Nissan Murano Forum banner

1 - 6 of 6 Posts

·
Love to live w/ MO
Joined
·
419 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
well got it and couldnt wait to put it on so just did it right in front of the shop i bought it from. almost a week since i ordered the oil filter but they havent got it yet.....

will post some results in couple of weeks about the change in performance and other stuff.


PS> Canadian Tire has them for 20% off till wed. so $66.89+ tax as compared to $82.99
 

·
Love to live w/ MO
Joined
·
419 Posts
Discussion Starter #2
OK.
after couple of weeks of testing, i am back. while most of you might not find my results interesting, some of you might and would be interested in getting it.

after changing the air filter, i did the oil change and used the k&n oil filter (model # HP1008) w/ mobil1
third change i made was to switch my gas grade, from 87 to 91.


now i have seen some power in MO while starting from cold (probably becasue of the air filter), better fuel economy ~30% (partly because of oil change and partly because of gas grade)

once the car is warm to optimum temprature, i can attain the speed of 100km/hr with rpms still under 1300 (used to be about 1500 to 1600 before)

so all the gurus out there, what factors are affecting the better performance of my mo now ?


just for info, i have 31,000 km on it, running Mobil 1 oil and treat my Mo as baby.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
844 Posts
hasaanbhutta said:
OK.
after couple of weeks of testing, i am back. while most of you might not find my results interesting, some of you might and would be interested in getting it.

after changing the air filter, i did the oil change and used the k&n oil filter (model # HP1008) w/ mobil1
third change i made was to switch my gas grade, from 87 to 91.


now i have seen some power in MO while starting from cold (probably becasue of the air filter), better fuel economy ~30% (partly because of oil change and partly because of gas grade)

once the car is warm to optimum temprature, i can attain the speed of 100km/hr with rpms still under 1300 (used to be about 1500 to 1600 before)

so all the gurus out there, what factors are affecting the better performance of my mo now ?


just for info, i have 31,000 km on it, running Mobil 1 oil and treat my Mo as baby.
I have always used 89 octane(Shell Silver) in my Mo and Mobil1 and at 100 Km/h i am usually at 1650 Rpms. Your drop in Rpms seems a bit excessive ( 300-500 Rpms less) I may want to question that accuracy of your tac.

I just did a trip from Calgary to Victoria where I got 9.0 Lts/ 100 Km ( 31 Mpg/imperial gallon) over a 1100 Km trip over the mountains at 1650-1700 Rpm. Have you had a chance to do a distance run with your Mo to see if there was a corresponding increase in your fuel economy?
 

·
Love to live w/ MO
Joined
·
419 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
^^ actually i havent. but i will be travelling to Vancouver the weekend of July1. so i will be able to test.
however, i will test my mo on a 30 -- 35 km track on the yellowhead hwy tomorrow just to see all the average and recollect data for the hwy. i tested the 100km on the expressway with the limit of 90km/h so will test it on the hwy with limit of 110km/h
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
844 Posts
Look forward to your results. On my trip at 100 KPH I was able to go from Calgary to Kamloops on 3/4 of a tank.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,373 Posts
i also have the K&N filter installed. i've had it in the car since it was new so almost 36000 km now. wow... that's not much for a year and a half of ownership. anyways, i'm from edmonton and we travel to vancouver at least once every summer and do quite a few trips out to the mountains in the winter. we normally use regular gas(87) while driving around in the city b/c of high gas prices. when you go onthe highway to vancouver we use premium(91). the last time we drove to vancouver we were avg about 140km/h and 9-10L/100km. this is through winding mountain roads. the last 150km before you enter surrey as most of you know is usually quite busy. avg speed around there is about 110km/h and then we were avg 8-9L/100km. this was all with an air temp b/w 25 and 35 degrees celcius according to the murano temp gauge. the only real advantages of the K&N that i could really get is that the engine got a little louder. the next mo is getting a jim wolf charger intake. can't waite for that.

the K&N maybe helped a bit with fuel economy but b/c we've had the filter from when the car was new, i really couldn't determine any significant changes.
 
1 - 6 of 6 Posts
Top