Excellent fuel economy
- Thread starter trevor1985
- Start date
Help Support Nissan Navara Forum:
4BYFOR
Member
I get 550k from 70 litres of diesel and I drive it hard all the time this navara has never seen a light foot
I can vouch for this I have seen you out and about a few times last time I saw you was at night about a month ago on Loganlea rd, I was towing a car trailer with my Black STX and you flew on by. It sounded pretty good, I was annoyed I had the trailer on.
I've managed to drop 2L per hundred. Down around 10 now.
siringo
Member
Have you got a trip computer in your King Cab Tappet?? I haven't in mine. My King Cab sounds not much different to yours and the best I can get is very high 11's.
If I check my mileage using the speedo and pump bowser, best I can do is low 12's, that's doing 90-95 on the open road.
If I plug in my OBDII thingy and use Torque, it tells me I'm getting high 7's to low 8's.
I wonder if all these people getting 8's get their figures from the in car displays/computers. I'd be interested to see what they got if they used the speedo and the pump bowser method.
I did read in another post on fuel economy that it was mentioned that the King Cabs get worse economy than the dual cabs. I wonder if that's because the King Cab's don't have trip computers (well mine doesn't anyway) and the KC owners rely on the speedo and pump bowser method????
K
KraftyPg
Guest
I don't think there was ever a good reason for the KC's economy being worse than the DC's but the newer models seem to show some improvement over the older ones which is expected. My economy is calculated and back up by the ECU.
nakedape
Member
- Joined
- May 27, 2010
- Messages
- 1,657
- Reaction score
- 1
Does the OBD11 read in km/L or L/100km? Because mixing up the units means both your readings are comparable.
siringo
Member
I'm fairly sure it was from the L/100km reading. I may check it again tonight.
mancini
Whinger, always complaining.
That sounds unbelievable, you would struggle to get them figures out of a suzuki Alto, are you sur you are not going off the trip computer figures, which are very optomistic, i struggle to get 12 around town.
user 10312
Member
- Joined
- Sep 23, 2011
- Messages
- 1,630
- Reaction score
- 68
No trip computer on mine either. Check it by the time honoured method of K's divied by pump liters. That's using the same Caltex premium pump and pressed up to the brim. So fairly sure it's right. The tyres are very slightly larger in diameter. 265X70 as opposed to the 255's. Engine is stock standard.
My running around, is mostly around Cairns and out of peak hour. So not to much stop start. Open road it's no better infact somtimes worse but I think that is where the bullbar starts to have more of an effect.
zed
Member
I got 510 k's to 60 lt ! I'm hoping injectors, timing chain and oil pump will improve this, and it's looking like a chip is on the cards too....
Pete22
Member
I too struggle to get 12 in fact I struggle to get 13 ......I get a consistent 13.5 averaged over 110000km. The ute is heavy as you can see from all the aftermarket stuff and I've given up long ago trying to get the 10 and under figures. I use mine a lot off road and towing my 1.5 tonne off road camper too. I think I'll leave the 6, 7, 8 numbers to my i30
longy509
Member
a little bit of weight seems to make a big difference i normally get between 10 and 12l to the hundred with a couple hundred kgs of tools on the back the other week tray empty i drove from bathurst to sackville through bells line rd to move the mother inlaw and averaged 8.3l/
K
KraftyPg
Guest
A load will make some difference but it will depend a lot of where the load is. On the roof or behind the vehicle will usually change things for the worse but just loading the tub up is not a sure fire way to increase fuel usage.
I came back from down the big smoke a few weeks back loaded floor to the roof of the canopy with bedroom furniture, boxes of bits and pieces and a concrete statue which I can not lift by myself and I still got home in the high 8's.
I still say economy is based on the driver not the car, the driver can influence fuel economy either good or bad a lot more than any load can. The difference is that it's easier to blame the load or conditions rather than the driver, especially if one is struggling to attain better figures than they currently get. For those that aren't trying it's rarely an issue.
I came back from down the big smoke a few weeks back loaded floor to the roof of the canopy with bedroom furniture, boxes of bits and pieces and a concrete statue which I can not lift by myself and I still got home in the high 8's.
I still say economy is based on the driver not the car, the driver can influence fuel economy either good or bad a lot more than any load can. The difference is that it's easier to blame the load or conditions rather than the driver, especially if one is struggling to attain better figures than they currently get. For those that aren't trying it's rarely an issue.
I don't know about that Krafty , last week i went from melbourne via euston to waikerie SA
I usually get 8.5 lts per 100 ks , towing the trailer i was using 12 per 100 , now the trip from Euston to Waikerie and back i done a test , there i drove manually ( its all 110 ks ) and on the way back i used cruise , guess what ? 12 lts per 100 ks both ways
K
KraftyPg
Guest
Your tests doesn't disprove anything I said.
well it wasn't the driver , it was the load , dead flat road , 110 kph door to door , exactly 300 ks
K
KraftyPg
Guest
I actually suggested that towing a load or making the vehicle higher would have an effect that was noticeable, where as a full load in the tub would not effect figures as much. Had nothing to do with Cruise or not cruise, however under most conditions cruise will drive less economical than a driver who knows what they are doing, even more so with a trailer on.
longy509
Member
my fuel usage went up between 2 to 3 liters per hundred after putting bullbar/winch and side steps on ute was only 5000km old
Nav D40
Member
Just standard D40 with canopy, no bull bar etc
726 k's out of 69.53 litres of fuel, which is 9.57 lt/100k with air con on full time and sitting on speed limit + 20%
726 k's out of 69.53 litres of fuel, which is 9.57 lt/100k with air con on full time and sitting on speed limit + 20%
Similar threads
