KV6 fuel consumption

[maxi_crawf]

Take what it says with a pinch of salt, the only true way is a brim to brim reading (for average Joe), the best I can prove is almost 32 mpg, that was Hull to Edinburgh on the A1 at 3,000 rpm where possible and safe in 5th so doing about 65 mph.

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

[championdaddy]

Originally Posted by maxi_crawf

Take what it says with a pinch of salt, the only true way is a brim to brim reading (for average Joe), the best I can prove is almost 32 mpg, that was Hull to Edinburgh on the A1 at 3,000 rpm where possible and safe in 5th so doing about 65 mph.

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

Blimey............. I bet that was boring !!

[maxi_crawf]

Especially in a 190, it was December time last year and I wanted to give it a bit of a test and also have some sort of reference point before my European jolly this August.

Originally Posted by championdaddy

Blimey............. I bet that was boring !!

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

[gazcaz]

V6 who cares

[kelvo]

Originally Posted by championdaddy

KV6..............fuel consumption.........who cares !!

Drive it.....listen to it...........enjoy it ! LOL

I bought my ZT190 because I liked it and wanted one, If i'd wanted something economical I would have bought a Fiat 500 or something.

I get about 24 - 25 mpg out of mine but that is mostly round town driving.

[marinabrian]

if you never reset the onboard computer, the figure becomes more and more accurate.

I never reset it, and find the readings to be within 1 MPG when compared to a brim to brim

Only 48.5 MPG for me, but mine's a stone crusher

Brian

[p2roverman]

Originally Posted by SD1too

If P2Roverman zeroed the consumption display then covered 80 miles at a constant cruising speed, he may well have achieved 40 mpg.
Simon

Thanks for all your comments guys. And,
yes, I did zero the mpg trip for the journey which did include that awful length of 50mph onthe M1 which sugggests most of the rest of the trip was nearer 80 than 70.

Following wind? possibly, I don't rmember the forcast that day.


General long distance driving typically 65mph (indicated) usually around 36/37mpg, I often zero the trips before a long trip. Knocking about locally typically 5 mile journeys and town work, the average oer time drops to 30 or just below.


No-one has yet comented on my query over the best rev range to use; I tend to stay within the 1500 - 3000 rpm range, but then I'm rarely in a hurry. Is the engine more efficient in the, say, 2000 - 4000 range, or even higher?


And yes, to answer other comments, I do enjoy driving it; often any excuse to take it out. Certain no plans to ever replace it; also have a low mileage one to cosset once I've changed the rusty subframes and a unique 2.6 tourer to be put to towing use.

[p2roverman]

Originally Posted by marinabrian

if you never reset the onboard computer, the figure becomes more and more accurate.

I never reset it, and find the readings to be within 1 MPG when compared to a brim to brim

Only 48.5 MPG for me, but mine's a stone crusher

Brian

Brian. I appreciate that never resetting the trip will give a genuine fuel consumption average for your style of driving. I let my trip run unset for long periods which gives a typical figure in the low 30s for mixed, mainly short jouneys, some very short, less than a mile to the post office and back again.
However, it was reset for this high speed run out of interest, the result staggered me hence deciding to post. (and yes I've got a Stag too).

[coab]

It all boils down to what you think of the official figures. I often hear from people (not necessarily on here) my car does say 44 to the gallon and yet the manufacturer who has all the technology says it only does 37 to the gallon. The same with top speed, you hear people say they did 130 mph yet the manufacturer says 115 mph. The gauges are not entirely accurate and I prefer to stick what it says in the book.
And I bet those figures are highly optimistic!

[p2roverman]

Originally Posted by p2roverman

I recently had reason to rush home so over 80 miles of the M42 / A42 / M1 I averaged 72 mph with a petrol consumption of 42 mpg, according to the on board system. A few days later driving at my normal 65 mph I noticed the mpg figure actually go down from 40.2 to 39.7 mpg


This seems to defy logic, or is the engine known to be more economical at 3500 rpm than 2800 rpm?


My normal driving engine rev range is 1500 - 3000. Is this the best rev range for economicl driving, or should I keep the revs higher? I'm used to slower revving older Rover engines so would appreciate members' views.

Seems that if I'm careful it's easy to repeat an apparently ridiculous mpg figure. Drove from Scotch Corner to Leeds outskirts today at 70 (50 in roadworks) and recorded 42.8 at the end, a figure that gradualy dropped from more than 50 over the first few miles.


Bodes well for an intended trip to Sweden next year, who needs a diesel!