A work in progress.
 

When I bought my Volvo V50 1.6L diesel in 2005, it had the best FE of any Volvo : 5L/100km combined, or 47.0 mpg (US).
The roofrails were left off - a factory option - as I wouldn't use them anyway, and they'd only add drag. (Does that qualify as a "mod" ? :p )
The car was also fitted with the free but unpopular optional diesel particle filter - a rarity in those days in Belgium.

The V50 came with fuel saving Michelin Energy E3 tyres which I disliked.
In its first year, the car got 3 sets of tyres, going from 195/65/15 to 205/50/17 in the process.
Fuel consumption was well above the advertised numbers :
5.97 L/100km or 39.4 mpg (min 5,42 Ø 5,97 max 6,92 )

The second year was a little bit better in terms of FE :
5.83 L/100km or 40.4 mpg (min 5,05 Ø 5,83 max 6,60 )

Late in its 3rd year - mid 2008, just as the economic crisis was about to hit and fuel prices were soaring - I made a trip to the UK and discovered the positive effects of driving 10 km/h slower.
5.76 L/100km or 40.8 mpg (min 5,39 Ø 5,76 max 6,26 )

During the car's 4th year, I finally saw the light : fitted Michelin Energy Saver tyres on 16" rims and really started changing my driving style
5.43 L/100km or 43.3 mpg ( min 4,89 Ø 5,43 max 6,13 )
Still above its rated FE, but going in the right direction.

In the 5th and current year, FE has gone down a bit due to the unusually long harsh winter we've seen in Europe, and a leaking injector.
5.51 L/100km or 42.7 mpg (min 4,94 Ø 5,51 max 6,35 )


Going from 39.4 to say 43 mpg is just over 9% improvement - but it's still 10% above the rated fuel consumption of 47 mpg.


I wouldn't call it a success story yet, but it's a start :)

Mods done to the car so far :

• Roofrails not fitted (10/2005)
• Michelin Energy Saver LRR tyres (1/2009)
• Tyre pressure gradually increased from 2.3 bar / 33psi to 3.0bar / 43.5psi
• Added Cruise Control (4/2010)
• Weight reduction : 35.8 kg / 78.9 lbs (8/2010)
  1. removed temporary spare tyre: 15.0 kg / 33.1 lbs
  2. removed jack: 2.3 kg / 5.1 lbs
  3. removed rear mats 0.9 kg / 2 lbs
  4. removed luggage cover: 8.0 kg / 17.6 lbs
  5. removed assorted junk: 2.1 kg / 4.6 lbs
  6. removed extra container of windshield washer fluid: 5.0 kg / 11.0 lbs
  7. filling windshield washer reservoir only halfway: 2.5 kg / 5.5 lbs
• ScanGauge2 (08/2010)
• 90% upper grill block (8/2010)
• Volvo Libra aerodynamic 16" wheels, adding 13.6 kg / 30 lbs (9/2010)

Mods done to the nut behind the wheel :

• increased ecological awareness
• driving slower (from 120 down to 100 km/h - 74.5 to 62 mph)
• recently started coasting
• reduced idling time
• use the AC less often
• shift up earlier

The goal I've set will be a tough one: achieving EM hypermiler status, 20% over the rated FE numbers.

As Euro-cycle fuel consumption figures are less realistic than the US EPA figures, it'll be a tough challenge.
All mods will need to be reversible and (at least superficially) legal.

20% better than 47 mpg means 56.4 mpg or 4.17 L/100km consistently.

Spritmonitor.de lists no-one with this kind of FE, the lowest average for non-DrivE Volvo's being 4.36 L/100km.


But then, 100mpg from a Civic hadn't been seen before either :D

What is the gearing in the V50 1.6 Diesel, is it quite long - 6 speed or 5 ?

Although the weight loss is quite intense the V50 is pretty heavy as standad so the overall gain probably isn't all that much. I've left all that stuff in my Fabia. You could think about taking out the reat seats if you are serious about less weight.

Keep an eye on the DPF with short shifting, I have read it can clog up. An occasional 'full beans' blow to clear it out may be worthwhile.

Good luck though, 50 MPG (US) should be within easy reach with that 1.6D engine and some coasting. I can get the average MPG on Mrs A's Octavia estate (2.0 litre) to read 60+ (UK) around town, I'm sure I could get it more on a run but I'm not allowed to drive it that far...:p

The 1.6D has a 5 speed box.
The gearing is fairly short - the DrivE versions have a longer gearing.

Officially, it's 1375kg / 3031 lbs, including a "standard" driver (75 kg/165 lbs) and 90% fuel, but I plan to have it weighed.

Well, combined with my own weight loss, and only filling up halfway, It'll have 5% less weight. That should start to have a small effect.

At the moment, I think that's still a bit too extreme.

I usually have to gun it on the short on-ramps of the motorway.
But I'm already keeping an eye on the DPF as I didn't have it replaced at 120.000 km ;)
It's still OK, so no need to swap it out.


... let alone mod it :D

That may happen.

I've had my car 5 years which is a record for me and Mrs A said I could change if I did, and one option is to exchange mine for her new one and I take over hers.

If it does then all sorts of mods.

Do you have a built in MPG calculator, if not do you have a scangauge ?

I'm almost sure that you have same engine that I do: DV6TED, a 1.6 commonrail turbodiesel, designed jointly by PSA and Ford, found in all sorts of cars like Citroen/Peugeot (1.6HDi), Ford (1.6TDCi), Volvo, Subaru, etc. Mine is also 2005, so should I also be expecting a leaky injector?

Svietlana officially weighs 1466kg, but I checked that it's actually less, only 1300kg without the rear seats.

Taking into account that we both have the same engine (and probably transmission) and that your Volvo is not as tall as mine (smaller frontal area), has a lower drag coefficient (0.32 compared to my 0.334) and is slightly lighter, plus LRR tires, I'm amazed that your fuel consumption is so high:confused: My car should average 5.6 l/100km, over 10% more than your's, so I think it's the diesel particulate filter that's killing you. Is it the PSA's FAP filter, or does Volvo have its own, different model of filter (do you have to add a liquid called Eloys at the service station every so often?)?

Those filters are wicked! Not only do they cause problem codes all the time, but they also require a high exhaust temperature to burn out every 500km or 1000km, so unless you are chased by the police very often, the engine's computer will add more fuel when the burn process is in need to raise the exhaust temp. This causes your fc to go through the roof. And the best part about it is that you won't find anything about it in the official numbers, since the fc testing is done with a car with a clean filter, not by a car in need of a burn out. Wicked wicked wicked!!!

I don't know exactly by how much the dpf improves emissions, especially after 3-8 years of use, but I wonder if it is worth the extra fuel burned (not taken into account when calculating fc and emissions), or the loads of $$$ spent at the service station clearing codes, adding Eloys, or regenerating the filter. Many Peugeot and Citroen owners have dealt with the problem by removing their FAP and adding a sensor emulator to trick the computer. Many of them do it thinking they'll get better performance numbers, others because of all the trouble the FAP has caused. Unfortunately, emissions aren't checked here as regularly as they should be, so I have no idea how this is effected by FAP removal.

I am by no means suggesting you should remove your filter!! It may, or may not, be better to keep it, I don't know.

That's right.

MTX75 transmission in the Volvo.
That box is also used in other diesel and non-diesel Volvo's so it may not be the PSA gearbox.

Yeah.
OTOH, my overall fuel consumption is average on spritmonitor.de
The overall FC is only coming down since mid 2008 or thereabout, with the LRR tyres being fitted in Jannuary 2009.

When I drive it without paying attention to FE, I'll average 6L/100 km even when driving fast. Only city driving tends to push it even higher.
Fuel consumption can rather easily be brought down to around 5.5 L/100km by driving a bit slower.
However, getting it to 5L/100km is pretty hard, and going below that is a real challenge in this car.

Also, driving conditions in this congested part of Europe are far from ideal.

The V50 is rated for 5.0 L/100km.
So it's easier for you to become a hypermiler :thumbup:

It's in the exhaust path, and it does quite the opposite of all engine tuning tricks to reduce backpressure in the exhaust ...
So yes, it must have some negative effect on FE.

It uses the PSA technology with Eolys fluid - though I doubt the filters are the same externally.

I have had my share of problems with it, and it has taken Volvo until the 80.000km service to sort them out ...

Using constant throttle, the car would buck like a wild horse when the particle filter was burned free.
It'd accelerate and decelerate in rapid succession, which is then made even worse by involuntary movement of the throttle.
Sometimes it'd just slow down if I did nothing.

Pushing down the throttle always solved these problems instantly, but I wasn't happy with it.


Though it's a lot less noticeable now, I can tell when the filter is burned free.
Fuel consumption can go up slightly, or even go down while the process is taking place !

I don't know if the Volvo onboard computer counts in the extra fuel needed to burn the filter free.

Since the last service - at 120.000 km - the onboard computer appears to be reading lower than it used to, and the difference between the indicated and actual fuel use is greater.

After 4 years, there were no measurable particles in the exhaust. 0 .
Normally, they usually read 2 to 4 (? units ?) even on cars with particle filters.

I can't tell how much extra fuel it's costing, but on spritmonitor.de , there are a number of drivers with DPF and better FE.
However, my recent figures are becoming better than theirs :cool:

(The DPF was far more common in Germany than it was in Belgium at the time I bought the car - in fact the DPF added a couple of months to the delivery time ! )


Eolys is around 100 euro every 60000 km
The particle filter however, is almost 1000 euro's to replace (every 120000 km).
I didn't have it replaced at 120000km because it's not causing me any troubles anymore - don't fix it if it ain't broken - and to stretch out the total mileage the car will get with the new filter.
I tend to keep my cars for a long time.
If I can do so by replacing the filter just once instead of twice, that's a lot of easy money saved. ;)

That's not the way I want to go.
The DPF is doing its job, even if it may cost a few mpg.

My car was tested in 2009, got a 2 year approval, so it's due for retesting in 2011, and yearly from then on.

Possibly.
It happens, but not too often I'm told.
If it happens, you'll start smelling exhaust fumes in the passenger compartment.

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 :eek: