Hi guys - I am getting about 15 - 16 litres per 100kms in the city in my auto 380 GT (with 30,000kms) and that is with easy driving. Just changed the air filter to a K&N and whilst it has only been a few days the consumption seems to be the same on the trip computer. When I mentioned the fuel consumption in other posts here - some members are saying that this is not normal consumption for city driving (no highway). The average speed is under 30kph. Using BP Ultimate 98 ron. Also used an injector cleaner in the last tank of fuel.

The OEM filter I replaced was quite dirty and I think based on reading other forums that perhaps the MAF sensor is dirty?

I can see the MAF is in item 3 in the picture - but would really appreciate some tips as to how I should go about cleaning the MAF and where exactly do I spray the cleaner? First time I have every tried this - tell me if I should just leave it alone as I don't want to create a problem by trying to fix another....

If anyone happens to have pictures from when they cleaned their sensor that would be awesome too...

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v456/yfin/MAFSensor.jpg

Humm a dirty filter will send your consumption up, so will injector cleaning(does every time I use it) but so will an improperly oiled K and N.

So.... paper filter maybe just for testing?

Also could be bad fuel.

I can't see the MAF being to dirty, if it is maybe try cleaning it our with some metho. I just kind of sprayed it over everything and wiped it off.

found a good website with a similar looking bosch sensor to the 380. will give it a go although not planning to swab any parts - just spray

http://www.louv.tv/cars/m5/MAF/

found a good website with a similar looking bosch sensor to the 380. will give it a go although not planning to swab any parts - just spray

http://www.louv.tv/cars/m5/MAF/
My TR did 220K's and MAF sensor was clean as a whistle. I don't see how yours could be that gunked up after 30K it would cause such high readings...

']My TR did 220K's and MAF sensor was clean as a whistle. I don't see how yours could be that gunked up after 30K it would cause such high readings...

What else should I do? This car is getting 15s with city driving even if I drive like a granny. When it is cruising at a constant speed it appears to be fine (eg at 65kph the instant consumption is showing 7.4-8.2-9.0 on an undulating road). On downhill sections it will drop to 3 or 2. Going up a hill at 60kph it will increase to 16. But taking off from standstill up to any cruising speed it is very high consumption 35~45l+ per 100 with very light throttle). So overall the stop and start is killing the average.

Looks like I need to put the MAF cleaning on hold anyway - can't find a key for those security screws and too many shops closed today.

What gear are you driving in?

Take it back to mitsu, thats running very ritch by the sounds of it.

What gear are you driving in?

Take it back to mitsu, thats running very ritch by the sounds of it.

Automatic

it recommended that you only use electronic contact cleaner on the MAF anything else can f##k it up
besides that contact cleaner gently loosens any stuck on crap like oil vapour varnish

What else should I do? This car is getting 15s with city driving even if I drive like a granny. When it is cruising at a constant speed it appears to be fine (eg at 65kph the instant consumption is showing 7.4-8.2-9.0 on an undulating road). On downhill sections it will drop to 3 or 2. Going up a hill at 60kph it will increase to 16. But taking off from standstill up to any cruising speed it is very high consumption 35~45l+ per 100 with very light throttle).


Dude! and i thought i was high! i used to be in the same category when i first got mine at the end of last year. I wasn't thrashing it too much and i was always in the auto feature, i switched to the triptronic function for about a 2 weeks/2 full tanks of fuel and it went straight down to 10 even. Switched back to full auto and it sits steady @ 12.5. and this is all city/suburban driving.

May not help, but i mean, anything could by the sounds of it. Try it, if it doesn't work i'd seriously suggest go and see mitsu and ask what the ****...

Ben

Dude! and i thought i was high! i used to be in the same category when i first got mine at the end of last year. I wasn't thrashing it too much and i was always in the auto feature, i switched to the triptronic function for about a 2 weeks/2 full tanks of fuel and it went straight down to 10 even. Switched back to full auto and it sits steady @ 12.5. and this is all city/suburban driving.

May not help, but i mean, anything could by the sounds of it. Try it, if it doesn't work i'd seriously suggest go and see mitsu and ask what the ****...

Ben

Thanks for the tip - tried the tiptronic today and it does get better consumption! Already dropped in to the low 14s as an average for this tank (@125kms only) ...see if things improve as that is a good start.

As for the sensor cleaning - it is harder than it looks. To remove the sensor I need a 5 point Torx tool that is very hard to find. None at bunnings. None at Repo. They all say that Torx tools are from 6 point onwards but this 380 has a 5...

snap-on has the 5 point torx, also kingchrome
i had to get the 5 pointer for some of the ford airbags...henry tried to pull a fast one

Does the MAF sensor actually "look" dirty to you? I would suggest absolute caution, to the point of maybe not stuffing around with it yourself - the sensors are fairly delicate and vey exxy.

I assume its a platinum foil honeycomb, much like earlier Magna models? The foil is not very strong physically, "fins" or honeycomb are easily bent by a slipped driver etc... or a stray finger.

If you can see a dirty appearance, I'd be looking into "why" - was the air-cleaner element properly seated etc, and make damn sure the cause is fixed. If the sensor is dirty, that means you engine has been sucking dirt too.
If the sensor is "downstream" from the filter element, it should remain clean-as.

As an aside, I am a country driver mostly, and stick to paper/fibre (OEM-style) air0-cleaner elements. If K7N etc are supposed to be less-restrictive, I assume they will let more dust and crap thru in dirt-road conditions.... I've never seen guarantees that re-washable "performance" filters actually FILTER as good as stock, only the 'performance' claims.

Does the MAF sensor actually "look" dirty to you? I would suggest absolute caution, to the point of maybe not stuffing around with it yourself - the sensors are fairly delicate and vey exxy.

I assume its a platinum foil honeycomb, much like earlier Magna models? The foil is not very strong physically, "fins" or honeycomb are easily bent by a slipped driver etc... or a stray finger.

If you can see a dirty appearance, I'd be looking into "why" - was the air-cleaner element properly seated etc, and make damn sure the cause is fixed. If the sensor is dirty, that means you engine has been sucking dirt too.
If the sensor is "downstream" from the filter element, it should remain clean-as.

As an aside, I am a country driver mostly, and stick to paper/fibre (OEM-style) air0-cleaner elements. If K7N etc are supposed to be less-restrictive, I assume they will let more dust and crap thru in dirt-road conditions.... I've never seen guarantees that re-washable "performance" filters actually FILTER as good as stock, only the 'performance' claims.

gday - i can't see the MAF sensor without removing it with the 5 point tool - which I don't have. It could be perfectly fine. The car has been using the OEM filter until about 100kms ago when I switched to K&N. Anyway doesn't look like I am going to do anything and will raise it at the next dealer service.

Mines done nearly 40k mostly running the K&N & I have had my MAF sensor out & it was spotless. I wouldn't touch it if I were you as they are very fragile.

Mines done nearly 40k mostly running the K&N & I have had my MAF sensor out & it was spotless. I wouldn't touch it if I were you as they are very fragile.
Thats good to know the K & N's are doing a decent job with filtration.

Mines done nearly 40k mostly running the K&N & I have had my MAF sensor out & it was spotless. I wouldn't touch it if I were you as they are very fragile.

Thanks - wil take your advice.

filters like k&n are better than paper for filtration because the air has to move thru twisting tunnels in the media which is oiled to catch the dust particles... many of the european oem filters actually have a prefilter resembling speaker wadding built into them for this exact reason

if in the country i'd find it a pain in the a## cleaning out my k&n when its filthy

the best part about k&n's is the filter only needs cleaning every 50000km or when your mileage decreases indicating a blocked filter

although one can purchase a restricion guage to clearly indicate when its time
and then theres the k&n prefilter socks... an oiled foam sock with k&n printed on it...made of the same foam that you find on briggs and stratton mower filters

if your MAF sensor has a honeycomb matrix at its entry and a plastic wedge about halfway down then its a Karmen Vortex airflow meter and i personally wouldnt touch it because it uses ultrasonics to measure the turbulence created by the wedge which is directly proportional to airflow
the sensor would have to be filled with crap to be out of whack

Thanks for the tip - tried the tiptronic today and it does get better consumption! Already dropped in to the low 14s as an average for this tank (@125kms only) ...see if things improve as that is a good start..

Good to see something's working :nuts:

If it's made a difference in just 125km you're on the right track.

I've been monitoring my instant readout and it does get into some pretty high figure when accelerating down low. So when in slow, heavy traffic conditions it might be very heavy on the juice considering the 380 is not light.

When you manually change, are you holding the gear a bit longer than auto or opposite?

What else should I do? This car is getting 15s with city driving even if I drive like a granny. When it is cruising at a constant speed it appears to be fine (eg at 65kph the instant consumption is showing 7.4-8.2-9.0 on an undulating road). On downhill sections it will drop to 3 or 2. Going up a hill at 60kph it will increase to 16. But taking off from standstill up to any cruising speed it is very high consumption 35~45l+ per 100 with very light throttle). So overall the stop and start is killing the average.

Looks like I need to put the MAF cleaning on hold anyway - can't find a key for those security screws and too many shops closed today.

15L/100km @ av 30Km/H = 4.5L/Hr
8.2L/100km @ 65km/H = 5.3L/Hr
16l/100km @ 60km/h up hill = 9.6L/Hr
that dont seem too bad to me for a big six
really you should disregard the consumption under accelleration except as a guide to controlling fuel consumption
have you checked your tyre pressures lately?
98 RON will only give you about 20km extra per tank, but burns slower and hence cleaner and also has extra detergents

heres some interesting reading : http://www.autospeed.com/cms/A_110216/article.html

Good to see something's working :nuts:

If it's made a difference in just 125km you're on the right track.

I've been monitoring my instant readout and it does get into some pretty high figure when accelerating down low. So when in slow, heavy traffic conditions it might be very heavy on the juice considering the 380 is not light.

When you manually change, are you holding the gear a bit longer than auto or opposite?

Surprisingly the tip shifting does make a difference - only been using the tiptronic for 30kms out of that 125kms and it has dropped the average for tank from 15.5 to 14.5 already. So for a full tank I should be in the 13s which is a big difference (for me to see in the 380 anyway for city driving - no freeway).

As for manually changing - this seems to work best:
* take off in 2nd gear not 1st
* change to 3rd at 20kms
* change to 4th at 40kms
* change to 5th at 60kms

These are the minimum speeds the auto will allow. Then when slowing down I let it do its own thing (ie I don't gear down). I think that is where the biggest benefit is as it will hold a higher gear down to slow speeds and even go around a slow corner in 4th gear. It still pulls away at those speeds in the higher gear - doesn't lug.

15L/100km @ av 30Km/H = 4.5L/Hr
8.2L/100km @ 65km/H = 5.3L/Hr
16l/100km @ 60km/h up hill = 9.6L/Hr
that dont seem too bad to me for a big six
really you should disregard the consumption under accelleration except as a guide to controlling fuel consumption
have you checked your tyre pressures lately?
98 RON will only give you about 20km extra per tank, but burns slower and hence cleaner and also has extra detergents

heres some interesting reading : http://www.autospeed.com/cms/A_110216/article.html

Thanks yeah tyre pressure is ok. You are right in terms of it not being terribly bad - but I did expect better. It is definately worse consumption than what I was getting in the 08 Ford FG turbo but that is a 6 speed auto. On the other hand it had 270kw and I pushed it much harder than the 380.

I also just don't know how other members here are getting 11s and 12s in the city stop start with the 380. I can't get that even driving on my tip toes. Hence why I am thinking of MAF sensor, injector cleaning, etc, etc.

Have you had the 30 000km service done yet??? Because it unleashes some pretty decent figures! Unsure how might neeed to look through some old threads on here but I remember a thread on improvements after 30 000km service

Thanks yeah tyre pressure is ok. You are right in terms of it not being terribly bad - but I did expect better. It is definately worse consumption than what I was getting in the 08 Ford FG turbo but that is a 6 speed auto. On the other hand it had 270kw and I pushed it much harder than the 380.

I also just don't know how other members here are getting 11s and 12s in the city stop start with the 380. I can't get that even driving on my tip toes. Hence why I am thinking of MAF sensor, injector cleaning, etc, etc.

What type of engine oil are you using? I had my FC improve after i change to Amsoil 5w30, now avg 12L/100km on petrol and 14L/100km on LPG, avg speed 32km. I used to get 14-15L/100km like you but it seem like the engine oil works.

dodgy O2 sensor can lead to high fuel consumption, or just unplugged.

dodgy O2 sensor can lead to high fuel consumption, or just unplugged.

Nope, the "engine check light" would have been shown. Try do an oil change, see if it's works.

rprodrive,

Mine is a base model manual, yours is a GT (and hence auto only), but I'm getting way better fuel economy than you, and I don't baby it at all. Plenty of 'spirited' acceleration if you know what I mean!

According to the official Mitsi figures the auto is meant to get better economy that the manual, because of the much higher gear ratios and final drive ratio. Soemthing like 11.4 litres per 100 km for the auto v 11.8 for the manual.

But that's the 'official' figures, i.e. driven like a Granny never come close to WOT.

I got my manual just over six months ago with 17,800 km on the clock, and the ave fuel consumption read out per the trip computer for the next month or so was around the 12.8 l/100k mark.

I've now down nearly 33,000 km, with a mixture of stop start city commuting and country driving (much of it up hills), and the ave fuel consumption read out has steadily dropped. It's now at 11.8 l/100km.

And as I said before, I don't baby it all, I've never driven it with max fuel economy in mind.

Your GT weighs a few kgs more than my base model, but that should be offset by your much taller gear & final drive ratios.

Seems there is definitely something wrong with your GT.

KJ.

What type of engine oil are you using? I had my FC improve after i change to Amsoil 5w30, now avg 12L/100km on petrol and 14L/100km on LPG, avg speed 32km. I used to get 14-15L/100km like you but it seem like the engine oil works.

Not sure what oil is in there - I have only had the car a few months. It was serviced by Mitsubishi in frankston so whatever they use. But I agree with you that oil can make a difference - I have some castrol full syn that I need to use anyway.

rprodrive,

Mine is a base model manual, yours is a GT (and hence auto only), but I'm getting way better fuel economy than you, and I don't baby it at all. Plenty of 'spirited' acceleration if you know what I mean!

According to the official Mitsi figures the auto is meant to get better economy that the manual, because of the much higher gear ratios and final drive ratio. Soemthing like 11.4 litres per 100 km for the auto v 11.8 for the manual.

But that's the 'official' figures, i.e. driven like a Granny never come close to WOT.

I got my manual just over six months ago with 17,800 km on the clock, and the ave fuel consumption read out per the trip computer for the next month or so was around the 12.8 l/100k mark.

I've now down nearly 33,000 km, with a mixture of stop start city commuting and country driving (much of it up hills), and the ave fuel consumption read out has steadily dropped. It's now at 11.8 l/100km.

And as I said before, I don't baby it all, I've never driven it with max fuel economy in mind.

Your GT weighs a few kgs more than my base model, but that should be offset by your much taller gear & final drive ratios.

Seems there is definitely something wrong with your GT.

KJ.

Yeah I understand - hard to know if there is something wrong as other people are getting 14s and even some tests are reporting 14s or 15s in the city. And those official figures are measured in a particular way and include highway.

As an update - last week I took the car on some highway driving for about 100kms and the consumption was 7 - 8 according to the instant trip :thumbsup: It sits beautifully on the freeway.

The average for the most recent tank is now 13.2 so the average is improving. Saw an average of 12.9 at one point but I have blown that now I am back to city driving.... I think the K&N filter I fitted is starting to help plenty.

I think a quality oil change would be a good thing too.

Yeah I understand - hard to know if there is something wrong as other people are getting 14s and even some tests are reporting 14s or 15s in the city. And those official figures are measured in a particular way and include highway.

As an update - last week I took the car on some highway driving for about 100kms and the consumption was 7 - 8 according to the instant trip :thumbsup: It sits beautifully on the freeway.

The average for the most recent tank is now 13.2 so the average is improving. Saw an average of 12.9 at one point but I have blown that now I am back to city driving.... I think the K&N filter I fitted is starting to help plenty.

I think a quality oil change would be a good thing too.

Choose a thinner oil like 5w30 or 0w30, FC would be better with these oil.