Interesting fuel consumption...

Toyota Starlet, EP91 M5 1.3

Usually, I get around 8l/100km milage.
Recently, on a trip along the Pacific Highway, uphill most of the way,
keeping the engine in 2nd or 3rd gear, fourth only along the downhill
sections, revving the guts out of the engine in general by keeping it above
3000rpm on the tacho (note tacho only goes to 5000) and having a bit of a
flog along the mountain....

Used 12 litres of petrol over 220km driving. Including the traffic and
highways on the way there, and the motorways on the return trip.

Anyone get better fuel consumption in cut and thrust driving?
Brakes feel better now also - fairly new, probably just needed bedding in ;)

--
mark
98 Starlet Life 1.3
MY02 Forester 2.5XS

In my manual turbocharged motor I get better milage if I remain between
2500 and 3500 rpm than if i sit at 2200rpm in a higher gear. I'm
guessing its to do with engine load more than revs. I was getting
15l/100km driving like miss daisy getting to 5th as soon as the engine
sounds happy to do so on dual carriageways (70mph)with lights and
through city, and now i get around 11.8l/100km if i dont let her get to
5th unless im drifting along in a particularly long section. Watching
the manifold pressure I can see that ive a lot lower load at 2800rpm in
4th than at 2200ish in 5th - i'd be about ambient in 5th, and about
7psi below ambient pressure at 2800 rpm.

Looking at the fuel maps for my car it shouldnt make a difference at
those loads as anything below 2800rpm has the same base fuel mapping
and so should only alter with RPM. Odd i know.

J

that's interesting that the higher revs seem to give better mileage.
they translate into 42.9 MPG and 29.4 MPG (US).
i normally get about 39/41 MPG in my echo. (1500 cc)5 speed.
i do find that running the revs and using a 'free running' engine
speed, i get better mileage. i suspect it has to do with the
spark being retarded during low vacuum/low flow conditions.
i don't know the revs as my echo has no tach.
i suspect the two engines are of the same basic unit .
the echo is produced in 1300 cc versions for other countries.
normal speeds in my travel are up to 75 MPH (120 k.) as well as in-town
travel.
of course, i use the cheapest fuel that burns and lies in the tank.
(regular) .
another feature that's interesting, is the fuel cutoff at revs over 1400 and
closed throttle. the injectors are disabled at these conditions, no idle
fuel is
burned til the revs are below about 1400 rpm.
we have a fair bunch of hills here in western pennsylvania and west
virginia.
sammmm



"Mark H" <nukeleerATinternodeDOTonDOTnetREMOVECAPSAU> wrote in message
news:426f1fd3@duster.adelaide.on.net...[color=blue]
> Toyota Starlet, EP91 M5 1.3
>
> Usually, I get around 8l/100km milage.
> Recently, on a trip along the Pacific Highway, uphill most of the way,
> keeping the engine in 2nd or 3rd gear, fourth only along the downhill
> sections, revving the guts out of the engine in general by keeping it[/color]
above[color=blue]
> 3000rpm on the tacho (note tacho only goes to 5000) and having a bit of a
> flog along the mountain....
>
> Used 12 litres of petrol over 220km driving. Including the traffic and
> highways on the way there, and the motorways on the return trip.
>
> Anyone get better fuel consumption in cut and thrust driving?
> Brakes feel better now also - fairly new, probably just needed bedding in[/color]
;)[color=blue]
>
> --
> mark
> 98 Starlet Life 1.3
> MY02 Forester 2.5XS
>
>[/color]

The 1500 rpm fuel cut-off is a feature of virtually all electronic fuel
injection systems since they were fitted to cars with catalysts. When you
are coasting, there is every reason NOT to feed fuel to the engine,
primarily for reduced emissions. Unless you coast down a lot of hills, the
feature does not significantly your overall MPG.


SAMMMMM wrote:[color=blue]
> that's interesting that the higher revs seem to give better mileage.
> they translate into 42.9 MPG and 29.4 MPG (US).
> i normally get about 39/41 MPG in my echo. (1500 cc)5 speed.
> i do find that running the revs and using a 'free running' engine
> speed, i get better mileage. i suspect it has to do with the
> spark being retarded during low vacuum/low flow conditions.
> i don't know the revs as my echo has no tach.
> i suspect the two engines are of the same basic unit .
> the echo is produced in 1300 cc versions for other countries.
> normal speeds in my travel are up to 75 MPH (120 k.) as well as
> in-town travel.
> of course, i use the cheapest fuel that burns and lies in the tank.
> (regular) .
> another feature that's interesting, is the fuel cutoff at revs over
> 1400 and closed throttle. the injectors are disabled at these
> conditions, no idle fuel is
> burned til the revs are below about 1400 rpm.
> we have a fair bunch of hills here in western pennsylvania and west
> virginia.
> sammmm
>
>
>
> "Mark H" <nukeleerATinternodeDOTonDOTnetREMOVECAPSAU> wrote in message
> news:426f1fd3@duster.adelaide.on.net...[color=green]
>> Toyota Starlet, EP91 M5 1.3
>>
>> Usually, I get around 8l/100km milage.
>> Recently, on a trip along the Pacific Highway, uphill most of the
>> way, keeping the engine in 2nd or 3rd gear, fourth only along the
>> downhill sections, revving the guts out of the engine in general by
>> keeping it[/color]
> above[color=green]
>> 3000rpm on the tacho (note tacho only goes to 5000) and having a bit
>> of a flog along the mountain....
>>
>> Used 12 litres of petrol over 220km driving. Including the traffic
>> and highways on the way there, and the motorways on the return trip.
>>
>> Anyone get better fuel consumption in cut and thrust driving?
>> Brakes feel better now also - fairly new, probably just needed
>> bedding in ;)
>>
>> --
>> mark
>> 98 Starlet Life 1.3
>> MY02 Forester 2.5XS[/color][/color]

Liftoff fuel cut on the 3sgte is active from 2200 to 1600 IIRC