How are you guys finding oil consumption on average. Any of you's owned a FWD third gen magna before and can giv input

How are you guys finding oil consumption on average. Any of you's owned a FWD third gen magna before and can giv input
I've had both but my Verada isn't a good comparison because it was never really spot on with fuel. In the VR-X AWD lately I average 12-12.5L/100km, highway runs normally get it into the low 8's, best I've managed was low to mid 7's per hundred. My average week is about 70% around town, 30% freeway/open roads. I could get it up to 14.5-15L/100km pretty easy if I booted it everywhere but it's just a waste in Melbourne traffic, I usually drive pretty sedately with the rest of the traffic and just give it a punch every now then depending on environment.

Are you referring to oil consumption or petrol consumption? Title suggests petrol, but thread suggests oil.

Lugo: What do you do when driving on the highway? Sit on 90 with windows closed, no a/c plus no spare to see mid 7's per 100? lol I don't think I've ever seen much less than 10l/100km in either of the AWD's that I've owned!

Lugo: What do you do when driving on the highway? Sit on 90 with windows closed, no a/c plus no spare to see mid 7's per 100? lol I don't think I've ever seen much less than 10l/100km in either of the AWD's that I've owned!
Usually it's low to mid 8's on the highway is sitting on 100-110km/h. I've seen 7's only a couple of times and I was probably averaging 80-90km/h on those trips. I think it's been established in the past that I've got a bit of a freak awd for fuel economy though lol

Lugo, not to cast doubt on your abilities, but are you measuring your economy from actual Kms travelled and L of fuel put in, or the trip computer?
Also, do you have wheels from a mini on your car? This would save about 40% of fuel required to turn the odometer for each km :) because it would only travel 600m along the road. hehe

I think gt-pete was averaging 22l/100km.

Why does it matter? The extra traction and handling is worth every cent. If you don't like it go back to 2WD?

Lugo, not to cast doubt on your abilities, but are you measuring your economy from actual Kms travelled and L of fuel put in, or the trip computer?
Also, do you have wheels from a mini on your car? This would save about 40% of fuel required to turn the odometer for each km :) because it would only travel 600m along the road. hehe
I measure my economy at the pump doing the maths based off km's traveled on the amount of fuel required to click back off at full. Economy is more or less the same on either the 18's currently fitted, or the factory alloys. Was probably marginally better on the 16's if anything.

I'm officially impressed - mine is normally around 15L / 100km measured from odometer and qty of petrol to fill the tank back up.

I'd love to get 10L/100km but just like MunkeyManz says, it's worth it. Oh, and that I only do 10,000kms per year, the difference in fuel is about $700, so not too bad.

To answer the OP's question about comparison with FWD Magnas, I can state that the AWD uses between 1 to1.5 L/100km more than the FWD. I still have both versions, and once had to drive both cars on a trip from Sydney to Port Macquarie (me in the AWD, my wife and daughter in the FWD). This was the ideal comparison of fuel consumption, since both cars were in sight of each other the whole way.

Since the AWD was re-flashed to run on 95 RON fuel last year, I can get a reliable 10 L/100km on the freeway and about 13 L/100km in suburban Sydney.

To answer the OP's question about comparison with FWD Magnas, I can state that the AWD uses between 1 to1.5 L/100km more than the FWD. I still have both versions, and once had to drive both cars on a trip from Sydney to Port Macquarie (me in the AWD, my wife and daughter in the FWD). This was the ideal comparison of fuel consumption, since both cars were in sight of each other the whole way.

Since the AWD was re-flashed to run on 95 RON fuel last year, I can get a reliable 10 L/100km on the freeway and about 13 L/100km in suburban Sydney.

Yeah, I'm having alot of conflicting thoughts of AWD vs FWD in my mind. Can't decide which one would be better, I will definitely test drive both to get an idea but always see really bad posts on this foum saying the fuel consumption is horrendously more and then some say its a little more.

I'm a younger guy and will most probably use the car for round town trips (station, gym) and other more moderate suburban trips. I do have a bit of a lead foot, but not all the time, I like to cruise as well. I hate understeer and FWD-traction-in-the-rain.
SO wat you guys reckon, AWD for the win?

Lookin at this one right now:

http://sydney.gumtree.com.au/c-Cars-Vehicles-Motorbikes-Parts-cars-VERADA-2002-AWD-3-5-RARE-COLOUR-LOW-KMS-2ND-OWNER-REDUCED-W0QQAdIdZ306938105

Looks pretty *** mean and really good condition. Low kms to boot.

Or otherwise, I could get a KL/TJ VR-X or a TJ Series 2 Verada.

If you have lead foot expect fuel consumption to be north of 15l/100km

If you have lead foot expect fuel consumption to be north of 15l/100km

Well, by lead foot, I didn't mean 100% if you know wat I mean. I press it down, but the main reason would probably be cause I drive a 2005 4 cylinder accord as of now, which has non existent torque and requires quite a push to go anywhere. With the torquey magna engine, I'm sure my lead footedness would calm down.

Well, by lead foot, I didn't mean 100% if you know wat I mean. I press it down, but the main reason would probably be cause I drive a 2005 4 cylinder accord as of now, which has non existent torque and requires quite a push to go anywhere. With the torquey magna engine, I'm sure my lead footedness would calm down.
Don't count on it, you'll probably drive just as hard enjoying the extra pickup of a six.

Yeah, I'm having alot of conflicting thoughts of AWD vs FWD in my mind. Can't decide which one would be better, I will definitely test drive both to get an idea but always see really bad posts on this foum saying the fuel consumption is horrendously more and then some say its a little more.

I'm a younger guy and will most probably use the car for round town trips (station, gym) and other more moderate suburban trips. I do have a bit of a lead foot, but not all the time, I like to cruise as well. I hate understeer and FWD-traction-in-the-rain.
SO wat you guys reckon, AWD for the win?



There's no right or wrong answer to this - it all depends on your own driving tastes.

Personally, I would have trouble giving up the advantages of AWD. In wet weather, they're second to none. Powering out of corners without drama is another strong feature.

However, some people don't like AWD because you can't have as much "fun" smoking tyres, spinning wheels, and other ho-hum stuff. If you like white knuckle driving, skip the AWD.

Of course, you may find that a sensibly-driven FWD suits what you want perfectly. Whatever you choose, enjoy!

Don't count on it, you'll probably drive just as hard enjoying the extra pickup of a six.

haha yeah, i know that will obviously happen, but yeah, im not lead foot perse. just sometime when i feel the need for speed (ie. only in safe areas, such as empty industrial zones), i will press it hard, or when needed, otherwise, i like to cruize.

I think gt-pete was averaging 22l/100km.
Yep

Short trips
Heavy foot
Traffic
Heavy wheels

Recipe for obscene fuel consumption

Yep

Short trips
Heavy foot
Traffic
Heavy wheels

Recipe for obscene fuel consumption

22l/100 is just insane.
anyone else get such obscene figures

If we're talking about general aspects and not just the fuel economy side of things I can probably comment a little more accurately from my experiences with both. So here goes my little story.

I bought the VR-X AWD because I was astonished by how planted the car felt in comparison to any other Magna I'd driven, it had absolutely no torque steer and didn't give me that uncertain feeling about what was about to happen next under any of the conditions I put it in on my first test drive. At that point I'd never driven one in the rain (only been a passenger), but was so overcome by how planted it felt that I completely disregarded my want for a manual VR-X and bought it. I had the pleasure of getting it out on the Great Ocean Road for the weekend literally two days after I picked up the car and grasped the opportunity to properly put it through its paces out on the windy roads which I only felt confident doing because of how well it held to the road, and it didn't prove me wrong, even when it got a bit greasy, and wet.

I'm pretty sure the first time it properly rained while I was driving (which I usually hate being absolutely pedantic about my cars being clean) which made me love the car, I'd never driven an AWD car of any sort on a wet road before and it left me dumbfounded as to how the road quite literally felt dry despite the fact the windscreen was being absolutely pelted by water. Obviously you do need to remember that the car is still effected by the wet road, especially in terms of stopping or turn in, but that feeling of putting the power down off the line or giving it a boot full out of the corners in conditions where my Verada would've just spun helplessly if I tried to do any of the sort is really quite satisfying.

I for one did find I needed to remind myself a bit originally that is wet as that feeling of infinite grip can push your confidence well above where it should be at times, and it does need to be said that when it does let go you're gonna want to be on your game because you'll be going a hell of a lot harder towards whatever may be in your path when it does, although with that said I've always found my car to be quite linear and predictable if you do somehow manage to find your way beyond the limits of adhesion.

To get back on point, coming on two years later I haven't lost the love for the confidence of knowing the grip is there when I want it and when I need it, there's nothing like some mechanical traction control as I like to call it. If I had the choice again I wouldn't change it.

There are things I miss about the Verada, the steering for instance can feel a bit heavy at times in the AWD, I found it quite a handful when I took it through a slalom course once, manageable but getting very heavy indeed after a few left and rights in comparison to the Verada, and I do miss that feeling of being right on the very edge of what the car can handle when you give it the occasional blast off the line, AWD cars do always seem to give the feeling that they could have more power because of how little fuss they make of a standstill launch. It's also a heavier feeling car (probably because it is!) in regards to how it feels over speed humps/pot holes etc, but that and what else I've mentioned is a worthy trade off for what I've gained in return.

So yeah I'd say AWD for the win as you put it, I am biased because it's what I prefer, I'll stand by it being the best of the Magna's ever made until the cows come home, but don't take my word or anyone elses for it, drive them both back to back and make the call for yourself, none of us ended up in AWD Magna's because we were told to buy one by the forum, we picked them because it's what we prefer to drive :)

P.S. I apologise to anyone who wasted 2 minutes of their lives reading this :P

2 minutes well spent lol
Excellent ready Lugo, cheers. Personally I reckon all magna's should've been AWD... When I was driving my TW AWD over to perth from melb, I stopped over night at Port Wakefield S.A. It had no plates and was on a permit and I told the motel owner I'd just bought it in VIC and was driving back to WA. The next morning he said to me "I was wondering why you went all the way to VIC just to buy a magna? Then I had a closer look and realised, oh, it's not just an ordinary magna is it."

The way AWD handles confidently in both wet and dry is worth every extra cent of petrol it uses (extra fuel bill is life insurance in my eyes). As for being slow, that's a lie. They have lower ratio first couple of gears and can actually get the power down to the road!

i have a ralliart magna...tiptronic...k&n filter...riding on 20's....i usually get around 620kms to a tank

Just remembered, Pete and I drove to melbourne from sydney back in 2010. Pretty much just straight roads on the hume hwy. Pete in his AWD had to stop for fuel as he was getting low. I still had half a tank left in my FWD. that should give the OP some idea about consumption difference

Just remembered, Pete and I drove to melbourne from sydney back in 2010. Pretty much just straight roads on the hume hwy. Pete in his AWD had to stop for fuel as he was getting low. I still had half a tank left in my FWD. that should give the OP some idea about consumption difference
Pete's KL AWD was abnormally bad for fuel though, unless your FWD was getting 1000+km to a tank his economy couldn't have been right even for the highway. The Hume through that stretch is 110km/h for the most part which hits fuel economy pretty hard compared to your normal 100km/h, but my last Melb-Albury return trip still returned between 600 and 650km to about 60L including a bit of driving around in town while I was in Albury.

Yeah my average was 7.2 on the way down, and 6.8 on the way home. I made the trip from melb to syd without filling up on the return trip dare i say petes was around 10l/100km

Yeah my average was 7.2 on the way down, and 6.8 on the way home. I made the trip from melb to syd without filling up on the return trip dare i say petes was around 10l/100km
That'd still give him a 600-650km range depending on how game to soldier on he was. I assume then you had more like a quarter of a tank left, not half. Otherwise your economy would've had to have been like 5.5L/100km.

Don't forget when doing comparisons that the AWD fuel tank is also smaller, so it can be deceptive if you do km per tank comparisons ;)

That'd still give him a 600-650km range depending on how game to soldier on he was. I assume then you had more like a quarter of a tank left, not half. Otherwise your economy would've had to have been like 5.5L/100km.

Don't forget when doing comparisons that the AWD fuel tank is also smaller, so it can be deceptive if you do km per tank comparisons ;)

is it really, specs say awd is 2 litres bigger

BTW, thanks Lugo for that epic summary, was well worth the 2 minutes and what I was thinking along the lines of.

Its just that all these random quotes of absymal fuel consumption get me confused. I thought AWD was meant to be appr. 1/100km more than FWD Magna's. I think the case may have been Pete's car was pretty bad on fuel, theres multiple cases of FWD cars even with shit fuel consumption.

Yeah my average was 7.2 on the way down, and 6.8 on the way home. I made the trip from melb to syd without filling up on the return trip dare i say petes was around 10l/100km

Spot on. 10.0L/100. Although we were sitting on between 110-120 all the way which is not the most economical speed

is it really, specs say awd is 2 litres bigger
AWD tank is smaller to allow for the rear diff. It's 65L, pretty sure the FWD models are 70 or 71L.

2 minutes well spent lol
The way AWD handles confidently in both wet and dry is worth every extra cent of petrol it uses (extra fuel bill is life insurance in my eyes). As for being slow, that's a lie. They have lower ratio first couple of gears and can actually get the power down to the road!

Spot on! I've never understood why some people reckon AWDs are "slow" off the line. I think Lugo nailed it when he mentioned the lack of fuss compared to getting a 2WD going from a standing start.

First gear is very low, but the AWD allows all the torque to be used without any need for traction control (which just kills engine power until the driving wheels on a 2WD can cope). Just as an experiment, see how quickly you can get from rest to 50 kph and count how many 2WD family sedans can stay with you up to that point. With the AWD, there will be no tyre smoke, no squealing and no torque steer - it just goes.

Spot on! I've never understood why some people reckon AWDs are "slow" off the line. I think Lugo nailed it when he mentioned the lack of fuss compared to getting a 2WD going from a standing start.

First gear is very low, but the AWD allows all the torque to be used without any need for traction control (which just kills engine power until the driving wheels on a 2WD can cope). Just as an experiment, see how quickly you can get from rest to 50 kph and count how many 2WD family sedans can stay with you up to that point. With the AWD, there will be no tyre smoke, no squealing and no torque steer - it just goes.

yeah, people just complain that they dont get that initial rush from the acceleration, like as someone said, the tugging of the steering wheel and what not. but i can imagine the awd would just grip straight out and go hard, only if someone had a video of the awd in car goin hard from 0-60km/h.
would be interested to see.
might be going next week to test drive the black verada awd.

Spot on! I've never understood why some people reckon AWDs are "slow" off the line. I think Lugo nailed it when he mentioned the lack of fuss compared to getting a 2WD going from a standing start.

First gear is very low, but the AWD allows all the torque to be used without any need for traction control (which just kills engine power until the driving wheels on a 2WD can cope). Just as an experiment, see how quickly you can get from rest to 50 kph and count how many 2WD family sedans can stay with you up to that point. With the AWD, there will be no tyre smoke, no squealing and no torque steer - it just goes.

...and what's more, the AWD will accelerate at the same rate in the wet or on gravel! Plus will corner without a fuss. AWD's also have a G-force sensor as part of the ABS/EBD system which the 2WD magna's didn't get (I think MMAL spent $700,000 on tuning the ABS/EBD and adding the G sensor for the AWD). Straight away that tells me they are a much more serious motor car.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FCpVZB898eI

If someone had just sent me this, I wouldve been convinced from day one,

We're not supposed to post youtube videos in here, otherwise I would've :P How far will the other cars make it? Well... as far as the first corner!

Haha always loved that ad! I think that should be allowed to be posted anywhere!! Haha
Also love reading this thread and knowing that my vr4 has lower consumption then awd magnas. Hahah

I've tested the traffic light grand prix in my AWD many times and think I have 1 key story:

Not long after I got my Magna, I was quite impressed with it's stability, so I gradually tested it and found that accelerating from a standstill, even in heavy rain, the car didn't veer to the side at all.

This culminated in me testing a 0-80kph run in heavy rain - the traffic light went green, I stomped on the throttle and launched hard without touching the steering wheel - my AWD Magna took off and in about 6 seconds was doing 80kph and still perfectly centred in the middle lane all without touching the steering wheel still. I don't recommend this and haven't done it since.

"no fuss" and "confidence" don't really describe my Magna sufficiently. Magical might come closer :)

I've tested the traffic light grand prix in my AWD many times and think I have 1 key story:

Not long after I got my Magna, I was quite impressed with it's stability, so I gradually tested it and found that accelerating from a standstill, even in heavy rain, the car didn't veer to the side at all.

This culminated in me testing a 0-80kph run in heavy rain - the traffic light went green, I stomped on the throttle and launched hard without touching the steering wheel - my AWD Magna took off and in about 6 seconds was doing 80kph and still perfectly centred in the middle lane all without touching the steering wheel still. I don't recommend this and haven't done it since.

"no fuss" and "confidence" don't really describe my Magna sufficiently. Magical might come closer :)

sounds awesome, was looking to hear something like that.

yeah, people just complain that they dont get that initial rush from the acceleration, like as someone said, the tugging of the steering wheel and what not. but i can imagine the awd would just grip straight out and go hard, only if someone had a video of the awd in car goin hard from 0-60km/h.
would be interested to see.
AWD cars don't tend to give that rush because of the way they grip, they don't have any sense of being on their limit (Unless it's got some ridiculous amount of power, Ken Blocks Focus for instance). I can confidently say the FWD accelerates quicker and pushes you back in the seat hard once you're rolling and gripping, they just don't get that jump off the line an AWD does, nor do have almost endless amounts of grip if traction isn't ideal. Don't get me wrong, if you're looking for the fastest Magna you can get, don't buy an AWD, you've gotta be happy to compromise a little for the stability and practicality AWD gives, because it's not the faster option overall, unless of course you live in the country on mostly dirt roads, or in an area where it seems to rain 370 days a year like Melbourne does more often than not :P I can video 0-60 if you really want to see it? Just don't expect anything too amazing lol

AWD cars don't tend to give that rush because of the way they grip, they don't have any sense of being on their limit (Unless it's got some ridiculous amount of power, Ken Blocks Focus for instance). I can confidently say the FWD accelerates quicker and pushes you back in the seat hard once you're rolling and gripping, they just don't get that jump off the line an AWD does, nor do have almost endless amounts of grip if traction isn't ideal. Don't get me wrong, if you're looking for the fastest Magna you can get, don't buy an AWD, you've gotta be happy to compromise a little for the stability and practicality AWD gives, because it's not the faster option overall, unless of course you live in the country on mostly dirt roads, or in an area where it seems to rain 370 days a year like Melbourne does more often than not :P I can video 0-60 if you really want to see it? Just don't expect anything too amazing lol

haha yeah, dont worry, i actualy found a video on the net of it, wasn't amazing but still decent. I live in a suburban area so no dirt or anything, and it does rain around here but not a shitload.

I was out an about so I thought I'd give you a bit of a gravel launch demonstration on my way home, I am sorry about the dodgy commentary and camera work, it was a spur of the moment idea and I didn't have any of the proper gear with me. Gives you a rough idea of what traction is like on take off and round a corner though on your typical less than ideal surface. What I should've done was monitored fuel economy for this effort so I could keep it strictly on topic but hey what can you do :P

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p_a5QYVRuIo

Awesome video Lugo! Thanks for posting that. AWD FTW!

I have broken traction in mine, both wet and gravel, both unintentional.
First I was entering a roundabout, pissing with rain when a ute, going to fast for the conditions, entered from the right, I had no option to go straight ahead, but to plant it and go right, ute missed the rear of the car, and mine lost traction, AWD drift is a weird experience.
Second, was travelling home with the Family after a trip to Perth and was taking a shortcut down a gravel road to the adjacent highway, when I went round a bend and the car again drifted, yet was very controllable in both occasions.

In terms of fuel usage, yes it uses slightly more than the TH I once owned, but, I still manage 750/800 on the open highway and 500 round the suburbs. It's a sacrifice I'm willing to make.
Unlike earlier days, there are more fuel stops out in the sticks, so, the extra usage is null and void.

Crappy tires in the wet are fun in an AWD, I've drifted sideways through a few corners, but apart from that - always 100% traction.

I have never managed to break traction off the line when heading straight ahead

I was out an about so I thought I'd give you a bit of a gravel launch demonstration on my way home, I am sorry about the dodgy commentary and camera work, it was a spur of the moment idea and I didn't have any of the proper gear with me. Gives you a rough idea of what traction is like on take off and round a corner though on your typical less than ideal surface. What I should've done was monitored fuel economy for this effort so I could keep it strictly on topic but hey what can you do :P

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p_a5QYVRuIo

thanks for the great video man, what mods does your car have. i'm assuming its not stock.

Just so that no-one thinks that these cars can't lose traction at all under any circumstances, I suggest you have a look here...... (http://www.aussiemagna.com/forums/album.php?albumid=603)

This is what can happen at low speed, under 60 KPH! Once these things lose traction at all four wheels, it's very hard to control them! Don't say you weren't warned!! :eek2:

BTW: No-one was injured in the smash, all 3 of us walked away with nothing more than a few headaches. :happy:

Al that's just your driving style, dare to be different :P I've always found mine to be very predictable and gradual in the event of traction loss.

On that note above though please don't take my video as an example of the impossibility to loose traction, I'm only demonstrating how much extra grip you have over the standard car, definitely not impossible to get unstuck, I would just think you'd have to be doing something pretty out of the ordinary (generally speaking) to get that way out of shape, unless of course you're skimping out on things like your tyres, which can play a big part when it comes to how well these hold on.

I had Dunlop SP Sport MaxxGT tyres on my car when I originally fitted the 18" wheels to it, which are by no means a cheap tyre (They're standard issue on the current model FPV GT-P for example), but they let go quite easily if you really gave it a boot full out of a tight corner, where as the Continental tyres on there now (typically found on most of the higher end Audi, BMW, Merc saloon range etc) hold on much better in the same conditions and require a lot more effort to let go.
(We're talking wet weather just so you all know, I've never got unstuck in the dry)

The AWD isnt that much more expensive to run than the FWD.
A lot of it, comes down to driving style, driving conditioning (in the middle of a city / outer city / rural) - these will all effect economy of a FWD too, in stop start conditions a FWD magna can also kill your wallet at the pump if you want it to..

The tradeoff that you gain through slightly increased fuel economy is the extra grip. There are times when you do need power / grip to be able to get out of a situation (I have nearly been crashed into in the wet on the road by other cars and the only reason I didnt get hit was because I was able to get the car away from them.)

My AWD Rada, with its flashed ECU, can better some FWD 5Speed Auto FWD Magna / Veradas with 8.03L/100km on a PURE highway stint @ 100/110km/hr

Around town, the car will feel heavier than a FWD - because it is - it is at least 100KG heavier than the FWD comparitive, Diffs and drive shafts etc all have weight to them.
I find personally that at highway speed the AWD feels much ore stable than the FWD does, it feels more settled, which to me makes it a much more relaxing drive

At town speeds, you wont feel the extra grip - just the extra weight,, but with more speed (as posted) and changing conditions you find that you can definatley feel the extra grip and start to 'tap into it' more and more. The feeling of security that it can bring to a heavy downpour driving situation is invaluable.

After having an AWD Verada, I would never go back to a FWD car of any sorts or maker, as someone who easily gets bored of my cars and buys new ones me keeping this one for the 4years that I have is an excellent sign.

Also the look on some peoples faces when you come through a wet corner with some reasonable speed and dont spear off the side / understeer off the side, is quite a shock for some people - but that is a MAGNA is the expression used the most (a lot of people have forgotten Mitsubishi made the AWD Magna / Verada Varient.

In short - the extra fuel consumption is worth it - for the rare event that you need the extra grip / traction in some situations.
Better to have it and not be needing it all the time - than to not have it and to need it (so to speak)

I would buy another onne again

AWD Verada :) Loves it!

Solid effort there Al.

And Doddski, I wouldnt call it rare that you are assisted by the extra grip - it helps to keep you safer round every corner you take, especially in the wet

After having an AWD Verada, I would never go back to a FWD car of any sorts or maker, as someone who easily gets bored of my cars and buys new ones me keeping this one for the 4years that I have is an excellent sign.

Also the look on some peoples faces when you come through a wet corner with some reasonable speed and dont spear off the side / understeer off the side, is quite a shock for some people - but that is a MAGNA is the expression used the most (a lot of people have forgotten Mitsubishi made the AWD Magna / Verada Varient.

I would buy another onne again

AWD Verada :) Loves it!

My thoughts exactly! I've lost count of the baffled looks on people's faces when I tell them I have a Magna AWD. It's as if the words "Magna" and "AWD" can't possibly be in the same sentence.

My thoughts exactly! I've lost count of the baffled looks on people's faces when I tell them I have a Magna AWD. It's as if the words "Magna" and "AWD" can't possibly be in the same sentence.

try magna and RWD and they will shit bricks.

There seems to be some confusion between grip and traction. AWD Magna for example has better traction but no more grip then FWD Magna provided they are running same suspension settings and tyres.
When driving in the wet M3 was quicker around Top Gear track then AWD Audi RS even if Audi has more power .AWD is easier and more predictable to drive fast for less experienced drivers then other layouts as it is harder to lose traction especially in low powered car.
AWD Magna wont corner faster then FWD Magna if set up identically due to identical grip being available.

There seems to be some confusion between grip and traction. AWD Magna for example has better traction but no more grip then FWD Magna provided they are running same suspension settings and tyres.
When driving in the wet M3 was quicker around Top Gear track then AWD Audi RS even if Audi has more power .AWD is easier and more predictable to drive fast for less experienced drivers then other layouts as it is harder to lose traction especially in low powered car.
AWD Magna wont corner faster then FWD Magna if set up identically due to identical grip being available.

I disagree, when powering out of a corner, and say for argument's sake you had identical power at the wheels - an AWD is going to be better at putting power down, and will handle differently out of the corner once that power is applied

I disagree, when powering out of a corner, and say for argument's sake you had identical power at the wheels - an AWD is going to be better at putting power down, and will handle differently out of the corner once that power is applied


Power out of corner on AWD is due to higher traction due to torque being divided between all four wheels. This is really noticable on wet or loose surfaces hence most rally cars are AWD . AWD has better traction but not more grip - on tarmac Rally Monte Carlo quickest cars were Front Wheel drives (306 Maxi) .
It would be interesting to compare cornering speeds between AWD and FWD Magna - i believe there would be no difference if running same tyres and suspension set up.

Power out of corner on AWD is due to higher traction due to torque being divided between all four wheels. This is really noticable on wet or loose surfaces hence most rally cars are AWD . AWD has better traction but not more grip - on tarmac Rally Monte Carlo quickest cars were Front Wheel drives (306 Maxi) .
It would be interesting to compare cornering speeds between AWD and FWD Magna - i believe there would be no difference if running same tyres and suspension set up.

You say the AWD will power out of a corner better, yet you say that neither will 'corner faster'....? Half of cornering is powering out of it! You have just contradicted yourself (or am I missing something)

IMO - Lateral grip is almost the same - take a corner too fast and both are going to slide off the corner instead of going round it.

The AWD's advantage is that when right at the edge of grip limitations, the diffs will shuffle power or engine braking to where there is grip and this helps the AWD a little.
The FWD's advantage is that it weighs a little less, this probably cancels out the advantages of the diff.

Then the AWD will get it's power down better, but doesn't accelerate quite as hard due to being heavier and more drivetrain losses.
Braking is probably equal - the AWD weighs more but had bigger brakes to compensate.

In the end, on the dry, I think they are probably equal, with the FWD edging ahead if acceleration plays a big part and the AWD being ahead (possibly by a long way) in adverse conditions.

BUT: the FWD can have a manual gear box. I think this would make it massively quicker than an AWD in the dry. eg: 1 seconds difference in a drag race is a long lead (40+ metres) my AWD auto does 15.8 second 1/4mile, some (near?) stock manual FWDs can break into the 14seconds range.

You say the AWD will power out of a corner better, yet you say that neither will 'corner faster'....? Half of cornering is powering out of it! You have just contradicted yourself (or am I missing something)

On low grip surface AWD power down advantage is resulting in better cornering control and quicker times - on grippy surface tyres have more grip in reserve to divide between cornering and driving - so the difference in cornering speed would not be large.

Its all about chassis balance and correct suspension geometry at the end of the day. AWD can certainly make
up for imperfections where the car flexes a fair bit like in a large heavy sedan, but a well sorted modern sports FWD will be able to show up the most accomplished AWD through all types of corners. The AWD will come in to its own on dirt roads where grip is really minimal

Well sorted FWD is great - i am biased as one of my all time favourite cars is 306 Maxi - check it out in action at Rally of Monte Carlo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cPzcihPq3mk&feature=youtube_gdata_player

Awesome car the 306, saw a red GTi-6 in top ryde car park just yesterday. Red P plater too, someone is smart! Just a shame that Peugeot fail at making hot hatches in the present day

Dave you ve got the pick of the current fwd hatches , and larger one from same manufacturer is good too.

I'd just like to put my foot in here and say that i did a trip with my mum on my Ls from Melbourne to Uluru/Alice Springs and back in (soon to be) my 2001 TJ Executive 3.5 auto that started the trip on 122,222ks
we averaged from high 8s down to 8.1L/100k
for a 10 year old FWD car that is as stock as a bone, i think thats pretty decent :D

AMs an AWD will average low 9's so that isnt anything special :D

As mentioned in another fuel economy thread, I was getting 14.5L/100 with DTE of 480kms with spirited driving around town on a daily 20km each way drive. I've been taking it easy the past month and it has come down to 12.7 with a DTE of 550kms. A huge improvement.

Lugo: I for one did find I needed to remind myself a bit originally that is wet as that feeling of infinite grip can push your confidence well above where it should be at times, and it does need to be said that when it does let go you're gonna want to be on your game because you'll be going a hell of a lot harder towards whatever may be in your path when it does, although with that said I've always found my car to be quite linear and predictable if you do somehow manage to find your way beyond the limits of adhesion.

I found that the AWDs have a g-force sensor which is used by the ABS to aid its functionality. It would be handy to be able to tap into that and have some sort of a graphical display so you know under dry/wet conditions how much G it can take before letting go.

The clio handily has a g-force feature, and knows when the car is partially airborne/airborne of which brake to apply and how much pressure to apply when the swaybars detect it has landed. Plenty useful when 3-wheeling haha

Hi Guys so after owning and driving my AWD for a cpl weeks it seems consistantly giving me low-mid 14 and the trip comp has given me a the fuel light at 375k's and a fuel usage of appx 50L. Now this is with a decent HWAY run down to hope island and back included and a run to the southside and back on the Hway also. On the HWAy I can get it down to 9L/100 but seems my trips to work and back (5kms) not to much traffic but build ups at lights. Now given the size of the tank i would think 500-550 wouldn't be a ridiculous expectation would it????

5kms is a very short trip which means it is running in cold cycle the whole time using more fuel. It is even worse if that 5kms is the combined distance.

Put it this way, my wife's 2.0L MIVEC 07 Outlander XLS returns 14L/100 when dropping off/picking up my daughter from our local school (2km away).

No, it's not.
Like I have said before, I use the Litre's used on the trip then the guage as the trip is more accurate.
I have gotten mine down to 8.6L/100 on a previous trip and gotten nearly 800km from a tank. And thats with A/C on the whole time.

Got any suggestions on mods to improve my economy Grelise???? Not sure exactly what I should do to try and improve it I have read the O2 sensor would be the first thing to check, is there a way to tell if its buggered from an inspection point of view.

O2 sensor, thermostat and driver attitude, driver weight and excess weight in the car. As I said before, what is killing your efficiency is the short trips to/from work. Cars run richer when cold. A buggered thermostat that is sending lower temperatures also causes the engine to run rich.

What is the driving to and from work like?

Correction to my previous post. The ZG Outlander has a 2.4 MIVEC I4 engine.

Not sure what you mean, like??? As in myself, traffic, ect??

Not sure what you mean, like??? As in myself, traffic, ect??
both. driving style. traffic condition. road condition like speed limits and flat or hilly etc.

The AWD isnt that much more expensive to run than the FWD.
A lot of it, comes down to driving style, driving conditioning (in the middle of a city / outer city / rural) - these will all effect economy of a FWD too, in stop start conditions a FWD magna can also kill your wallet at the pump if you want it to..

The tradeoff that you gain through slightly increased fuel economy is the extra grip. There are times when you do need power / grip to be able to get out of a situation (I have nearly been crashed into in the wet on the road by other cars and the only reason I didnt get hit was because I was able to get the car away from them.)

My AWD Rada, with its flashed ECU, can better some FWD 5Speed Auto FWD Magna / Veradas with 8.03L/100km on a PURE highway stint @ 100/110km/hr

Around town, the car will feel heavier than a FWD - because it is - it is at least 100KG heavier than the FWD comparitive, Diffs and drive shafts etc all have weight to them.
I find personally that at highway speed the AWD feels much ore stable than the FWD does, it feels more settled, which to me makes it a much more relaxing drive

At town speeds, you wont feel the extra grip - just the extra weight,, but with more speed (as posted) and changing conditions you find that you can definatley feel the extra grip and start to 'tap into it' more and more. The feeling of security that it can bring to a heavy downpour driving situation is invaluable.

After having an AWD Verada, I would never go back to a FWD car of any sorts or maker, as someone who easily gets bored of my cars and buys new ones me keeping this one for the 4years that I have is an excellent sign.

Also the look on some peoples faces when you come through a wet corner with some reasonable speed and dont spear off the side / understeer off the side, is quite a shock for some people - but that is a MAGNA is the expression used the most (a lot of people have forgotten Mitsubishi made the AWD Magna / Verada Varient.

In short - the extra fuel consumption is worth it - for the rare event that you need the extra grip / traction in some situations.
Better to have it and not be needing it all the time - than to not have it and to need it (so to speak)

I would buy another onne again

AWD Verada :) Loves it!

Hi, I am interested to find out who flashed the ECU in your car and how much you paid for it to be able to achieve such a low fuel consumption. I own a Verada GTVI AWD II and it really kills me to drive it around town at 14.5lt/100kms. In the highway, in a 20 kms drive starts going down up to 11.2lt/100km. I took the car for a service with the mechanic and I reckon that for changing the oil (and although he said that he had checked the the other 2 for the transmission) I ended up paying $ 180.00 which I think it was not worth it against the $ 420.00 that Mitsubishi was asking me for the 60000 kms service. I got annoyed because I bought a disc with the repair manual and I discover that you need a MUT-II or III engine analyzer to be able to properly see how everything is working and for also to be able to cancel the service code that appears in the car for every service. So if you care to write me a line, appreciated.

Hi Vlad
I own a car exactly like yours with 60000 km on the clock and I came across (according with a repair disc manual) the MUT-2 or 3 engine analyzer that you need have to be able to check the Mitsubishi cars. Although our cars are already kind of "old technology", still we do need one of them to do a good job "at home". I consider then that a mechanic should need to have one of them to provide you with a good service. At least if you go to Mitsubishi for a service and you demand the print out of the engine analyzer, you know that they have the right tools and that they did the right thing for you. I'm 65 y.o and at this stage I can not go under the car to make an oil change or start trying to change an oil filter or going ever deeper than that, so have you ever thought about it, the engine analyzer? In Ebay they range from US$ 329.00 (wireless) up to the professional ones for US$ 1150.00. Have a look and send me a line, if you've got some time available.

Hi ewsy, no I have not thought about getting the MUT-II analyser. You can easily find the error codes etc using a simple test light. There are instructions on here on how to do it. I always take my car to a Mitsubishi service centre for general services. One thing you should do for yours is to fit an external transmission cooler in-line with the existing one (that is the bottom of the radiator). This, along with regular transmission servicing and genuine Mitsubishi or SPIII transmission oil will prolong the life of the very complex auto trans.

As for fuel usage, 14.5 around town is a bit high. I only got that high when I was flooring it at every light and only letting go of the accelerator at the last minute, so to speak. Depending on the route I take to and from work (whether I go into the city or not), I am getting 12.5 to 13.0. On the trip to Robe and back I averaged 9.5 and that was with numerous overtaking manoeuvres. I always manually shift up. I let the ECU/TCU shift down unless I am going around a corner or I anticipate that the lights are about to go green. I find kicking down to down change actually uses more fuel than manually changing down. Also, I never rev beyond 2200rpm unless I floor it and hence, I shift to 5th at just above 40km/hr to take full advantage of the low down torque. When I got SKR to tune my car, I asked for it to lean out a little as well. The end result was not much gain in power but a generous increase in torque through a wider rev range. I find that during school holidays, I can get it down to as low as 11.5 doing the same route.

http://i856.photobucket.com/albums/ab124/vbednikov/mycar/SKR_TUNE2.jpg

Since then I have fitted 380 cams but have yet to get it retuned. In saying that, I am using 98RON to achieve the above figures of fuel usage.

BTW, what colour is yours and have you made any mods to it?

Hi Vlad
In the first place I would like to wish a Happy New Year and secondly to apologize for the delay in responding to yours. I have been very busy and although I had the report of the dynamometer in the glove box of my car, I was always forgetting to grab it from it because I don't use the car very often (once a month..?) Finally today , because I had to get the rego papers I also got the results and I have to tell you that I'm really disappointed with the pathetic information that I received printed in mine against the quality and quantity in yours.
Because I don't know how you inserted your report here (if you tell me how to do it, I'll do it, I have a scanner if I need it) I want to tell you that on the left hand side I have the KW, bottom KPH and right hand side AFR:P (?) from 10 (bottom) to 18 (top). Do you know what that is AFR:P? The final result was that at 153 KPH showed 96.9 KW. Very unimpressive!!! Now coming back to the engine analyzer I saw very elementary ones starting from $ 28.00 that at least with one of them you can get rid of that bloody light telling you that you are in the 60000 km service and that if you take it to M'shi after the service they are going to cancel it for you. A friend of mind has another car like ours and he told me that after you are over the 60000 km mark the light disappear by itself.
Regarding the external transmission cooler, I have everything with me to install it but I am going to do it when i put the car to repaint front and rear bumper bars because the back one has a small dent and the front one has bottom scratches which happened when I go out of the building into the street. I realized that to be able to avoid this I had to come out 30+ degrees across the entrance to avoid the sinking in the street. Well, I learnt my lesson. I asked to some auto-trans specialists if they had ever installed an E.T.C. in this particular car and the answers were "no" or just bring it and we'll see what we can do for you. There was only one that on the phone was able to quote $ 220.00 to install it (with me providing everything).
Just a comment but I saw it (and learned it) in You Tube how to make a complete flush of any automatic transmission without rolling the car one centimeter and only using (in our case) no more than twelve liters of ATF. Total time if you have drainage plug for the ATF: ten, yes ten minutes!!!!! Unbelievable how we are being taken for a ride by the auto-trans specialists telling you that you need one now, come back in two hundred kilometers and get a second one and you know what: after the second one still your ATF is contaminated with the old fluid!!!
If you are interested let me know and I'll explain to you how he did it. I'm still in a state of sock in how simple and easy it is and angry at how come that the auto-trans specialists don't do it because they want you to spend a lot of money or because THEY SIMPLY DON'T KNOW HOW TO DO IT. Anyway that's life.
By the way, I believe that I didn't tell you that I installed in the car all HID lamps, front and rear parking sensors and reverse camera which is not at the deep level of modifications that you made in yours and that means touching any mechanical parts.
Doddski wrote an article, the one on top of yours that he mentioned his "AWD Rada, with its flashed ECU" and I don't know of any one doing this job here in Sydney. Are you aware of some one doing that because I'm very curious about the result of his car economy after the flashing. The other option that I was looking into was a gas conversion but now things have changed dramatically about that option. Before you were able to buy 2.2 liters of gas for 1 of petrol but now is only 1.55 of gas for 1 of petrol. By the time that I look at the extra consumption of gas against petrol not only i might end up breaking even but I rang M'shi many times while they were in Adelaide about the conversion and they always told me "no you can not do it in that particular model". It seems to be that everything was related to the valve seats not being hard enough to support "higher temperature" than what the normal petrol combustion does produce.
I have also to tell you that my other car died a Magna Elite 1990 and I bought a Magna Altera TF 1997 3L, good condition, owner an old person, well looked after but I have a problem that makes the car to use a lot more petrol that what it should: doesn't matter how gentle I try with the accelerator, the fourth gear doesn't engage until the car is at 57 KPH.
I drive with the GPS on all the time and it keeps continuously telling me that I am in a 50 KPH zone and either I break the speed limit by 10 KPH to engage fourth gear or I drive in third all the time. Sydney has become almost 40% of it "a 50 KPH zone". I talked before Xmas with Central Automatics and they guessed on the phone that it could be a sensor; I had before some kind of similar trouble with my Magna Elite and they fixed it by adjusting the voltage of the sensor that manages the gear box. To make a comparison between this car and the Verada: this one is a crazy horse that you touch the accelerator and flies while the Verada you can control it from a very calm and sedated car to a very up and go one. Will see what happens when I take it to them to have a look at the auto-trans sensor.
Well, last but not least the color of my car is Silver and as I mention before I only made those cosmetic modifications to the car.
It will be then until the next time and if they discover what was happening with the auto-tans and fix it I will let you know what it was.
Regards, ewsy

EwSY, I will reply in full later. in short, AFR is air fuel ratio. ETC installation on ours is a b***h to do. The whole bar has to come off. Lots of scrivets to undo (need to get some new ones from mitsu ready as some will get damaged during removal). It will take over two hours to do so $220 labour is not bad. Be sure not to route the lines over the radiator fan but go under the battery.

I've just done a run from Canberra to Adelaide (where I am now). Achieved 8.6l/100km (11.6km/l) with the aircon on most of the way in 40ºC+ temperatures.

PS: My car has a std 91 octane tune, HM headers & trans external cooler. Apparently puts out more power ATW than vlad's too. See: http://www.aussiemagna.com/forums/showthread.php?t=71053&p=1596077&viewfull=1#post1596077

I've just done a run from Canberra to Adelaide (where I am now). Achieved 8.6l/100km (11.6km/l) with the aircon on most of the way in 40ºC+ temperatures.

PS: My car has a std 91 octane tune, HM headers & trans external cooler. Apparently puts out more power ATW than vlad's too. See: http://www.aussiemagna.com/forums/showthread.php?t=71053&p=1596077&viewfull=1#post1596077
Meh, different dyno but check out my torque vs yours. Put it this way. I have beaten many a V8 off the lights in merge lanes (I don't condone this). It is the torque that is more important for an AWD, esp low down torque.

Meh, different dyno but check out my torque vs yours.
I think you'll find your torque figures are dodgy - they're about double the real figures. That's because there is a fixed relationship between torque & power for any given RPMs. For that reason, it's also impossible for one car to produce more torque than another at the same RPM but less power.

The Torque/RPM/Power relationship is:
Power(Kw)=Torque(Nm)*RPM*2*PI/60000
Thus, if we use your dyno figures:
411.8Nm*3780RPM(88Km/h)*2*PI/60000=163Kw
Obviously, that's much greater than the reported peak power (105.9Kw), which didn't occur until 4770rpm(111Km/h).