A work in progress.

[Piwoslaw]

Originally Posted by euromodder

As it turns out, it was just a cheap seal that needed replacing and not the injector itself.
Unfortunately, it's a lot of work to clean up the mess and get to it.

Parts : 20 euro.
Labour : 400+ euro

I can buy a new injector for the equivalent of 300€, or a used one for 100€ on an auction.

[euromodder]

Though my V50 has an onboard computer (instant + avg mpg / avg speed / remaining distance) I've ordered a Scangauge 2 to have more details about my actual fuel use and to be able to monitor other parameters like TPS, temperature, quantity of fuel used etc.

We have a saying here : Meten (measuring) is weten (knowing)

[Arragonis]

My Fab has onboard too (TDI) but I still got one for the same reasons - mainly temps but I'm finding the GPH (Gallons per Hour) and MAP (Manifold Abs Pressure) interesting.

If you use instant and average MPG on the SG (even if they are not accurate) you can try and keep instant above average. Result is less money to Shell, BP, Exxon etc.

LOD (Engine Load apparently) seems a little random to me and not much info on what it actually means - if it really is a percentage of engine power available then my engine is much less powerful that I think, and as it smoked an annoying dumb woman in a Merc CLK today (don't ask, I just ruined my tank I know) I don't think that is the case.

As I am now getting over 650 miles a tank (before I was on 450 max) my calibrating tank is taking much much longer than I thought it would so my GPH and so on is inaccurate as it is based on wimpy US gallons and not HM The Queen's (gawd bless her) gallons. I'm actually keen to refuel to set it all up, but then again a tank costs about 3/4 the price of an SG2 at the moment and I have 200 miles to go

On the plus side my Credit Carb bill this month, including the SG2 purchase and fuel (they are the only things I spend on CC) is about half the one in January when I drove fewer miles (longer crimbo / new year hols in Scotland).

Thats more beer tokens for, er, beer - so its win win

[euromodder]

Originally Posted by Arragonis

smoked an annoying dumb woman in a Merc CLK today

When it's got to be done, it's got to be done

As I am now getting over 650 miles a tank (before I was on 450 max)

I had gotten to within 11 km of the magical 1000 km (621.5 miles) before joining EM, but my current tank is going to be well over 1000km - the remaining distance keeps hinting at a total of 1100 to 1200 km !

OK, it's always reading a bit too optimistic, just like the tank average indication of 4.5 L/100km (52.3 mpg US / 62.8 mpg UK), but still ...

Even engine-on coasting is greatly adding to my overall FE.
I was reluctant to try it, but I'm really surprised at how far this cage will coast - I've had to constantly increase the starting distance, because I still had to (engine) brake !

It's very tempting to do a full fill-up and register a record tank rather than do a partial fill-up to keep the car's weight down.

my calibrating tank is taking much much longer than I thought it would

Why not use a few "early fill-ups" to calibrate it quicker, then fine-tune with a few full tanks ?

a tank costs about 3/4 the price of an SG2 at the moment and I have 200 miles to go

Yeah, diesel prices in the UK are really horrendous !
In my fuel log I can pick out my fuelings in the UK just by looking at the price
Your beloved Majesty's government is a tad on the greedy side

Thats more beer tokens for, er, beer - so its win win

Using less fuel is always a win, no matter what you use the savings for

[320touring]

Arragonis-good to see you thinking like a scotsman

As for this volvo-has anyone taken volvo to task over the mpg claims?
It sounds as if you've done considerable, and good work to get to that mpg.. But its below what they sold it as?

[euromodder]

Originally Posted by 320touring

As for this volvo-has anyone taken volvo to task over the mpg claims?

They've got their official test results, and that's what counts officially ...

The car will match its economy figures if you match the silly driving style during the official tests.

Recently, lots of car manufacturers have come under some flak because their "eco" cars simply don't match their claimed FE in real life - hence no fiscal bonusses should be handed out for buying them.
(We get 15% off the price for buying a car with less than 104 gr/km CO2 , paid for by the government.)

But that's not due to the car manufacturers, it's the very tests themselves that are ridiculously unnatural and should be changed quickly to reflect a more normal car use. And that's a political issue.
EPA has done so in the recent past.

[Arragonis]

The ECE test is not realistic which is the issue. The V50 is quite heavy and the 1.6 is quite small but with some coasting you will be getting much better MPG. The key one is to work out when to use EO(n)Coasting vs overrun when running downhill. I don't use EO(ff)Coasting very often - I have a thread about EOC vs turbos - basically remember the turbo is very hot and when you switch off suddenly the oil in the turbo stays there and absorbs lots of heat, which can affect the seals.

The ECE figures for the V70 2.5D (not the D5) matched what Mrs A got in hers pretty closely though between 2000 and 2005. It was the attitude of the dealer in wanting to sting me for about 1KGBP in unrequired repairs and their inability to fix what we had already told them about on visit after visit that made me vow to never have another one.

Originally Posted by 320touring

Arragonis-good to see you thinking like a scotsman

Somewhat ironically the beer I have is Tennents too.

[Piwoslaw]

Originally Posted by euromodder

The car will match its economy figures if you match the silly driving style during the official tests.

The Fuel Consumption Testing Scheme

[Arragonis]

At the risk of demanding this bus go to Cuba (aka Hyjack alert) I would be interested in your experiences with the SG.

I decided I couldn't wait so I topped up my tank. The tank itself was my best (or second best I can't remember) and when I told SG it recorded an adjustment % which I assume is the difference between what it thinks I used vs what I did.

The immediate 2 effects of this were :

- GPH adjusted from 0.2 GPH at idle to 0.14 to 0.16, not stable yet.

- MPG has adjusted but doesn't match the OBI (On Board Instrument). Having tapped that the OBI is optimistic and the SG2 is below that so maybe its more realistic.

I may do some video comparisons and maybe people can comment. However I would be very interested to know what your V50 does.

Disclaimer - I do realise that the SG2 vs TDi MPG issue has been debated, but

[euromodder]

You owe me a few Havana's now


The ScanGauge arrived today - from Greece of all places - more toys !

For starters, I'll be calibrating the indicated speed and distance against GPS.
I already know true speed is off by roughly 2 or 3 km/h across the range when compared to the tacho speed, but the ScanGauge will give a better speed reading than the tacho.

I'll have the car weighed later this week.
I know what's gone out, by filling up shortly after that, I can calculate how much fuel was in there, so I'll also know the original weight and be able to compare that to its official weight.

Calibrating the ScanGauge and determining actual vehicle weight will require topping up the fuel tank, rather than filling up only halfway and save some more weight.


Unfortunately, I'm less happy with the way my current tank is going.
Winds and heavy rain during the last 2 days have taken their toll on FE.
I was all too often between 0.5 and 1 L /100km over the usual FC for a given stretch of road. That hurts badly !

A lot of the driving I do is on roads with severe lane grooves.
They're bad enough when dry, but become a real FE killer in the rain.
Driving faster in the fast lanes that are less affected, might actually be the better option.

I was working my way down to 4.4L/100km from 4.5 (indicated) but instead it's gone up to 4.6 - while the total distance prediction is now barely over 1100km