Petrol Use in the Ce's

i have a 2000 sedan gli, 1.8 engine.
using 98 octane, i get 400km out of a tank in the city, and on the highway ill get 600.
what rpm do you shift at? and what petrol are you using.
 
tm34 said:
i have a 2000 sedan gli, 1.8 engine.
using 98 octane, i get 400km out of a tank in the city, and on the highway ill get 600.
what rpm do you shift at? and what petrol are you using.
Yes the same as my car.. I'm not sure what i shift at because i have no rev meter but relatively normal i'd say not too higher revs because i don't usually speed. Maybe its the petrol i use either 95 or when i go to the 7/11 i get 91 because its either that or 98.. Maybe ill have to try 98. Does it make that much of a difference have you tried 95 & 91? Cheers
 
91 95 98 don't make much of a difference in our NA cars, but 98 is better if only slightly...turbo is a different story.
 
I use whatever is cheapest. Only time I bought premium was when they were out of 95 and were refuelling the E10, I only bought 10L to get me to the next servo :D
 
i just filled up today, so far i've filled my car up 9 times since i've bought it (yes i keep a record) and it was only the second time i've reached 400km. and i think i use 91 octane, cuz its cheapest :p and its all city driving to uni every day.
my average is about 350km to a tank. The fuel gauge is really inaccurate. half way mine says about 240-270, and in the third quarter i can watch it drop it's that quick! but the the last quarter lasts a long while.

BUT there's 3 weird things i have no idea about. 1. Fuel tank is 50L (apparently, the manual says) and i've never filled over 35L when fuel gauge is on empty. 2. When car reaches near 400km it feels like crap, the clutch feels bad and the car is a bit more jerky changing gears and seems like is has less power, but as soon as i fill it up, its perfect again and feels like it has more power and likes to rev a bit more, sounds louder too. 3. I've NEVER seen the petrol light come on, so maybe i still could have another 15L in the tank when i fill up?

btw i floor it every now and then, but if i drive a bit economically im sure i could make a bit more k's
 
d3x said:
91 95 98 don't make much of a difference in our NA cars, but 98 is better if only slightly...turbo is a different story.
If you drive fairly sedately you wont really notice the difference but I did find that even in my old Excel if you flogged the guts out of it then you did notice a difference on 98, including better mileage. 98 is supposed to have improved friction modifiers and deterrgents, etc added which are better for the motor though...

SyKRyD said:
Doesn't sound like an accurate way of measuring guys.

Instead, fill the tank to full. Reset your trip meter. Drive. The next time you fill up, fill to full tank and note down the km on your trip meter and divide that by how many litres you put in. This will give you km per litre - more accurate for you guys to compare.

Incidentally, topped up last night. 315km for 27l = 11.6km/l. Not exactly good but considering how hard I drive, the additional weight and boost. I'm pretty pleased with my tuner.

Yeah exactly why I never have measured in km to a tank (except for my bike because of its lack of a fuel guage lol)...although I really don't like km/l and I always measure in L/100km.


---------------------

As for the OP, what brand of fuel do you use?? If it's 91RON its likely E10 and some cars can guzzle that down for whatever reason but another thing to consider is the brand you are using. I always use 98RON fuels but even then I found I ALWAYS run around town with reduced performance and higher fuel usage on Caltex Vortex 98 in the CJ whereas BP Ultimate is the best closely follwed by Shell V-Power, both of which give me better performance and around 1L/100km less fuel usage...

So I'd suggest running her dry again and slapping Shell or BP 98RON fuel in and see how that goes for you...x



Jazza2442 said:
BUT there's 3 weird things i have no idea about. 1. Fuel tank is 50L (apparently, the manual says) and i've never filled over 35L when fuel gauge is on empty.

Yeah the CJs are rated for 59L capacity however the computer is going nuts by around 50L to refill and the most I have ever stretched to was 51L (at which point there was a permanent bowser showing on the dash screen lol). You shouldn't really get too low in the tank anyway as the fuel pump in many cars is submersed in the petrol which acts as a coolant. As for the issues you reckon yo notice that's obviously a fuel pressure issue,,,might be worth checking the condition of the pump and replacing the fuel filter...
 
We have used Shell V-power since we bought our Lancer back in 2001. We got 9.8l/100km with the 1.8 and now with the V6 we get 7.5l/100km.
 
Ryan said:
d3x said:
91 95 98 don't make much of a difference in our NA cars, but 98 is better if only slightly...turbo is a different story.
If you drive fairly sedately you wont really notice the difference but I did find that even in my old Excel if you flogged the guts out of it then you did notice a difference on 98, including better mileage. 98 is supposed to have improved friction modifiers and deterrgents, etc added which are better for the motor though...

I find as I move up the octane range that the CH has a smoother rev and idle on the 98 (and caltex 95), and I do find I actually get bout an extra 20-50km/tank on the higher octane stuff

---------------------
Ryan said:
As for the OP, what brand of fuel do you use?? If it's 91RON its likely E10 and some cars can guzzle that down for whatever reason but another thing to consider is the brand you are using. I always use 98RON fuels but even then I found I ALWAYS run around town with reduced performance and higher fuel usage on Caltex Vortex 98 in the CJ whereas BP Ultimate is the best closely follwed by Shell V-Power, both of which give me better performance and around 1L/100km less fuel usage...

So I'd suggest running her dry again and slapping Shell or BP 98RON fuel in and see how that goes for you...x

Curious, I found the 98 Vortex to be the sweetest in my car with BP being the worst... Every time I've filled up from BP or Shell on 91 (or 95 from BP) I always run lumpier then Caltex.
 
skippy said:
Ryan said:
As for the OP, what brand of fuel do you use?? If it's 91RON its likely E10 and some cars can guzzle that down for whatever reason but another thing to consider is the brand you are using. I always use 98RON fuels but even then I found I ALWAYS run around town with reduced performance and higher fuel usage on Caltex Vortex 98 in the CJ whereas BP Ultimate is the best closely follwed by Shell V-Power, both of which give me better performance and around 1L/100km less fuel usage...

So I'd suggest running her dry again and slapping Shell or BP 98RON fuel in and see how that goes for you...x
Curious, I found the 98 Vortex to be the sweetest in my car with BP being the worst... Every time I've filled up from BP or Shell on 91 (or 95 from BP) I always run lumpier then Caltex.

Being over in WA your fuel is mostlikely coming from a different lot of refineries I would assume....
 
From what i've heard vortex for power and ultimate for clean efficient driving. Most of this is hearsay and lots of tests have been run each with varying degree of results. I would put my money on a component getting dirty clogged or worn before you should be concerned about octane rating,

With this said RON is a *poo*house method of rating a fuel so it is very likely you may have had some bad fuel. Due to the way the rate RON is rated the fuel may be very good quality with low amounts of ether benzene kickers or it was a crap cook and at the plant and they just threw in extra barrels of booster.
 
i have had some pretty terd petrol lately, its been bloody expencive too, barely got 350kms out of my tank the last few weeks, and i usually get 550kms
 
Res said:
i have had some pretty terd petrol lately, its been bloody expencive too, barely got 350kms out of my tank the last few weeks, and i usually get 550kms

Take off your big boots!!! :lol:

I try to fill up only once every 2 weeks if i can help it. unless im getting it for less than $1.25
 
you guys don,t know how lucky you are with the fuel consumption your getting from your under 2 litre engines. i also run a 2.6 courier ute that just loves to eat the fuel as well as a 3.5 litre v6 pajero that is in the same boat, when i drive the 1.8 lancer around the fuel gauge really doesn,t lower too much atall.
what i have been told regarding the pajero for eg; is if your getting bad fuel economy all of a sudden you need to check / replace the CO2 sensor as first priority then if no better do an injector clean .
 
I got at least 400ks to a tank on my lancer. Fuel usage went down noticbley when I got light weight wheels. Was bouncing off the limiter all day though.
 
Blacklancer1 said:
Yes the same as my car.. I'm not sure what i shift at because i have no rev meter but relatively normal i'd say not too higher revs because i don't usually speed. Maybe its the petrol i use either 95 or when i go to the 7/11 i get 91 because its either that or 98.. Maybe ill have to try 98. Does it make that much of a difference have you tried 95 & 91? Cheers

yeah, well i used to fill up with 95.
then i realised that its only about 5c difference from 98, and i get from 50-100km more out of 98. so i choose it :)
*fudge* using ethanol, it felt like i had alot less power, and would be lucky to get 300 out of a tank. 98 only costs me $55-$60 paying under 1.50c
i dont have a tacho either, i shift to second gear at 15-20km, to 3rd at 30-40, 4th at 50-60, and 5th from 70-onwards.

but when a hero pulls up next to me, trying to show off his stock civic. its 1st gear to 40, and 2nd gear to 80 ;)
 
I shift 1->2 at 40km/h 2-3 at 75km/h or speed limit 3-4th when I hit speed limit 4-5 when im cruising above 80... 4th i use for 50-80km/h 3rd i'll use only when cruising at 30/40 or changing through gears... Probs not the most fuel efficient shifting pattern but it's what im use to now.
 
lol what? you change to 3rd at 75km/h? you know thats about 5-5.5k rpm or there abouts! do you accelerate everywhere with your foot flat? i do usually but still shift only at 4-4.5k max if i do. or if i get past a truck ill go down to 2nd or 3rd. rarely go above 5.5k. otherwise about 3k without the foot flat or just under when the engine's cold.
and you should cruise in 5th at anything over about 65-70, otherwise your just making your engine work harder and using extra fuel!
 
and? Your point? There is no yes or no on when to change, and you dont have to cruise in 5th. If I have the money to spend on fuel (which I do) then I'll drive the way I like.
 
skippy said:
and? Your point? There is no yes or no on when to change, and you dont have to cruise in 5th. If I have the money to spend on fuel (which I do) then I'll drive the way I like.

also ur not exactly wrong shifting there

there is much debate about the economics of fuel, shifting lower u will put ur pedal on more to accelerate and generally be taking ur car out of its powerband (where it makes easy power) putting slightly more load on the engine

shifting higher keeps it in power band if you still need to accelerate in the next gear, less load, reving it high doesnt necessarily mean ur flat to the floor, i can get to redline on 1/2 throttle easy
you could well be using less/same fuel doing it this way

same debate about cruising rpm, normally cruising i would be at 2-2.5krpm, whereas matty with his close ratios is at 3-3.5krpm in the same gear same speed, and even with his 1.8l he still uses less fuel than me! less load on the engine and keeping it on feather throttle in powerband is actually not bad for fuel at all

i drive around accelerating and shift at 4-5k, and still get 550km a tank, i get exact same shifting low tho, so its rather balanced
 
Back
Top