Fuel Economy: Real vs Official

Forums › Transport (cars, bikes and boats) › Fuel Economy: Real vs Official

1 | 2 | 3 | 4

blakamin

4431 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#1625290 7-Sep-2016 22:09

mudguard:

blakamin:

I'm amazed at some of these numbers... I drive a 21 year old V8 sedan that weighs over 2.1 tonne.

Edit: Trip computer is very accurate.. It will tell you fuel usage per second if you want, and knows how much fuel is in either of the tanks to a decimal point per tank. German precision. :D

Clearly it is neither a BMW X5 or AMG E55. Those precision German machines lose more fuel than the Exxon Valdez

HAHAHA.. 1995 E38 740iL

Batman

Mad Scientist
29771 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1625314 7-Sep-2016 23:08

mudguard:

blakamin:

I'm amazed at some of these numbers... I drive a 21 year old V8 sedan that weighs over 2.1 tonne.

Edit: Trip computer is very accurate.. It will tell you fuel usage per second if you want, and knows how much fuel is in either of the tanks to a decimal point per tank. German precision. :D

Clearly it is neither a BMW X5 or AMG E55. Those precision German machines lose more fuel than the Exxon Valdez

OTOH I have driven cars for miles where the computer says there is no more fuel in the tank.

ghettomaster

387 posts

Ultimate Geek

#1625414 8-Sep-2016 09:08

My 1996 Honda Inspire has a manufacturer rating of 11/100km, and doing 2/3 city driving, I find I get exactly that. 50L gets me 450km every time.

Batman

Mad Scientist
29771 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1625530 8-Sep-2016 11:39

I used to have a Nissan X-Trail. rated at 9/100 combined.

Instantaneous Fuel consumption read out = the speed I drive/10 between 50-110pkh! Ie at 50 = 5, at 110 = 11! But that's on the flat, no braking, no accelerating.

bmt

574 posts

Ultimate Geek

#1626082 8-Sep-2016 21:40

I've got a 2015 Mitsubishi Lancer. Advertised fuel economy is 7.1L/100km.

I drive 35km each way to work, probably 80% on the Southern and North-Western motorways. The majority of the NW has been an 80kph zone for a long, long time which definitely helps fuel econ.

Probably average 6.3L/100km. On open road i.e Auckland > Hamilton I can get high 6's, depends on traffic really.

Once got 5.6L/100km on a drive home from work. Chuffed.

martyyn

1971 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

#1630750 15-Sep-2016 10:24

mudguard:

Clearly it is neither a BMW X5 or AMG E55. Those precision German machines lose more fuel than the Exxon Valdez

We have three BMW's. Don't hate me, I just think if you know what you are looking for they are stunning value for money.

The 2003 3.0l X5 is used to get the family all over the place. We've done over 25000kms in the 10 months we've owned it with the vast majority being open road and it's averaging 11.2l/100km. When it's been solely used on the open road and cruising at 80kph I've had it under 9. Not bad for a 2.2 tonne truck filled with kids and football gear.

My wife drives a 2003 530i to work and back which is only a 12km round trip. If its lucky it might get on the open road once a week and she averages 9.4. If I use it for my travelling I can get down to just above 8. I've had it around 6 if I cruise at 80kph.

Sadly cruising at 80kph neither makes sense on single lane open roads, nor is any fun.

My baby is a 1990 535is. 5 speed manual, LSD, Bilstein and Eibach suspension, 17x8 BBS RZ412 with Michelin PS3's. It's only done about 800km in the last six months being tucked up in the garage for the winter. I don't care what it does because any time it comes out I drive it like I stole it ! The grin it puts on my face outweighs any fuel consumption figures.

[e] I completely forgot to add the BMW figures

X5: 9.7 / 12.7 - motorway/combined

530: 7.9 / 10.7

535is: 9.6 / 11

So overall I'm pretty happy with what I get from cars which are 13 and 26 years old and they aren't too far away from the official figures.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4