Hey guys,

the other night I picked up my Skyline (R33). The tank was pretty much empty so on the way home I stoped by BP and put in a full tank of BP Ultimate 98.

Less than 50km into the tank I reset the tripmeter to see what sort of consumption I get. Now the Magna used to get at WORST, 450km's a tank. 650 If I was doing all highway.
Currently the fuel guage reads 1/2....and the tripmeter reads? 117km.

Wtf?

The car seems to be running perfectly fine and all, and its a smaller engine than the magna so I would have assumed consumption would be equal if not better. I haven't been fanging it too much either. My thoughts are maybe a bad batch of fuel but as I said, the cars running fine. The tank is 65 Litres as well so its not like its a tiny fuel tank. Any sugestions/ideas?

Just seems very low to me.

its is only 2.5 L but te turbo makes up for being small. if your driving on boost your going to be using the same amount of fuel as a bigger motor


remember a review of the WRX and one thing that said was it used as much fuel when on boost as a V8

It's a turbo skyline, nuff said. A guy i knew at TAFE had an R34 GTS-T which averaged around 25L/100km! I couldn't believe it! But he didn't drive it softly though and was mainly city driving.

It's a turbo skyline, nuff said. A guy i knew at TAFE had an R34 GTS-T which averaged around 25L/100km! I couldn't believe it! But he didn't drive it softly though and was mainly city driving.

R34 GTT, think that changed the name for the R34, i could be wrong.

but yeah it will know what to do with petrol, knew another guy driving one. someone my know it or have seen it around (CYAHSV) and he said he got like 150-250 ks out of tank

That is rather discouraging news :cry:

Surely a stock turbo engine can't be THAT bad on fuel? Can it? :doubt:

no they can be good, just drive it off boost,

hows this for using my brain, whats a stock gtst run 7psi so say around half a bar over what the magna would have from the atmostphere, so then when on max boost amd i right to say as its have half the amount of air again it would have .5 the amount of petrol again.

i may be way dont listen to me

Yeh i heard 7psi is roughly 50% off a couple of people. I didn't think you could just run a turbo engine "off-boost" without de-tuning it? Kinda defeats the purpose of having a turbo'ed skyline.
Lol you bought a v6 turbo, what did you expect the fuel economy to be like? :P. Those things are practically race engines aren't they?

R34 GTT, think that changed the name for the R34, i could be wrong.
Quite possibly, i don't know my skylines all that well. All i know is that it wasn't the hardcore one (GTR is it?) and so i figured that it was a GTS.
It was pretty quick though hehehe.

R34 GTT, think that changed the name for the R34, i could be wrong.

but yeah it will know what to do with petrol, knew another guy driving one. someone my know it or have seen it around (CYAHSV) and he said he got like 150-250 ks out of tank


nope your right, they stopped using gts for the r34

all they have now is, gt, gt-t ( single turbo), gtr

sounds about right, i had a 300zx N/A and it drank a tank in about 250km so dont complain to much :P

Yeh i heard 7psi is roughly 50% off a couple of people. I didn't think you could just run a turbo engine "off-boost" without de-tuning it? Kinda defeats the purpose of having a turbo'ed skyline.
Lol you bought a v6 turbo, what did you expect the fuel economy to be like? :P. Those things are practically race engines aren't they?

Quite possibly, i don't know my skylines all that well. All i know is that it wasn't the hardcore one (GTR is it?) and so i figured that it was a GTS.
It was pretty quick though hehehe.

yeah 1 bar is about 15 psi, but as for driving off boost, you can do it but there isn't much power, the stock skyline i drove came on boost fairly early so driving off boost might be a bit hard.


as for the RB25det its a straight 6, but RB= race bread from memory

nope your right, they stopped using gts for the r34

all they have now is, gt, gt-t ( single turbo), gtr
Musta been a gt-t then.

They would lack serious balls off boost, slower than a magna i reckon.

ask on the skyline forums but i don't believe it should be that bad, turbo's shouldn't be less efficient, if my memory serves me correctly (which it often doesn't) they should be more efficient. Another problem they need to be better maintained... and the a/f mixture needs to be pretty right... alot of near stock ones have spiky boost, which would be terrible for efficiency... but yes ask on the skyline forums...

the r34 gt-t does about 15 down the 1/4, and about 0-100 in about 6 to 7 seconds
gtr does about 13 down the 1/4 and about 0- 100 in 5.1 seconds

i have been looking into the r34 gt-t as a replacement for the magna

the r34 gt-t does about 15 down the 1/4, and about 0-100 in about 6 to 7 seconds
gtr does about 13 down the 1/4 and about 0- 100 in 5.1 seconds

an R34 Gtt is faster then that that have 206kws they would be more around the high 13'slow 14's depending on the drice

ask on the skyline forums but i don't believe it should be that bad, turbo's shouldn't be less efficient, if my memory serves me correctly (which it often doesn't) they should be more efficient. Another problem they need to be better maintained... and the a/f mixture needs to be pretty right... alot of near stock ones have spiky boost, which would be terrible for efficiency... but yes ask on the skyline forums...
A turbo being more fuel efficient?
That's like saying, a V8 must be more fuel efficient because it works only half as much as a 4 cylinder :P.

Just to confirm its an R33 GTS-T

And yeah, driving off boost is like...not possible in it, as even at 2,000 rpm you have SOME level of boost. Oh well, despite the fuel consumption its still a good car.

i always thougth that thats why turbos where invented for better fuel coumsumption,anless its driven hard then its worse.

Just to confirm its an R33 GTS-T

And yeah, driving off boost is like...not possible in it, as even at 2,000 rpm you have SOME level of boost. Oh well, despite the fuel consumption its still a good car.


dont let it get you down they a wicked car i want one. as for on boost at 2000rpm one way the fix that, get a bigger turbo :badgrin:

i always thougth that thats why turbos where invented for better fuel coumsumption,anless its driven hard then its worse.
I thought turbo's were initially invented to get more power out of smaller engines to save on space/weight.
If you have 2 identical engines, one with turbo, one without, i can't see the turbo engine being more fuel efficient.

A turbo being more fuel efficient?
That's like saying, a V8 must be more fuel efficient because it works only half as much as a 4 cylinder :P.
haha on the highway....?? Efficiency is how easily an engine is making the power to drive in certain conditions... off boost they still have the turbine in the exhaust flow as a restriction yet it's not used to make any power...
ie at idle they'd be drinking alot more in comparison...

and 206kw through the rear wheels... mid -high 14... at the drags most i've seen have at least exhaust, cooler, bov etc and they run about 14.1-14.7 but then theres the ones that have had the minimals mods needed to get the 13...

haha me; cooler + full zorst + piggy back and i'd be happy... plus change from 5000$ a fair bit if ur in the know

Dont for-get theres a lot of CROOK ( Faulty) petrol Pumps out there not giving out correct amount of fuel.I know one servo he's lol lovin it, he's not doing anything about it he reckons its the $ cream $ off the milk. Will plead ignorance only till the Weights & Measure guys come around to Check his Pumps out.

and 206kw through the rear wheels... mid -high 14... at the drags most i've seen have at least exhaust, cooler, bov etc and they run about 14.1-14.7 but then theres the ones that have had the minimals mods needed to get the 13...


a stock R33 with the 180kws is a little quicker than a ralliart and a raliiart is ment do what 14.6 or something, so if a R33 is a little quicker with 180 i would think the R34 with 206 is faster again.


as for using fuel my mate use to keep hit sr20 off boost and it wasn't to ba on fuel, but on boost it could use a bit. so i guess the skyline will work the kinda same.

maybe having someone have a look at it, make sure its not running to rich or something

if your right mr pete, then my choices will be further narrowed

i need a performence comparsion between ( all stock)

180sx, 200sx, r34 gt-t ( non of the other models as they are dog ugly), evo6, intergra type r

what do you expect, you by a mid field performence car, of course its gonna chew some petrol, either you by a performence car and put up with the fuel consumpition ( if using as a dialy driver), or only drive it on weekends

if my memory serves me correctly (which it often doesn't) they should be more efficient.

You're confusing volumetric efficiency with fuel efficiency. Turbos have better volumetric efficiency than naturally aspirated motors when they are producing boost, meaning they ingest a larger amount of air during the intake stroke than an N/A engine.

But more air means you need more fuel to get the proper ratio for combustion, so on boost you will use more fuel than an N/A engine of the same displacement.

My friends parents stock R34 GTT auto does the quarter mile is 14.70 @ 152kph and well driven manual should be .5 quicker than that and they get about 400ks around town out of it.

You're confusing volumetric efficiency with fuel efficiency. Turbos have better volumetric efficiency than naturally aspirated motors when they are producing boost, meaning they injest a larger amount of air during the intake stroke than an N/A engine.

But more air means you need more fuel to get the proper ratio for combustion, so on boost you will use more fuel than an N/A engine of the same displacement.
Thank you! That's what i was getting at, i just didn't know the details :).

Yeah well anyway, aside from the other 20 posts blaming the turbocharger or you, it may be a faulty fuel gauge or tank design.

Wait and see until the tank is nearly empty, don't all jump to conclusions.

My friends parents stock R34 GTT auto does the quarter mile is 14.70 @ 152kph and well driven manual should be .5 quicker than that and they get about 400ks around town out of it.

auto's on boost are generally quicker, no despooling (thats the scientific term).

As for the ralliart's... from my experience a 180kw's ralliart fwd chomps r33 180kw's rwd no worries... the r34's i dont know...

auto's on boost are generally quicker, no despooling (thats the scientific term).

As for the ralliart's... from my experience a 180kw's ralliart fwd chomps r33 180kw's rwd no worries... the r34's i dont know...


My car chomps R33's and R34's, there not as fast as people think

yeah the R33s aren't as fast as people thing that are, nearly thrump one at the lights on Maroondah Highway in Chirnside Park, i reckon he got very worried when he couldn't pass me till i hit the speed limit, he only went past me when i either backed off or he actually got me (can't remember), not sure... but i had a mate in the car that was got a lil excited.

if there just the single turbo variant, there not that great, however the gtr is another story

if there just the single turbo variant, there not that great, however the gtr is another story

The v-specII is another story on top of that. Mums TF exec. managed to keep up with a non gtr or vepsc R33 up a windey(sp?) road and that really shat off the owner of the skyline.

I am sure the V-spec and the gtr's go through more fuel than your R33. I just have to say, meaning no offense to you of course; you chose a performance car so you should expect a pricey fuel bill, just like driving any car hard you can expect higher use of fuel. I certainly expected it when I drive my car hard :)

Hey guys,

the other night I picked up my Skyline (R33). The tank was pretty much empty so on the way home I stoped by BP and put in a full tank of BP Ultimate 98.

Less than 50km into the tank I reset the tripmeter to see what sort of consumption I get. Now the Magna used to get at WORST, 450km's a tank. 650 If I was doing all highway.
Currently the fuel guage reads 1/2....and the tripmeter reads? 117km.

Wtf?

The car seems to be running perfectly fine and all, and its a smaller engine than the magna so I would have assumed consumption would be equal if not better. I haven't been fanging it too much either. My thoughts are maybe a bad batch of fuel but as I said, the cars running fine. The tank is 65 Litres as well so its not like its a tiny fuel tank. Any sugestions/ideas?

Just seems very low to me.
Youve got this thing called a Turbo strapped to your engine.

Mild fanging of my car nets results of around 18 - 26L/100km's..

And you also dont know the history of your skyline.. I would be amazed if it hasnt been modified in the past.

Take it to a specialist mechanic (who deals with Jap imports) and have them look at the tune of the car. Perhaps someone has used an aftermarket chip and pulled it out while returning the car to stock?

Has the car got an aftermarket filter or 2nd cai (both will use more fuel)..

*edit* Forgot to add, is your muffler covered in black residue? This is a sign of the car running overly rich.

yeah the R33s aren't as fast as people thing that are, nearly thrump one at the lights on Maroondah Highway in Chirnside Park, i reckon he got very worried when he couldn't pass me till i hit the speed limit, he only went past me when i either backed off or he actually got me (can't remember), not sure... but i had a mate in the car that was got a lil excited.

i didnt know anyone lived out near me (im in moutn evelyn)

Wasnt eddies old car u were aginast was it? (greeen kitted r33)


remember 90% of skylines are filled with extra weight anyway (subs etc)

One of my mates has a heavily modified R33 GTS-T. He gets about 150kms out of a full tank of fuel when driven hard. 300 if he's lucky when puttering. Like Bain said get the car looked at by a proper tuner, it could be running rich. Other than that, mate, what did you expect? It's an 11 year old car with a turbo strapped to it. :doubt:

Edit: As for I think it was valaxy66 trying to decide on a car? The Evo6 would be the quickest out of those in stock form. It would be the better all round car too. The Evo6 was the best Evo made in a lot of peoples eyes.

I drive my charade around all day off boost, you just have to not use a lot of throttle.

Like the old saying, petrol in = power out. If you drive slow and dont make any power, then you dont use much fuel, but if you make the power, its going to use petrol.

It is true though, take a 100kw 2L NA motor(opperating at atmospheric pressure = 1 bar = 14.5psi(absolute). It is sucking in as hard as it can, but due to VE (volumetric efficiency) it can only get 85% of its possible air in because of intake restrictions and exhaust restrictions. If you were to run the motor at 2 atmospheres/2bar/29psi(absolute) then it will flow twice the amount of air, and need twice the amount of fuel to keep the AFR the same, it will (in theory) make 200kw. It will also flow the same aount of air as a 200kw 4L NA motor.

Motors are big air pumps remember, the more air you can force/suck in, the more fuel you can get in for performance.


As another example, my 1L motor is running 17psi, so its effectivly a 2.2L NA motor.

Also note that due to supercharging causing increased air temp, the air is thinner and has less mass. Hence why the 200kw 4L NA motor and a 2.2L NA motor will always be more desireable.

i didnt know anyone lived out near me (im in moutn evelyn)

Wasnt eddies old car u were aginast was it? (greeen kitted r33)


remember 90% of skylines are filled with extra weight anyway (subs etc)

can't remember the car..might be a silver or greenish one, just can't remember...

Yeah well anyway, aside from the other 20 posts blaming the turbocharger or you, it may be a faulty fuel gauge or tank design.

Wait and see until the tank is nearly empty, don't all jump to conclusions.

About time there was a logical post... wait till you fill it up again at the servo and divide the amount of litres it takes by how many ks - most accurate way. Not uncommon for fuel gauges to read way off, my car only takes 56L from E.

About time there was a logical post... wait till you fill it up again at the servo and divide the amount of litres it takes by how many ks - most accurate way. Not uncommon for fuel gauges to read way off, my car only takes 56L from E.

56L from E is quite common mate, the needle will sit at E a long time before you get the fuel light going, in fact i have heard the needle can go past E. i put in about 54L the other day and it was very close to the E and i had already done about 515km

56L from E is quite common mate, the needle will sit at E a long time before you get the fuel light going, in fact i have heard the needle can go past E. i put in about 54L the other day and it was very close to the E and i had already done about 515km
Yeh mines about the same, they do this on purpose so that people can drive to a petrol station, instead of realising sh!t i'm on empty and have the car conk out.

Yeh mines about the same, they do this on purpose so that people can drive to a petrol station, instead of realising sh!t i'm on empty and have the car conk out.

yeah with 56L you'd still have supposedly have another 12L of petrol, that would be about another 100km...you'd only worry about that if u were out in Outback Australia.