| hasaanbhutta |
Ok, as the followup to my previous post regarding the problem with my TCM....
now when i got my tcm changed last week didnt get a chance to test it until this weekend....
reset my trip computer and went to a 50 mile drive..... and throughout the trip (after first couple of km)the fuel econ stayed at 7.5 l/100 km or 31 MPG...... :eek:
now, i dont care about the city driving since da-wafe drives around more than i do.... but getting this much fuel efficiency has made me wonder.... is it just for this trip or its gonna stay like this forever....
the conditions i was driving under were... -20C .... heat fan set at medium and temp around 28C for the cabin .....
any ideas guys !!!! |
|
|
| Kris |
What was your speed? Wind conditions? Uphill/downhill driving?
I am getting 24 mpg highway driving with speeds apprx. 75 mph. So if you drove around 100km/hr (60 mph) your readings could have been right.... |
|
|
| hasaanbhutta |
the wind was calm.... around 5km/hr South....
i was driving to north.... plain flat surface..... (saskatchewan is perfectly flat except for the south western part)
speed was around 110 km/hr .....
so i believe it is correct reading.... wow...
cant wait till next weekend to try same thing but in opposite direction..... |
|
|
| GripperDon |
| Sounds Good and reasonable. So many variables, So much different effect. BUT...... Not surprised. GRIP :D |
|
|
| b0xdesigns |
| I once got 120mpg from coasting down a really long hill. |
|
|
| bruno |
31 MPG is in US gallons, in Imperial that is about 35 MPG.
Sorry but that seems very very unlikely. |
|
|
| Eric L. |
| I think he was posting instantaneous mileage when he was already at speed on the highway (maybe going 55, down a grade?). I think its impossible for a Murano to accelerate from a stop and average 31mpg, no matter the speed or road conditions. |
|
|
| Stoker |
| On the hwy the best I can get out of my Mo is 8.8 Lts/100Km which converts to 32miles per imperial gallon. My hwy speed was 100 Km/h and was going up and down the foothills toward Banff. The highest RPM I noticed on these hills was 3000rpm, the Mo was hardly breaking a sweat. At that consumption rate the DTE was indicating 900 KM till empty |
|
|
| GripperDon |
Now that is "Fuel Economy" worth talking about! You should give lessons. Plus in your temps!! Go MO!!! GRIP :D
Wait!!!!!!!!!!!!! have to convert that to US gal. ).8327 so 26.6mpg USA, Not bad BUT: as the little girl said "Never Mind" Hee hee! Grip :D |
|
|
| Kris |
| A year ago or so I was driving at Florida Panhandle for approximately 60 miles or so. Outside temps – high 70’s. I stopped several times and accelerated rather gently. Most of the time the speed was 55 – 60 mph. After 50 miles or so the computer showed 26 mpg. I believe that driving on a flat road without strong head wind, with speed approximately 60 mph, it is possible to have 26 mph. I also drove to Owensboro, KY – 330 miles. CC mostly on 75 mph. Computer showed 24.5 mpg. |
|
|
| GripperDon |
A number of places, Highway + 60, Highway +50, Urban, City, click on the mileage. after a while great data. It would take some jiggling to get the format great but I am sure you could do it.
If you have the time and are so inclined. (darn there I go again rhyming) GRIP:D |
|
|
| Kris |
Sorry Don,
time is something I do not have now.....but I believe there are others who just might take on this project...;) |
|
|
| GripperDon |
| Well I understand, lack of time for sure. I would give it a go but the feedback would be a killer. GRIP :D |
|
|
| Hossley |
| The best I have ever gotten is 24mpg, I typically hover at around 20. |
|
|
| MightyMo |
| As slippery as the Mo's shape may be, it's a big SUV with a large frontal area, so wind resistance is a big issue and keeping highway speeds down helps a LOT. For those that weren't around back then, here's my testing on MPH vs. MPG, and also MPG vs. PSI . |
|
|
| ADV |
| What was your fuel consuption before the TCM replacement? Are you still getting this stellar mileage. I can't even come close. My best mileage is the energuides lower value. |
|
|
| HuskyFan |
| I read somewhere that the drag coefficient for the Murano was about .41 which is fairly high. The car isn't has slippery as it looks if that number is correct. |
|
|
| GripperDon |
specs
Page 1 | 2 | Specs | Pictures
Model Nissan Murano
General Information
Price [$US] from $28,199 (Get the latest price here)
Layout front-engine / all-wheel-drive or fwd
Drag Coefficient [cd] 0.39
Not all that slippery but there are SUV's that are a lot worse.
GRIP :D |
|
|
| Fstrnu |
Okay .. so here are some whacky number for you that believe it or not all checked out after manual calculations. (not using the onboard computer)
Stoker, this might interest you if you have not seen it
http://www.calgarygasprices.com/
I always fill my tank at every fill (first click and round to the nearest dollar)
Highway
Very best – 7.6 l/100k @ 100 KPH (twice)
Consistent average - 8.1 L/100k @ 125 KPH (1.7824 gallons /62M)
City
Consistent Average – 12.2 L/100k (2.6845 gallons /62M)
I know it's weird, but I swear that is where it is at
:confused: |
|
|
| hasaanbhutta |
quote:
Originally posted by ADV
What was your fuel consuption before the TCM replacement? Are you still getting this stellar mileage. I can't even come close. My best mileage is the energuides lower value.
well before TCM it was about 18L/100km. and yes, it is even giving me same consumption on highway at around 100 -- 110 km/hr
and yea, there is one site for Saskatoon's gas prices as well.
http://www.saskatoongasprices.com |
|
|
| ADV |
Fstrnu,
do your calculations account for startup(especially in cold weather) How can you calculate manually (not using cmptr) highway and city seperate without either driving around a city until your tank is empty or floatin of the highway until empty. The computer calculation on mine is consistently between 0.5 to 0.8 L/100k better that my manual calculation. I trust the manual calcualtion. I always hit the same pump at fill-ups. |
|
|
|
