202 Fuel Economy
#1 _NOI53Y_
Posted 14 February 2006 - 01:35 PM
I was cruising along in my 202 powered beasty of an LX and was wondering what sort of economy others get out of theres.
I was wondering if people could state what they have done to the motor/gearbox/diff and what it's like on fuel, giving a rough L/100.
I just put fuel in mine yesterday so i'll be able to work mine out in a couple of days but I think mine is pretty good because mine is completely stock. Stock strommy and exhaust at the moment, stock ignition. The works
#2 _Yella SLuR_
Posted 14 February 2006 - 01:43 PM
Please???
#3 _Herne_
Posted 14 February 2006 - 01:56 PM
Cheers
Herne
#4 _sourbastard_
Posted 14 February 2006 - 02:19 PM
If your car is modified correctly, economy is a word that will never be used.Hey folks,
I was cruising along in my 202 powered beasty of an LX and was wondering what sort of economy others get out of theres.
I was wondering if people could state what they have done to the motor/gearbox/diff and what it's like on fuel, giving a rough L/100.
I just put fuel in mine yesterday so i'll be able to work mine out in a couple of days but I think mine is pretty good because mine is completely stock. Stock strommy and exhaust at the moment, stock ignition. The works
The corrective terms should be.
Horsepower
Torque
Air Fuel Ratio
Timing
I havent used the word economy when referring to my own cars in years!
#5 _gm3300_
Posted 14 February 2006 - 02:28 PM
weekend it did 26 mpg, or around 10.6 l/100km on the return
trip, its a stock 202, low-impedance air filter, single branch exhaust,
M20 4 speed, 3.08 diff, 185 70 13 tyres, and in was running on
95 octane (Vortex) with Lucas Fuel Conditioner added as an
upper cylinder lubricant.
grant
#6 _HardleyNormal_
Posted 14 February 2006 - 03:06 PM
I run a 202 with 1 3/4 tripple SUs with yella terra head, stage 3 crow cam, genie extracors 13inch tyres and a m20 manual box. I get approx 450 KMs per tank full whateva that makes it. It has a stock tank in it with a 3.08 diff. It is my daily driver and a tank will last me a week or close to it. So yeah i dunno specifics but hope this gives you an idea.
Cheers Tim
#7
Posted 14 February 2006 - 03:19 PM
#8
Posted 14 February 2006 - 03:38 PM
Most 202s ive heard of get similiar economy to a 253...
#9 _TORANASS_
Posted 14 February 2006 - 04:25 PM
My LX had a stock 202, genie extractors and a 2" exhast.. the rst was stock and ran real nice and was very healthy... trimatic with 3.08 diff and stocky 13"s on the back and it drank about 17ltr to 100km round town and 15ltrs to 100km on the hwy..
I beleive thats a GUZZLER!!!!
John
#10
Posted 14 February 2006 - 04:33 PM
#11
Posted 14 February 2006 - 04:37 PM
Sydney to lithgow and back... 25L per 100Kms.... Highway...
*sigh*
(Notice i didnt use the word ECONOMY hehe )
#12 _Herne_
Posted 14 February 2006 - 04:53 PM
Ya cant really have both those of us who have been around a while now this
Some like it slow, others like it fast furious and sideways, I know which I prefer but have to admit age does slow you down even if only by a tad lol.
What we lose in age/speed we make up for with knowhow/cunning
Cheers
Herne
#13
Posted 14 February 2006 - 05:00 PM
I see it like this... I'm employing people and making this place a better place...
I burn the fuel that is created by thousands of hard workers right from building the drilling rigs, to the dillers, the transport people, the rifinery staff, again the transport people and the annoying indian guy at my local BP that cant speak english....
All for my Buck 30....
Killing trees? Poisoning the atmosphere... or keeping hundreds of thousands employed... Same Same
#14 _sourbastard_
Posted 14 February 2006 - 05:06 PM
What I lose in age i seem to make up for in weight. But the donuts are so sweet...... mmm donuts....hehehe, wisely so eh Tiny lol
Ya cant really have both those of us who have been around a while now this
Some like it slow, others like it fast furious and sideways, I know which I prefer but have to admit age does slow you down even if only by a tad lol.
What we lose in age/speed we make up for with knowhow/cunning
Cheers
Herne
#15 _Yella SLuR_
Posted 14 February 2006 - 05:09 PM
#16 _Keithy's_UC_
Posted 14 February 2006 - 05:14 PM
And the UC sedans also have 55l tanks!
#17 _devilsadvocate_
Posted 14 February 2006 - 05:58 PM
I agree, use the term fuel consumption, not fuel economy, or more annoyingly the term fuel efficient . How often do you hear someone say they are getting a smaller car because it is more fuel efficient, there's lots of ways one could measure efficiency in different vehicles. Just better to say getting a smaller car because of lower fuel consumption........my sermon for the day.
#18 _WYLDLC 6_
Posted 14 February 2006 - 05:58 PM
Expensive trip from near Cranbourne, but fun to drive.
#19 _lexa_
Posted 14 February 2006 - 07:03 PM
#20 _Bomber Watson_
Posted 14 February 2006 - 08:15 PM
#21 _CHOPPER_
Posted 14 February 2006 - 08:32 PM
#22
Posted 14 February 2006 - 09:02 PM
Add bigger valves + tripple webbers + exhaust (inc. cam and dizzy mods) divided by good luck and a bit of wet weather = win Bathurt against Ford V8's
RACV MAN
Edited by rodomo, 14 February 2006 - 09:09 PM.
#23 _TORANASS_
Posted 14 February 2006 - 09:08 PM
#24 _LX CHAMOIS HATCH_
Posted 14 February 2006 - 09:31 PM
previously my 100% stock 202 did bout 12L/100kms so not much difference
next experiment is getting a 465 holley on there and seeing what happens.
both engines were mated with a trimatic and 2.78 banjo. means that it is the slowest piece of shit off the line imaginable. that'll change when the new diff goes in.
daily- Shitron (Citroen) Berlingo van does bout 8L/100kms, the torana will never be that good.....
cheers
#25 _CHOPPER_
Posted 14 February 2006 - 10:04 PM
2 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users