MPG on us Site

TnUplander

Contributor
Reservation Holder
I apologize if this is old news but I just saw it today for first time. US site now carries this footnote:

"The CO₂ emission (Gasoline – 523-541g/mi) and fuel consumption (Gasoline – 15.7-16.3 mpg) figures quoted by INEOS are Combined Cycle estimates. Where a range is quoted, the low figure is from a base vehicle, high from fully optioned vehicle with off-road tires. Passenger (M1) vehicles are tested with 15% of payload. Commercial (N1) vehicles are tested with 28% of payload (Bodystyle and powertrain availability may vary by market). These figures may not reflect real world driving conditions, which will depend upon a number of factors including variations in weather, driving styles, vehicle load and accessories fitted (post-registration). "

And under Consumption and Emissions: "Fuel consumption - combined (WLTP)14.37 l/100km." Which according to my figuring is 16.37 MPG (US).

So what does that likely mean for highway? 19MPG or so? Or am I too optimistic.
 

Caladan

Contributor
Reservation Holder
Good question. According to Grenadier's U.S. market brochure (p. 41), the Grenadier station wagon w/petrol (gas) engine gets 18 mpg combined. But that number is not an EPA test-derived number. It's the combined number based on Europe's NEDC test average between the Urban Cycle (city driving) and Extra Urban Cycle ("highway" driving up to 120 kph) test results. My gut tells me that the Grenadier's mpg results from the EPA will land somewhere close to the V-6 engined Bronco (17/17). But the Grenadier is heavy (5,875 lbs) compared to the Bronco (4,705-4,945 lbs) so there's that to factor.

I would expect the EPA's city/highway numbers sometime before the end of the year (or early in 2023). At least in time for INEOS to update and open the U.S. ordering banks.
 

stickshifter

Contributor
Reservation Holder
I don't know how Europe tests fuel economy, but the EPA here in the U.S. does not test in very realistic driving conditions. It seems that forced induction engines often get "over-rated" by the EPA, because their test drivers don't spend much time in the boost. In real-world driving, most people tend to get into the boost more than the EPA. Hence the adage - with regard to Ford's "Ecoboost" engines - you can have "eco" or you can have "boost" but you can't have both.

Here are two examples from Edmund's tests of Ford F-150 trucks (2018 Ecoboost, and 2021 Hybrid):
 

Ibn Al-Bert

First Posts
US 87 octane rating is the same as European or Middle East 91 octane, because the former is measured as (RON+MON)/2 while the latter is a RON. The minimum octane rating for B58 engine has always been 91 RON, and there is no need to modify anything in the engine for the US market.
 

painter

Contributor
Reservation Holder
US 87 octane rating is the same as European or Middle East 91 octane, because the former is measured as (RON+MON)/2 while the latter is a RON. The minimum octane rating for B58 engine has always been 91 RON, and there is no need to modify anything in the engine for the US market.
Hello Ibn Al-Bert, would that be true with the higher factory tunes ? Im wondering if it would be likely to add a modest aftermarket tune without needing higher octane fuel. Just curious.
 

Ibn Al-Bert

First Posts
Hello Painter,
By no means I consider myself an engine expert, but I believe that chip tunings mainly modify two parameters to increase horsepower: delay ignition moment and increase fuel-to-air ratio. These have opposite effect on required fuel octane grade. Later ignition requires higher octane rating, while richer fuel mix allows lower octane. Whatever prevails in your chosen solution gives the answer. A usual problem is that the sales guys don't know in depth what their tuning product does.
 

painter

Contributor
Reservation Holder
Hello Painter,
By no means I consider myself an engine expert, but I believe that chip tunings mainly modify two parameters to increase horsepower: delay ignition moment and increase fuel-to-air ratio. These have opposite effect on required fuel octane grade. Later ignition requires higher octane rating, while richer fuel mix allows lower octane. Whatever prevails in your chosen solution gives the answer. A usual problem is that the sales guys don't know in depth what their tuning product does.
Got it. Thank you !
 

emax

Prolific Contributor
Grenadier Ordered
> Later ignition requires higher octane rating

That's exactly the opposite of my understanding. Engine 'knocking' happens if the ignition comes too early with a given octane rating. Knocking is either suppressed by a higher octane rating or by retarding ignition.

That's at least my understanding.
 
Top