[eldo]

atari4x4 wrote:

Fatzook wrote:

I'm getting 855-870km per tank. (83L tank)

860kms on 83L = 9.53L/100km

reckon you used my link gus!!! it is a great link to have saved in favourites, i found it about 2yrs ago

[atari4x4]

eldo wrote:

atari4x4 wrote:

Fatzook wrote:

I'm getting 855-870km per tank. (83L tank)

860kms on 83L = 9.53L/100km

reckon you used my link gus!!! it is a great link to have saved in favourites, i found it about 2yrs ago

yeah it's

i've saved it in my iPhony so i can work it out when i fill up... i would ruffly work it out in my head driving away from the servo & by the looks of it i've been way off!

i thought i was getting around 14L/100kms around town driving like a granny but i was giving it shit this time round, using that link i got 12.6L/100km & thats runing 5" of lift 31's muds, 5.12:1's, roof rack with nearly 100kw to burn under my right foot i think thats pretty bloody good.

[Che]

I had a Barina once too, but it had a Slayer sticker on it so therefore it was totally un-gay.


I got a 84L LPG tank (max capacity 68 litres), ~550kms range if I was to run it empty.... 12.2L per 100km. With LPG at 58c p/l, that means i'm paying $7.01 per 100kms - cheaper than a Getz.

[96coily]

Jord wrote:

hey i drive a 94 barina! a purple one:p

but i only drive it when its cold so i can have the heater

[Myles]

96coily wrote:

Myles wrote:

Nah it never used to bother me, just sucks when I'm trying to save $250 of my $300 per week wages and my car costs me $60 a week in petrol to go to school lol. Also my best mates 93 barina gets like 500ks to a 40l tank so she allways pays me out about it lol.

You get paid out by ya best mate who drives a Barina
What's her name

Sebastian - Seb. But in his defence it has allot of cool stickers on it and the best $3,000 sound system ever lol... Still a white barina city though

[honks]

10l/100k on premium with 215/75/at tyres

[swifty_ano]

I get about 15L per 100KM.
Pretty shit aye! one of the perks of having a V6 triton

[SuziBlu]

I get kilometers per liter, not so much ks per tank.

Ks per tank, crikey, easy coasting drive, or, super flat out fang drive.

About 12.5kpl or so at around 90kph on the road, way over 20kpl when fanging.

31s with stock NT gearing. Few other bits to make it go better.

[Gwagensteve]

You might want to read those figures again suziblu, you might have something back to front.

I find cars less economical when I'm "fanging"

You're claiming 8l/100Km @ 90km/h but 5l/100km when driving hard.

Both figures are a bit optimisitc for a sierra on 31's, even if your figures are the other way around.

Steve.

[SuziBlu]

Doh, yep, fukd up, LPH sorry not KPL'

Did fuk up on the KPL N LPH but, the 12.5 is very close to perfect over dozens of tanks, and the 20, struth, that is a guess, ruffly accurate, but still a bit up in the air. If it is full on flat out, I recon it would be closer to 30lph.

remember, as you love to poke shit at me, my driving is sand, and offtimes its WOT in 3rd, 3-4000rpm.

[Gwagensteve]

I'm more than aware of the fuel consumption effects of driving on sand.

Your your numbers come out at 50hp per hour assuming your tuning is sound.

(0.5lb of fuel per horsepower per hour)

Steve.

[SuziBlu]

What are you trying to say steve.

By my calcs, 20lph works out at (why you use lbs of fuel fuk knows, but I'll play ya game) 0.64lb of fuel per horsepower hour.

30lph equates to 0.97 pounds or fuel per horsepower hour.

Um, ok, so now what, there must be a point to this.

Why did you over complicate the equation by using a mix of metric and imperial values, were you trying to trick me hmmm.

[Gwagensteve]

[SuziBlu]

I set her rich on purpose, as that is well known to produce more power.

I do not care for the amount of fuel I burn, I care for how far I can go in my little 1.3.

Petrol is not a known, deisal is, as when I done my engineering papers we had to calculate power verses fuel consumption.

All is by the way as we get more perfection in our engines, computer controls in both forms of fuel.

Many years ago we saw engines that produced very tiny amounts of power verses fuel consumption, like 50hp that used 1lm per k, puts paid to your modern calculations.

Yes, you are right, I am a bit hopeful that I am only using such a little amount of fuel, but, why do you turn around and then say that my figures are incorrect as to modern formulas and I should be burning far less. ????

Go one way or the other, you cannot have your cake and eat it too.

I do believe that my engine has a lot more power than stock, and so, fuel is power, so, it burns a lot more than stock, but then, at the same time, you said that my figures were optimistic, meaning, er, no idea, seems you were initially saying that I would be using a lot more, now your saying, I should be using far less.

Steve, you attack every thing I say, ok, you think im a dork, I know your a fukwit, leave it alone, ok.

Say no more, an I will as well.

[Gwagensteve]

I don't think you are a dork Suziblu, I just find your posts confusing.

All I'm suggesting that your car is running pretty rich.

My comment about optimistic was relating to your original numbers that indicated very impressive fuel consumption.

Your actual figures indicate very heavy fuel consumption.

I don't know what the rest of your post means.

Steve.

[SuziBlu]

Gwagensteve wrote:

Both figures are a bit optimisitc for a sierra on 31's, even if your figures are the other way around.

Steve.

Ok, your right, I didnt understand, I am so sorry, please forgive me.

[bakerboy]

i get an awesome 18L/100ls stop complaining about 11L/100ks hahahaha

[whincup]

Steve, you cannot ACCURATELY say how much fuel you should be using per 100km without knowing at least very close to exactly how much heat is released...

haha 18L/100km. would cost a bit to use that round town... most of us sierra drivers would get a little over 200km per tank with that rate!

[bakerboy]

and from a recent trip to lano and back towing a jetski, 23L/100, yeahhhh

[Fatzook]

My old GQ patrol 4.2L petrol auto used to do a very impressive 3.5 - 4km/L when towing fatzook 90L tank..... you do the math

Ok, I'll do it

25-28.5L/100kms, or 360-350km per 90L tank

[SuziBlu]

Crikey guys, the maths wiz here is gunna have a go at yas all about how your figures are wrong, your optimistic, or your engines are running very rich.

I recon as yr all wrong, I have been convinced.

[Fatzook]

SuziBlu wrote:

Crikey guys, the maths wiz here is gunna have a go at yas all about how your figures are wrong, your optimistic, or your engines are running very rich.

I recon as yr all wrong, I have been convinced.

eh?

[bakerboy]

SuziBlu wrote:

Crikey guys, the maths wiz here is gunna have a go at yas all about how your figures are wrong, your optimistic, or your engines are running very rich.

I recon as yr all wrong, I have been convinced.

English motherfucker, do you speak it?

[SuziBlu]

bakerboy wrote:

SuziBlu wrote:

Crikey guys, the maths wiz here is gunna have a go at yas all about how your figures are wrong, your optimistic, or your engines are running very rich.

I recon as yr all wrong, I have been convinced.

English motherfucker, do you speak it?

err ????

[Highway-Star]

...

My fuel consumption changes every time I fill up. There are allot of variables.
Last time I filled up my Sierra got me around 11.5km/L. The exact calculated number was 11.567 or something, but my correction for the inaccuracy of my trip meter is a grey area. I only correct it by a pessimistic 10% for the 31's.

It's only been getting such good economy since I fitted the VSS to the speedo though . Worth doing for all you people with EFI conversions.

[atari4x4]

bakerboy wrote:

SuziBlu wrote:

Crikey guys, the maths wiz here is gunna have a go at yas all about how your figures are wrong, your optimistic, or your engines are running very rich.

I recon as yr all wrong, I have been convinced.

English motherfucker, do you speak it?

Say "what" again. Say "what" again! I dare you! I double-dare you, motherfucker! Say "what" one more goddamn time!

[bakerboy]

You make no sense, period, go back and read your previous post out loud, preferably to a co worker or friend and see if they look at you like a retard

[bakerboy]

atari4x4 wrote:

bakerboy wrote:

SuziBlu wrote:

Crikey guys, the maths wiz here is gunna have a go at yas all about how your figures are wrong, your optimistic, or your engines are running very rich.

I recon as yr all wrong, I have been convinced.

English motherfucker, do you speak it?

Say "what" again. Say "what" again! I dare you! I double-dare you, motherfucker! Say "what" one more goddamn time!

what?






im so glad someone picked it up

[SuziBlu]

bakerboy wrote:

You make no sense, period, go back and read your previous post out loud, preferably to a co worker or friend and see if they look at you like a retard

Pretty good for someone thousands of miles away, bet you pull the wings off flys an feel tough about it.

Can you not see when someone is being flippant, have you no sence of humor, or are you just a big brave man that makes shocking rude statements from behind a keyboard knowing full well you are 100% safe from a kick in the teeth.

[bakerboy]

SuziBlu wrote:

bakerboy wrote:

You make no sense, period, go back and read your previous post out loud, preferably to a co worker or friend and see if they look at you like a retard

Pretty good for someone thousands of miles away, be you pull the wings off flys an feel tough about it.

Can you cot see when someone is being flippant, have you no sence of humor, or are you just a big brave man that makes shocking rude statements from behind a keyboard knowing full well you are 100% safe from a kick in the teeth.

shocking rude statement? and i have no sense of humor?

get over your self, i'd say it to your face as well, humor obviously fails on the interwebs you angry little man