well i had a search and found nothin.

So here it is for all you 2nd genners

what do you get per tank???

i use premium, 56ltrs i got 515km's of half city and freewy running.... i was shocked.

usually i get 400-430km with all short trips.

EDIT..... V6 injected Auto with 76000km on the OD

well i had a search and found nothin.

So here it is for all you 2nd genners

what do you get per tank???

i use premium, 56ltrs i got 515km's of half city and freewy running.... i was shocked.

usually i get 400-430km with all short trips.

This has been done before, but meh. From memory, last thread started by Lugo:)

ANYWAY; As of late, fuel economy has become alot better. I am not getting 420-450km/tank to my 350-380 beforehand.

Lately I have been filling with either Mobil8000 or Shell V-Power. Both work wonders and I can tell that my car isnt running as rich as it used to (judged by the amount of black crap on my bumper)

I get 250km's from a full tank in my ts v6 i drive the car very hard all the time.

out of a tank i get around 350 on a good tank
i use any normal unleaded.

4cyl carby with a berklee sports exhaust

out of a tank i get around 350 on a good tank
i use any normal unleaded.

4cyl carby with a berklee sports exhaust

Didnt know carbys used that much more than EFI!

BTW, I changed my air filter from a Drift Pod to a standard Mitsubishi panel and it's shown a massive dif. Not running as rich and more POWAAAAA...lol

ive got to 560 kms with 12 litres still left... so dunno what my car can do but its one hell of an economic car..... maybe due to only doing 90.000kms on the odometer and im not a led foot.

Get this, ADZA_27 Has a reconditioned engine, he somehow got 700L..... as he drives around with the fuel light on for about 50 years, untill it starts gurgling around corners.

ive got to 560 kms with 12 litres still left... so dunno what my car can do but its one hell of an economic car..... maybe due to only doing 90.000kms on the odometer and im not a led foot.

Get this, ADZA_27 Has a reconditioned engine, he somehow got 700L..... as he drives around with the fuel light on for about 50 years, untill it starts gurgling around corners.


is that due to my wicked exhaust?

Trotty + Quality workmanship = Awesomeness!!!!!:bowrofl:

PS and i think low k's really help with these cars....

Didnt know carbys used that much more than EFI!

BTW, I changed my air filter from a Drift Pod to a standard Mitsubishi panel and it's shown a massive dif. Not running as rich and more POWAAAAA...lol

Don't know much about carb's but I'm pretty sure they use fuel ALL the time, unlike EFI where the fuel can be cut and stuff to save it, so yeah they use tons.

yep the carby's a hunka ****e like that
the only reason iv still got it is lack of money and knowledge

out of everyday use, i get 350kms to 420kms for my V6 KR with 212000kms

i got 650kms out of a tank when i went over to ballarat, with 9lts still remaing.... so that came to 170 -180kms per quarter.

not bad for a 17 and a half year old car, huh.

well, i put down 350-400 cos thats an average. i have got up to 580 but that was a pure highway run, and i have got as low as 280 when i used it to tow/serious hills run.

i often try to see how good i can get it but unfortunatly there are 103 fwkw that keep sucking me in lol

I currently get low 400s on LPG with only suburban driving. This represents LPG consumption of approx 15l/100Km. re. At under 40c/l, the consumption cost is approx $5.50 per 100Km.

With the venturi dual fuel setup, I have noticed more pull at higher RPM (which I don't normally rev to). So what I have just done is run the petrol on V-Power so that I can advance the static timing more favourably toward LPG, without pinging on petrol.

I am expecting the LPG consumption to then drop to around 13l/100Km city, but I will give you an update in a few weeks.

Has anyone already done this? If so, I would love to know how much you advanced the timing etc.

Constant 480km's to 52-54L In the TR. Very damn good IMO for a 230K car with alot of added weight :P

my rada, 210oookm auto, 340 city, 370highway (yeah its roted)
brothers magna, 197oookm manual, 540 city and over 700 highway

i want his car hahah

can this be sticky'd plz:D

i usually get just over 400 mostly short trips

420,000 Kms on my '92 Verada Wagon, 610 kms on e10 fuel thats on a trip.
Around town it guzzles:rant:

now i drive in traffic over short trips its around 350k's off my 48L's when its a mix around 450 and purely highway 550k's.

about 400 in my girlfriends TS

I currently get low 400s on LPG with only suburban driving. This represents LPG consumption of approx 15l/100Km. re. At under 40c/l, the consumption cost is approx $5.50 per 100Km.

With the venturi dual fuel setup, I have noticed more pull at higher RPM (which I don't normally rev to). So what I have just done is run the petrol on V-Power so that I can advance the static timing more favourably toward LPG, without pinging on petrol.

I am expecting the LPG consumption to then drop to around 13l/100Km city, but I will give you an update in a few weeks.

Has anyone already done this? If so, I would love to know how much you advanced the timing etc.

Have thought about doing this, would be very interested in any of your findings. Especially as I just use BP Ultimate for the little petrol I use anyway. And I am thinking that as it is adjustable it should hopefully still retard timing if it pings anyway, but will enable it to advance timing further than usual.

Ollie

WOW, I thought my magna was thirsty:shock: I get 550km per tank on 91 octane with fairly hard suburban driving, Stock auto 2.6 se with just a straight through muffler on the back and spice jar lids where the resonator thing on the intake was.

Have thought about doing this, would be very interested in any of your findings. Especially as I just use BP Ultimate for the little petrol I use anyway. And I am thinking that as it is adjustable it should hopefully still retard timing if it pings anyway, but will enable it to advance timing further than usual.

Ollie
Here's an update thus far:
My petrol tank now has Shell V-Power in it.
I have scribed a notch on the distributor's adjustment slot for reference.
Loosening the distributor bolt with a 12mm socket, I have advanced the timing (twist distributor counter-clockwise as seen from cap) by moving the notch about 2mm at a time. I would test the petrol cold start and acceleration from low rpm, and test the LPG top end grunt.

I got to a point where the engine's LPG pull started to drop off above 4500rpm (timing getting too advanced) and petrol idle getting rough. I then retarded the timing with the notch coming back by 1mm. The new distributor position puts that notch about 5mm below its original position. Based on the turning radius, I'd estimate that I have advanced the timing by 6-8 degrees.

Now, The petrol cold start and idle are fine, and the LPG acceleration from low RPM has increased significantly, with increased power continuing up to 5000rpm.
As I don't use the engine at above 5000rpm (the auto has to set to PWR to rev it higher), I am happy with this "compromise".

In all this I have left the vacuum advance alone for now, and come Wednesday morning, the tripmeter will be reset as I fill up for a range test. Based on the more efficient take-offs and the amount of city driving the car does, I am expecting a noticeable improvement in the consumption. My next post will be the results!:cool:

How big is the 4cyl magna fuel tank btw?, i havent used in a while. I have lpg installed and usually get about 400kms from a 60L tank

How big is the 4cyl magna fuel tank btw?, i havent used in a while. I have lpg installed and usually get about 400kms from a 60L tank
All magnas have the 64L tank, regardless of 4cyl or V6

i fill up around 50L each week, and when i get down to that my fuel light is on, reckon my fuel sender needs replacing? Shouldnt the tank have another 14 odd litres in it?

i fill up around 50L each week, and when i get down to that my fuel light is on, reckon my fuel sender needs replacing? Shouldnt the tank have another 14 odd litres in it?
i fill up on instinct... ive seen the low fuel light come on before and most i ever put in was 58ltrs....

normaly ill put in 52-6ltrs week...

i fill up around 50L each week, and when i get down to that my fuel light is on, reckon my fuel sender needs replacing? Shouldn't the tank have another 14 odd litres in it?

hey i get my amazing mileage as i ignore the fuel light and go on kms. This is because the fuel light is way off on mine comes on very early from anywhere from 15 or more litres still left.
best way is to do what i do, zero the kms after each fill up. and knowing its a 65 or 70L tank, make note of how many litres are left when you fill up. That tells you how far you can go as you can see how many litres you have left.Adza_27 also does this and he gets like 700 a tank or something ridiculous with his re-coed engine.

']Constant 480km's to 52-54L In the TR. Very damn good IMO for a 230K car with alot of added weight :P

Heh, I thought it'd be 0km/52-54L since it doesnt move :P

Heh, I thought it'd be 0km/52-54L since it doesnt move :P

thats getting old, VERY fast. :gtfo:

I there's something wrong with MY fuel sender as I usually fill up on approx 50L, get down to just before the last bar before the E and the car's gurgling and cutting out on corners. freaking car.

thats getting old, VERY fast. :gtfo:

I there's something wrong with MY fuel sender as I usually fill up on approx 50L, get down to just before the last bar before the E and the car's gurgling and cutting out on corners. freaking car.

I think it must be a magna thing - mine gets to about 11L and the fuel light gos on. Most fuel I have ever put in is 62L in a 70L tank (this was with the fuel light on for a good 20km)

thats getting old, VERY fast. :gtfo:

I there's something wrong with MY fuel sender as I usually fill up on approx 50L, get down to just before the last bar before the E and the car's gurgling and cutting out on corners. freaking car.

In the gregorys manual there should be a quick ohms and volts test on how to see if the fuel sender is screwed, but judging by that, I'd say its screwed.

This thread frustrates me.........

Some of us are in manuals, autos, 4's 6's its all different.......... Are all our tanks exactly the same size?

You would have to empty your tank ALL THE WAY to work out how much you really get out of it and who is going to do that?

It would have been much simpler and more accurate for us all to post our actual fuel economy (xL/100km). Yes it can vary but its not hard to monitor your consumption over say three tanks and take an average.

/rant (dont take it personally trotty)

That said, I fill up at about 450-500kms usually but I think my oxy sensor might be buggered, I am using 11-12L/100km when I used to consistently get 8-9L/100km. 98ron Premium always

V6 KS - Auto. 70/30 Country/City

This thread frustrates me.........

Some of us are in manuals, autos, 4's 6's its all different.......... Are all our tanks exactly the same size?

You would have to empty your tank ALL THE WAY to work out how much you really get out of it and who is going to do that?

It would have been much simpler and more accurate for us all to post our actual fuel economy (xL/100km). Yes it can vary but its not hard to monitor your consumption over say three tanks and take an average.

/rant (dont take it personally trotty)

That said, I fill up at about 450-500kms usually but I think my oxy sensor might be buggered, I am using 11-12L/100km when I used to consistently get 8-9L/100km. 98ron Premium always

V6 KS - Auto. 70/30 Country/City

I'm more impressed by your ability to put your driving into an actual percentage :P
the L/100k's thing (when you fill up usually) is what most people do dont they....

']I'm more impressed by your ability to put your driving into an actual percentage :P
the L/100k's thing (when you fill up usually) is what most people do dont they....

Its a rough percentage.... not like Life's 'facts'

I was ranting about the poll being measured in km/tank rather than L/100km..... it just seems to make more sense the other way. I dunno, maybe im crazy

So are all our tanks the same size?

Its a rough percentage.... not like Life's 'facts'

I was ranting about the poll being measured in km/tank rather than L/100km..... it just seems to make more sense the other way. I dunno, maybe im crazy

So are all our tanks the same size?
Ahh yes, Good pickup. Yes, it should be like that....
or else, its pretty much, who runs there tank down the most:bowrofl:
Wagons have a slightly bigger tank, It's listed in the owners manual FYI too for tank sizes

']Ahh yes, Good pickup. Yes, it should be like that....
or else, its pretty much, who runs there tank down the most:bowrofl:
Wagons have a slightly bigger tank, It's listed in the owners manual FYI too for tank sizes

Exactly my point! If wagons have a bigger tank then the results are instantly flawed :rant:

I was just about to post up a new untainted thread with a title that specifies either km/litre or litres/10km, but realised that too would be flawed as a poll due to the city vs country / suburbs vs freeway etc differences in economies, no way of catering for that unless you have multiple polls running.

Seems a lot of people still fail to grasp that a "tank" is never a tank, unless you can specify a standard litre level. Even then, quite a few people don't understand the concept of extrapolating a usage rate based on how many kms you just did from the amount of litres it took to fill up to the same level...:rant:

Just did a trip from Brissy to Coffs, got a bit better than 10km per litre, close to 11. And general driving when down there also pulled in the same kind of figures.
Having a badly slipping clutch is a pain in the ****, but I guess it improves the economy a bit when you have to ease into the acceleration...

Exactly my point! If wagons have a bigger tank then the results are instantly flawed :rant:

Sorry pete.......

TBH i thought a thread the same as the 3rd gens was sufficient.... :redface: bviously not. haha

Now if you read my thead starter you will notice how many LTRS i actually put in the car to get that distance and the conditions i was driving under.... must be too much information to take in pete?lol

Well i CBF making a new thread, so be my guest Rogue!

we can gather from this
Carby 4cyl's - crap economy
EFI 4cyl's not bad
V6's best L/100k's with a good power mix aswell.
for around 10L/100k's I think our 16yo cars are doing extreamly well considering most medium size cars today are about the same!!

I think one of the main things here is providing a benchmark for others to compare to, you can get an idea whether your car is running on par with the others or whether there's something that needs to be rectified. Fuel usage is a major barometer of whether your car needs attention or not.

I think one of the main things here is providing a benchmark for others to compare to, you can get an idea whether your car is running on par with the others or whether there's something that needs to be rectified. Fuel usage is a major barometer of whether your car needs attention or not.


I tried i really did.... Nah really its only as good as the information put into the posts. and how people interpret them.

Main factors i would take into account are.... EFI or Carby
4cyl or 6cyl
Auto or Manual
And Driving conditions... Highway driving/City driving (in rough percentage.)
If those 4 things are listed i think we have a reasonable amount of info to make decision on if we need a service or somthing is wrong.
PS mileage of motor and Weight of right foot might also applylol

When I had the standard SOHC V6 engine in, i used to get almost 420kms to a full tank but with the DOHC V6 GTO engine i would get just over 460kms.

Pete, the tank capacity is 64 litres.

Pete, the tank capacity is 64 litres.

Lol I found it a few pages back and ninja-deleted my post. Too quick for you Dimi

Lol I found it a few pages back and ninja-deleted my post. Too quick for you Dimi
HAHAHA sif man i was too quick for you. You full tried to delete your post and stealth it but it got noted.

well my town driving has increase dramatically. My POS Verada now manages 420kms per tank (roughly 48-50litres) and that was 90percent town 10percent freeway.

I found out the issue. The timing belt was done before i brought the car, and the plastic belt cover (engine cover) on the front of the engine always looked crooked. Well it turns out it was rather crooked. I went to the effort of bolting it back on correctly to find my timing was not the 15degreesBTDC it was set to but rather 7degreesBTDC. Upping that back to factory spec and i still have a low rpm miss but she is much more lively now (wow i know) and fuel economy has returned (previosuly as low as 330kms from 51litres)

4 banger TS Wagon EFI

These specs (http://www.drive.com.au/buy/market_value/car_details.asp?nvic=0XI&make=MITSUBISHI&model=MAGNA&series=EXECUTIVE&year=1996&body=4D+WAGON) says the Wagon has a 71ltr tank.
Most I've put in at 1 time was 55.690 ltr. From the previous fillup, that got me 498 k's
Average (guestament) Hwy/City - 85/15
Attached is a copy of my fuel summary

lately ive been getting less then 300km per tank.
not sure if this is due to the fact ive stopped using 98RON and have been using 91RON.
or i have been driving stop/start.
Or a combantion of both. I will put in some Nulon Fuel cleaner and fill up with BP Ultimate and see how i go!!!

TS v6 Auto 170k

E10 ~550km per tank highway driving Sydney to Bisbane trip

well i gota suprising 580kms before she started to gurgle around corners after the long magna cruise last weekend (which was up the long windy pass) and also town driving for the week after.

ts- 3l
v6
manual
E10

Interesting test done by Today Tonight (I think), 3 identical BRAND NEW (camry's)cars, driven in a line.

1 E10
2 91 ron
3 95 ron

The result

The most economical car was the 91 ron car, while the 95 ron car id get slightly better economy, the extra cost for the fuel out weighed the savings in extra mileage.

The E10 car was the worst of them all, and due to having to fill up more often the fuel costs overall was more expensive

The test was done in all traffic conditions and I believe they did approximately 2000k

I am sure if you search the Today Tonight or ACA site you will find a link to the article.

Can Camry's advance their timing to make use of the 95 Ron like the 2nd gens can?

2nd gens dont advance their timing for 95ron fuel, they just pull the timing out when they regsiter a detonation event (via the knock sensor) such when running lower RON fuel. Engine knock is basically a yes or no event but the resonance the knock sensor is designed/tuned to pick up has a scale, where the sensor can pick up a frequency it thinks is a knock but is not say loud enough to be, this is likely how the ecu knows not to fully advance the timing. The knock sensor is NOT part of the closed loop function of the cars operation, ie: it doesnt send info to the ecu to moderate timing it only sends info when it registers a 'knock' event, in which case it will cause the ECU to RETARD timing from the stock ignition map. Just to clear the air

This is why the 91RON fuel cost/km is better then the 95RON fuel and i would put money that the same results would apply to 2nd gen magnas as did the camrys

Thanks for that explanation.

I actually worked out the costs versus extra mileage back in 2006 on my old 4cyl TR over a period of about 4 weeks. At the prices of the time (i think about 1.30 per litre) I broke even by using 95 ron and getting that little extra mileage. I think the average cost was up something like 50 cents per tank; i.e negligible.

So the costs were even, but the car ran better, had a little more power and whatever other benefits there were from running premium fuel. I think it is worth it with 2nd gen to put in premium fuel.

ACA and today tonights thorough awesome analysis did not mention state of engine through regular use and maintenance cost on regular fuels. My car ran smoother on 98 and only costs a bit more ive no doubt internals are cleaner. Note before new ecu

I get around about 600kms from a tank on a trip. Probably less everyday driving

I usually fill up at just over 500km. The fuel light isnt on but I fill up anyway just incase the light doesnt work (never seen it on).. IMO not bad for a car with over 285k on the dial ;)

This thread is a great indicator of ruff fuel usage ans can certanly help in diagnosing service issues eg if car is driven nice and uses heaps more than somone else, but why cant we all quote Ltr/100 as this is more accurate.

the wagon has a bigger tank and im sure if roof racks are fitted etc the usage would be higher.

Fill car to the brim then drive till almost empty, fill car to brim and calculate liters used and k's traveled for a pretty spot on usage.
Vechile: ts wagon
Engine: v6 3lt 12 valve
Gearbox: 5 speed man
Mods: K&N pod
Extra Weight: Duel amps/ 12 inch sub / Second dry cell batt large but removed spare so should only be minor added
Std Weight with full tank of gas: 1463kg

Different models vary a fair bit so please check my specs as jpeg below for yours as this will have a great effect on consumption if driven hard. eg 1337 to 1587, ever driven with 250kg in your car! big difference.

Exhaust:Stock
Service History: Excellent with exception of sensor replacements
Kilometers Traveled:205000
Roof Rack: No
Wheel Size: 215/60/15
Fuel Type: Shell 95 Best i can get in current location! No Fuel wars please.
Fuel Consumption: 11.5 ltr or 420k per tank with about 10 ltr left. (wagon)

Before

full tune eg new sensors leads plugs air filter dizzy cap rotor, oil change, throttle clean, O2 sensor

18lt per 100k half mountains half highway at 110 & 70% throttle acceleration to desired speed.:roflwtf:

After Tune

11.5 ltr per 100k same driving.

This was done over several tanks and in different weather condition. The A/C was used 20% of time but i eased off the gas a bit so to keep fuel usage down hence i get almost identically fuel usage with or with out it on. eg i also turned it off when leaving traffic lights until cruise speed attained.

I have just had my injectors cleaned and car runs better eg no surging and less likely to stall in my steep drive(manual seems to have more torque) but yet to do economy test.

I'm hoping for 10-10.5ltr as one injector was down 50% and others about 5-10% efficiency.


TR/TS and Verada fuel tank size as per owners manual all models inc 4 cylinder

Sedan 64 ltrs
Wagon 71 ltrs

If i drive with light on and gauge down very very low tank still has about 8-10 ltrs left. eg it will take about 60-64 liters of fuel. (wagon)

Hand book power figures below for fuel grades and weights

Hope this helps and every body jumps on board as this would give some excellent comparatives

I get 250km's from a full tank in my ts v6 i drive the car very hard all the time.


you make me angry and upset at the same time drig hard all the time :(

:beer:
you make me angry and upset at the same time drig hard all the time :(
My Fuel Economy is now 135km to a full tank of V-Power:beer:

My Fuel Economy is now 135km to a full tank of V-Power :roflwtf:

Is that even possible on the street , i dont think its even possible on the race track with a fairly stock vehicle?

correct me if im wrong.

:roflwtf:

Is that even possible on the street , i dont think its even possible on the race track with a fairly stock vehicle?

correct me if im wrong.
will it is when i am not running a air flow meter so lots of unburnt fuel :woot: