How many KMS per tank - 2002 NB

[Black_Penguin]

I average 7.5-8.2 L/100km in my NB8A, mostly my 5 min commute to work/town and the weekly highway trip for my volunteer work.

[Jeo]

OP?

Original Poster. The person who asked the question in the first place, yet couldn't provide numbers when asked multiple times.

[Missy]

Jeo

Didn't answer multiple times as I have no info... No need to reply like an ass.

I already said thanks to everyone who replied and I also said I will go away and do some proper calculations based on the help I have been given.

I trust this answer is sufficient for you.

[Hjt]

Original Poster. The person who asked the question in the first place, yet couldn't provide numbers when asked multiple times.

All the OP (face palm) required to say was, hey guys I filled up my car with 40 litres and only travelled 340km in medium traffic levels, is it a bad reading etc.

It would have saved all the posts. Guran added a really great quality post that I wish many others bothered to fully comprehend.

How many litres do you usually buy when you fill up? For example, a 29L fill would mean 8.0L/100km and you would be pretty happy with that. But a 35L fill would mean 9.7L/100km which is on the high side. (assuming "360km per tank" in both calculations)

amount of litres filled up/kilometres travelled = km/l

I think something is off tbh (to be honest), my SP (1.8 Turbo) gets an average of 330 km off 42 litres, which is a tad over 12l/100km.

Driving gentle I have achieved 395km in Sydney traffic. Highway even less.

[NitroDann]

Wheel size or something, diff ratio maybe.


Anyways I said it before who cares, minor discrepancies in consumption cannot be 'fixed' for less than just paying the few extra dollars and enjoying the car, without stressing about it.

As i said, I just bought another pair of tyres, I do this every month or 2, but it doesnt stop me enjoying the car.

Dann

[zero00]

Jeo

Understand now. To me, this was never about 'cost', it was about 'how many kilometres from a tank', assuming the gauges are correct. Guran was correct in saying the number of litres/distance travelled

Regardless of what topic someone posts, it is their perogative to do so and also for people to answer as they see fit and attract comments, unfortunately regardless of the topic there will always be someone that can't see any reason for it continuing, and to them I say 'fine, DON'T come back and look at it!!' Unfortunately they don't

How many times do you see someone beside the road, OUT OF FUEL!! Simply because in most cases they had no idea how far their car would go on a tank and how much was left in it when the gauge hit 'empty'. When my NA hits the 'empty' mark, I find it still has 8-10 litres left based on a 45 litre tank, nice to know but not a good idea letting it get that far down!

Only this morning as I drove past my 'SHELL' station it was closed, normally a 24/7 operation, I didn't need fuel but if I did, another 20km back later this afternoon and the wondering 'has Coles gone broke? why was it closed?'

Thanks for your comments

[93_Clubman]

Again, neither car has been dríven for economy...

...doth protest too much...

[Caffeine]

To summarise:

• 'Per tank' is generally meaningless, as Guran pointed out, a few L variation can mean the difference between acceptable and atrocious fuel economy.
  
  
• NB8B's range anywhere from around 6 to more than 12L/100km depending on how you drive it, plus the condition of dozens of engine and driveline components, the weather, the road, the altitude, the traffic, plus many more.
  
  
• Outright fuel economy is not one of the MX5's strong points, however tracking fuel usage can be useful, as it can be a good indicator when something is wrong. If you calculate it accurately, increases in average over time can be identified

[jerrah]

Let me know what mods that NB had .. thats a hell of a lot of fuel regardless of cost

zero00,

Your track figures seem quite frugal but as I've said many times in this thread. Fuel economy has a large part to do with driving style or driving conditions. You exceeded the US tested figures for the NB even on your track days (as do I when not on a track day) and have experience driving by a vacuum gauge. I too have experience with vacuum gauges (remember it was standard on many cars in the 80's such as Falcons and Sigma's) and I think it teaches good habits to save fuel. I think a vacuum gauge would help many people improve their economy.

I regularly get better fuel economy driving all our cars than my fiancee recently returning 5.6L/100km (all highway not traffic) in a SP23 (9L/100km quoted) and I think a lot of that is to do with how you drive.

Swap cars with one of these high consumers and I suspect you will better their vehicles economy figures and worsen yours.

Incidentally with track fuel consumption I always fill up immediately prior to the track and again afterwards, perhaps because you are doing some additional driving you are bettering your 'some track driving' figures. My car (as you would expect) is also not a standard B6 anymore with double stock power, but if I drive it conservatively I can beat the figures from others above. I would be interested if you could fill immediately before and after a track day and see what your consumption is like when hard pressed.

Edit: Re: Dann, I'm not obsessed with fuel economy but I like not having to fill up too often on interstate trips.

[Jeo]

Didn't answer multiple times as I have no info... No need to reply like an ass.

So why not say that up front? This thread could have been done and dusted by the third post, instead many others came through offering yet more disinformation, further confusing what should have been a really simple issue.

Also, big difference between being an ass for the sake of being an ass, and being informative and to the point. I'm sorry if you get the two confused.

[Missy]

Didn't answer multiple times as I have no info... No need to reply like an ass.

So why not say that up front? This thread could have been done and dusted by the third post, instead many others came through offering yet more disinformation, further confusing what should have been a really simple issue.

Also, big difference between being an ass for the sake of being an ass, and being informative and to the point. I'm sorry if you get the two confused.

If people didnt want to post in this thread then they didnt have to... simple.

I am sorry i didnt give precise information when i originally posted, i didnt have it.... i simply thought posting here would get me some helpful info from others that may have experienced the same problem...

Your previous post came across bitchy.

If a mod wants to close or delete this thread that would be fine.. i have been given the information and help i need.

AGAIN - thank you to everyone who was kind and helpful to me even tho i didnt have the "correct information".

[zero00]

jerrah

See where you are coming from for what would be a 'track day' reading but only one thing against that for me!

I have to run 'NB Modified' Class because of the suspension, tyres etc even tho the engine is stock. I'm up against others with quite a few mods done, cold air, extractors, haltec etc and even ow i'm only 7/100ths a lap in front!! To achieve that means running less weight or taking a few risks, the latter is out of the question so to 'lighten the load' I start Lakeside [37km from home] on around 3/4 tank and QR out near Ipswich [125km from home] i'm down to around the same by the time I get there - I WON'T carry fuel in the car, I know some do, their choice. I do notice as the day goes on the lap times are coming down and the car feels 'lighter' as the fuel load lightens

I'm currently leading my Class by 2 points so if a want to achieve my aim for this year every little thing counts!!

Hope this makes sense to you

As for the topic, like I said before it's NOT about the cost, it's about knowing what your car does and I have no problem with it. Missy asked a question, OK maybe not enough info provided but for it was enough, Missy said 'a tank' and the distance, that gave quite a good parameter to work, it was A TANK, not 1/2 or 3/4 so my assumption would have been 35-40 litres at least and tat was enough for me to say hmmmm .. considerable!

My 'rule of thumb' in any car I have had is 10L/100km, which is about 28.6mpg on the old scale

[NitroDann]

My 'rule of thumb' in any car I have had is 10L/100km, which is about 28.6mpg on the old scale

Not sure how a single random number is useful at all.

Dann

[zero00]

Dann

It's pretty simple of you grew up with cars from the 60's, most people would ask 'does it do 30mpg or better highway cycle? That equates to 28.6mpg

If you wonder if your car could be out of tune [like brakes, they slowly wear down until nothing for most people] each time you fill, considering your driving is similar each time, that gives an idea. Of course not having to worry about tuning carbys, setting points etc has made that much easier now

Dann, this topic may not interest you, but to me to hear someone say the numbers 'missy' quoted, if it was my car i'd be getting it checked out - not sure how long since it has been tuned and having an idea of your mechanical skills I'm sure if I arrived at your place and said what 'missy' said, you would be asking me a few questions like driving style, last tune-up etc and assisting in solving the problem

Thanks

[NitroDann]

Apart from telling me to be more useful with myself (fair point) I dont really understand the rest.

Anyways,

The answer is to fill the tyres regularly, Use good quality fuel, and assess whether you are hooning the car or not, and if it spends a lot of its life idlign stationary or accelerating from lights.
If all this checks out and you arent getting close to the easily google-able factory quoted numbers and you dont know the rest to check its better to take it to a mechanic.

There we go.

I however still think its not worth chasing a 5-10% fuel discrepancy if the car drives just fine. It will cost more to pay a mechanic to check it.

Dann