The title of this thread "D40 Fuel Economy" is an oxymoron - especially when specifically related to the auto diesel. I have made a few posts on this subject in the past, but I still love the Nav and with the chip in it pulls harder than a classroom full of boys and uses only a fraction more fuel to do so.
D40 Fuel Economy
- Thread starter Dazza
- Start date
Help Support Nissan Navara Forum:
K
KraftyPg
Guest
Why so? I'm still getting anything from low 9's to mid 10's with my 09 auto and that's under normal conditions without trying to conserve fuel. I'm more than happy with those figures I never expected to get much under 10 going by the Nissan documents.
Pete22
Member
You sure are doing well KraftyPg....bugger if I can get any better than high 12s and that's when I drive like Miss Daisy.
Jabba
Member
- Joined
- Oct 3, 2008
- Messages
- 71
- Reaction score
- 0
I'm seeing the same results from my 2007 desiel auto...
tagMan
Member
I have a new ST auto, diesel dual cab. I have averaged 12.3 l/100klms for the first 3000ks. This is a lot better than i expected.
The best I can get is 13.5 L/ 100 under 'non-normal' driving conditions (i.e. consciously driving economically) with the chip out. 13.8 is what I normally achieve with the chip out and a fraction under 14 with the chip installed.
The diesel auto Triton in our fleet does under 10l / 100 and the diesel manual Transit van is well under 9l / 100!.
The diesel auto Triton in our fleet does under 10l / 100 and the diesel manual Transit van is well under 9l / 100!.
K
KraftyPg
Guest
I'm carting somewhere around 800kgs in the tub and a tandem axle trailer with 7 x 1500m rolls of fencing wire and up to 10 packs of star pickets in it this week and on road I'm still keeping it under 13's, in the paddocks is a bit different but that's all low speed short movements so it's to be expected. Here I was waiting for my Nav to go through the run in phase and start loosening up a bit but maybe it's already loosened as far as it's going to go.
My 2.5 nav does 9.8 on the highway; 11.8 around town and 13.3 towing my 1200 kg camper- the vehicle is an auto with 34 k on the clock
Jabba
Member
- Joined
- Oct 3, 2008
- Messages
- 71
- Reaction score
- 0
Thats good, mine was around the 15/100 when new... Now with 45k on the clock, I nearly always get under 10l/100, thats a mix off city/hwy....
When I tow my boat (2.5tonne with trailer) my economy halves
My economy is improving, we're just around 15,000km on the clock and heading into the 11s with 4 adults, suitcases with clothing, Engel, 2x50Ah Deep Cycle batteries and assorted other stuff (shoes, umbrellas and things that don't impact on vehicle weight too much).
I did the "reset" but I am not convinced it's actually achieved anything. I remain skeptical about its benefits, although I am more than willing to endorse the claim that "The ECU reset routine did not damage, inhibit, or otherwise cause issues with my vehicle".
In other words, by doing that reset thingy, you can't actually lose. You might gain squat, you might even look stupid doing step 8a (where you have to shout across the road at your neighbour with your foot on the brake while waving a red flag in the passenger side mirror). But it's my experience that this doesn't do anything detrimental to the vehicle.
I did the "reset" but I am not convinced it's actually achieved anything. I remain skeptical about its benefits, although I am more than willing to endorse the claim that "The ECU reset routine did not damage, inhibit, or otherwise cause issues with my vehicle".
In other words, by doing that reset thingy, you can't actually lose. You might gain squat, you might even look stupid doing step 8a (where you have to shout across the road at your neighbour with your foot on the brake while waving a red flag in the passenger side mirror). But it's my experience that this doesn't do anything detrimental to the vehicle.
tagMan
Member
Just back from first camping trip in the new nav. Travelled a total of 300 klms towing a camper trailer - fully loaded trailer and nav. fuel economy on the trip was 15.3L/100.
I am fairly happy with that.
I am fairly happy with that.
K
KraftyPg
Guest
Got my economy down to less than 3 lph on the weekend, admittedly it was whilst following a tractor at less than 30kph for about 20ks of dirt road and a further 20ks of bitumen but none the less atleast I can tell Nissan I bettered their figures.
In the real world though highway cruising this afternoon along the Princes Highway east of Melbourne and the Nav was getting 9's for the trip which I'm happy with
In the real world though highway cruising this afternoon along the Princes Highway east of Melbourne and the Nav was getting 9's for the trip which I'm happy with
grahcom
Member
2009 plated V6 petrol auto, has now done 30000km, town/city = avg 15/100, Hwy 110kph (gps) = avg 13.5/100, Towing with a GCM 5300kgs avg 21/100 on bitumen (speed 90-92 gps) avg 23.5/100 on dirt. (Cape York trip, speeds on gps b/w 70-90kph)
Last edited:
K
KraftyPg
Guest
The towing figure is fairly average, but towing is always going to play havoc with economy, (especially since Cape York is up hill on every map you look at). However those petrol figures for non towing will make some diesels owners blush, they're not bad
grahcom
Member
The 2.5L oil burners should generally do a little better than what I get but often they don't. It must be said that if it's uphill going to the Cape, it must be down hill coming back 
Going there we used avg 1L/100 less than coming back. (up Cooktown - Seisia via Lakefield NP & Weipa, return Seisia - Mossman) Difference could eiter be the terrain or more likely sightly faster speeds on return trip.
Going there we used avg 1L/100 less than coming back. (up Cooktown - Seisia via Lakefield NP & Weipa, return Seisia - Mossman) Difference could eiter be the terrain or more likely sightly faster speeds on return trip.
K
KraftyPg
Guest
Well of course it's down hill but the reason you get different economy on the downhill run is because the winds naturally push you upwards and even your Nav knows the further down you go from Cape York the closer you get to Brisbane and it wants to keep away.
I've got a 1 week old D40 ST Manual and have done over 1500Kms already. I only measured the second tank (not sure if the dealers reset the gauge on the first tank) and got 9.9L/100Km mixed hwy / city driving.
As a side note, the spec sheet mentions an 80 Litre fuel tank. First two tanks I only put in just over 60 litres with not a lot of room for movement on the fuel gauge. I'd be very surprised if it is actually 80 litres. If there were 20 litres left then it should still be sitting over 1/4 on the gauge given that's spot on 1/4 (unless the 20 litres is the 'spare' capacity after hitting empty). Comments regarding fuel tank size ?
http://www.nissan.com.au/webpages/resources/grade-comparator/specification-documents/NAV0342_NEW_A4specs_December_2009.pdf
As a side note, the spec sheet mentions an 80 Litre fuel tank. First two tanks I only put in just over 60 litres with not a lot of room for movement on the fuel gauge. I'd be very surprised if it is actually 80 litres. If there were 20 litres left then it should still be sitting over 1/4 on the gauge given that's spot on 1/4 (unless the 20 litres is the 'spare' capacity after hitting empty). Comments regarding fuel tank size ?
http://www.nissan.com.au/webpages/resources/grade-comparator/specification-documents/NAV0342_NEW_A4specs_December_2009.pdf
K
KraftyPg
Guest
I've put 76 in mine with scangauge telling me there was 5 litres left. I'd be more inclined to suggest your fuel gauge is out before suggesting the tank was less than they claim. Fuel gauges like speedos are one of those items that are allowed tolerances and may never be correct. I know between the top and 3/4 mark and the 1/4 and bottom mark on mine doesn't add up to the same as between the two does yet mathematically it should be the same.
It's not that hard to adjust fuel gauges but the effort outweighs the results in most cases.
It's not that hard to adjust fuel gauges but the effort outweighs the results in most cases.
Fair enough. I only suggested fuel tank size as I thought that may have been another one of the minor changes on the build savings they are obviously making on the ST vs the ST-X's.
Other non documented things like less blank switch's in the cab, different (cheaper quality) sun visors etc are the little things you notice after a while.
Agree it's likely my gauge or me not being brave enough to let it run lower than just above empty.
cheers,
Other non documented things like less blank switch's in the cab, different (cheaper quality) sun visors etc are the little things you notice after a while.
Agree it's likely my gauge or me not being brave enough to let it run lower than just above empty.
cheers,
Similar threads
