oh ok i thought u meant like on dyno having the actual ECU tuned.

currently have 91tr did reply in an earlier thread about a trip to my gambier. forgot to add that i had a heavy downhill mountain bike on the back plus a car full off bags etc.
currently have the offer of getting a v6 93 se magna(220,00klm ). what would be the best for fuel the v6 or my 2.6 (207,00klm)both cars automatic. must admit that my last tank on the 2.6 i got 9.7 ltrs per 100 around town. the v6 is a lot tidier than mine

Weird cartman02au. :confused:
You'd also think the the auto would be worse than the manual. Better state of tune maybe?
Both tuned exactly the same :(
All with filters, oil, plugs, lead, cap and rotor in good condition.
With idle and timing as specified.
With TPS adjusted the same.

The funny thing I found with the auto was that it used less fuel in Power mode than Economy :bowrofl:

In my previous car - the Shagna, I had also noticed the possibility of power being more effecient than economy. When in economy I feel that sometimes the computer will shift up a gear too early thus requiring too much throttle at a lower rpm. In power it would shift up at a higher rpm resulting the next gear being more in its torque range therefore requiring less throttle.
I think economy works best in 'grandma' driving mode but even for normal driving I think power did the job pretty well.
I miss my autobox sometimes - especially when it comes to McDonalds drive though :)

Oh yeah and my fuel consumption is so up **** creek that I am not even going to mention it :confused:

well iam taking mine from melbourne to sydney tomorrow. will report on findings.
anyone notice a recent petrol price spike. one day it was 1.17/litre and today its 1.28/litre? wtf

Nearly always buy fuel mon-wed.... normally cheaper those days!

The best I have ever done out of my 93 2.6 auto was 627km on 59.6 litres (9.51) and that was with a big load (4ppl, food and gear for a 41 day hike). Other than that one trip for melbourne to canberra economy is generally up the creek!!

i know mine isnt a second gen, but it has an engine from one. its manual with a webber carby. the other week i did 455km's and had to put in 55litres at the servo. this is a combination of city driving with some highway cruising.