Hey guys, does anyone have any idea how to get these 380's to run economically am running in 13-14 range,without major mods having to be done ,so if someone has any input please help. Or someone who can tune it better would be helpful

The first thing I would do is search throguh these forums, as there are loads of posts regarding this issue.

To get the best fuel economy out of the 380 you have to get a free flowing exhaust and intake. The current 380 exhaust and intake are highly restrictive.

To start off with I would get the galant intake with a K&N filter paired with the berklee straight through muffler. That should get you around the mid 11s around town and below 10 when on the freeway.

I just need the K&N and exhaust done

but I got low 13s with just the new snorkel

remove as much crap out of your car too

weight is a big factor
keep it clean and serviced and all should be OK

Make your sig much bigger Braedz?

Make your sig much bigger Braedz?

Nah...not really lol

Mine runs around town between 13.6 and 11.8 litres per 100 km. Depends entirely on my driving style.

If I concentrate on economical driving by never exceeding 1800 Rpm in any gear (around town remember) and never using anything other than light pressure on the accelerator 11.8 is easy. Don't mean driving like "Granny" but doing just enough to keep up with the traffic, coasting up to red lights, corners etc. Keep the trip computer on ave fuel consumption to check progress!

If I want to be first off from the lights, race up to 60Kph, accelerate up hills etc 13.6 is the result.

Really makes you focus on your driving style, without holding up traffic to obtain the best result.

Cheers

Foot the floor and balls to the wall is the only way to drive

I average 12.5 but I know I am heavy footed especially since I had my straight through exhaust fitted couple of weeks ago and just love the growl.
Have cut away the rubber strip on bonnet and am fitting a K&N filter.
Will I notice much improvement with the filter anyone?
Cheerz

Hehehe.... well I get 10.1L/100km towing my 7X4' trailer :D

I average 12.5 but I know I am heavy footed especially since I had my straight through exhaust fitted couple of weeks ago and just love the growl.
Have cut away the rubber strip on bonnet and am fitting a K&N filter.
Will I notice much improvement with the filter anyone?
Cheerz

Not too much, maybe a little more throttle response, perhaps a slight induction noise

To get the best fuel economy out of the 380 you have to get a free flowing exhaust and intake. The current 380 exhaust and intake are highly restrictive.

Actually it doesn't stop there - the air fuel ratio (AFR) for these engines are set from factory horrendously rich. If you check most ppls dyno sheets you'll see the ECU is running 11s at best but usually less.

Actually it doesn't stop there - the air fuel ratio (AFR) for these engines are set from factory horrendously rich. If you check most ppls dyno sheets you'll see the ECU is running 11s at best but usually less.

Now will they adjust at dealer is the ?,mine just checked ecu and said all was ok when i told them about lack of economy.Have got a galant intake made small diff but not much.OK call me stupid but when people talk about straight thru exhaust I assume that is replacing rear muffler.Probably main prob is that I basically have to go thru city to get to work at average speed of 31-33 that doesnt help.

Now will they adjust at dealer is the ?,mine just checked ecu and said all was ok when i told them about lack of economy.Have got a galant intake made small diff but not much.OK call me stupid but when people talk about straight thru exhaust I assume that is replacing rear muffler.Probably main prob is that I basically have to go thru city to get to work at average speed of 31-33 that doesnt help.

The dealer can't adjust the AFRs. These are controlled by maps held in ROM chips in the ECU. On some cars they can be flashed, but so far not the 380.
As I have, you can get a piggyback interceptor fitted that will trick the ECU into improving the AFRs.

That's correct about the rear muffler. it is a standard tri-flow design on the 380 where the gases have to exit after two 180 degree turns. A straight through muffler removes the associated restriction this causes and hence improves fuel economy and power.

Thanks Knotched, looks like next step should be a berklee as extractors a bit out of my range at the moment.

Out of interest I am running basically standard at present with auto and the bottom resonator opened up. Tyre pressure is 40 psi cold inflation which is well within the tyre makers parameters and reduces rolling resistance. Before these things I was getting around 10.2 - 10.5 but normal running but now have dropped to 9.2-9.5 normal and down to around 8.2 on a trip. Again it is all back to the old "nut behind the wheel" factor. If you are going to punch it through the gears and nail quick take offs it will quickly blow out. Am yet to get the 90mm intake (have put an order in) and will then assess the difference before going to the K and N.

still punching 14.5s consistently

I live in a hilly suburb at the bottom of a valley in SYDNEY

I have a GT which is heavier than the rest of the range

I am happy with that figure I can go lower but the trips I take are always clogged with traffic

Get the LPG kit.

The cost is then like getting 4L/100km...:)

looked into lpg , according to a previous thread mine cant be converted something about 1 drill hole or 3 on the head minehas 1 therefore no lpg compliant, shit happens that is why trying to get best out of what i have got

I am happy with mine

Hell I was getting better milage in a smaller car but I did not buy this car for its economy

I am happy with the way it drinks could be better but TBH Who cares

I have to haul heaps of baby crap around so it does the job FANTASTICALLY and its got leather, sunroof and looks HOT in Molten RED

1 really HAPPY 380 Owner

looked into lpg , according to a previous thread mine cant be converted something about 1 drill hole or 3 on the head minehas 1 therefore no lpg compliant, shit happens that is why trying to get best out of what i have got
That is right. I have researched the same and the VRX and GT's generally cant get lpg fitted unless they have 3 drill holes in the front of the head. I beleive that for some reason only known to Mitsi they have run 2 different valve and seat arrangements and the ones on the base models run the hardened valves/seats. The same goose probably picked the smaller snorkel too:wtf:

still punching 14.5s consistently

I live in a hilly suburb at the bottom of a valley in SYDNEY

I have a GT which is heavier than the rest of the range

I am happy with that figure I can go lower but the trips I take are always clogged with traffic
I am hearing you on the hills. They certainly make a large impact on your economy. I fairness I live in an area predominantly surrounded by 80-100 kph zones and that is mixed with drives to work in town, but I have never had the 14.5's. Have you done the mods on the air filter 3" snorkel and resonator ?

That is right. I have researched the same and the VRX and GT's generally cant get lpg fitted unless they have 3 drill holes in the front of the head. I beleive that for some reason only known to Mitsi they have run 2 different valve and seat arrangements and the ones on the base models run the hardened valves/seats. The same goose probably picked the smaller snorkel too:wtf:

Damn... that's stupid on Mitsubishi part. I'm going fantastic return(petrol cost when compare to LPG) when i converted my 06 SXII to gas 4mth ago, consistently getting 16L/100Km(LPG) around City driving(petrol around 14-15L/100km). If i go on highway, i could get as low as 12-13L/100km.

Damn... that's stupid on Mitsubishi part. I'm going fantastic return(petrol cost when compare to LPG) when i converted my 06 SXII to gas 4mth ago, consistently getting 16L/100Km(LPG) around City driving(petrol around 14-15L/100km). If i go on highway, i could get as low as 12-13L/100km.

Mmm that is 3.8-4.8 l/100km more than I get on a trip but at half the cost LPG looks really good! Damn mitsi and their stupid valves and seats. I think I am getting better than most. trip low 8's and generally 9.3-10.5. yahoo!

Mmm that is 3.8-4.8 l/100km more than I get on a trip but at half the cost LPG looks really good! Damn mitsi and their stupid valves and seats. I think I am getting better than most. trip low 8's and generally 9.3-10.5. yahoo!

Do the intake & exhaust mods & chip it & you may get down to my best of 7.7 l/100km on the highway cruising at 110km/hr.

No worries, i'm paying avg $35-37 for 600km in LPG cost when compare to $70-80 for petrol, that like close to 50% off. I'm also looking at K&N filter next, maybe that might help improve both the power & mileage abit.

Do the intake & exhaust mods & chip it & you may get down to my best of 7.7 l/100km on the highway cruising at 110km/hr.

How much was the chip mod and what was it? Where did you get it done?
The 7.7 l/100 km was over how many kms?

How much was the chip mod and what was it? Where did you get it done?
The 7.7 l/100 km was over how many kms?

Chip was $1295 I think all up & that reading was all highway over about 250km sitting on on 110km/hr.

Getting 10.9 ATM running 95RON done 165 kms round sydney last couple of days was down round 8.9 for first 100km

Strange

yeah I just remembered that when i got 8.2/100km I was actually running on E10 ( I await the barrage of comments lol). I wanted to see what it would do. I want also to compare standard unleaded with one of a higher RON to see if there is much in it.

Speaking of Ethanol,anyone looked at a conversion to run E85? I believe some others are getting good results with this stuff and the conversion it not that expensive.I think fuel availability in some areas might be an issue though.

Speaking of Ethanol,anyone looked at a conversion to run E85? I believe some others are getting good results with this stuff and the conversion it not that expensive.I think fuel availability in some areas might be an issue though.

Where do you get it from??? Not much point if you can't fill up on it!

Where do you get it from??? Not much point if you can't fill up on it!

Yeah I can get it locally no probs! and I believe its becoming more available.The Oz stuff is supposed to be good gear as its made from sugar cane i think i read, but the Yankie stuff not as good? Good octane rating this stuff,you'd be keen on that!:woot:

Yeah I can get it locally no probs! and I believe its becoming more available.The Oz stuff is supposed to be good gear as its made from sugar cane i think i read, but the Yankie stuff not as good? Good octane rating this stuff,you'd be keen on that!:woot:

Well come on QLD, that's what we grow here ....... sugar cane :facejump:

Well come on QLD, that's what we grow here ....... sugar cane :facejump:

Make your own mate!lol

How much would fuel cost (per litre) that contains 85% ethanol? (That's what you're referring to by E85?)
Does the octane level have to go up as the ethanol content does? Cos E10 is 95octane - I've never seen 91 octane ethanol fuel. So what octane would E85 run on? And what would the conversion cost?

How much would fuel cost (per litre) that contains 85% ethanol? (That's what you're referring to by E85?)
Does the octane level have to go up as the ethanol content does? Cos E10 is 95octane - I've never seen 91 octane ethanol fuel. So what octane would E85 run on? And what would the conversion cost?

E85 is about 105ron

E85 is about 105ron

Wow!
Better be cheaper than that 100 octane Shell used to sell? Extreme/V-Power+ (which had 5% ethanol I think) and sold for 20c+ above 98 octane.

Probably be good for another 10 KW over 98 with a retune in a N/A car or more blown :hmm:

Last time I filled up with Shell V-Power i got the dreaded check light, refilled with normal fuel and CL never came back.

Last time I filled up with Shell V-Power i got the dreaded check light, refilled with normal fuel and CL never came back.

Strange, never experienced that & have been running on 98 since before I chipped it.

However, for E85 (85% ethanol), . Actual performance may vary depending on the vehicle. Based on EPA tests for all 2006 E85 models, the average fuel economy for E85 vehicles resulted 25.56% lower than unleaded gasoline.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethanol_fuel

E85 might have a higher octane but it doesn't contain the same amount of energy as petrol. So you have to use a lot more.

And just to clarify, where the Wikipedia article says "the average fuel economy for E85 vehicles resulted 25.56% lower than unleaded gasoline", it means 25.56% worse fuel economy than petrol, not better.

KJ.

Strange, never experienced that & have been running on 98 since before I chipped it.


98 is fine, just V-power seems to have something not quite right.

May have been the servo I went to, maybe the fuel was stale...didn't bother to try again.

BP 98 is the one that seems to work best for me.

98 is fine, just V-power seems to have something not quite right.

May have been the servo I went to, maybe the fuel was stale...didn't bother to try again.

BP 98 is the one that seems to work best for me.

May have been a dodgy batch, mine is tuned for V-Power & no probs.

May void your warranty too. I would check before running it.

May void your warranty too. I would check before running it.

The E85? Is anyone seriously considering that conversion? How much would it cost? And how much does the fuel cost? And what of the E85 availability? And of course, the warranty.
Sounds like a dud if you lose economy from it.

I think if you were running super/turbo charging then you would have to look at it i reckon.An octane rating like that will make good horsepower in those situations and if tuned correctly be economical.I think ,from memory,E85 was alot cheaper compared to PULP at the pump so would offset the increased consumption.As for N/A you can buy conversion kits for about $300-400.Not finding alot of info on N/A setups as most everyone is using it in boosted applications. Warranty,not sure on that one!When I get my Xede up and running I might have a go with E85,couldn't hurt to try!

I think if you were running super/turbo charging then you would have to look at it i reckon.An octane rating like that will make good horsepower in those situations and if tuned correctly be economical.I think ,from memory,E85 was alot cheaper compared to PULP at the pump so would offset the increased consumption.As for N/A you can buy conversion kits for about $300-400.Not finding alot of info on N/A setups as most everyone is using it in boosted applications. Warranty,not sure on that one!When I get my Xede up and running I might have a go with E85,couldn't hurt to try!

Sounds like a waste of time to me. A good water/methanol kit like I have will net you the equivelent to about 110 octane with a 50% mix of methanol.

E85 truth: You require 30% more fuel than 98 octane fuel.

The EVO boys love the stuff because they gain about 20-30kwatw with just this fuel alone, but a full tank will only last them about 250kms, if that. You will need to upgrade to bigger injectors at a minimum most likely. Availability and extremely poor fuel economy would be the cons. Better performance would be the pros.

E85 truth: You require 30% more fuel than 98 octane fuel.

The EVO boys love the stuff because they gain about 20-30kwatw with just this fuel alone, but a full tank will only last them about 250kms, if that. You will need to upgrade to bigger injectors at a minimum most likely. Availability and extremely poor fuel economy would be the cons. Better performance would be the pros.
I think they have lost me on that one. With the conversion cost etc and lack of economy it is not making much sense.

Sounds like a waste of time to me. A good water/methanol kit like I have will net you the equivelent to about 110 octane with a 50% mix of methanol.
Hey Fooz I am chasing down your 7.7/100. Just did the snorkel yesterday and yet to do the K and N, piggy back ecu and muffler and was averaging 7.9 /100 but was travelling a little bit faster than you were so I will see what happens when I go 110. Can notice the difference. Looking forward to doing some more mods :badgrin::badgrin::badgrin:

Hey Fooz I am chasing down your 7.7/100. Just did the snorkel yesterday and yet to do the K and N, piggy back ecu and muffler and was averaging 7.9 /100 but was travelling a little bit faster than you were so I will see what happens when I go 110. Can notice the difference. Looking forward to doing some more mods :badgrin::badgrin::badgrin:

Are these lt/100 are they in city numbers or combo city / open road, as what I get will never come near those numbers in the city with average speed (according to trip computer) 33km/hr.
Just read post in 90mm intake thread and it answer the above question,but what is the point of getting it as low as you can on highway when most driving is in cities.

Well aren't we all an enviromentaly friendly bunch!:badgrin: Sorry to harp on but answer me this! If ,for arguements sake, you use 25% more e85 than PULP but its 25% cheaper to buy plus it becomes readily available and you could convert your car for $350 and have no issues.Would any of you ever consider it ,at least a little bit,or is this Biofuel stuff a waste of time as an alternative fuel? Apart from LPG what else is on the horizon as an alternative thats easy to change too? We gotta get away from petrol some time,don't we?

Hey Fooz I am chasing down your 7.7/100. Just did the snorkel yesterday and yet to do the K and N, piggy back ecu and muffler and was averaging 7.9 /100 but was travelling a little bit faster than you were so I will see what happens when I go 110. Can notice the difference. Looking forward to doing some more mods :badgrin::badgrin::badgrin:

I believe you can go lower than the 7.7 as mine isn't really tuned for economy, more performance. The modded 380 is a definite improvement in performance, economy as well as driveability.

I posted this in the strut brace thread, my comments on the comparison between a stock & modded 380 .......


I actually hired a 380 Platinum today (yesterday now) as my Pajero is getting some repairs done & the 380 doesn't go yet & was eyeing off the strut brace but for $24 I ordered a new one.
I must say a stock 380 feels pretty unresponsive & doey to drive after driving mine. Starting the motor has no crispness, it's like a wet fish handshake & when poked it goes, but doesn't have that real push of 163KW at the wheels (not surprisingly). This makes me happy with my mods, absolutely no comparison between the two. :happy:

Also, lets keep perspective on these fuel claims. I could claim 6.3 L/100km over five kilometres down a hill. We really should be posting figures over a complete tankfull. My figure of 8.8 comes from this although I have seen 7.9L/100KM over 150km.

Also, lets keep perspective on these fuel claims. I could claim 6.3 L/100km over five kilometres down a hill. We really should be posting figures over a complete tankfull. My figure of 8.8 comes from this although I have seen 7.9L/100KM over 150km.

Mine was quoted over 250km, sure there were downhills but also uphills & a lot of flat & some spirited overtaking. My experience is the longer I sit on highway cruise speeds it keeps coming down, obviously at some point though it won't go lower. Once it gets down it doesn't tend to rise on cruise so I think my claim is pretty legit for hwy cycle.

Mine was quoted over 250km, sure there were downhills but also uphills & a lot of flat & some spirited overtaking. My experience is the longer I sit on highway cruise speeds it keeps coming down, obviously at some point though it won't go lower. Once it gets down it doesn't tend to rise on cruise so I think my claim is pretty legit for hwy cycle.

Yeah, we all know you are a "special case"....:P

A couple of things to note;

1. Mods will drive down the consumption even without chipping because when the ECU is in "open loop" mode it is measuring 02, throttle, load etc many times a second and not using the stored acceleration maps. So if the intake flow and exhaust restrictions are improved this will help with the ECU calculating more effficient timing and fuel.
2. When the ECU comes out of "open loop" i.e. under acceleration (not cruising or idling), the factory configured maps come into play and this is where consumption goes up. If the car has a piggyback fitted, these maps can be modified to provide better consumption. This could help a lot in heavy traffic etc.

I consistently get 13.5 litres per 100 kilometres on LPG.

Are these lt/100 are they in city numbers or combo city / open road, as what I get will never come near those numbers in the city with average speed (according to trip computer) 33km/hr.
Just read post in 90mm intake thread and it answer the above question,but what is the point of getting it as low as you can on highway when most driving is in cities.
I guess the point of it is that most of my driving is not in cities. Having said that, if your economy is better on the open road then it will flow across to city driving as well. Those figures for both Fooz and myself are strictly hwy travel. Mine had a couple of traffic lights and stop/starts but generally open hwy.

I consistently get 13.5 litres per 100 kilometres on LPG.
Yeah Unfortunately I found out just a bit too late about the heads and cant run LPG on mine:rant: Is that combo or city or hwy?

Mine was quoted over 250km, sure there were downhills but also uphills & a lot of flat & some spirited overtaking. My experience is the longer I sit on highway cruise speeds it keeps coming down, obviously at some point though it won't go lower. Once it gets down it doesn't tend to rise on cruise so I think my claim is pretty legit for hwy cycle.
I would run with that too. Having just seen what mine will do over a couple of hundred clicks today. On purely hwy cycle I drove around 150 km and averaged 7.8 . I think Fooz is legit based on what I have seen. I then went off the hwy and hit the road of many roundabouts (return trip around 18 I think and they knock the mileage heaps) and 60/70 kph zones + traffic. Add to the equation 3 stops, 2 of them shopping centres and then heavier traffic on the way home and it bounced out to 8.5l/100km. Fooz car has the piggy back ecu and K and N filter on top of mine so he should be getting better. Why do so many doubt?

I will be going on a road trip to Victoria at the end of September

It will be interesting to see the figures then as it will be alot of HWY

Yeah Unfortunately I found out just a bit too late about the heads and cant run LPG on mine:rant: Is that combo or city or hwy?


That's prolly 25% city 75% highway.

Not driven pussy foot, driven mostly hard.

That's prolly 25% city 75% highway.

Not driven pussy foot, driven mostly hard.
Yeah I would beleive it!!:sniper: bl00dy LPG drivers!!:nutkick: Dont worry I am just jealous because I got caught with the wrong head.

...: Dont worry I am just jealous because I got caught with the wrong head.




LOL...did you mean to say that?

LOL...did you mean to say that?

I don't think he means the head on his shoulders!:woot:

I don't think he means the head on his shoulders!:woot:
Correct. I have the "non LPG head". Just being jealous blackstar lol. I really wanted to put it on LPG :boohoo:

Correct. I have the "non LPG head". Just being jealous blackstar lol. I really wanted to put it on LPG :boohoo:


Just put it on anyway, even if you have dramas later it won't happen till about 300,000 k's.

The kits start on petrol etc when cold, so if you force it on petrol every once in a while you'll still last longer than the Holdens and Fords out there...

Get rid of the car before hand (the 380 will probably be pretty lame by 300,000 k's anyway)

Just put it on anyway, even if you have dramas later it won't happen till about 300,000 k's.

The kits start on petrol etc when cold, so if you force it on petrol every once in a while you'll still last longer than the Holdens and Fords out there...

Get rid of the car before hand (the 380 will probably be pretty lame by 300,000 k's anyway)
It is a bit of a lottery as far as I can tell. I have spoken to Impco who apparently do the kit for the 380's and they are unsure of what the difference is. They went on to say that there are a few vehicles that state the same, one of them (I think they said it was a Holden of some description) wouldnt have a problem with the LPG regardless of what the factory said, and they had a examples that were still going 200k + with no problems......however they also stated that on a Hilux with the non LPG head you could only expect 12k before needing to redo your heads. On a V6 that would equate to big $$$. Mitsi are useless and know nothing about the differences in the heads.

Just do it, the gas installers can tell you that it starts paying for itself at the rate of $60 a week if you use a tank a week.

With the Mitsi kit you can run it on petrol if you want, and only as much gas as you want.

The idea is to get the 2000 bucks from the government cause the offer wont last forever.

Just do it, the gas installers can tell you that it starts paying for itself at the rate of $60 a week if you use a tank a week.

With the Mitsi kit you can run it on petrol if you want, and only as much gas as you want.

The idea is to get the 2000 bucks from the government cause the offer wont last forever.
Easy to say when it isnt your car. You are correct in what you say you will save, but what about what you will lose.
You will void your warranty. You may stuff your heads up and will cost you a few thousand to fix plus off road time and inconvenience + initial outlay on LPG. $2000/$60 = 33 weeks. so if the car stuffs up in the first 3 years you will be in the red. At this stage noone has been able to answer me the big question, "what are the differences in the 2 heads and what are the valves and seats that they are running in the non LPG head". Until those questions are answered I feel that it wouldnt be wise to convert. I would be interested in hearing from anyone that is running LPG on the non LPG head.

When I've spoken to Gas Fitters they say that all unleaded heads are suitable as they have stainless valve seats. Correct me if I'm wrong but all series 3 380's are compatible I believe, if not how do you know. As far as warranty goes you keep it as long as the impco Sequent 56 is installed, which is certified and tested by MMAL.

When I've spoken to Gas Fitters they say that all unleaded heads are suitable as they have stainless valve seats. Correct me if I'm wrong but all series 3 380's are compatible I believe, if not how do you know. As far as warranty goes you keep it as long as the impco Sequent 56 is installed, which is certified and tested by MMAL.
I dont know about series 3 as I have a series 1 vrx. you tell by the marks on the head. If you have 3 holes drilling in the front of your head near the o2 sensor you are ok for LPG if you have one, like me, you apparently are not.

Just for a moment, back to the E85 queries that were discussed a few pages back, I asked how much this fuel would cost. There was no answer, perhaps due to the lack of this product in existence... but if 10% ethanol's 4c per litre saving is anything to go by, 85% should go for ~34c a litre less. The flipside mentioned to this is that E85 has 25% less power (or something like that). However, for around 35c a litre saving, 90% of drivers wouldn't care less about that... well, that is if they cared enough/could afford the conversion.

Just for a moment, back to the E85 queries that were discussed a few pages back, I asked how much this fuel would cost. There was no answer, perhaps due to the lack of this product in existence... but if 10% ethanol's 4c per litre saving is anything to go by, 85% should go for ~34c a litre less. The flipside mentioned to this is that E85 has 25% less power (or something like that). However, for around 35c a litre saving, 90% of drivers wouldn't care less about that... well, that is if they cared enough/could afford the conversion.

Its funny you mention that! I was going to play with E85 when I fit my XEDE hopefully next week,but!, I drove past the servo nearest me that sold ethanol E85 and BP have bought them out and guess what? won't be offering E85.Made a few calls and can't get it,was told by one guy that the Govt made them shut down their E85 pump?There goes my little experiment then! Was also told that when the E85 commodore is released next year it should become more available,but that could be BS i don't know! Ah well I'm happy to pollute and use fossil fuels for awhile yet!

I dont know about series 3 as I have a series 1 vrx. you tell by the marks on the head. If you have 3 holes drilling in the front of your head near the o2 sensor you are ok for LPG if you have one, like me, you apparently are not.

I wondered about this and thought my Series 2 VRX would definitely be non LPG. I asked at my dealership and they ran my engine number through some sort of list and said it's eligible for LPG!

Suggest you try the same.

Its funny you mention that! I was going to play with E85 when I fit my XEDE hopefully next week,but!, I drove past the servo nearest me that sold ethanol E85 and BP have bought them out and guess what? won't be offering E85.Made a few calls and can't get it,was told by one guy that the Govt made them shut down their E85 pump?There goes my little experiment then! Was also told that when the E85 commodore is released next year it should become more available,but that could be BS i don't know! Ah well I'm happy to pollute and use fossil fuels for awhile yet!

Heh, of course. We can't be allowed to fill up on a cleaner safer cheaper fuel* when there's still a limited supply of the current dirty and expensive stuff yet to be totally depleted. (End sacarstic rant).
*=I can't vouch for the contents of E85... I just wanted to state this for my rant.

Heh, of course. We can't be allowed to fill up on a cleaner safer cheaper fuel* when there's still a limited supply of the current dirty and expensive stuff yet to be totally depleted. (End sacarstic rant).
*=I can't vouch for the contents of E85... I just wanted to state this for my rant.
Rant on my friend, we all enjoy a good rant.:thumbsup:

I heard someone mention once about an "E41" on the compliance plate....

Back to the earlier issue where someone complained we were not doing economy figures over a full tank. I have just completed a tank doing 600+ kms of mixed driving from freeway to peak hour, roundabouts and lots of traffic lights. I averaged 8.9 l/100 km. Not too bad. I am keen to see what a country trip alone will do.

Back to the earlier issue where someone complained we were not doing economy figures over a full tank. I have just completed a tank doing 600+ kms of mixed driving from freeway to peak hour, roundabouts and lots of traffic lights. I averaged 8.9 l/100 km. Not too bad. I am keen to see what a country trip alone will do.

What was your av speed there Matey?

Having just fitted my 90mm intake last week I am averaging 15.4.
My right foot may be the problem. I may fit a hand throttle

Having just fitted my 90mm intake last week I am averaging 15.4.
My right foot may be the problem. I may fit a hand throttle

15.4 sounds a bit excessive. What octane of fuel are you using? I use 98 octane and in a week I average around 11. Thats 60% highway 40% city. I dont granny it either.

Worst case scenario I would make it into the high 12s

Having just fitted my 90mm intake last week I am averaging 15.4.
My right foot may be the problem. I may fit a hand throttle

It'll take a little while to adjust. Give it at least another week.

What was your av speed there Matey?
Mmm That would have been interesting to look at, but I think it was around 70kph from memory. Will get more info on the next tank eh?

Having just fitted my 90mm intake last week I am averaging 15.4.
My right foot may be the problem. I may fit a hand throttle
Do you have a K and N in as well?

15.4 sounds a bit excessive. What octane of fuel are you using? I use 98 octane and in a week I average around 11. Thats 60% highway 40% city. I dont granny it either.

Worst case scenario I would make it into the high 12s
OK I fess up I am chasing economy here but it just goes to show that lower figures are achievable. I did give a serious blast going up hill the other day in a 100 kph zone. No figures mentioned but was happy with the torque and power. Definite improvement with the snorkel. I also toyed with refitting the original snorkel as well to the airbox. Unfortunately it would require major mods to the bonnet as it doesnt have the recess on the drivers side that it has on the passengers side. There is, however, a good entry spot in the airbox from what I can see just below the original one. I am still postulating on where I could put the ducting through to the front and if it is going to be worth the hassle. At this stage I think it is breathing well enough. The throttle body may now be the limiting factor.

15.4 sounds a bit excessive. What octane of fuel are you using? I use 98 octane and in a week I average around 11. Thats 60% highway 40% city. I dont granny it either.

Worst case scenario I would make it into the high 12s
Should be getting the K and N filters in around 6-10 days. Keep in touch and I will let you know if we get them through without duty and how much. At this stage they may be around $80-$85 plus postage of course. Will chat later if still interested.

I am out with the K&N

money is tight

My work has not paid me right in over 8 weeks now

I am out with the K&N

money is tight

My work has not paid me right in over 8 weeks now
Thats a bugger. and they still want you to keep on working for them without correct pay? Be very careful, these are some of the warning signs that a business is in trouble. Get onto them about it. Make sure that everything is in writing too, otherwise they can just deny it. If they give you a verbal answer ask for it in writing. If they question you on that just tell them this is business and that you are looking after your own welfare. I know a few people that have been stung like that. If you are in a union get them involved straight away. I bet management is being paid!!

Am going to Loxton in the Riverland at the weekend about a 400k roundtrip. I am looking forward to any improvement in economy now that my 90mm intake has been fitted alomg with straight through muffler a couple of weeks ago.
Will have my better half with me so will be cruising at 110
Will post the results

Am going to Loxton in the Riverland at the weekend about a 400k roundtrip. I am looking forward to any improvement in economy now that my 90mm intake has been fitted alomg with straight through muffler a couple of weeks ago.
Will have my better half with me so will be cruising at 110
Will post the results

The 90mm certainly made a big improvement. At least 1l/100km. I will be interested to evaluate the K and N for myself when it gets here soon. Even if there is no improvement it is alot cheaper than $30 a pop for the paper ones.

Well...... just got back from 400k roundtrip nearly all highway at 100kph and the result was....12.1 average although the actual readout was between 8 and 9 on cruise at 110 kph
To add pain to the trip my rear passenger window jammed open and wouldnt move. Had to put up with the last 100k with wind noise like you wouldnt believe on the windiest day inSA for years.
Just blackpasticked it up and now to REPCO for a motor.
Didnt someone else have this problem....what was the cost to repair?????

Well...... just got back from 400k roundtrip nearly all highway at 100kph and the result was....12.1 average although the actual readout was between 8 and 9 on cruise at 110 kph
To add pain to the trip my rear passenger window jammed open and wouldnt move. Had to put up with the last 100k with wind noise like you wouldnt believe on the windiest day inSA for years.
Just blackpasticked it up and now to REPCO for a motor.
Didnt someone else have this problem....what was the cost to repair?????
Take it back to Mitsi dealer as it would be covered under warranty. I had the same problem with my drivers window just before we went away on holidays. They tested it at the mitsi dealer and ordered a whole new motor etc, then it started to work and continued to work whilst we were away on holidays until we got back and stuffed up again. They replaced the whole assembly under warranty nil charge :facejump:
I cant believe you were doing 12's on a trip!! I haven't even got that high yet, anywhere!! I get between high 6's -9's and average around 8's doing the same. Was it particularly hilly or something?

not hilly,pretty flat and barely any traffic.
On the long straights I was on cruise at 110 and monitored the computer readout for actual fuel usage and the figure fluctuated between 8 and 9.

not hilly,pretty flat and barely any traffic.
On the long straights I was on cruise at 110 and monitored the computer readout for actual fuel usage and the figure fluctuated between 8 and 9.
Wow!! were you towing a caravan? Damn I get 10.5 towing a camper trailer behind. OK I am driving a lot steadier but you have to. Still 12's on a trip, there is something desperately wrong here. Remind me again, what have you had done?

90 mm intake and straight through muffler. nothing else

GT is the heaviest of all the 380's extras will do that so we GT owners tend to have higher economy cause we are fatties (the cars)

I am consistently getting 13s city driving in sydney now
Highway is way lower, had it sitting on 6s on a trip to C-Town after filling up I was chuffed LOL

6!!!! are you serious. my 12.1 is embarassing

6!!!! are you serious. my 12.1 is embarassing

I've been in the 6's too, if that's the best you can get I'd be looking at a chip to better the AFR's.

It must be the fuel here in SA then cos my wifes magna never betters 10.7

12.1 seems excessive. Mine is a manual which is lower geared and even I get in the 8's when cruising.

I've noticed a trend here that a lot of GTs have worse economy than other models. Dunno if that's cos they're heavier or something... but wondering if any GT owners are getting great economy.
I'm getting low 10s/high 9s on mine (almost 1L better once I put the snorkel back on!)

GT is the heaviest of all the 380's extras will do that so we GT owners tend to have higher economy cause we are fatties (the cars)

I am consistently getting 13s city driving in sydney now
Highway is way lower, had it sitting on 6s on a trip to C-Town after filling up I was chuffed LOL
There is only 30 kgs difference between the VRX 1670 kgs and the GT 1700 kgs and only 35 kgs between the base model 1665 kgs. I really think I would be dropping it in to the local mitsi dealer and checking on the diagnostics.
Mecha, what do you do over a tank on a trip. I get down to the 6's too but the best so far I have done on a trip is 7.8l/100k. I think from memory fooz still has economy mantle on a tank at 7.7l/100.

90 mm intake and straight through muffler. nothing else
I have only done the 90 mm intake and the lower resonance chamber. I thought the muffler would have given you more power/economy!! Have you checked your air filter lately? Maybe run some injector cleaner through a tank too. I would be crying tears of blood if I was getting 12's on a trip out of it!!!:eek2: Just out of interest Redbook quotes the same figures across the range for economy.
http://www.redbook.com.au/used-cars/compare.aspx?__Qpb=true&__Ns=p_Make_String%7c0%7c%7cp_ClassificationType_S tring%7c0%7c%7cp_Family_String%7c0%7c%7cp_Year_Str ing%7c1%7c%7cp_SequenceNum_Int32%7c0&__N=2994%204294949495%204294842993%204294965618&silo=1300&CT=Compare&__Nne=15&trecs=19&__sid=122973ABDDC2

When was the last time you reset the trip computer for your average fuel economy? You may have done a s**t load of ks so it will be hard to get your average fuel consumption down.

To reset it, just hold in the button where you can change your read outs from Average Fuel Consumption to litres used etc for a couple of seconds. Once done, it will take around 150km for the average fuel consumption to read correctly.

If it is still high (Above 14), I would definately consider taking it to a Mitsi dealer.

I am averaging 10.7 on 98 octane, but my average speed is 60kmh.

I have to cart around baby stuff all day everyday plus a wife

and my FAT A$$

I get 13.1 each and every week driving like mad

It is what I expected going to a 6 cyl

but I have had it down to 6.2

I just wish I knew the econ figure the day I drove to Canberra I filled up just before I left and came back and still had a 1/4 tank to spare

When was the last time you reset the trip computer for your average fuel economy? You may have done a s**t load of ks so it will be hard to get your average fuel consumption down.

To reset it, just hold in the button where you can change your read outs from Average Fuel Consumption to litres used etc for a couple of seconds. Once done, it will take around 150km for the average fuel consumption to read correctly.

If it is still high (Above 14), I would definately consider taking it to a Mitsi dealer.

I am averaging 10.7 on 98 octane, but my average speed is 60kmh.
Good point Braedz, I guess I was "assuming" that everyone resets after each fill. ChrisV I would definately try that first.

Took my car to a Mitsi dealer this morning to get window fixed (waiting on part)
Told them of my fuel consumption. They ran a diagnostic with no results, suggested disconnecting battery.Did this and on way home my average consumption dropped from 12.1 to 9.5 within 10k.
Yippee:woot:

One of the mechanics at the dealership has a 380 and does a lot of distance work and reckons he cant improve much on 10,s. But reckons he selects 5th instead of D when upto speed?

One of the mechanics at the dealership has a 380 and does a lot of distance work and reckons he cant improve much on 10,s. But reckons he selects 5th instead of D when upto speed?

Good to hear that your fuel consumption is now alot better Chrisv :).Also, I find it curious that the dealership told you to disconnect your battery? I thought this does nothing (From what people have been telling me)...obviously this is not the case.

I would just leave your transmission in D, the auto will go into 5th soon as it hits 60kmh. You cannot change into 5th below 60kmh when using manual mode.

One of the mechanics at the dealership has a 380 and does a lot of distance work and reckons he cant improve much on 10,s. But reckons he selects 5th instead of D when upto speed?
He's probably cruising on 160 kph lol

He's probably cruising on 160 kph lol

:stoopid:

The mechanic told me that by disconnecting the battery it also resets the memory in the auto!

The mechanic told me that by disconnecting the battery it also resets the memory in the auto!

Sweet! That is definately some good news!!! :woot:

So disconecting your battery DOES reset the ECU and the memory in the Auto! Good work ChrisV for finding this out! :happy:

That's confusing... Are you saying the ECU was showing a wrong too-high reading for economy? Cos that could be fixed with a disconnect/wipe of the memory. But real fuel economy can not possibly be altered by connecting/disconnecting or doing anything with the battery.
I'm not arguing with you... just seems odd, the problem and the solution.

That's confusing... Are you saying the ECU was showing a wrong too-high reading for economy? Cos that could be fixed with a disconnect/wipe of the memory. But real fuel economy can not possibly be altered by connecting/disconnecting or doing anything with the battery.
I'm not arguing with you... just seems odd, the problem and the solution.

i think he means that he took it in there, aand they suggested the reset, which would have reset the gear changes and whatnot. he then zerod the meter and drove home and got the lower figure on the return trip compared to his usual higher figure.

yes Stormie you are correct. My economy was ok but I was gertting a bad reading

Glad that is all sorted. Can you do another 400 k run just to be sure!! lol

yup in a couple of weeks but hopefully my windows wont fail 100k from home with a screaming sick 2yr old in the back:nuts:

yup in a couple of weeks but hopefully my windows wont fail 100k from home with a screaming sick 2yr old in the back:nuts:

That sounds like the trip from hell.

Great you got it sorted.

yup in a couple of weeks but hopefully my windows wont fail 100k from home with a screaming sick 2yr old in the back:nuts:

Ha ha ha I just had deja vu. Almost the same thing happened on holidays. stuffed drivers window, 2 year old who went to all you can eat chinese only to find out it was all you could throw up over the car. Second hand chinese food + digestive juices:eeek::eek2:. I feel your pain!!

Thanks I feel better for that

Thanks I feel better for that
It was an ugly trip let me tell you!!

Here's a good reason to free up your intake & exhaust & install a blower!!!

........ fuel economy :woot:

I'm out of town at the moment but so far today have done a bit over 300km (pretty well all hwy). My trip computer is telling me on average I am getting 5.8l/100km, it also tells me with distance travelled & distance to go I will get over 1000km out of the tank at the current rate. By the fuel gauge I have used about 1/3 of a tank which sounds roughly right.

I will keep you all updated as I will be around the 700km mark by the time I get back to Brissy & will fill up to confirm the mileage.

If this is the type of consumption that can be had with mods & a blower it will pay for itself in 5 years lol

I'm sure however if I could put my foot down & use all the boost it wouldn't be very good at all ..........

Wow, that economy is almost in 4 cylinder territory!
Since I put my intake snorkel back on, I've been getting 3 tanks in high 9s (a first for me).

.......

If this is the type of consumption that can be had with mods & a blower it will pay for itself in 5 years lol

I'm sure however if I could put my foot down & use all the boost it wouldn't be very good at all ..........


Wonder how it would go on LPG with that much boost.?

Z80a on MCA has a Supercharged LPG GT blackstar plus a TMR, 2 more 380's and a front cut
greedy

I heard from a few people now that LPG can take more boost without risk to engine cause of 110 octane.

There's a guy on the Ford forums who converted his XR6 turbo to gas...he reckons it actually goes harder when he switches to gas.

Another 3 kw on the dyno....

But so cheap, at $25 a tank, it's like using 2 litres/100km compared to petrol dollars in a 380.

I will keep you all updated as I will be around the 700km mark by the time I get back to Brissy & will fill up to confirm the mileage.

My car's only got the intake mod. Driving south from Rockhampton I was quite in a bit of a predicament - fuel low on a long stretch of highway. I actually got the range meter to display "---" whenever I went up hills.

http://s402.photobucket.com/albums/pp102/n00bie/empty.jpg

I definitely went past the 650km mark then! Got to fill up and this was the result:

http://s402.photobucket.com/albums/pp102/n00bie/full.jpg

Wow, that economy is almost in 4 cylinder territory!
Since I put my intake snorkel back on, I've been getting 3 tanks in high 9s (a first for me).

Yep It is astounding what difference the snorkel and resonator box mods will do. I am going to Adjust (cut) and redirect the rubber seal above the intake today to allow better, more unrestricted air flow. I think a few guys have taken it off altogether, but if you just cut it and Silicone it in a swept back position it should actually funnel more air into the box. I will take some pics of what I do. The seal appears to close over the top half of the intake:wtf:. Why do they do such things? Why don't they have a clear passage of air into the snorkel? ....and why didn't they have the MIVEC engine in the car to start off with or at the very least in the up spec versions like Apat and I were talking about the other day.

Why do they do such things? Why don't they have a clear passage of air into the snorkel? ....and why didn't they have the MIVEC engine in the car to start off with or at the very least in the up spec versions like Apat and I were talking about the other day.

All too true.

MIVEC would've been great - straight swap out of the US Galant. Maybe one of us will do it one day. There's the Ralliart version of the MIVEC as well....:drool:

All too true.

MIVEC would've been great - straight swap out of the US Galant. Maybe one of us will do it one day. There's the Ralliart version of the MIVEC as well....:drool:

Drool, lust, covet :2cool: So who's it gonna be? Are there any stats on the engine, Knotched?

Drool, lust, covet :2cool: So who's it gonna be? Are there any stats on the engine, Knotched?

Have to look it up again but the Ralliart was 296HP at the fly.

From what i've read on the US forums, the Mivec is just a head replacement, a couple of oil lines and an electric relay to allow the oil flow at a chosen RPM.
The oil moves a cam that moves the cams.

So....just find a Pajero half cut, grab the needed bits....

From what i've read on the US forums, the Mivec is just a head replacement, a couple of oil lines and an electric relay to allow the oil flow at a chosen RPM.
The oil moves a cam that moves the cams....

Yep, that's what I've gleaned as well. So it should be fairly simple (as far as these things go) without too much complicated electronic tuning.

Actually I got the power figure wrong, but check this out:


Perform it does. Power is readily at hand; the MIVEC and six-speed are eager to please and deliver instant gratification a stock Galant just can't. The engine likes to be pushed; that, and the smooth transmission's short, Evo-like shifts, are an addictive combination that works well together--0-to-60 times are down 0.67 second and quarter-mile speeds are up 7.6 mph over stock. While a front helical differential or AWD would help, some of the cars this front-drive Ralliart beat through our slalom test are surprising: Its 68.8-mph run is better than those of the 350Z, RX8, and 911 40th Anniversary

and


Galants aren't supposed to slalom at 69 mph. They don't run the quarter mile in 14.4 seconds at 98.5 mph and can't do Motor Trend's figure-eight in 25.7 seconds. And no Galant behaves like an Evo.

http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/sedans/112_0503_mitsubishi_galant_ralliart/index.html

Max horsepower SAE net 260 @ 5750 rpm
Max torque SAE net, lb-ft 260 @ 4500 rpm
Transmission 6-speed manual
Curb weight, lb (est) 3700
0-60 mph, sec 6.1

6.1s in 0-100km/h is impressive for a NA vehicle....especially front wheel drive with no LSD.

I will have to get a HP>KW converter lol. I had heard that it wasnt as easy as just the head as you had to change the ECU and some other bits as well. It would be very interesting to see how hard it would be to do. Hey Knotched, do you know the power difference between the 380's motor and the MIVEC?

6.1s in 0-100km/h is impressive for a NA vehicle....especially front wheel drive with no LSD.

0-60mph does not equal 0-100kmh.

I will have to get a HP>KW converter lol. I had heard that it wasnt as easy as just the head as you had to change the ECU and some other bits as well. It would be very interesting to see how hard it would be to do. Hey Knotched, do you know the power difference between the 380's motor and the MIVEC?

260hp = 194kW.

Looks like ~ 20KW, thanks Brett.

May not be worth it if you compare MIVEC with a set of improved cams that are in development on this Forum.

60 mph = 96.56064 kph roughly
100 kph= 62.1711 mph again roughly lol

Looks like ~ 20KW, thanks Brett.

May not be worth it if you compare MIVEC with a set of improved cams that are in development on this Forum.

Still it would have been nice to have as an option or on the upspec models. I think alot of VRX and GT owners feel a bit ripped off that there werent any performance improvements on these models. If you were to compare relatively speaking of course, the stock VE crummy door with the SV6 you get 15 KW more power and 10 NM torque plus the other goodies. The XR6 doesnt get any more KW but you do have other go fast options in the range.

Just modded the rubber strip across the front of the car that retards the airflow into the snorkel. Yet to test drive it but dont expect big gains. A lot of little improvements do add up though.
This should improve air flow into the air box. I have cut the strip and siliconed it to the underneath of the bonnet and held it in place with masking tape whilst it set.

Here's a good reason to free up your intake & exhaust & install a blower!!!

........ fuel economy :woot:

I'm out of town at the moment but so far today have done a bit over 300km (pretty well all hwy). My trip computer is telling me on average I am getting 5.8l/100km, it also tells me with distance travelled & distance to go I will get over 1000km out of the tank at the current rate. By the fuel gauge I have used about 1/3 of a tank which sounds roughly right.

I will keep you all updated as I will be around the 700km mark by the time I get back to Brissy & will fill up to confirm the mileage.

If this is the type of consumption that can be had with mods & a blower it will pay for itself in 5 years lol

I'm sure however if I could put my foot down & use all the boost it wouldn't be very good at all ..........
That is really good mileage!! You have a piggy back ECU as well dont you? What do you get around town in grandpa mode?

Just modded the rubber strip across the front of the car that retards the airflow into the snorkel. Yet to test drive it but dont expect big gains. A lot of little improvements do add up though.
This should improve air flow into the air box. I have cut the strip and siliconed it to the underneath of the bonnet and held it in place with masking tape whilst it set.

I wish I had seen your idea before I cut mine away.

Here's a good reason to free up your intake & exhaust & install a blower!!!

........ fuel economy :woot:

I'm out of town at the moment but so far today have done a bit over 300km (pretty well all hwy). My trip computer is telling me on average I am getting 5.8l/100km, it also tells me with distance travelled & distance to go I will get over 1000km out of the tank at the current rate. By the fuel gauge I have used about 1/3 of a tank which sounds roughly right.

I will keep you all updated as I will be around the 700km mark by the time I get back to Brissy & will fill up to confirm the mileage.

If this is the type of consumption that can be had with mods & a blower it will pay for itself in 5 years lol

I'm sure however if I could put my foot down & use all the boost it wouldn't be very good at all ..........

Fooz I don't wanna be rude, so don't take this the wrong way. When you get a piggyback or aftermarket ECU, it will throw out the computers readings. I remember when Black Beard had his twin turbo conversion done, his trip computer said he was averaging 9L/100km, but the real figure was a lot more. Might pay to check it the old fashioned way when you're done with the tank.

Yep It is astounding what difference the snorkel and resonator box mods will do. I am going to Adjust (cut) and redirect the rubber seal above the intake today to allow better, more unrestricted air flow. I think a few guys have taken it off altogether, but if you just cut it and Silicone it in a swept back position it should actually funnel more air into the box. I will take some pics of what I do. The seal appears to close over the top half of the intake:wtf:. Why do they do such things? Why don't they have a clear passage of air into the snorkel? ....and why didn't they have the MIVEC engine in the car to start off with or at the very least in the up spec versions like Apat and I were talking about the other day.

I did that cut before, but found it makes no difference to feel or economy - then on one service I forgot to tell them and they replaced it.
I noticed the stupid design of the seal completely blocking the front of the snorkel, but I think that was to create a clean vaccum area of air uneffected by incoming dirt, etc.
I put my snorkel back on now. I found slightly higher consumption with it off, and only after replacing it did I see a big drop to high 9s. Current tank is back to low 10s though.
I never did the lower resonator chop... I tried but couldn't get at it and am way to lazy to jack the car up, etc.

I did that cut before, but found it makes no difference to feel or economy - then on one service I forgot to tell them and they replaced it.
I noticed the stupid design of the seal completely blocking the front of the snorkel, but I think that was to create a clean vaccum area of air uneffected by incoming dirt, etc.
I put my snorkel back on now. I found slightly higher consumption with it off, and only after replacing it did I see a big drop to high 9s. Current tank is back to low 10s though.
I never did the lower resonator chop... I tried but couldn't get at it and am way to lazy to jack the car up, etc.
You were sucking in hot air with the snorkel off so that would be why your mileage jumped.
As for being lazy, I didn't take my wheel off. Mind you I did cheat a little and drilled 5 x 1" holes in it with a wood bit. That did the job alright, but....... I am still picking little bits of plastic out of the air filter. It is no great drama to do but me thinks jacking the car up and doing the chop may have been more time efficient over all. I am having a bad tank this time due to playing around with power and alot of idling only averaging 9.7l/100k.:sook:

Notice a funny quirk with my instant fuel readings today

When I start up and drive off it will push up around 112L with no no throttle input and be very thirsty according to the meter (and yes 112 is not a typo)

going to monitor it and see

might try the disconnection of the battery to see

Fooz I don't wanna be rude, so don't take this the wrong way. When you get a piggyback or aftermarket ECU, it will throw out the computers readings. I remember when Black Beard had his twin turbo conversion done, his trip computer said he was averaging 9L/100km, but the real figure was a lot more. Might pay to check it the old fashioned way when you're done with the tank.

Worth a double check over a tank. At least you will know for sure. If you have zeroed your trip computer at the start of the new tank you should be able to work it out on this one to see if it really is doing the figures the 'puter is spitting out. Hope it is!!

I so wish I could get 9s at the moment but it could be the above issue that is affecting it

I wish I had seen your idea before I cut mine away.

If the silicone doesnt hold it (which I am having my doubts about) I am going to drill 2 holes to accomodate the little plastic plugs I have taken out and will fit them near the new ends. May have to make a couple of small holes in the rubber. Wont be that hard to do and will fix it for sure.

I so wish I could get 9s at the moment but it could be the above issue that is affecting it

Have you got a piggy back?

na stock as a rock

na stock as a rock

Get the 90mm intake and do your resonator chamber then you will notice it!!

Oh I got the intake and I just disconnected the battery now I will see how it goes when I go to work tonight

Oh I got the intake and I just disconnected the battery now I will see how it goes when I go to work tonight

Have you only just put the intake on or had it on for a while?

I have had the intake for a while

I drove to work and got 11.4 after the battery disconnect

Still having the high read with no throttle which is weird but it is going to get a transmission service and a cooler fitted in two weeks

just waiting for the cooler from ebay

Fooz I don't wanna be rude, so don't take this the wrong way. When you get a piggyback or aftermarket ECU, it will throw out the computers readings. I remember when Black Beard had his twin turbo conversion done, his trip computer said he was averaging 9L/100km, but the real figure was a lot more. Might pay to check it the old fashioned way when you're done with the tank.

Mate, well as it turns out the economy is about the same as N/A. I had the piggyback before the blower & it indicated fine.

What I believe has happened is, I am guessing the way the trip computer works out the fuel usage etc is to measure the fuel injector duty cycle compared to maybe rpm/vehicle speed.

I have bigger injectors & my piggyback has had to pull the AFR's back as it was running rich (ie reduce the duty cycle). Therfore what the factory ecu is seeing is a reduced duty cycle for the same power output. The trip computer therefore thinks I have way better fuel economy but I haven't.

So at least on a 380 bigger injectors means f'ed up trip computer lol

Just modded the rubber strip across the front of the car that retards the airflow into the snorkel. Yet to test drive it but dont expect big gains. A lot of little improvements do add up though.
This should improve air flow into the air box. I have cut the strip and siliconed it to the underneath of the bonnet and held it in place with masking tape whilst it set.

Hehe. Nice job there. You beat me to it.

The snorkle is ordered, so I think I'll be performing this surgery at some point through the week.

P.S. I'm still jealous of the view from your verandah.

I just cut it

good idea though matey

I do not think the reset works but I am going to give a week and see

Mate, well as it turns out the economy is about the same as N/A. I had the piggyback before the blower & it indicated fine.

What I believe has happened is, I am guessing the way the trip computer works out the fuel usage etc is to measure the fuel injector duty cycle compared to maybe rpm/vehicle speed.

I have bigger injectors & my piggyback has had to pull the AFR's back as it was running rich (ie reduce the duty cycle). Therfore what the factory ecu is seeing is a reduced duty cycle for the same power output. The trip computer therefore thinks I have way better fuel economy but I haven't.

So at least on a 380 bigger injectors means f'ed up trip computer lol

Makes sense. Still, same as N/A - gotta be happy with that.

Makes sense. Still, same as N/A - gotta be happy with that.

I haven't actually filled up to confirm but I'm on empty & up around 700 km for the tank so similar to my average N/A figures.

Of course this is all based on mostly highway cruising with part throttle overtaking as I couldn't mash the peddle to the floor since it isn't tuned. But yeah pretty happy with that.

Notice a funny quirk with my instant fuel readings today

When I start up and drive off it will push up around 112L with no no throttle input and be very thirsty according to the meter (and yes 112 is not a typo)

going to monitor it and see

might try the disconnection of the battery to see

Do you mean taking off while idleing? That is normal, because you are going so slow. Your milage is 'distance per second divided by fuel per second' (and then converted to km/100l). For the same reason it shows '-.--' when you are standing still, as your mileage is effectively 'infinite'. Which would be the most fuel efficient way to drive, idling to your desination at 1200rpm or cruising at 80kmh at 2000rpm?

112l/100km sounds a bit high, either the ECU is screwed or the throttle position sensor is scratchy, or the accelerator pedal is worn.

something is not reporting a smooth gas pedal transition.

Ok when I put the car in drive and put NO throttle input but just roll thats when it occurs

Also when I am pulling up and are at a complete stop It has a reading around 90 for a good 5 secs after pulling up

Hope that explains it better

I haven't actually filled up to confirm but I'm on empty & up around 700 km for the tank so similar to my average N/A figures.

Of course this is all based on mostly highway cruising with part throttle overtaking as I couldn't mash the peddle to the floor since it isn't tuned. But yeah pretty happy with that.

Well I filled up & it worked out to 8.6l/100km which would be average for some city mostly highway driving.

The stupid trip computer said I averaged 5.8l/100km & after filling my range to empty is now 1000km which I believe is the maximum it will read.

So the trip computer is now useless with the bigger injectors & the only worthwhile info it can give me is km travelled. I wonder if this can be recalibrated??? Probably would require an ecu reflash which can't be done :doubt:

So at least on a 380 bigger injectors means f'ed up trip computer lol

and for TJ.

my current trip computer reading is something like 7.2 around town. in reality I'm using about 11.5. it's funny when the computer thinks I've used like 20L and the tanks almost at 1/4 lol

cheers,
.wook

Well I filled up & it worked out to 8.6l/100km which would be average for some city mostly highway driving.

The stupid trip computer said I averaged 5.8l/100km & after filling my range to empty is now 1000km which I believe is the maximum it will read.

So the trip computer is now useless with the bigger injectors & the only worthwhile info it can give me is km travelled. I wonder if this can be recalibrated??? Probably would require an ecu reflash which can't be done :doubt:

Yeah - but man, 8.6L/100! My TL won't even do that and it's stock and slow! :roflwtf:

Well I filled up & it worked out to 8.6l/100km which would be average for some city mostly highway driving.

The stupid trip computer said I averaged 5.8l/100km & after filling my range to empty is now 1000km which I believe is the maximum it will read.

So the trip computer is now useless with the bigger injectors & the only worthwhile info it can give me is km travelled. I wonder if this can be recalibrated??? Probably would require an ecu reflash which can't be done :doubt:

I'm sure it can be done, but I'm not sure it resides in the ECU. I've had my stock ECU re-flashed to run the 470cc injectors and I reckon the trip computer runs off the ECU's injector pulse and increments by a standard amount. if someone could find that static and change it according to the increase in fuel delivery then the trip computer would still work correctly.

Well I filled up & it worked out to 8.6l/100km which would be average for some city mostly highway driving.

The stupid trip computer said I averaged 5.8l/100km & after filling my range to empty is now 1000km which I believe is the maximum it will read.

So the trip computer is now useless with the bigger injectors & the only worthwhile info it can give me is km travelled. I wonder if this can be recalibrated??? Probably would require an ecu reflash which can't be done :doubt:

8.6!!! I'm making a billion less kw's at the wheels and I have never averaged better than 11!! Ripped off :doh:

Don't think the injector pulses determine fuel consumption.

A 380 with LPG and the computer still shows the fuel consumption....(Injectors are inoperative)


Also have seen the dedicated LPG magna has no fuel injectors...and still has teh same trip computer and economy readings.

Don't think the injector pulses determine fuel consumption.

A 380 with LPG and the computer still shows the fuel consumption....(Injectors are inoperative)


Also have seen the dedicated LPG magna has no fuel injectors...and still has teh same trip computer and economy readings.

Hmmm wonder how it measures fuel delivery then??? Must have something to do with the injectors or at least the output which would still be there even if it was running LPG. The pure fact that mine & Wookie's is inaccurate because of larger injectors points towards the injector output timing possibily dictating the consumption measurement.

fooz you lucky SO and SO that is still great figures for economy

Hehe. Nice job there. You beat me to it.

The snorkle is ordered, so I think I'll be performing this surgery at some point through the week.

P.S. I'm still jealous of the view from your verandah.
Have to come around for a brew sometime when you have more time.

I have had the intake for a while

I drove to work and got 11.4 after the battery disconnect

Still having the high read with no throttle which is weird but it is going to get a transmission service and a cooler fitted in two weeks

just waiting for the cooler from ebay

Mmm that all sounds a bit weird alright. Judging by everyone else you should be getting a bit more. My drive is not like Sydney traffic however so it probably explains why I average a bit more (and the reason I went for a larger car too)

Ok when I put the car in drive and put NO throttle input but just roll thats when it occurs

Also when I am pulling up and are at a complete stop It has a reading around 90 for a good 5 secs after pulling up

Hope that explains it better

Definitely screwed up me thinks. Back to Mr Mitsi!!

Have to come around for a brew sometime when you have more time.

OH a man date room for a third :ninja:

Hmmm wonder how it measures fuel delivery then??? Must have something to do with the injectors or at least the output which would still be there even if it was running LPG. The pure fact that mine & Wookie's is inaccurate because of larger injectors points towards the injector output timing possibily dictating the consumption measurement.

The injector pulses will be open loop.
So....the ECU already has the timing pulses derived from some set of conditions.
So it keeps doing that task whether the injectors fire or not.



I reckon it will be a simple calculation of (injector pulse fuel delivery in millilitres) X (milliseconds) X distance travelled.


So...yours is wrong because the delivery amount per pulse has changed due to larger injector volume.



I forgot to mention, in mine it is just as wrong as yours, cause the injectors for LPG are smaller.

Mine says I am only getting 350k's to a tank of LPG yet odometer records about 500k's.

So basically what ppl are saying is the read out you get /100km should be an approx only, and the best way in reality is to fill up ,drive,fill up again and work out a true lt/100.

nope. they saying that is the most accurate way of measuring, however on a car that still has standard fuel injectors it (trip computer) should be reasonably accurate.
also lol at all those who thought fooz was getting really good economy because of his TC

nope. they saying that is the most accurate way of measuring, however on a car that still has standard fuel injectors it (trip computer) should be reasonably accurate.
also lol at all those who thought fooz was getting really good economy because of his TC

I think we were all wishing and hoping that it was true!!

OH a man date room for a third :ninja:

Ha ha. Funny man. how about BYO kidz as well?

Ha ha. Funny man. how about BYO kidz as well?

LOL can be arranged


I think I am alway going to have trouble chasing economy just because of what I use the car for

I am still up at around 12s but I am still happy with that

I when from a small 4cyl to a big 6 I have to expect comsumption to be higher
I have a friend in an Stock Aurion SX6 who is getting 8s
Funnily she only drives on the M5 in it after peak periods where as I use my car FOR everything and live in the bottom a valley in a hilly area I love this car but I do not think I will get clos to some of the figure you guys are getting but it aint going to stop me from trying

I use my car FOR everything and live in the bottom a valley in a hilly area I love this car but I do not think I will get clos to some of the figure you guys are getting but it aint going to stop me from trying

I think that has alot to do with it. You may find that if you go on a trip somewhere you will get the same as the rest of us.

Just thought I'd add something to cheer you guys up...
When I had a mildy worked 5.0L VL Calais a decade or so ago, it'd go through a tank of premium in 2.5 to 3 days. Although there were no economy gauges back then, I recently guesstimated the readout from my memory of how it guzzled the gas... and came up with a best-guess of 18L/100KM!

When I had my VY SS I sometimes returned 21L per 100k crawling in traffic to work.:eeek:

When I had my VY SS I sometimes returned 21L per 100k crawling in traffic to work.:eeek:

Which is why you bought the GT right?

Which is why you bought the GT right?

Too right, plus the manual box drove me nuts it was so notchy like a truck. Had it looked at twice,gave up.:beer:

Too right, plus the manual box drove me nuts it was so notchy like a truck. Had it looked at twice,gave up.:beer:

Going to SA on the weekend. Sent you a pm.

Too right, plus the manual box drove me nuts it was so notchy like a truck. Had it looked at twice,gave up.:beer:

The 380 manual box is far smoother than the Holden 6 speeder, and better again if you slip some Nulon G70 gearbox treatment into it like I have done. Just needs a sixth speed to drop the highway cruising revs a bit (but not as tall as the ridiculous moon shot Holden 6th speed).

KJ.

The 380 manual box is far smoother than the Holden 6 speeder, and better again if you slip some Nulon G70 gearbox treatment into it like I have done. Just needs a sixth speed to drop the highway cruising revs a bit (but not as tall as the ridiculous moon shot Holden 6th speed).

KJ.

Mate get onto RPW about your Quaife diff. They also do a ge****t change which brings the revs down to a normal level which would be super easy if you already have the diff out.

If you drop the revs me thinks the speedo will be out by a fair bit, (as will the trip computer etc)

If you drop the revs me thinks the speedo will be out by a fair bit, (as will the trip computer etc)

The speedo gear needs changing when the Quaife goes in so could work out what was required.

The speedo gear needs changing when the Quaife goes in so could work out what was required.

So the Quaife fits in???

So the Quaife fits in???

Should fit a manual as the box is the same as the Magna, auto is still questionable.

Hey Fooz I think you need to start a Quaife thread so we can track the progress and know where to look for it. I just realised we were in the Economy thread. Us get off topic? No never lol.

Great thread! Can anyone post a list of modifications to improve fuel economy and state the price for each? The exhaust, filtre ect.
Thanks

How far do you want to go?

Probably for now, Air Filtre and Air Intake i think.. I dont want a noisy exhaust.

Probably for now, Air Filtre and Air Intake i think.. I dont want a noisy exhaust.

OK Firstly buy yourself a 90 mm intake as per ebay (link attached). I bought off this guy as did many others here. He is reputable and might I add has dropped his price by around $8 from what I paid!! Now $68 + delivery. This will drop your fuel usage if you are judicious, by around 1l/100km possibly more. Mine has more than paid for itself already in fuel savings. 5-8 KW gains claimed and better throttle response. This one everyone will agree with.
http://cgi.ebay.com.au/Mitsubishi-380-high-flow-air-intake-snorkel-galant_W0QQitemZ160363847893QQcmdZViewItemQQptZAU_ Car_Parts_Accessories?hash=item25566e20d5&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14#ht_500wt_1182

Secondly "modify" your resonator on the bottom of your airbox as per this thread.
http://www.aussiemagna.com/forums/showthread.php?t=65965
This is a rather extreme chop on one, but you get the idea. The main thing is to remember to make sure that the opening isn't sucking hot air in from the engine bay, so keep the chop back into the inner guard a bit.
I drilled mine with a large wood bit but if you are going to do that dont do what I did. Jack the car up take the wheel off and then take the resonator chamber off and do it, otherwise you will get a lot of little plastic bits in your air filter for ages after. :slap:

Thirdly and more contentiously you could fit an after market K and N filter panel instead of the OEM paper one. You will get arguments both ways on whether it actually does anything or not. I have one and it maybe makes a small amount of difference, but these are serviceable so you wont need to fork out another $30+ for an air filter after you get this one. Just remember never, never, ever over oil them. Attached link to K and N thread
http://www.aussiemagna.com/forums/showthread.php?t=69944

Number 4. Exhaust. Yes I hear you about being noisy and there have been numerous people who have gone for the Berkeley and said that it gets noisier with time. I am looking at another option with a Redback as I dont want it noisy at all. Apparently according to the guy that does my exhausts, the Berkeleys only run 20 gauge steel whereas the Redbacks run 16 gauge (sorry all you Berkeley boys!!) and that is why they get noisier. He reckons that the Redback is about the same as standard, noise wise, which suits me fine. Haven't gone ahead with it at this stage, only found out about this one today. Gains of about 7% from this. Will let you know

Next jump up is a piggy back ECU, but do these first as they will make your ride a totally different being altogether, guaranteed!!

Cheers!!

Just returned from 400k roundtrip to Loxton.
Last time was 11.2 this time 9.4!!!
I sure wasnt hanging around either on those long stretches between towns.
Great improvement. I am thinking the computer has now settled down after I fitted the 90mm intake? and she really flew while my better half was dozing. (no grandkids this time or stuck open rear window):woot::woot:

I'm guessing you did it well under 2 hours eh? What fuel were you running?

standard unleaded and we stopped at swan reach for a break.
Very impressed

I am itching to do a good trip in mine without the camper trailer attached to see how it goes. I am hoping for 8's.

Just returned from 400k roundtrip to Loxton.
Last time was 11.2 this time 9.4!!!
I sure wasnt hanging around either on those long stretches between towns.
Great improvement. I am thinking the computer has now settled down after I fitted the 90mm intake? and she really flew while my better half was dozing. (no grandkids this time or stuck open rear window):woot::woot:



Probably the aerodynamic spoiler has improved your fuel economy...:woot:

Missus gets over 16 pottering around the local neighbourhood in her SX (she really drives more than a few k's at a stretch). We got 9.9 last time we went on a highway run, is the 16 just because she does lots of little local trips or should I get it looked at? No intake mod etc - she won't let me touch it tell the warranty runs out....

Missus gets over 16 pottering around the local neighbourhood in her SX (she really drives more than a few k's at a stretch). We got 9.9 last time we went on a highway run, is the 16 just because she does lots of little local trips or should I get it looked at? No intake mod etc - she won't let me touch it tell the warranty runs out....

I get around 14 on short trips. My old ss returned 21+ on local trips AAAGGGHHH!!!:eeek:

Chris, I assume that's after the mods?

Missus gets over 16 pottering around the local neighbourhood in her SX (she really drives more than a few k's at a stretch). We got 9.9 last time we went on a highway run, is the 16 just because she does lots of little local trips or should I get it looked at? No intake mod etc - she won't let me touch it tell the warranty runs out....

How does she drive around town? I get a worst of 15 or so around town and that isn't conservative driving..... Your Missus must love the accelerator eh :hmm:

Chris, I assume that's after the mods?

Yes , that is after the mods. I am very heavy footed and to be honest fuel consumption is not a big concern whereas
getting enjoyment from my car is:happy:

Well, she says she gives it some stick from time to time - and I usually do the driving when we take the 380. She used to have a Falcon, which handled like a boat, maybe she does enjoys the driving experience more. :)

Yes , that is after the mods. I am very heavy footed and to be honest fuel consumption is not a big concern whereas
getting enjoyment from my car is:happy:

I couldnt agree more, that is exactly why I bought the 380 in the first place. Enjoyment comes first and economy comes second in my books :happy:

I couldnt agree more, that is exactly why I bought the 380 in the first place. Enjoyment comes first and economy comes second in my books :happy:
Enjoyment comes in many forms. I enjoy trying to get the best economy that I can as a challenge. I have done the boy racer bit long time ago. Mind you I still like a good drive now and then!!:happy:

Seeing we are in the economy thread has anyone noted improved economy after changing their muffler. I know the power would improve as well as the sound and the temptation to use it, but the economy should improve markedly as well. Thoughts and experiences lads?

0.8l per 100 better economy with a new muffler, thats the average though over about 17 tanks.

Mmm 0.8l/100km eh. Let me guesstimate the savings. 17 tanks@ around say 500 km per tank (conservative) would save you around 68 litres @ say $1.25 per litre = $85 well on the way toward paying for the muffler. If you are getting 600 a tank your savings are over $100. Pretty good.
What sort of muffler was it? Does anyone else have any figures?

I didn't notice any difference at all, in economy, after my muffler fit. If anything, it got worse (cos I was enjoying the new sound). Mainly just the difference in note.

Seeing we are in the economy thread has anyone noted improved economy after changing their muffler. I know the power would improve as well as the sound and the temptation to use it, but the economy should improve markedly as well. Thoughts and experiences lads?

I dont know if we got anything after doing the duels. As Grubco said we probably ended up using more due to heavy a heavy foot.

I've removed 8 posts that were OFF TOPIC, caution!

Down to 9.3 with a low of 7.2 round country Victoria 11.2 in melbourne

With the comments that E10 costs more as the engine uses more, does anyone know if the trip computer inst L/100 and average l/100km show this also?

yes from what I have seen on mine it was almost instantly apparent. I take particular note of what instant fuel usage I have on particular strips of road so I can compare changes I have made. I have wondered what low humidity v high humidity does to fuel figures too. Any ideas? I was thinking it through and high humidity should give you better mileage, or can someone discount this theory?

I will be very interested to see what a hot dry summers day trip will do. Already as the days are heating up a bit there is an increase in instant and overall economy. I may even map out a years worth of fuel economy figures to see what, if any, the difference is. I know that you get more fuel in colder weather due to expansion/contraction factors. This also would have a bearing on things as well.

Has anyone checked their air filters after the last big dust storm? I was just thinking that may have clogged things up a bit! Another job to do eh?

Has anyone checked their air filters after the last big dust storm? I was just thinking that may have clogged things up a bit! Another job to do eh?

Yeah I took the K&N out and put the factory filter in while they were around....I had to do a highway trip whilst it was at its peak around here so the K&N was pretty dusty....hope none of it went in the engine!

Has anyone checked their air filters after the last big dust storm? I was just thinking that may have clogged things up a bit! Another job to do eh?

Yeah you guys got that full on! I've just been doing some K's off road in a national park but i still don't reckon it would have been as bad as that dust storm over there!Haven't checked the filter yet though.

I was in Sydney that week, and drove a couple of times from the city to Parammatta in the same day.

Got back to Vic and the stock filter was chockers full of red shit....just shook it out and threw it back on.

Didn't notice any change in fuel economy.

With the dust storm the majority of it would of went into your motor anyways, the particles were too fine for a paper/K&N to pick it up.

Mmm time for an oil change too as well as cleaning the air filter. I think I will put the paper one back in and see if there is a difference whilst I have the K&N out for a while and cleaning it. All very interesting.

so far with below things i have done i have shaved 3.5 litres per/100 off my fuel consumption from stock. Listed in order of effectiveness. Currently sitting on 10l per 100 with strictly stop start city driving around town. Would be alot better with a mix of highway use

galant intake snorkel
cleaned Mass airflow sensor (used CRC airflow sensor cleaner - $24 a can but well worth it)
rear muffler
k&n air filter
mobil 1 oil 5/50w
trade strength Nulon injector cleaner

so far with below things i have done i have shaved 3.5 litres per/100 off my fuel consumption from stock. Listed in order of effectiveness. Currently sitting on 10l per 100 with strictly stop start city driving around town. Would be alot better with a mix of highway use

galant intake snorkel
cleaned Mass airflow sensor (used CRC airflow sensor cleaner - $24 a can but well worth it)
rear muffler
k&n air filter
mobil 1 oil 5/50w
trade strength Nulon injector cleaner

Terry
What are the steps to claening the airflow sensor?
Cheeers

Terry
What are the steps to claening the airflow sensor?
Cheeers
x 2 (you beat me to it chrisv)

and where is it and how often should you do it too pls! I am not up on sensors.

Terry
What are the steps to claening the airflow sensor?
Cheeers

You remove the whole airflow body. It is situated between airbox and throttle body (two large hose clamps and 1 elctrical connection)
Before this i removed the airbox and snorkel as makes easier
If you look throught the honeycomb structure you wil see the "hotwire" , this is what needs cleaned but dont touch it with anything. Just spray from both ends with the CRC airflow cleaner and it will clean it. If you want you can remove the actaul hotwire assembly from the body but you need a 5 point torx head which are hard to come by. No need tho i reckon as i managed to clean it without removing.
Id recommend cleaning maybe every 45,000 or sooner if you drive on dirt roads/ dusty conditions or whenever your fuel consumption starts to increase.
This is the stuff i used. Dont use carby or throttle body cleaner as you will damage it
http://www.crcind.com.au/catalogue.nsf/web_brands/MAF+Sensor+Cleaner?openDocument

Can we get a DIY with Pics (someone just post up the pics)

You remove the whole airflow body. It is situated between airbox and throttle body (two large hose clamps and 1 elctrical connection)
Before this i removed the airbox and snorkel as makes easier
If you look throught the honeycomb structure you wil see the "hotwire" , this is what needs cleaned but dont touch it with anything. Just spray from both ends with the CRC airflow cleaner and it will clean it. If you want you can remove the actaul hotwire assembly from the body but you need a 5 point torx head which are hard to come by. No need tho i reckon as i managed to clean it without removing.
Id recommend cleaning maybe every 45,000 or sooner if you drive on dirt roads/ dusty conditions or whenever your fuel consumption starts to increase.
This is the stuff i used. Dont use carby or throttle body cleaner as you will damage it
http://www.crcind.com.au/catalogue.nsf/web_brands/MAF+Sensor+Cleaner?openDocument


With all due respect.

I am skeptical about this procedure, it assumes that a LOT of dirt manageas to get past the air filtration system.


>rant on>
The MAF sensor is a small signal silicon diode with a heating element to keep the bias current at a known value.
The airflow then presents changes in current in the diode into a resistance which by ohm's law presents a varied voltage to the analogue to digital converter in the ECU. Simple stuff in electronic terms, since semiconductors have negative temp coefficients.
</rant off>

If...as you say, you have managed to alter the overall economy of the vehicle significantly (30%!), then I can only assume that:-


-It was absolutely caked in dirt and the vehicle has ongoing air filtration issues?
-Or...the vehicle has backfire issues?
-Or...The vehicle has sustained engine/catalyst damage due to running an extremely rich AFR and ingesting so much dirt?

You must have had engine CEL's ....and plenty of them...but since you haven't mentioned it I can only assume that you have done something else to get a 30% improvement in fuel economy?

Must remember that Terry's car had well over 100,000 kms though.

With all due respect.

I am skeptical about this procedure, it assumes that a LOT of dirt manageas to get past the air filtration system.


>rant on>
The MAF sensor is a small signal silicon diode with a heating element to keep the bias current at a known value.
The airflow then presents changes in current in the diode into a resistance which by ohm's law presents a varied voltage to the analogue to digital converter in the ECU. Simple stuff in electronic terms, since semiconductors have negative temp coefficients.
</rant off>

If...as you say, you have managed to alter the overall economy of the vehicle significantly (30%!), then I can only assume that:-


-It was absolutely caked in dirt and the vehicle has ongoing air filtration issues?
-Or...the vehicle has backfire issues?
-Or...The vehicle has sustained engine/catalyst damage due to running an extremely rich AFR and ingesting so much dirt?

You must have had engine CEL's ....and plenty of them...but since you haven't mentioned it I can only assume that you have done something else to get a 30% improvement in fuel economy?

In his post he does actually list 6 things that he believes have contributed to the improved economy, not just cleaning the MAF sensor.

I am wondering though if this sensitive sensor should be maintained by a non-qualified person like myself or would it be more sensible to leave it to Mits???

In his post he does actually list 6 things that he believes have contributed to the improved economy, not just cleaning the MAF sensor.

I am wondering though if this sensitive sensor should be maintained by a non-qualified person like myself or would it be more sensible to leave it to Mits???

It sounds like warranty to me if it's broken, and, the reason they put Torx security screws on things is cause you ain't meant to stuff with it due to calibration.


My humble opinion on those mods (and my opinion only)?

1-galant intake snorkel...may improve economy marginally, but probably will increase it
2-cleaned Mass airflow sensor (used CRC airflow sensor cleaner - $24 a can but well worth it)..maybe if broken
3-rear muffler...will not improve fuel economy
4-k&n air filter..will not improve fuel economy
5-mobil 1 oil 5/50w...will not improve fuel economy
6-trade strength Nulon cleaner...maybe if injectors are blocked, but car would be noticeably sick


30%..............13l/100km to 10l/100km is something Mitsubishi would love to know about.

and also GMH,Ford,Chrysler,Toyota........

30%..............13l/100km to 10l/100km is something Mitsubishi would love to know about.

and also GMH,Ford,Chrysler,Toyota........

Personally this Economy thing is a Feed of Bull. If you want cheep running costs by a car that has better economy.
Or drive like grandpa does and see the economy improve. I cant see why people spend money and some lots to supposedly improve it for a couple of bucks a week savings on fuel at the most.

Just dont buy a SIDI commy

was proven that a G6 had better fuel economy over 1000KMs by Toby @Drive

Economy is the Holy Grail IMO

We will continue chasing it but will never obtain it

Personally this Economy thing is a Feed of Bull. If you want cheep running costs by a car that has better economy.
Or drive like grandpa does and see the economy improve. I cant see why people spend money and some lots to supposedly improve it for a couple of bucks a week savings on fuel at the most.


:stoopid: Install a supercharger :facejump:

I got 166.7 litres per hundred kilometres a few days ago.

Can anyone beat that economy?...:)

Yup there is a thread somewhere in the lounge

BTW I have seen on my way home from melbourne an instant figure of over 200l/100km

It sounds like warranty to me if it's broken, and, the reason they put Torx security screws on things is cause you ain't meant to stuff with it due to calibration.


My humble opinion on those mods (and my opinion only)?

1-galant intake snorkel...may improve economy marginally, but probably will increase it
2-cleaned Mass airflow sensor (used CRC airflow sensor cleaner - $24 a can but well worth it)..maybe if broken
3-rear muffler...will not improve fuel economy
4-k&n air filter..will not improve fuel economy
5-mobil 1 oil 5/50w...will not improve fuel economy
6-trade strength Nulon cleaner...maybe if injectors are blocked, but car would be noticeably sick


30%..............13l/100km to 10l/100km is something Mitsubishi would love to know about.

and also GMH,Ford,Chrysler,Toyota........

whatever all you seem to do mate is flame other peoples posts and automatically take to opossite opinion on any post
What i did worked and iam not making it up. My airflow sensor must have been dirty. I had no check engine lights at all and the fuel consumption was getting high and car felt like had a loss of power.Mitsubishi couldnt find a fault so i went on my own quest to fix it. Once i cleaned the airflow sensor it fixed it period. Its a totally different car now.Fuel consumption considerably and car has more power. Im happy and just hoped to pass this on as it was very frustrating
Im not saying everyone should do it but my car probably has travelled the most kays out of everyone (180,000) and people will probably have similar problems to me.

As for the galant intake everyone who has fitted it has noticed improvemnt in economy. You are against the galant intake obviously and im not sure why.

As for engine oil , its already been proven that you can get slightly more power and better fuel economy due to less drag coefficients with better oils.

Rear muffler - stock one is quite restrictive and does improve economy by changing to a straight thru

K&n - i guess the millions of people who have bought one have been ripped off and K&N shouldnt be in business?

no point disagreeing with the already proven facts. Not really going to get you anywhere.

Personally this Economy thing is a Feed of Bull. If you want cheep running costs by a car that has better economy.
Or drive like grandpa does and see the economy improve. I cant see why people spend money and some lots to supposedly improve it for a couple of bucks a week savings on fuel at the most.

i spent $400 on mods and now saving around $30 a week on fuel with muffler/k&n/ bigger intake. In 13 weeks the mods are paid for so anything after that is savings.
On top of that with the mods the car has around 12kw more power, depending on what fuel im running ,so more power so when i want to drive hard there is more power on tap.
win win situation for me

Personally this Economy thing is a Feed of Bull. If you want cheep running costs by a car that has better economy.
Or drive like grandpa does and see the economy improve. I cant see why people spend money and some lots to supposedly improve it for a couple of bucks a week savings on fuel at the most.
I guess it could be turned around the other way on power suspension and other mods too. Why bother going to all the trouble of supercharging a 380 and modding it further when you could go and buy a car that already has these mods. Non of it is BS rather it is what each of us is seeking out of our own vehicles. Non is right nor wrong, just different. MCHenry has 22" rims on his vehicle, I have stock 17" rims on mine, the fact that I don't have 22" rims doesn't make Matt's choice BS (Sorry to pick on you there Matt!! lol) or Foozr with his mods, same again. And cheap running costs and better economy don't necessarily go hand in hand. There are those here, myself included, that like chasing economy out of our "family trucksters" and do it successfully I might add. We enjoy it and like other modding is neither right nor wrong, just different.

i spent $400 on mods and now saving around $30 a week on fuel with muffler/k&n/ bigger intake. In 13 weeks the mods are paid for so anything after that is savings.
On top of that with the mods the car has around 12kw more power, depending on what fuel im running ,so more power so when i want to drive hard there is more power on tap.
win win situation for me

Totally with you on most of this Terry. I am a bit anal when it comes to watching my fuel consumption and have carefully noted any changes in consumption after different mods. After doing the 90mm intake and resonator mod I dropped 1l/100k. I was running 10.5 regularly and now down to 9.5 or lower. Do the math. Say 25,000 km per year you are doing 250 x 100 km. Using $1.25 as the bench mark for fuel that would make your savings per year over $312. The intake was $75 and the K&N was around the same (the jury is still out on the fuel effectiveness of the K&N but it will save money in filter changes in the future) so that makes $150 leaving me $162 up on what I would have been spending. Obviously Terry does a heap more km than I do so the savings are greater. For me What Blackstar is saying is not the general experience apart from injector cleaner where he is closer to the money. I appreciate what Terry has to say as it is another thing that may go wrong in the future and we need to be aware of it. Thanks mate!

I don't think Blackstar was flaming anyone. He did post that it was his opinion with all due respect.
If Terry has got 30% better results all power to him and no reason why others shouldn't try the same - that's why AMC exists. However, word of caution, I once owned a Nissan Silvia Q 9turbo) with lots of mods and decided to clean the air sensor one day; I used a special electrical cleaner and didn't touch the sensor. Really bad move. Ended up $300 poorer for a replacement and that was secondhand.

I believe all the mods are worth the small expense and certainly give more power. Trouble is, if you don't drive with a light foot you don't get better economy - damn!

I don't think Blackstar was flaming anyone. He did post that it was his opinion with all due respect.
If Terry has got 30% better results all power to him and no reason why others shouldn't try the same - that's why AMC exists. However, word of caution, I once owned a Nissan Silvia Q 9turbo) with lots of mods and decided to clean the air sensor one day; I used a special electrical cleaner and didn't touch the sensor. Really bad move. Ended up $300 poorer for a replacement and that was secondhand.

I believe all the mods are worth the small expense and certainly give more power. Trouble is, if you don't drive with a light foot you don't get better economy - damn!

That's it in a nutshell. We get all the mods on and it goes better soooo we drive it easier.......NOT! we are tempted as it sounds and goes better so we give it the berries a bit. Damn my fuel economy is worse with these mods. No it is probably the nut behind the wheel again lol.