Hey Guys & Gals;
I was just wondering how many K'z you guys get to a full tank of juice.
Of cource how you drive your car matters, but on average how many per tank.
I get about 250 .
Anyway let me know what you guys get.
Cheers Wayne
Some original photos have not been recovered yet.
Quote:
Originally Posted by vlturbo90
Hey Guys & Gals;
I was just wondering how many K'z you guys get to a full tank of juice.
Of cource how you drive your car matters, but on average how many per tank.
I get about 250 .
Anyway let me know what you guys get.
Cheers Wayne
i get that on freeyway if im babying it and if im lucky
n/a manual, exhaust & extractors
oh, its an old vl turbo, what uthink ur gonna get?
i hate when people with performace cars complain about fuel economy, do you waant a performance car? dont complain aboutt he economy
if u want economy, get a
By mad_wog (http://profile.imageshack.us/user/mad_wog) at 2007-08-07
Some original photos have not been recovered yet.
My VLT with bleed valve to 10psi, 3" exhaust gets about 12L/100Kms in city.
My last country trip (set AFM cal to a bit leaner) to Esperance from Perth
got me 9.58L/100Kms
@Mad_Wog
Your nick has me no longer perplexed
Performance cars dont have to be driven hard all the time as if you dont care
about money or getting too much attention, therefore its perfectly reasonable
to be interested in economy for any performance mods even to a non
performance factory car.
There are heaps of mods that improve performance *and* economy at the
very same time, such as exhaust, reducing intake pumping losses, better
plugs and leads , higher CR, fuel with more energy etc etc
Some original photos have not been recovered yet.
the main reason i got rid of my VL.....i would put a full tank in it every 2 days...granted i do 1000ks a week, but its alot easier with my new car that i only have to fuel up once or twice a week and get 600k's out of a tank or 700 if highway driving
If I was to drive the car to completely empty the tank, my fuel consumption would allow me to do atleast 400kms around the town with short trips and multiple cold starts, and on the open road at highway speeds of 110km/h to Perth which is 2.5hours from where I live, and sticking to speed limits through the towns and driving normally, I get atleast 600kms to a tank. With a good tune, and correctly serviced and maintained vehicles, cars which perform like mine does (10sec 1/4 mile) can still return awesome economy when driven normally when power isnt required.
All the people who say that they are getting 200kms in city driving and 400kms on the highway must have issues somewhere. Many factors that can contribute to bad fuel economy such as; low tyre psi, wrong viscosity oils in engine and diff and gearbox, AFM not correctly adjusted, bad tune on aftermarket computer, unserviced or incorrectly gapped plugs, slipping trans, faulty coolant temp sensor etc etc.
I have owned 4 vl's (3 turbos and 1 n/a) and I have had awesome economy out of every vehicle after I had done all my complete servicing using correct products and with some knowledge.
A classic example was when a friend complained that his standard vlt wasnt getting anywhere near the economy of mine which has lower diff ratio and stall and does 10's etc. After quickly checking his car, it was many reasons that contributed to it. The tyre psi was around 25psi when they should be approx 32psi all round, the oil was so discoloured, the AFM that was installed was reading to rich (using multimeter, its possible to calibrate it to correct reading), the auto gearbox hadnt been serviced in the 2 years he had the vehicle, and plugs were fouled etc. So many factors can easily be rectified to create better economy than currently experiencing.
Good points HoldenOn, lots of combinatorial factors and attention to detail
Reading between the lines and in relation to various other posts I have seen
re this cal screw on the AFM, I might add:-
The cal screw does nothing to the AFM output, its a screw that moves a 22
turn trim potentiometer that sends an analog voltage to the ECU on a
separate pin, its independent of the AFM function in all respects. Its the ECU
that decides what it does with this voltage and it acts as if its an AFM tune,
the actual algorithm is not clear but it appears to act as a base offset as
well as a fractional multiplier. This two part proportion might also be related
to engine speed as one of the many correction factors needed for compliance.
The 380 Ohm figure that is often touted is a guide only but if you want the
best state of tune then it should be done with the correct emissions test
gear etc.
This is not to say that setting the cal screw to 380 Ohms wont get close, it
very likely will and could be within the curve of 80% of cars on the road but
there are going to be occasions it bears little relation to the engines final
tuning requirements.
The single biggest influence on the final cal screw position as a result of
a proper tuning cycle will be the fuel pressure regulator - which should be
working flat across whole load range at 250.1 Kpa on n/a and turbo alike
but could be out by as much as 2% from new production.
Classic manufacturing tolerances for all the fuel system components require
some method to trim the tuning, its convenient to have the cal screw on the
AFM do this in concert with the idle speed adjust and ECU screw and this
can lead us to the assumption its AFM related when its a system adjustment.
Some original photos have not been recovered yet.
