Author Topic: Real-world fuel consumption (Read 84411 times)

YURKBC · « **Reply #880 on:** December 25, 2011, 01:33:28 pm »

I have done a lot of driving over the past few weeks. Here are my observations.

Cold weather driving from Okanagan to Calgary and back with snowy roads in the mountains: Lancer averaged 7.2 l/100km over 1200km trip. Average speed was 87 km, including stops and city driving.

Moderate weather driving from Calgary to Oregon (sub-zero temperatures, dry roads): 7.4 l/100 km over 1300km trip. Average speed was 94km, including two long streches of 120+ and some stop-and-go city driving in the middle. That was Dec. 23.

Moderate weather driving from Oregon to San Francisco (from sub-zero to +12, dry roads): averaged 6.9 l/100km over 760km. Average speed was 105 km. at about half-way the computer was showing 6.5-6.6 l/100km (I was cruising at 100km/hr), but then we came to a freeway with 70m/hr speed limit, and fule consumption went down.

Merry Christmas and/or Happy Holidays everyone!

1TSX · « **Reply #881 on:** January 09, 2012, 03:20:02 pm »

Best ever tank for the TSX this weekend.

From Waterloo to the ON/PQ border:
-6.9 L/100 km within 552 km of driving. 95% cruise at 120 KPH, 5% city

From ON/PQ border to Montreal, some in town driving, then to Kingston:
-8.55 L/100 km within 500.5 km of driving. 85% cruise at 120 KPH, 15% city

From Kingston to Ingersoll:
-7.51 L/100 km within 481 km of driving. 90% cruise 120 KPH, 5% 130 KPH, 5% city

5 Wheel Drive · « **Reply #882 on:** January 16, 2012, 09:56:27 am »

I went to Montreal yesterday for the auto show. The extreem cold (saw the temp display go as low as -29!) took a huge toll on economy. The Forester used 58.4 litres and I drove 515km's. It worked out to 11.3l/100km's. And that was all highway.

quadzilla · « **Reply #883 on:** January 30, 2012, 09:30:39 am »

From the weekend.

Toronto - Tobermory = 7.5L/100
Tobermory - Toronto = 7.0L/100

Temps between -5C and 0C

Once up there, I did a test by driving to the trail head which was approx 12kms from my hotel. Set the display to show average L/100 and watched it drop as I drove further.

The drive from the hotel to trail head had only 1 stop sign, 3kms of 60kph then 7kms of 80kph then 2kms of 50kph.

Around the 8km mark the average finally got down to 10L/100 with no traffic. It continued to drop and when I stopped it was down to 8L/100. I don't think I could find an easier drive with no interruptions to test with.

Just shows how bad short drives with stop signs/lights and traffic destroy good fuel economy.

Loudpedal · « **Reply #884 on:** February 22, 2012, 09:01:46 pm »

Fuel consumption from a weekend trip - 2008 Honda Odyssey, no a/c, winter tires, 2 passengers.

Newmarket ON to Lavaltrie QC .- 628 kms, 64.4 litres = 10.2 litres/100km (cruise at 115 kph)
Lavaltrie QC to Jonquiere OC - 458 kms, 51.1 litres = 11.1 litres/100 km (cruise between 80 and 110 kph)
Jonquiere QC to Ingleside ON - 614 kms, 64.2 litres = 10.4 litres/100 km (cruise at 115 kph)
Ingleside ON to Newmarket ON - 429.7 kms, 45 litres = 10.4 litres/100 km (cruise at 115 kph)

All in, 2130 kms, 224 litres for a total average of 10.54 litres/100 kms.

Also, over this distance, the GPS measured .3km farther than the vehicle odometer.

SeaBlueS4 · « **Reply #885 on:** February 23, 2012, 01:54:33 pm »

First long(ish) run in a while - Weekend road trip from Ottawa area to the Laurentians, mixture of backroads and 400 series highways, typically 15 - 20kph over the posted limit (except in 50/60 zones), -5 to -10degC with plenty of "spirited" overtakes...

496km's and 46.03 litres
9.27 litres/100km (trip computer showed 9.3 for the drive up 8.9 on the return).

Not bad for 333bhp & AWD

Keh-vin · « **Reply #886 on:** February 23, 2012, 02:03:42 pm »

See below...looks like I should've saved up for an S4...

Sir Osis of Liver · « **Reply #887 on:** February 23, 2012, 02:05:46 pm »

Current tank is sitting at 13.0L/100km!

rrocket · « **Reply #888 on:** February 26, 2012, 08:06:22 am »

Was in the USA over the weekend. Filled up the LS400. 20.5 gallons @ 3.75 a gallon for premium. Total: ~$77 USD. If I were to fill up in Canada, it would be ~77.5 liters @ $1.42/litre for a total of ~$110 CDN!!

A savings of $33 per tank!!

airbalancer · « **Reply #889 on:** February 26, 2012, 08:14:47 am »

Quote from: rrocket on February 26, 2012, 08:06:22 am

Was in the USA over the weekend. Filled up the LS400. 20.5 gallons @ 3.75 a gallon for premium. Total: ~$77 USD. If I were to fill up in Canada, it would be ~77.5 liters @ $1.42/litre for a total of ~$110 CDN!!

A savings of $33 per tank!!

$100 fill ups, is nothing , I do that 2x a week

sailor723 · « **Reply #890 on:** February 26, 2012, 08:28:14 am »

Aren't Canadian taxes great?

On the other hand,I read somewhere that if the US would impose even a relatively minor national HST they could erase their deficit.

airbalancer · « **Reply #891 on:** February 26, 2012, 08:37:32 am »

Quote from: sailor723 on February 26, 2012, 08:28:14 am

Aren't Canadian taxes great?

On the other hand,I read somewhere that if the US would impose even a relatively minor national HST they could erase their deficit.

I had both knees scope, a number of ultrasound and treatment for blood clout at no extra charge
I friend in PA was paying $20gs a year for health cost, luckily she now has job the covers it
You pay one way of another

safristi · « **Reply #892 on:** February 26, 2012, 09:15:47 am »

Quote from: rrocket on February 26, 2012, 08:06:22 am

Was in the USA over the weekend. Filled up the LS400. 20.5 gallons @ 3.75 a gallon for premium. Total: ~$77 USD. If I were to fill up in Canada, it would be ~77.5 liters @ $1.42/litre for a total of ~$110 CDN!!

A savings of $33 per tank!!

I wouldn't necessarily call the LS400 a TANK didya stock up on big rubbers???

mmret · « **Reply #893 on:** February 26, 2012, 10:04:14 am »

Quote from: sailor723 on February 26, 2012, 08:28:14 am

Aren't Canadian taxes great?

On the other hand,I read somewhere that if the US would impose even a relatively minor national HST they could erase their deficit.

Deficit is like 1.2 Trillion. Thats a lot of bones.

Very roughly....14.5 trillion economy, about 68% of that is consumption, so that's about 9.9T.

1.2T on 9.9T is 12% assuming people still buy the same amount of stuff which obviously is not the case. I don't think we would call 12% that minor (Europeans might), especially since we're talking about a 12% across the board INCREASE.

Now they might be able to erase the cyclically adjusted deficit with a relatively "minor" HST increase.....

tpl · « **Reply #894 on:** February 26, 2012, 10:25:23 am »

MM I think that if the USA were to impose a Federal VAT ( aka HST) it would have to subsume all the state sales taxes so the Feds would only get about 1/2 of that 12% anyway...not forgetting that it would as difficult to impose it on food as it would be here so that probably means a huge exemption and so on.

safristi · « **Reply #895 on:** February 26, 2012, 10:34:48 am »

so we are just going to EAT IT then.......the gas increases HST harmony and Fark me taxes....ya know McSquintys NON TAX actual Health TAX

.... how many ways can a sane man be duped before he becomes a NON PERSON.....pick a Dylan THOMAS or BOB...........sheesh.............we as a society are offering CHAMPAGNE LIVING to a BOOR!! BUDGET electrorate...and we expect "results" that let us keep on keeping on and demanding MORE Circuses and freebies..............I'm Voting for the next guy that brings in a $5,000 RESTORATION GRANT...aimed at Lotus owners ov'r 50 ONLY

.
Folks get out and work yer arse off and SAVE more than U spend.............yeah like that's gonna be a WINNER on the Election HUSTINGS........

Sival · « **Reply #896 on:** February 28, 2012, 03:04:38 pm »

Quote from: mmret on February 26, 2012, 10:04:14 am

Quote from: sailor723 on February 26, 2012, 08:28:14 am
Aren't Canadian taxes great?

On the other hand,I read somewhere that if the US would impose even a relatively minor national HST they could erase their deficit.

Deficit is like 1.2 Trillion. Thats a lot of bones.

Very roughly....14.5 trillion economy, about 68% of that is consumption, so that's about 9.9T.

1.2T on 9.9T is 12% assuming people still buy the same amount of stuff which obviously is not the case. I don't think we would call 12% that minor (Europeans might), especially since we're talking about a 12% across the board INCREASE.

Now they might be able to erase the cyclically adjusted deficit with a relatively "minor" HST increase.....

A lot of the current US deficit is due to the economic downturn. A lot of people have lost their jobs or had their wages reduced, so they pay less taxes. These people also need more assistance from the social safety net, so these programs cost more since more people depend on them. Some of the deficit is also a stimulus package, which will be phased out anyway in the coming years. If the economy recovers, a large part of the deficit will vanish overnight.

I think that leaves about half of the current deficit to deal with later on, even without doing anything else. If they let the Bush tax cuts expire, they'd reduce that remaining half likely by 50-60%, leaving perhaps 300 billions a year. Yes, a small HST could balance the budget. Would they do it though? Not likely.

mmret · « **Reply #897 on:** March 04, 2012, 09:00:59 pm »

Just gassed the CLK yesterday. Overall it printed about a 12.5L/100km in mixed driving by my calculations. Not too bad.

I wonder if the dealership actually put 91 in it, or just gave me a tank full of 87?

johngenx · « **Reply #898 on:** March 04, 2012, 10:37:11 pm »

Gas is $1.09 here, so pretty inexpensive.

But, gas everywhere in North America is cheap. Really cheap. I have no problem with the level of gasoline taxes we pay. Anything that encourages at least some conservation is good.

mmret · « **Reply #899 on:** March 10, 2012, 08:41:35 pm »

Feed me.

Two tanks down.