lt/100km

Fri Oct 02, 2009 9:49 pm

I was just wondering what other people get in fuel economy.

I checked my alto today (an F5A), it uses 7.4 per 100km. I'm hoping thats good.

It would be good to see if its running rich or if its good.

Cheers
Craig

Fri Oct 02, 2009 10:34 pm

i'll be able to tell you in a few weeks. just got mine registered a couple of days ago.

Sat Oct 03, 2009 12:29 am

Mine is running pretty bad, about 6lt/100km. I had it doing 4.9lt/100 out of the F6A

Sat Oct 03, 2009 12:33 am

I drive mine pretty hard around town and I'm averaging about 8.5 but I've got a few results down at 6.1 (cruises).

If I drove it more within it's capabilities rather than always on the redline, I'm sure I'd get a more reasonable result, I just have too much fun when I'm in it to drive it economically...

Sat Oct 03, 2009 7:32 am

last trip I did in mine was *roughly* 7.5L / 100k but that was with ski rack and skiis on top, and I could really feel the drag.

Sat Oct 03, 2009 9:40 am

In the snot rocket I get between 7-8L per 100kms, worse if I bury the loud pedal a lot. But I didn't turbocharge it for fuel economy!

Special Ed does about the same, but I blame the auto slushbox for that.

Sat Oct 03, 2009 11:50 am

Mine is a maximum of $25-$30 to fill....
I really don't care how many k's i get out of a tank, it's cheaper than my landcruiser and thats all that matters

Sat Oct 03, 2009 12:49 pm

Australia seems to be the only country on Earth that uses the litres per 100km scale and thankfully I see that changing by some motoring journos to world standard kilometres per litre. My original Carry with the F10A 970cc and 263,000 km on the clock happily sits on an average of 16.4 km per litre; about 6 litres per 100 km.

Sat Oct 03, 2009 6:28 pm

I really don't care how many k's I get out of a tank, it's cheaper than my landcruiser and thats all that matters Wink

Word perfect!

Sun Oct 04, 2009 12:00 am

My MB was getting around 14L/100Km from F8B & auto with worn out carby before it died.
The bank would not loan me $1000.00 to re-power her instead they loaned $12000.00 for a 1996 3.1L Turbo diesel Jackaroo that averages 11L/100Km.
The 'roo is great but I want the 'Boy back on the road!!

Wed Oct 07, 2009 10:16 pm

i get about 7.15L per 100 kms. i think i could get it down to 6.25L per 100kms which works out to be 400kms out of one tank! I have a 1988 alto single cam turbo. whats the capacity of my tank? 25L?

Sat Oct 10, 2009 9:02 am

My MB gets between 4.8 and 5.4 L/100.

I drive 100km/day and most of it is at 80km/hr.

Sun Oct 11, 2009 2:29 pm

Last time i checked, my boy was running about 17km/L or 5.8L/100km. Varies though.

Mon Oct 12, 2009 10:12 am

Thanks for the replies guys, & girls.

I guess mine's not doing too bad then, since the stereo weighs it down abit.

Cheers
Craig

Mon Oct 12, 2009 3:01 pm

mine was getting about 55-60 mpg but I had a big lunch.
l per 100k is a load of crap that was inflicted on us by the metric conversion people who also gave us m/2 instead of 2/m so that I always have to verify what I am actually being offerred as square metres is not the same as metres squared.
apparently these peolpe were geeks kept in a white room and never let out into the real world. When Labor was last in power I think.
I totally ignore litres per 100 k, and ask the sales rep what the kilometres per litre is, always makes them think.
the fact is that it is a pain to work out how much fuel you need or use in the l/k method. I need to know that if i put in 18 litres I am going to travel approximately 150k.
Apparently when the metric measurements were introduced motoring journalists were threatened with legal action by the govt if they used km per l, as most wanted.