Board index » Talking About Stuff » Suzuki Talk
Print view
Previous topic | Next topic
| Author |
Message |
zammit
Joined: Thu Nov 04, 2010 9:18 am Posts: 273 Location: traralgon
Vehicle: Jimny
|
 Posted: Sun Sep 25, 2011 11:20 am |
|
|
hey guys just wandering what sorta economy everyone is getting with 31+ tyres with either 1.3carb or 1.6efi..
cheers
_________________ DONT BUY A GQ! zooks are better. i have both 
|
|
|
|
 |
SuziBlu
Joined: Mon Sep 14, 2009 11:30 pm Posts: 4268 Location: Eyre Peninsula
|
 Posted: Sun Sep 25, 2011 11:35 am |
|
|
Bout 12/13 liters per hundred kays
_________________ Bad decisions make good stories.
|
|
|
|
 |
zammit
Joined: Thu Nov 04, 2010 9:18 am Posts: 273 Location: traralgon
Vehicle: Jimny
|
 Posted: Sun Sep 25, 2011 11:38 am |
|
|
are they highway miles? do you find your get heaaps less up the bush?
_________________ DONT BUY A GQ! zooks are better. i have both 
|
|
|
|
 |
SuziBlu
Joined: Mon Sep 14, 2009 11:30 pm Posts: 4268 Location: Eyre Peninsula
|
 Posted: Sun Sep 25, 2011 11:48 am |
|
|
Thats highway, out fanging, full noise, its more like 20 instead of 12, but that is an unfair comparison, you cannot take into account full noise feul milage.
_________________ Bad decisions make good stories.
|
|
|
|
 |
whincup

az supporter
Joined: Sat Apr 17, 2010 11:30 pm Posts: 1588 Location: Gracemere, QLD
Vehicle: '94 suzuki maruti
|
 Posted: Sun Sep 25, 2011 12:14 pm |
|
zammit wrote: are they highway miles? do you find your get heaaps less up the bush?
mines on 31's, carby 1.3, stock gears, and i seem to get better mileage in sand than i do on the highway...
|
|
|
|
 |
christover1

az supporter
Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2008 11:30 pm Posts: 8203 Location: Melbourne
Vehicle: Pajero 91 NH 3.0 SWB
|
 Posted: Sun Sep 25, 2011 12:35 pm |
|
|
speedo reading and thus the odometre will be out,
so you may be getting more k's to a litre than you think.
But the extra weight and tread width saps power, so I'd guess it use more fuel.
|
|
|
|
 |
smiffkid

az supporter
Joined: Fri Aug 13, 2010 12:55 pm Posts: 3266 Location: perth wa
|
 Posted: Sun Sep 25, 2011 1:08 pm |
|
|
my jimny with the baleno 1.6 running 31 inch claws would get 10km per litre that was with a corrected speedo reading
changed to xterrains and got bit over a 11km to a litre
have since changed the gearing and am back to 10km but more responsive power wise
so pretty much the same as a bog stock jimny would get tho running alot bigger tread
_________________ dodgy brothers mechanical
|
|
|
|
 |
alien
Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 10:30 pm Posts: 16343 Location: Perth
Vehicle: '92 Sierra, 1.6efi, SPOA, 31s.
|
 Posted: Sun Sep 25, 2011 1:18 pm |
|
|
did a highway drive today - 100km used 11L of fuel... was doing 105-110km/hr most of the time, although i did plant my foot a few times up to 120ish... so i think it did well. These KM figures are off a GPS too.
_________________ 
|
|
|
|
 |
ando_zook94
Joined: Sun May 09, 2010 9:23 pm Posts: 263 Location: brissy
|
 Posted: Sun Sep 25, 2011 11:00 pm |
|
|
mines on 31's, carby 1.3, stock gears, and i seem to get better mileage in sand than i do on the highway...[/quote]
yeah im running same setup but only 30's and it really does seem better on sand
_________________ If in doubt power out!
|
|
|
|
 |
alien
Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 10:30 pm Posts: 16343 Location: Perth
Vehicle: '92 Sierra, 1.6efi, SPOA, 31s.
|
 Posted: Sun Sep 25, 2011 11:38 pm |
|
|
yup - i get better economy 4wding than on the highway. I put it down to wind resistance.
_________________ 
|
|
|
|
 |
nato78

az supporter
Joined: Fri Apr 09, 2010 11:30 pm Posts: 1504 Location: Auckland, NZ
Vehicle: Yamaha scooter, 50cc
|
 Posted: Sun Sep 25, 2011 11:41 pm |
|
|
If you're running 31's and standard speedo, multiply your odometer reading by 1.2, that will give you more accurate km figures
|
|
|
|
 |
SuziBlu
Joined: Mon Sep 14, 2009 11:30 pm Posts: 4268 Location: Eyre Peninsula
|
 Posted: Mon Sep 26, 2011 12:04 am |
|
alien wrote: yup - i get better economy 4wding than on the highway. I put it down to wind resistance.
Crikey. I only sit on 90 or so in the toy, no need to go faster, use more fuel, for a few seconds arrival faster, if I want to go somewhere, I take another car.
When im out playing, she runs around at 3-7,000, mostly above 5k, peddle flat to the floor.
_________________ Bad decisions make good stories.
|
|
|
|
 |
alien
Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 10:30 pm Posts: 16343 Location: Perth
Vehicle: '92 Sierra, 1.6efi, SPOA, 31s.
|
 Posted: Mon Sep 26, 2011 6:29 am |
|
|
haha yeh what can i say... lead foot.
i did do a long drive once down south and stuck to 80-85km/hr the whole way, got something like 480km to 30L (this was with 215/75 HT tyres and g13a engine with extractors and 1.5" pipe)... on the drive home i did the speed limit (100-110) and only go 350km to 30L (still pretty good though).
_________________ 
|
|
|
|
 |
Mike57

az supporter
Joined: Fri Jul 22, 2011 11:09 am Posts: 1009 Location: Melbourne
Vehicle: Suzuki Jimny 2009
|
 Posted: Mon Sep 26, 2011 9:55 am |
|
|
There are a four factors which consume energy and fuel and these affect fuel consumption at different times.
WIND RESISTANCE
The energy required to keep the car moving is exponential with speed. That means that at 100 kph it is something like four times 50kph and not double. At highway speeds this is the dominant factor accounting for something like 70% I think of the energy to keep the car moving. Slowing down will significantly reduce fuel consumption in a car like a suzuki Jimny or the like which are not aerodynamically designed.
INERTIA
This is the energy required to start the car moving. In heavy stop start traffic it is not wind resistance which is the killer but the energy required to impart inertia to the vehicle. I forget what % this is but once you are moving it is no longer important.
ROLLING RESISTANCE
This is one that is affected by bigger tyres but more so the tread and width than the diameter. I have not seen any published figures for the rolling resistance of tyres but I am pretty sure mud terrains will be pretty bad. This one becomes important once you are moving and accounts for the energy to keep the car moving along with drive train losses and of course wind resistance.
DRIVE TRAIN LOSSES
This is the friction in the engine, gearbox, transfer case and all the rest of the drive train. This one is not so big but will increase when 4WD is selected. The energy is disippated as heat and this is why the gearbox and diffs etc get hot.
The lowest fuel consumption should occur when moving at a low and constant speed (and at engine revs which are close to the most efficient rev range). One of the reasons off road fuel consumption can be less in a car like a Sierra and a Jimny is that at highway speeds the wind resistance is a killer but that is not critical offroad at low speed. Constant stop/start driving offroad will take its toll though. You will probably find a better write up on the net with actual percentages if you search long enough.
My own experience is that by going up to 215/75 mud terrains on the Jimny I added about 1 litre per 100km to the fuel consumption on comparative highway testing (after taking the different radius into account), so the rolling resistance at speeds does have an affect.
Another affect of large diameter tyres might be that you are running the engine at a less efficient rev range (for the same speed) consuming more fuel. That part I am not so familiar with though so I can't explain how it works.
|
|
|
|
 |
alien
Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 10:30 pm Posts: 16343 Location: Perth
Vehicle: '92 Sierra, 1.6efi, SPOA, 31s.
|
 Posted: Mon Sep 26, 2011 10:23 am |
|
|
if i remember correctly from when mine was on a dyno the loss through the tcase, gearbox and driveshafts was around 40% in my sierra... this lessens the more power you add.
_________________ 
|
|
|
|
 |
JrZook
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2006 11:30 pm Posts: 5517 Location: Holland Park
Vehicle: Awesome!!
|
 Posted: Mon Sep 26, 2011 10:33 am |
|
alien wrote: if i remember correctly from when mine was on a dyno the loss through the tcase, gearbox and driveshafts was around 40% in my sierra... this lessens the more power you add.
Errr WTF captain sssiera??
_________________ Lil Foot!
http://tiny.cc/gtsw1
|
|
|
|
 |
sideways

az supporter
Joined: Fri Oct 29, 2010 1:53 pm Posts: 5936 Location: Northcliffe, W.A.
Vehicle: LJs, Sierra, Jimny, Swift.
|
 Posted: Mon Sep 26, 2011 11:07 am |
|
JrZook wrote: alien wrote: if i remember correctly from when mine was on a dyno the loss through the tcase, gearbox and driveshafts was around 40% in my sierra... this lessens the more power you add. Errr WTF captain sssiera??
The more power you have, the lower the resistance percentage.
|
|
|
|
 |
Mike57

az supporter
Joined: Fri Jul 22, 2011 11:09 am Posts: 1009 Location: Melbourne
Vehicle: Suzuki Jimny 2009
|
 Posted: Mon Sep 26, 2011 12:22 pm |
|
|
That makes sense because the drive train losses are probably almost constant increasing only a small amount when more power is applied.
|
|
|
|
 |
christover1

az supporter
Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2008 11:30 pm Posts: 8203 Location: Melbourne
Vehicle: Pajero 91 NH 3.0 SWB
|
 Posted: Mon Sep 26, 2011 12:25 pm |
|
Mike57 wrote: That makes sense because the drive train losses are probably almost constant increasing only a small amount when more power is applied.
But then resistance decreases to zero after drive line breaks 
|
|
|
|
 |
SuziBlu
Joined: Mon Sep 14, 2009 11:30 pm Posts: 4268 Location: Eyre Peninsula
|
 Posted: Mon Sep 26, 2011 12:27 pm |
|
JrZook wrote: alien wrote: if i remember correctly from when mine was on a dyno the loss through the tcase, gearbox and driveshafts was around 40% in my sierra... this lessens the more power you add. Errr WTF captain sssiera??
Just say for argument sake, that you have a 100kw motor, and the drive train loss is 40%, ok, cool, there is a 40kw power loss, so you have 60kw to the wheels.
Now, up the anty some, and get a 200kw motor, it still takes the same loss thru the drive train, 40kw, not 40%, you cannot talk precentages, the drive train only needs the same power, regardless of the engine size, there is a very big difference, you now have 160kw to the wheels.
Up the power of your engine by 100%, and gain, a 266% power increase to the wheels
_________________ Bad decisions make good stories.
|
|
|
|
 |
JrZook
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2006 11:30 pm Posts: 5517 Location: Holland Park
Vehicle: Awesome!!
|
 Posted: Mon Sep 26, 2011 12:29 pm |
|
SuziBlu wrote: JrZook wrote: alien wrote: if i remember correctly from when mine was on a dyno the loss through the tcase, gearbox and driveshafts was around 40% in my sierra... this lessens the more power you add. Errr WTF captain sssiera?? Just say for argument sake, that you have a 100kw motor, and the drive train loss is 40%, ok, cool, there is a 40kw power loss, so you have 60kw to the wheels. Now, up the anty some, and get a 200kw motor, it still takes the same loss thru the drive train, 40kw, not 40%, you cannot talk precentages, the drive train only needs the same power, regardless of the engine size, there is a very big difference, you now have 160kw to the wheels. Up the power of your engine by 100%, and gain, a 266% power increase to the wheels
All good, I was just picking on his funky wording for the explanation 
_________________ Lil Foot!
http://tiny.cc/gtsw1
|
|
|
|
 |
SuziBlu
Joined: Mon Sep 14, 2009 11:30 pm Posts: 4268 Location: Eyre Peninsula
|
 Posted: Mon Sep 26, 2011 12:32 pm |
|
JrZook wrote: SuziBlu wrote: JrZook wrote: alien wrote: if i remember correctly from when mine was on a dyno the loss through the tcase, gearbox and driveshafts was around 40% in my sierra... this lessens the more power you add. Errr WTF captain sssiera?? Just say for argument sake, that you have a 100kw motor, and the drive train loss is 40%, ok, cool, there is a 40kw power loss, so you have 60kw to the wheels. Now, up the anty some, and get a 200kw motor, it still takes the same loss thru the drive train, 40kw, not 40%, you cannot talk precentages, the drive train only needs the same power, regardless of the engine size, there is a very big difference, you now have 160kw to the wheels. Up the power of your engine by 100%, and gain, a 266% power increase to the wheels All good, I was just picking on his funky wording for the explanation 
Doh
_________________ Bad decisions make good stories.
|
|
|
|
 |
christover1

az supporter
Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2008 11:30 pm Posts: 8203 Location: Melbourne
Vehicle: Pajero 91 NH 3.0 SWB
|
 Posted: Mon Sep 26, 2011 12:38 pm |
|
|
extra heat generated by higher power can increase resistance, due to expansion and oil losing viscosity
|
|
|
|
 |
JrZook
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2006 11:30 pm Posts: 5517 Location: Holland Park
Vehicle: Awesome!!
|
 Posted: Mon Sep 26, 2011 12:40 pm |
|
SuziBlu wrote: JrZook wrote: SuziBlu wrote: JrZook wrote: alien wrote: if i remember correctly from when mine was on a dyno the loss through the tcase, gearbox and driveshafts was around 40% in my sierra... this lessens the more power you add. Errr WTF captain sssiera?? Just say for argument sake, that you have a 100kw motor, and the drive train loss is 40%, ok, cool, there is a 40kw power loss, so you have 60kw to the wheels. Now, up the anty some, and get a 200kw motor, it still takes the same loss thru the drive train, 40kw, not 40%, you cannot talk precentages, the drive train only needs the same power, regardless of the engine size, there is a very big difference, you now have 160kw to the wheels. Up the power of your engine by 100%, and gain, a 266% power increase to the wheels All good, I was just picking on his funky wording for the explanation  Doh
But I'll give it to ya, that's one of your best technical descriptions I have ever read. Easy to read and makes sense, just cept the last bit as 100->200kw at the engine will not = 60 -> (200*266% = 532kw ATW) 
_________________ Lil Foot!
http://tiny.cc/gtsw1
|
|
|
|
 |
SuziBlu
Joined: Mon Sep 14, 2009 11:30 pm Posts: 4268 Location: Eyre Peninsula
|
 Posted: Mon Sep 26, 2011 12:46 pm |
|
|
Talk power at the wheels, not engine power.
60kw*266% = 159.6kw
_________________ Bad decisions make good stories.
|
|
|
|
 |
alien
Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 10:30 pm Posts: 16343 Location: Perth
Vehicle: '92 Sierra, 1.6efi, SPOA, 31s.
|
 Posted: Mon Sep 26, 2011 1:00 pm |
|
|
nerds.
_________________ 
|
|
|
|
 |
SuziBlu
Joined: Mon Sep 14, 2009 11:30 pm Posts: 4268 Location: Eyre Peninsula
|
 Posted: Mon Sep 26, 2011 1:09 pm |
|
|
lol I live mathematics every day of my life, love it.
Well, till I hit the piss or get into my toy.
_________________ Bad decisions make good stories.
|
|
|
|
 |
alien
Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 10:30 pm Posts: 16343 Location: Perth
Vehicle: '92 Sierra, 1.6efi, SPOA, 31s.
|
 Posted: Mon Sep 26, 2011 1:17 pm |
|
|
alright... no googling and no graphics calculator...
x * (e ^(0.5x)) = 0.5
whats the value of x? =)
_________________ 
|
|
|
|
 |
SuziBlu
Joined: Mon Sep 14, 2009 11:30 pm Posts: 4268 Location: Eyre Peninsula
|
 Posted: Mon Sep 26, 2011 1:25 pm |
|
|
Exponential functions off the top of my head, at midnight, lol yea goodo.
_________________ Bad decisions make good stories.
|
|
|
|
 |
alien
Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 10:30 pm Posts: 16343 Location: Perth
Vehicle: '92 Sierra, 1.6efi, SPOA, 31s.
|
 Posted: Mon Sep 26, 2011 1:36 pm |
|
|
do it in the morning then =P
_________________ 
|
|
|
|
 |
|
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: BZOOK and 317 guests
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
|
Untitled Document
Untitled Document
|