Why does my MPG suck?
ORIGINAL: Landzu
Not knowing where you live, I have to ask do you have to use
Ethanol?
I was getting 13 to 14mpg intown untilI have been using a P.C.
fuel Ethanol at10% I have found that I get 15% less mpg's.
So it takes 5% more 93 to burn the Ethanol.
I now get 11mpg or so.
I have less power runs ruff.
All that is gone when I get real fuel but as I live where the government mandated the bad fuel,,,, well you get my point.
Tires will make a difference.
Not knowing where you live, I have to ask do you have to use
Ethanol?
I was getting 13 to 14mpg intown untilI have been using a P.C.
fuel Ethanol at10% I have found that I get 15% less mpg's.
So it takes 5% more 93 to burn the Ethanol.
I now get 11mpg or so.
I have less power runs ruff.
All that is gone when I get real fuel but as I live where the government mandated the bad fuel,,,, well you get my point.
Tires will make a difference.
I should keep my mouth shut but I'm averaging 15.3 MPG in all around driving in my '04. It probably helps that I'm at 5000 feet where the air is thinner and thus 15%less fuel is needed to mix with it to burn. Of course that also means that the engine puts out 15% less HP than it would at sea level. [8D]
Dave
Dave
ORIGINAL: geotrash
I should keep my mouth shut but I'm averaging 15.3 MPG in all around driving in my '04. It probably helps that I'm at 5000 feet where the air is thinner and thus 15% less fuel is needed to mix with it to burn. Of course that also means that the engine puts out 15% less HP than it would at sea level. [8D]
Dave
I should keep my mouth shut but I'm averaging 15.3 MPG in all around driving in my '04. It probably helps that I'm at 5000 feet where the air is thinner and thus 15% less fuel is needed to mix with it to burn. Of course that also means that the engine puts out 15% less HP than it would at sea level. [8D]
Dave
It's just me but the math doesn't add up. I think I would have a hard time paying $$ to replace plugs, wires, system flushed synthestices, etc, etc, etc only to gain an additional 2-3 MPG. It would take you years to recover that cost in the increased fuel economy.
My opinion is to accept the fact the you own a Land Rover for the simple fact of owning a Land Rover. Not because it's an economical vehicle. It's anything but....
The diesel Rovers common everywhere else is another deal...40mpg! Come on, we Americans are out of our minds for not DEMANDING legislation to allow these vehicles and get the automakers to build and ship them to us.
I'll step off my soap box now...
Smile, it's a beautiful day in Seattle!
My opinion is to accept the fact the you own a Land Rover for the simple fact of owning a Land Rover. Not because it's an economical vehicle. It's anything but....
The diesel Rovers common everywhere else is another deal...40mpg! Come on, we Americans are out of our minds for not DEMANDING legislation to allow these vehicles and get the automakers to build and ship them to us.
I'll step off my soap box now...
Smile, it's a beautiful day in Seattle!
Hi Mike,
5hp per 1000' would be almost spot on for the 4.0 liter. However, the best way to run the calculation for a broad range of normally aspirated engines is by percentage. The formula to use is 3% per 1000' of elevation, plus another 1% per 10 degrees F above 59F.
At 5000' and 100F, for the 4.6 (217hp at sea level) it would be a 19% loss of HP, or just under 176hp. At 10,000' and 80F,the 4.6would be putting out about 143hp.
Cheers,
Dave
5hp per 1000' would be almost spot on for the 4.0 liter. However, the best way to run the calculation for a broad range of normally aspirated engines is by percentage. The formula to use is 3% per 1000' of elevation, plus another 1% per 10 degrees F above 59F.
At 5000' and 100F, for the 4.6 (217hp at sea level) it would be a 19% loss of HP, or just under 176hp. At 10,000' and 80F,the 4.6would be putting out about 143hp.
Cheers,
Dave
ORIGINAL: NWDiscoRover2004
It's just me but the math doesn't add up. I think I would have a hard time paying $$ to replace plugs, wires, system flushed synthestices, etc, etc, etc only to gain an additional 2-3 MPG. It would take you years to recover that cost in the increased fuel economy.
My opinion is to accept the fact the you own a Land Rover for the simple fact of owning a Land Rover. Not because it's an economical vehicle. It's anything but....
The diesel Rovers common everywhere else is another deal...40mpg! Come on, we Americans are out of our minds for not DEMANDING legislation to allow these vehicles and get the automakers to build and ship them to us.
I'll step off my soap box now...
Smile, it's a beautiful day in Seattle!
It's just me but the math doesn't add up. I think I would have a hard time paying $$ to replace plugs, wires, system flushed synthestices, etc, etc, etc only to gain an additional 2-3 MPG. It would take you years to recover that cost in the increased fuel economy.
My opinion is to accept the fact the you own a Land Rover for the simple fact of owning a Land Rover. Not because it's an economical vehicle. It's anything but....
The diesel Rovers common everywhere else is another deal...40mpg! Come on, we Americans are out of our minds for not DEMANDING legislation to allow these vehicles and get the automakers to build and ship them to us.
I'll step off my soap box now...
Smile, it's a beautiful day in Seattle!
I live in Illinois so I suppose the ethanol must have a lot to do with it.
In the overall scheme, I'm not dropping a couple hundred bucks just for the hell of it. Good wires, plugs, etc. help the car run better and gas mileage is just one benefit. Currently I drive 200miles per week. At 12mpg that's 16.67 gallons x $2.89 for 90octane=$46.24 per fillup. At 14mpg its $41.29. I save $4.95 per week. In one year thats a savings of about $257 in gas for driving 10,400 miles. $257 minus the plugs, wires, and fluids pretty much breaks even. But the engine is in better condition and I save a couple of trips to the gas station.
Getting crappy mpg is part of the LR experience but so is spending time under the car. So looks like the t-stat huh? O2 sensors are pricey so I'll try the t-stat for a while.
In the overall scheme, I'm not dropping a couple hundred bucks just for the hell of it. Good wires, plugs, etc. help the car run better and gas mileage is just one benefit. Currently I drive 200miles per week. At 12mpg that's 16.67 gallons x $2.89 for 90octane=$46.24 per fillup. At 14mpg its $41.29. I save $4.95 per week. In one year thats a savings of about $257 in gas for driving 10,400 miles. $257 minus the plugs, wires, and fluids pretty much breaks even. But the engine is in better condition and I save a couple of trips to the gas station.
Getting crappy mpg is part of the LR experience but so is spending time under the car. So looks like the t-stat huh? O2 sensors are pricey so I'll try the t-stat for a while.
I never saw what brand of plugs and wires you got. Just an FYI, I put the Bosch wires on when I first got the truck (didn't know better). They were cracked and missing within a year and got them replaced under warranty. I got a new set the same way a coupld of weeks ago, and then ordered Magnacors because I was tired of changing them. I have a spare set if I need them, but the Magnacors are great and well worth the money spent.
i havent been testing city v. highway, but i routinely get ~16.5 average on my 96 with 82k. althought that IS probably mostly highway.
Alas, this may be the only reason i get rid of my Discovery some day
Alas, this may be the only reason i get rid of my Discovery some day


