1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Fuel Consumption Guide (repost)

Discussion in 'Fuel System & Electrics' started by Mordred, Dec 14, 2018.

  1. Mordred

    Mordred Super Moderator Staff Member

    Messages:
    2,775
    Location:
    Penna, Hobart
    Retrieved from the archives due to some questions about fuel consumption.

    This chart was worked out by a member (Dingostrategy, miss you bloke) quite a few years ago based on a sample of other members reporting their figure (real world figures and some factory spec) as well as some other sources of info. Only to be used as a GUIDE!!! Not meant as a definitive or highly accurate mileage calculator but should give new people some sort of idea of what to expect, and if they find they are way off without explanation, it might be worth looking in to why.


    [​IMG]

    Notes:

    • Raise or lower your target band according to the arrows on the right.
    • feel free to comment on whether this works for you, and report your efficiency and vehicle details if not.
    • For a graphic-free calculation, take 3/4 of your capacity (expressed as 16, 18, 21 etc, i.e a 1700 engine is '17'), and subtract 1.1. Then add or subtract one for the things listed near the arrows. (i.e. Warren's 1700 engine gives a calculation of around 11.5, adding about 2 for heavy bits, gives 13.5L/100km)
    • For Fuel Injection, the regression used ACTUAL figures. Theoretical figures and mechanic's advice is that an FI 2L should return ~12/100. Up to 30% increases have been reported for poorly tuned FI. Get yours looked at now!
    • Best estimate of carbon pollution for Type IV Kombi engine is 3kg/L (yes, 3). i.e. for average bus, around 25kg for every 100kms you do, or for an average daily driver, 500 TONNES per year. That's why I think this stuff's important.


    Disclaimer:

    The regression model used to compute this chart is only partly explains the relationship between these variables. The factors used to raise or lower the estimate are those that seemed to have an effect of greater than 1SD about the weighted grand mean. This is sort of dodgy statistically, but as an estimate, not too bad.
     

Share This Page