My fuel economy, as an example...

General Subaru Talk - Media / News / Stories ...
Post Reply
User avatar
Damned67
Junior Member
Posts: 18
Joined: Thu Oct 08, 2009 7:29 pm
Location: Qld.

My fuel economy, as an example...

Post by Damned67 » Thu Mar 18, 2010 6:14 pm

Ok, I bought a cheap, high mileage, '98 5sp manual Outback in late November/ early December.
I've tried to keep fairly accurate records of my fuel usage since (keeping the receipts and logging it into an Excel spreadsheet), and also what I've done to change it.
I've tried to exclude the records when I've either been towing the boat or done a fair bit of 'city' driving, just trying to keep it to my 'normal' usage, which comes close to 150ks a day, with about 135 of those on the highway.
Here's how it breaks down:
When I first bought the car, I used 81.09L for 698.7ks (11.6L/100).

I did a simple 'tune up' which was upper engine cleaner, oil, oil filter, air filter and plugs.
It then changed to 121.84L for 1242km (9.8L/100)

A couple of bottles of Spitfire injector cleaner gave me 180.12L for 1870.1km (9.63L/100).

I then, rather than keeping my speed to just under 10kph over the limit, kept my speed to only 1 or 2 kph over the limit (using cruise control). It then dropped to 213.3L for 2423.9km (8.8L/100).

I then switched from 'regular unleaded' to 95 premium.
I'm now getting 183.92L for 2113.1km (8.7L/100).

The total of my 'kept' records comes out to 699.2L for 7649.1K (9.14L/100).
I'm still not happy with how the car is running (aside from the fuel usage). Thinking that I should probably look at the MAP or O2 sensor, or both.
So, my biggest differences came from a simple tune up and changing my driving habits. Also, the Spitfire made enough of a difference, with my mileage, to make it worth using on occasion.
Regardless, I thought that this might be some useful information for those wondering if their fuel economy was 'normal' or not?
(and that's not to say that mine IS normal....)

Oh, and another thing that I have noticed is that any 'city' driving really increases the consumption quite dramatically.

Cheers!

User avatar
Captain Obvious
General Member
Posts: 1292
Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2005 10:00 am
Location: maryborough

Post by Captain Obvious » Thu Mar 18, 2010 7:51 pm

well that is quite interesting!! they are pretty good figures but that is around what it should be getting doing highway driving !!
[SIGPIC]http://www.ausubaru.com/forum/image.php ... 1468060434[/SIGPIC]



The 4x4: 2004 Nissan Navara d22 ZD30 dual cab.
The Wifes car: 2005 SG9 Facelift forester 2.5l auto XS

User avatar
steptoe
Master Member
Posts: 11582
Joined: Thu Oct 06, 2005 10:00 am
Location: 14 miles outside Gotham City

Post by steptoe » Thu Mar 18, 2010 10:30 pm

nice template for anyone thinking of sharing fuel economy measures in the future HINT,HINT


And if you can edit it to say what engine is in this beast for the benefit of those like me that don't know, manual or auto? And just how high are the kms?

Ta, Jono

User avatar
SuBaRiNo
Senior Member
Posts: 2893
Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2005 10:00 am
Location: Perth, WA
Contact:

Post by SuBaRiNo » Thu Mar 18, 2010 10:40 pm

Good read... Don't happen to want to do a tank of Ultimate 98 BP Fuel to test do ya??

Dave
EJ conversion wiring harness cut downs available. Please PM or email ([email protected]) for details.

User avatar
Gannon
Senior Member
Posts: 4580
Joined: Sat Nov 05, 2005 10:00 am
Location: Bowraville, Mid Nth Coast, NSW

Post by Gannon » Fri Mar 19, 2010 5:22 am

That is very good economy for an Outback, i think redbook lists them as between 8.9 and 9.5 L/100km

As for city driving, its quite normal to use more. Remember that your outback weighs in at around 1500kg.
Current rides: 2016 Mitsubishi Triton GLS & 2004 Forester X
Ongoing Project/Toy: 1987 RX Turbo EA82T, Speeduino ECU, Coil-pack ignition, 440cc Injectors, KONI adjustale front struts, Hybrid L Series/ Liberty AWD 5sp
Past rides: 92 L series turbo converted wagon, 83 Leone GL Sedan, 2004 Liberty GT Sedan & 2001 Outback
------------------------------------------

User avatar
TOONGA
Elder Member
Posts: 5339
Joined: Sat May 30, 2009 10:15 am
Location: Mandurah where they divided by zero
Contact:

Post by TOONGA » Fri Mar 19, 2010 8:14 am

on the open road my wifes 92 liberty (apparently it has a 60 litre tank according to the specifications) will get 500-550 km to a tank (91 octane) with the aircon on freeze with the aircon off it has hit 600km from a full tank but when its stop start in the city it has been as bad as 330km (aircon on freeze) or as good as 450km (aircon off) using 95 or 98 made no real difference apart from when I pay (and there is always fuel in the tank when I fill it up)

TOONGA
Image
PJ Gone but not forgotten
JETCAR AKA the sandwedge Rusted in pieces

User avatar
Damned67
Junior Member
Posts: 18
Joined: Thu Oct 08, 2009 7:29 pm
Location: Qld.

Post by Damned67 » Thu Mar 25, 2010 7:09 am

SuBaRiNo wrote:Good read... Don't happen to want to do a tank of Ultimate 98 BP Fuel to test do ya??

Dave
Just for the fun of it, I filled her up with 98 the other day. I'll run a few fills through it and let you know.

User avatar
SuBaRiNo
Senior Member
Posts: 2893
Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2005 10:00 am
Location: Perth, WA
Contact:

Post by SuBaRiNo » Thu Mar 25, 2010 9:01 am

Awesome... that should be interesting... they claim u get an extra 70km out of a tank or something.

Dave
EJ conversion wiring harness cut downs available. Please PM or email ([email protected]) for details.

User avatar
someguy
Junior Member
Posts: 316
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2008 10:37 am
Location: Adelaide, SA
Contact:

Post by someguy » Thu Mar 25, 2010 9:16 am

Damned67 wrote:Just for the fun of it, I filled her up with 98 the other day. I'll run a few fills through it and let you know.
Yeah, do it for at least 3-4 fill ups.

You won't notice a difference straight away, it takes consistent use for it to start taking effect.

I was running 98 on the L but ended up going back down to 95 as the difference wasn't noticeable enough to justify the 10 odd cents BP charge per litre for 98.

I still get much better economy with 95 than I ever did with 91
* 1990 L Series Sportswagon (Daily Driver)

* WTB 1982-84 MY 4WD Wagon (Any Condition)

User avatar
Alex
Elder Member
Posts: 5405
Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2005 10:00 am
Location: Perth
Contact:

Post by Alex » Thu Mar 25, 2010 2:47 pm

SuBaRiNo wrote:Awesome... that should be interesting... they claim u get an extra 70km out of a tank or something.

Dave
i get this with ultimate EASY...its defiantely worth it in my books, although i do think the newer motors get the most benefit from it.

alex
my07 Outback
my13 Hyundai i45(shhhh)
my02 Gen3 Liberty limited ed.

previously
L-series wagon, LSD, EJ20turbo, 29in tyres, 'wanky wagon'
2000 gen3 outback, lifted, otherwise stock.

User avatar
Damned67
Junior Member
Posts: 18
Joined: Thu Oct 08, 2009 7:29 pm
Location: Qld.

Post by Damned67 » Fri Mar 26, 2010 2:11 pm

Just to jinx myself, it already seems to be getting much better mileage, still running on the first tank.
I'm not expecting too much, as I didn't see any great difference between 92 and 95, but we'll see what happens over the next few tanks.
Cheers!

User avatar
Damned67
Junior Member
Posts: 18
Joined: Thu Oct 08, 2009 7:29 pm
Location: Qld.

Post by Damned67 » Wed May 12, 2010 5:57 pm

Sorry this has taken so long, I just never seem to get the chance to sit down and deal with my fuel receipts. On the plus side, this means I've done quite a few K's for this comparison.
This is about 10 tanks of fuel (anyone know what the tank capacity is in a 98 Outback?). All of them were Caltex 98.
And the results are:

4652.6 Km/405.86L= 8.72L/100Km

This is actually 0.02L/100Km higher than running on 95 octane, and both 95 and 98 octane improved fuel economy by approx 1% from 92.

Now, for clarification, this is the fuel usage in MY car with MY driving. Other cars and other drivers may see a greater improvement with the different fuel.
In addition, I don't feel my car is running to it's greatest potential. It has the occasional small hesitation while cruising. Something minor enough that it'll probably cost $$$ to throw new parts at it to try and fix it, and may not make too much of a difference.
Anyway, for me, for the sake of my fuel costs, I'll be switching back to 92.

Cheers All!

User avatar
d_generate
General Member
Posts: 1529
Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2008 1:51 am
Location: Back in Perth and SORing it atm.

Post by d_generate » Thu May 13, 2010 2:30 am

Yes the Outback has a 60L tank & your fuel light should come on with 9L left in the tank (they are pretty accurate) my Gen 2 sedan weighs 1320kg so I'd say yours should come in at less than 1,400kg.
Mine, to a 60L tank averages about 580 around town with a reasonable amount of hard driving & Ive had 732kl on a country run, 2 up + luggage and averaging around 130kph, I squeezed 56.8L into the tank when I finally found a servo that sold 98ron:D
Not too bad for a car that would pull a high 12sec qtr without a 26kph headwind, overall I can't complain, shame it's more than likely going to be a hail write off.
98 Libbo with V3 STI running gear. 13.0 @ 105mph with CAI & 3" Zorst:mrgreen:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TKrsF-2JS3M :twisted:
Image

Post Reply

Return to “Subaru Chat”