Fuel Economy logbook

[squala]

Highway cruising is where the CVT really shines, relaxed at 2000 rpm doing 100 kph. Economy is really good in this case, but I noticed it's at its worst in a full parking lot going around in circles to find a space. I still suspect I have the brake issue Mitsubishi is recalling now; will have to check this out.

[aussie027]

Hi Guys,
In case you haven't yet noticed this, check out your mileage figure when you first start the car in the morning and what it shows during the first 1-2KM while it is yet to reach normal operating temps.

It will give you a shock, you will see figures around 25L/100km or worse.


In the first 500m one day I saw 2 km/l = 50L/100KM from memory.

[m1n1on]

Not sure how accurate the readings are on our cars... I believe the most accurate way to measure our fuel efficiency is to take note of the exact amount of fuel you have pumped. Then use one of the trip meters to record how many kms you have done until your next refill.

[Dummer]

Yeah I noticed that this morning. Drove like 250m to the corner shop, left the car running whilst i went in and grabbed my caffeine and when i was leaving it was sitting around like 50L/100km, by the time i got to work it had only gotten down to 9.4L/100km (about a 6.5-7km trip) and I actually was going slower and not fanging it today. Although I noticed that my fuel economy is usually worse in cold weather no matter how I drive it.... No matter the weather though I usually dont notice a significant drop until after about the 6km mark once the engine is right up in its optimum temp....

[aussie027]

m1n1on is correct.

The only way to get an accurate consumption figure is to divide total Km by total L used from a full tank to the next full tank.

If you do 1 or more partial fills just keep recording the amounts till next top up then divide total into the Km.

Using this method what figures are you all getting on average?????

Are the figures you all have posted in this thread using this method or just looking at the screen readsouts of instantaneous and average???

I have a 2L manual VRX and have been averaging around 9.5-10.5km/L on average driving on Perth's freeways and roads. No peak hour crawls.
This tankful may be better as I have done several long freeway trips.

Best I got was about 8.5l/100Km on one tankful driving pretty sedately.
This is over an 18 month period I have had the car. I use the above calculation method on every refill.[/i]

[m1n1on]

m1n1on is correct.

The only way to get an accurate consumption figure is to divide total Km by total L used from a full tank to the next full tank.

If you do 1 or more partial fills just keep recording the amounts till next top up then divide total into the Km.

Using this method what figures are you all getting on average?????

Are the figures you all have posted in this thread using this method or just looking at the screen readsouts of instantaneous and average???

I have a 2L manual VRX and have been averaging around 9.5-10.5km/L on average driving on Perth's freeways and roads. No peak hour crawls.
This tankful may be better as I have done several long freeway trips.

Best I got was about 8.5l/100Km on one tankful driving pretty sedately.
This is over an 18 month period I have had the car. I use the above calculation method on every refill.[/i]

The values that I have included in this thread, have been calculated in the way I mentioned before.

[Jmi]

Further to the discussions we're having on the chat board,

For those who don't already know, I work at the University of Melbourne, I need to take peak hour traffic via the Eastern Freeway into the city from my place about 17.4KM away.

Here's my typical morning reading:


To rub this in further, my car is sound deadened throughout (Melbourne members can vouch for this), so I'm technically carrying a child each time I drive.

I do 6.8L/100km if there's no traffic easily and I never exceed 110km/h.

I go the same way as you do, from donnie eastern to the city. Maybe is the time I leave at ~730am, cause my average consumption is 10.5-11L and my average speed never reach the 50km/h mark. It's not even "cruise control" worthy sort of traffic :p

[squala]

Yes I measure those figures based on the number of kms divided by the number of litres topped up. The Platinum is coming in for service tomorrow and I hope I can get those numbers down.

[BeHaV3]

just crunched the numbers on the Ralliart...plenty of short 7 km trips, plus the odd cruise. list is l/100 km. Generally these are ~40 litre fills to top.
11.9
11.3
13.1
11.4
15.3
12.4
14.9
11.6
11.5
11.3
17.2 (includes 80km or so on skid pan)
11.5
13.2

[vlad_the_impaler]

C'mon guys.... this car is for fun not for FUEL ECONOMY!!!

[squala]

I know we all like cars for fun, but in the end we still like to get the best possible economy. Evos are as fast as ever but MIVEC is there to save on fuel when they go slow. Efficiency is important even in the likes of F1, as it will take longer to fill up a thirstier car and could lose out in the pitstop wars.

[Dummer]

I know we all like cars for fun, but in the end we still like to get the best possible economy. Evos are as fast as ever but MIVEC is there to save on fuel when they go slow. Efficiency is important even in the likes of F1, as it will take longer to fill up a thirstier car and could lose out in the pitstop wars.

MIVEC is more there for top end power rather than fuel efficiency. Yes the 4B1's are fully adjustable in the lower bands for max torque efficiency but the main effects of it aren't felt until 3500RPM when it kicks in to create higher power from the motor (at which point it's just drinking down the fuel).

[BeHaV3]

I know we all like cars for fun, but in the end we still like to get the best possible economy. Evos are as fast as ever but MIVEC is there to save on fuel when they go slow. Efficiency is important even in the likes of F1, as it will take longer to fill up a thirstier car and could lose out in the pitstop wars.

MIVEC is more there for top end power rather than fuel efficiency. Yes the 4B1's are fully adjustable in the lower bands for max torque efficiency but the main effects of it aren't felt until 3500RPM when it kicks in to create higher power from the motor (at which point it's just drinking down the fuel).

2 comments to Vlad et al.
- You don't buy Ralliarts or EVOs for economy. Real world economy for city driving will not reach published combined cycle numbers. Given I spend ~$3000 per year on fuel...to blow it by 10% by giving it a bit at the lights.....$300 per year more, or less than a dollar per day!
Numbers published not to boast about economy, merely as reference for others on the forum. You can see mis 11's best, high teens worst. All real world driving (although skid pan is unreal!)

- Ralliart boost is on by 2000rpm, and it (we) drink(s) in celebration of that build-up usable torque. MIVEC just adds to that.

PS The Mazda 6 is the economical holiday car... the Ralliart is the fun car!

[Dummer]

Yeah and when you compare it to a commonwhore SS or a faclon XR8 which has similar straightline performance, the RA is quite frugal.

The other thing people forget is the RA is lugging alot of extra weight due to its AWD and turbo setup, plus there's always the inherrent fuel inefficiencies that AWD has over RWD or FWD.

Like BeHaV3 said you aren't buying a RA because you want to drive like a pussy and see how low your fuel economy goes. I know I've gotten 15L/100km in my VRX on a heavy right foot around town, so I think the RA has very good economy for what it is!

[sicsid]

Lol, i love this thread, one guy says they got 6.7 on a long drive , next 4 posts are .2 lower each post