Go Back   EcoModder Forum > EcoModding > Success Stories
Register Now
 Register Now
 

Reply  Post New Thread
 
Submit Tools LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 08-29-2010, 11:32 PM   #31 (permalink)
(:
 
Frank Lee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: up north
Posts: 12,762

Blue - '93 Ford Tempo
Last 3: 27.29 mpg (US)

F150 - '94 Ford F150 XLT 4x4
90 day: 18.5 mpg (US)

Sport Coupe - '92 Ford Tempo GL
Last 3: 69.62 mpg (US)

ShWing! - '82 honda gold wing Interstate
90 day: 33.65 mpg (US)

Moon Unit - '98 Mercury Sable LX Wagon
90 day: 21.24 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1,585
Thanked 3,555 Times in 2,218 Posts
I think a lot of that "coking" cool-down theory is for the worst-case scenario ie. racing, hard-working heavy equipment, etc. and probably not needed for garden variety street driven stuff.

__________________


  Reply With Quote
Alt Today
Popular topics

Other popular topics in this forum...

   
Old 08-30-2010, 09:28 AM   #32 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
comptiger5000's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: CT, USA
Posts: 544

RaceJeep - '98 Jeep Grand Cherokee (ZJ) 5.9 Limited
90 day: 13.62 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1
Thanked 26 Times in 23 Posts
With gentle driving, it is less of an issue. Good quality oils (especially good synthetics) with good heat tolerance reduce the issue further.
__________________
Call me crazy, but I actually try for mpg with this Jeep:



Typical driving: Back in Rochester for school, driving is 60 - 70% city
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-01-2010, 03:15 AM   #33 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Lancaster Ca
Posts: 362

Tank - '76 Chevy El Camino Classic
90 day: 25.89 mpg (US)

Sabrina - '91 Mercedes Benz 190 E
90 day: 37.07 mpg (US)

Angel - '88 Mercedes-Benz 420SEL
Last 3: 23.01 mpg (US)

Quicksilver - '04 Mercedes-Benz CLK55 AMG Cabrio
Thanks: 52
Thanked 8 Times in 8 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Varn View Post
Good job getting 50 mpg. I might suggest running low octane fuel since you are still operating in the intake vacuum side of things.
U don't run low octane in turbo motors or any forced induction motors for that point It would ruin the turbo after a while
__________________


Tank:
(No actual EPA numbers for car just used F/E numbers when i first got it)
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-01-2010, 05:38 AM   #34 (permalink)
Weight Reduction
 
Drive Stick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: NJ
Posts: 113

Celica GTS - '02 Toyota Celica GT-S
90 day: 36.32 mpg (US)
Thanks: 0
Thanked 3 Times in 3 Posts
Send a message via AIM to Drive Stick
Quote:
Originally Posted by Domman56 View Post
U don't run low octane in turbo motors or any forced induction motors for that point It would ruin the turbo after a while
I'm not sure who told you this, but I'll tell you the reason turbocharged or high compression engines use higher octane gasoline.

The turbocharger sees no gas, it's predetonation you're trying to avoid with the higher octane rating. I would take the time to explain what detonating is, or how octane ratings work but.. I must go to work.
__________________
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-01-2010, 11:37 AM   #35 (permalink)
Do more with less
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: North Eastern Missouri
Posts: 930

OD - '05 Ford Econoline
90 day: 18.64 mpg (US)

Joetta - '86 Volkswagen Jetta Turbo Oil Burner
TEAM VW AUDI Group
90 day: 49.71 mpg (US)

Benzilla - '85 Mercedes Benz 300D
90 day: 28.08 mpg (US)
Thanks: 66
Thanked 177 Times in 112 Posts
I don't think he ran any boost. I believe he kept the engine at 10"hg vacuum.

Part of being eco in my opinion is to not use the more highly processed fuel. When the lower octane will run the engine without detonation. He was keeping his cylinder pressure down with his driving style.

I have had a turbo truck. The manufacturer recommended premium fuel but stated it was safe with lower octane as the fuel map and boost and or timing would adjust to prevent engine knock. I never drove it for economy. It had a turbo and I was going to use it. In my part of the country premium fuel is not always available. I had to fill with unleaded regular or gasohol many times.

Cool graphic showing the extended butt of the Saab.

Are they out of business after the GM collapse?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Domman56 View Post
U don't run low octane in turbo motors or any forced induction motors for that point It would ruin the turbo after a while
__________________
“The further a society drifts from the truth, the more it will hate those that speak it.” George Orwell

“Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom in Europe.

The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed.”

Noah Webster, 1787
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-05-2010, 08:13 PM   #36 (permalink)
EcoModding Lurker
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: PA
Posts: 2
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
I picked one of these cars up. Just got 32.6 mpg in hilly terrain by staying out of the boost averaging about 65mph. Not bad for a $400 car with 178k miles and a bad o2 sensor. They published a max economy rating around 45 mpg @ 45 mph back when they first came out. Since then Saab made some minor mods for the Talladega record to reduce drag (ie. dish like wheels and ride height) . These cars will do 150mph+. I will post more results as I get this thing tuned up.
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-05-2010, 08:25 PM   #37 (permalink)
The PRC.
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Elsewhere.
Posts: 5,304
Thanks: 285
Thanked 536 Times in 384 Posts
I had a reading of -39mpg on my SG2 today.
__________________
[I]So long and thanks for all the fish.[/I]
  Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Arragonis For This Useful Post:
mcrews (03-12-2011), roflwaffle (03-13-2011)
Old 11-05-2010, 08:52 PM   #38 (permalink)
EcoModding Apprentice
 
tumnasgt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Wellington, NZ
Posts: 158

The Charger - '15 BMW i3
Thanks: 81
Thanked 15 Times in 12 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arragonis View Post
I had a reading of -39mpg on my SG2 today.
Driving backwards?
__________________
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-05-2010, 09:13 PM   #39 (permalink)
EcoModding Lurker
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: PA
Posts: 2
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arragonis View Post
I had a reading of -39mpg on my SG2 today.
I payed a little more for this car than you did for your SG2. I will recoup my investment vs driving my Tacoma in about 6 months. What do you tow your boat with?
__________________
2007 Tacoma 2.7l 4x4 32" tires 24.6mpg
1997 900 2.0t 32.6 mpg
HQ Fluids & tire pressure.
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-12-2011, 11:26 AM   #40 (permalink)
ninja lurker
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Akron, Ohio
Posts: 11
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
ok so i"m a little late to the party (story of my life!).
having owned a ng900 saab i can tell you from my personal experience that the SID (SAAB Information Display) on the dash takes quite a bit of time (and/or different driving style) to make a change in the mpg number.
I say great job even if you can't make it happen everyday.
***a side note about my experience with switching to synthetic fluids, I saw a 1.2 mpg increase in the MPG #'s after switching to synthetics (it took about a month to get there but it stayed there for the following 8 months i owned the car, so probably not a fluke.

  Reply With Quote
Reply  Post New Thread




Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
101.5 MPG on my 2003 Ninja 250!!! theycallmeebryan Motorcycles / Scooters 308 01-06-2016 02:56 AM
Project: Rebuilding an '01 Honda Insight as a nonhybrid Fabio Hybrids 158 01-12-2013 12:59 PM
First 90+ mpg fill HOTDOG Danncomm Success Stories 13 08-12-2010 02:34 PM
SGII first observations! gone-ot Success Stories 10 04-02-2010 02:26 AM



Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.5.2
All content copyright EcoModder.com