Petrol/Gas B58 petrol fuel economy

[DaveKop]

Petrol. Actually, the Grenadier taught me to be a truly prudent and law-abiding driver after decades of very heavy foot driving. Previously my goal was the highest possible average speed, now the lowest possible average consumption... Another form of driving fun...

Okay, this is exactly the reason I am planning to put a throttle controller in the Grenadier.

I wonder how you all feel, but to me the throttle response is set to very aggressive. It throws the very heavy vehicle around unnecessarily quickly. It's very hard to control that, though. Only a minimal throttle input results in very fast acceleration.
Now that makes sense in light BMW sedans and so on, but here not so much. I also find it's not very practical for off-road maneuvering, actually.

I am looking forward to modulating the throttle response through a controller in hopes to make the driving experience smoother, more controlled and it's encouraging that, together with swapping tires and reducing air drag, there is a real fuel consumption gain here! 13.3L is really encouraging

 

[Tazzieman]

reducing air drag,

Is somebody making a Strosek bodykit?

 

[DaveKop]

For me personally I ordered the Trialmaster, so it's more about removing the snorkel and ordering an "aero-friendly" roof rack instead of the "oem" rhinorack, as I find it incredibly noisy and also basically as good as an airbrake.
My driving pattern includes a fair bit of long highway transfers also, so this is quite important to me.

 

[alvan]

Okay, this is exactly the reason I am planning to put a throttle controller in the Grenadier.

I wonder how you all feel, but to me the throttle response is set to very aggressive. It throws the very heavy vehicle around unnecessarily quickly. It's very hard to control that, though. Only a minimal throttle input results in very fast acceleration.
Now that makes sense in light BMW sedans and so on, but here not so much. I also find it's not very practical for off-road maneuvering, actually.

I am looking forward to modulating the throttle response through a controller in hopes to make the driving experience smoother, more controlled and it's encouraging that, together with swapping tires and reducing air drag, there is a real fuel consumption gain here! 13.3L is really encouraging

I don't find the sensitivity of the accelerator too aggressive, rather I believe that the transmission map tends to favor a low ratio to have more torque with consequent greater consumption. I often intervene with the manual to switch to the higher ratio without the automatic taking care of it. moans. Perhaps a mapping slightly less inclined to maintain a higher rpm would not bring particular penalties but certainly lower consumption. The optimal solution would be the possibility of choosing between various maps (eco, sport, o/r) as happens in many cars...

 

[Lollo050968]

Back from skiing in Austria, all over 2000km, 1600km motorway, speed around 120km/h, 400km narrow roads and mountain roads, all tarmac, skibox on crossbar on the roof. 16.2l/100km (14.51 mpg(US))
O.T. The BF KO2 are for me in Winter OK, I had snow, ice on road, wet, salty conditions. All now problem, and this conditions I have max. 4 weeks/year

P.S. Used E10, 95Oktan Super

 

[CJV]

Human or computer calculated?
The actual vs Grenadier software figure?

The actual was pretty close to the Grenny computer. Within a mile.

 

[Lars]

19 MPG in my Scottish white Trialmaster.

Don't believe the trip computer...If you calculate the MPG you'll be getting what the rest of us average, i.e. around 13.2 MPG or ~18 L/100km

 

[pmatusov]

19 MPG in my Scottish white Trialmaster.

Hahaha.
No.
14 mpg is a very, very good number for a Grenadier used mostly on highway, close to Interstate speeds.
Here are my notes with what-you-pay-for-at-the-pump divided by miles driven: https://3rj.org/Grenadier/#D

 

[FlyingTexan]

I'm curious about the divergence of computer vs reality folks see here.

In my first 5 tank refills I found the computer to be about 1-2 liters off in what it claims as average fuel consumption. Computer hovers around ~15.5L/100km (~15mpg) for mostly sub 90km/h, mostly even surface dirt or pavement mountain roads and some city. Reality at the pump is more like 17-18L/100km (~13.5mpg).
Roof rack, KO2s, ~250kg load

For me it's a couple MPG. I'm using the Fuelly app and have been monitoring to the decimal. My average mpg is 13.5. I'm either in the big city or 75+mph on the highway though.

 

[Tom109]

16mpg, Shell 93 (onboard computer says 18mpg).

 

[FlyingTexan]

I'm at 13.6 after 2600 miles. I guess I need to slow down.

 

[Tazzieman]

I live in a hilly place. I regularly see 30L/100km uphill (max it can show on the gauge).
And then add a 2.5T caravan....
I'm working to earn the $ to build up my petrol superannuation.

 

[pmatusov]

I posted my last numbers in another thread - https://www.theineosforum.com/threads/what-is-your-petrol-us-gal-mpg.12412741/post-1333262919
In short, 14.05 mpg or 16.7 L/100km, for a mix of interstate highway/country roads/city traffic/few hundred miles of dirt.

 

[ADVAW8S]

I'm at 13.6 after 2600 miles. I guess I need to slow down.

Your user name literally says you have trouble going slow.

 

[Krabby]

Your user name literally says you have trouble going slow.

Or has trouble staying on the ground.

 

[Tom109]

Keeps getting better. Next fuel-up I’ll add my last 1/2-tank highway run.

 

[Tom109]

Used 2/3 of a tank driving home from DC plus a couple days to work.

 

[GrennySpain]

Interesting to see the @Andras table, so let's post mine too, based on ODO meter readings and real liters filled in my tank
View attachment 7841966

The mean value is 15.29 l/100 km petrol.

No roof rack, mixed driving, but quite a lot of motorway, not very often 4X4 driving, usually not very loaded. no towing at all!

I have also a graph:

View attachment 7841967

Some of the peaks in my first 13000 km were motorways, including German motorways.
But in winter there is clearly a higher fuel consumption, see the steadily rising consumption after my 15000 km (that was end of October).
For those who doubt about it, I have two arguments:

1. In winter, the car uses more energy: lights, heating, cold motor (worse combustion)
2. I experienced this with all my previous cars, most being diesels, some were petrol.

I have another graph, derived from the previous one, to prove this, I will not enter in technical details about the mathematics (not really difficult), but the graph is called CUSUM. Don't look at the numbers (they have no meaning), look at the pattern:

• More or less downward slope in summer, more or less upward slope in winter!
• An upward slope means higher consumption
• The strange peaks in May and September are my travels to Hungary: a lot of German motorways and more load in the car.
• I did not travel in Winter, otherwise I also would have seen strange peaks

View attachment 7841973

Final comment: my ODO meter shows 132 km/h while I am driving 127 km/h according to my GPS. The GPS speed is the more correct speed.
The difference is 4%.
This means that when my ODO meter tells me that I have driven 100 km, in reality I have been driving only 96 km!
Therefore my real consumption is also higher than my table above.

In fact I consumed an average of 15.89 l/100 km petrol.
( again: usually not very heavily loaded, a lot of mixed driving, almost no 4x4, no towing)

Excellent data analysis . Many thanks