Post Your Average Fuel Consumption [Merged]

[jdbebz]

Unit: Mitsu Lancer 2001 GLS 1.5cc matic
4g92A Gas
on highway 9L/km
on city 8L/km

[crosswind]

All full-tank method and city driving...

Hilux 2.5 VNT MT - 6.5km/l
Crosswind MT - 7km/l
Innova 2.5 AT - 5-5.5km/l or 4km/l for V-Power

lakas nama po yata sa diesel yung innova niyo paps parang expedition paps ah

[desertst0rm]

lakas nama po yata sa diesel yung innova niyo paps parang expedition paps ah

Madali lang patipirin exp at mga sasakyan na di pa electronic throttle. Punoin mo lang palagi fuel tank tapos before mag 85% refuel ka para above operating range ka ng EVAP. Di masyado effective sa mga bagong sasakyan na palaging naka ON EVAP.

Fuel Emission (Fuel Evaporating) is the biggest factor that increases your fuel consumption. Gasoline initial boiling point is 35°C / 95°F at atmospheric pressure
and 39 °C / 99 °F the fuel tank. Is it not STUPID to put something that generate heat inside the fuel tank? Fuel vapors generated from the gasoline cooled fuel pump is burned at the Catalytic Converter without producing power.

[jut703]

Madali lang patipirin exp at mga sasakyan na di pa electronic throttle. Punoin mo lang palagi fuel tank tapos before mag 85% refuel ka para above operating range ka ng EVAP. Di masyado effective sa mga bagong sasakyan na palaging naka ON EVAP.

Fuel Emission (Fuel Evaporating) is the biggest factor that increases your fuel consumption. Gasoline initial boiling point is 35°C / 95°F at atmospheric pressure
and 39 °C / 99 °F the fuel tank. Is it not STUPID to put something that generate heat inside the fuel tank? Fuel vapors generated from the gasoline cooled fuel pump is burned at the Catalytic Converter without producing power.

Galing naman, all the car manufacturers in the world with billions of dollars of R&D couldn't think of that.

Also odd because whether I fill up my Mazda 3 with 3/4 left in the tank or with 1/4 left in the tank, my mileage is still the same at 5-6 km/L for city driving. Hindi naman electronic throttle yun.

You know what improves my FC to 12 km/L? Driving on the highway. [emoji12]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[desertst0rm]

Galing naman, all the car manufacturers in the world with billions of dollars of R&D couldn't think of that.

Also odd because whether I fill up my Mazda 3 with 3/4 left in the tank or with 1/4 left in the tank, my mileage is still the same at 5-6 km/L for city driving. Hindi naman electronic throttle yun.

You know what improves my FC to 12 km/L? Driving on the highway. [emoji12]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

WHAT? They are spending billions on advertising to convince people that their newer model of vehicles are getting more fuel efficient, more safe and more environment friendly even though they're not.

"If you tell a big enough lie and tell it frequently enough, it will be believed."

According to EPA Evaporative emissions occur several ways: https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPDF.cgi/...y=P10001KF.PDF

DIURNAL: Gasoline EVAPORATION INCREASES as the TEMPERATURE RISES during the day, HEATING the FUEL TANK and venting gasoline vapors.
RUNNING LOSSES: The hot engine and EXHAUST SYSTEM can vaporize gasoline when the car is running.

HOT SOAK: The ENGINE REMAINS HOT for a period of time after the CAR IS TURNED OFF, and GASOLINE EVAPORATION CONTINUES when the CAR IS PARKED.

REFUELING: Gasoline vapors are always present in fuel tanks. These vapors are forced out when the tank is filled with liquid fuel.

PERMEATION emissions are specific hydrocarbon compounds that escape through micro-pores in pipes, fittings, fuel tanks, and other vehicle components (typically made of PLASTIC or RUBBER). They differ from leaks in that they occur on the molecular level and do not represent a mechanical/material failure in a specific location. https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPDF.cgi?Dockey=P100KB5V.pdf

Pano mo compute ang fuel consumption kung di mo alam exact volume ng fuel tapos estimated lang din yung natirang fuel? Matakaw talaga pag within 15-85% fuel level dahil ng EVAP tapos return type fuel system. Pero from full hanggang 85% napakatipid. Mas malakas pa sa gas 2012 CRV ko kesa sa F150 4.2 V6 OHV at E150 na 4.6 V8. Malaki at mabigat pa rim ng CRV (17") kesa sa 98 F150 (16") at E150 (15").

[dr. d]

aren't the vapor pressure and rate of evaporation the same, whether the tank is 15% full or 85% full?

[oj88]

WHAT? They are spending billions on advertising to convince people that their newer model of vehicles are getting more fuel efficient, more safe and more environment friendly even though they're not.

Your post is riddled with inaccuracies and partial-truths. Allow me the pleasure of a rebuttal.

Let's stick to facts and simple physics... Newer vehicles are built with lighter materials, employing tighter engine tolerances, more efficient transmission gearing, and closed-looped, computer-controlled ignition systems that delivers precise fuel and air quantity as required, among many others. Why would you say that newer [internal combustion] cars are NOT more fuel efficient compared to older [internal combustion] vehicles?

Don't get me started on 'safety', as that is a different topic altogether.

IURNAL: Gasoline EVAPORATION INCREASES as the TEMPERATURE RISES during the day, HEATING the FUEL TANK and venting gasoline vapors.

RUNNING LOSSES: The hot engine and EXHAUST SYSTEM can vaporize gasoline when the car is running.

There's this thing called the Evaporative Canister or EVAP (Controlling Emissions - How Evaporative Emission Control Systems Work | HowStuffWorks), which you briefly mentioned but I'm not sure you understand how it works. As the fuel in the tank generates vapors due to elevated heat or as a result of fuel sloshing around, the EVAP (charcoal) canister absorbs the vapors for temporary storage. Two ways these vapors are released; First, when the fuel tank temperature cools down, the vapors in the tank contract and pulls the stored vapor from the EVAP canister. Second, the collected vapors are purged every now and then by the ECU and sent to be burned by the engine. As required by environmental laws, raw fuel vapors ARE NEVER vented into the atmosphere.

Additionally, modern vehicles have a 'closed' fuel system. In fact, while the engine is running, the fuel tank is maintained at a slight negative pressure (vacuum). If there's a leak (ie. faulty EVAP, loose or faulty fuel filler cap, etc.), a vacuum will never happen, tripping a pressure sensor and sending a Check Engine Light to the driver while a DTC is triggered (P452 EVAP System Pressure Sensor/Switch Low DTC)

HOT SOAK: The ENGINE REMAINS HOT for a period of time after the CAR IS TURNED OFF, and GASOLINE EVAPORATION CONTINUES when the CAR IS PARKED.

That was true with carbureted engines of old (open throat with float tank, technically exposed, etc.) NOT so with modern EFI engines with a closed fuel system.

REFUELING: Gasoline vapors are always present in fuel tanks. These vapors are forced out when the tank is filled with liquid fuel.

True, but you'll have to blame the government for that. The fact is, fuel pumps in more progrssive nations have a vapor recovery system to prevent displaced vapors from venting into the atmosphere (https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=...95yajg&cad=rja)

PERMEATION emissions are specific hydrocarbon compounds that escape through micro-pores in pipes, fittings, fuel tanks, and other vehicle components (typically made of PLASTIC or RUBBER). They differ from leaks in that they occur on the molecular level and do not represent a mechanical/material failure in a specific location.

Again, true, but not really a serious problem. We're talking about tinier than trace amounts of fuel getting through. In the context of fuel economy, fuel loss in this manner is practically considered negligible. In my own guesstimation, we're probably talking micro-liters of lost fuel due to permeation in a span of years... or even the whole life of the vehicle.

[n_spinner06]

2000 isuzu hilander xtrm

Sent from my LG-D855 using Tapatalk

[desertst0rm]

Your post is riddled with inaccuracies and partial-truths. Allow me the pleasure of a rebuttal.

Let's stick to facts and simple physics... Newer vehicles are built with lighter materials, employing tighter engine tolerances, more efficient transmission gearing, and closed-looped, computer-controlled ignition systems that delivers precise fuel and air quantity as required, among many others. Why would you say that newer [internal combustion] cars are NOT more fuel efficient compared to older [internal combustion] vehicles?

Don't get me started on 'safety', as that is a different topic altogether.



There's this thing called the Evaporative Canister or EVAP (Controlling Emissions - How Evaporative Emission Control Systems Work | HowStuffWorks), which you briefly mentioned but I'm not sure you understand how it works. As the fuel in the tank generates vapors due to elevated heat or as a result of fuel sloshing around, the EVAP (charcoal) canister absorbs the vapors for temporary storage. Two ways these vapors are released; First, when the fuel tank temperature cools down, the vapors in the tank contract and pulls the stored vapor from the EVAP canister. Second, the collected vapors are purged every now and then by the ECU and sent to be burned by the engine. As required by environmental laws, raw fuel vapors ARE NEVER vented into the atmosphere.

Additionally, modern vehicles have a 'closed' fuel system. In fact, while the engine is running, the fuel tank is maintained at a slight negative pressure (vacuum). If there's a leak (ie. faulty EVAP, loose or faulty fuel filler cap, etc.), a vacuum will never happen, tripping a pressure sensor and sending a Check Engine Light to the driver while a DTC is triggered (P�452 EVAP System Pressure Sensor/Switch Low DTC)



That was true with carbureted engines of old (open throat with float tank, technically exposed, etc.) NOT so with modern EFI engines with a closed fuel system.



True, but you'll have to blame the government for that. The fact is, fuel pumps in more progrssive nations have a vapor recovery system to prevent displaced vapors from venting into the atmosphere (https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=...95yajg&cad=rja)



Again, true, but not really a serious problem. We're talking about tinier than trace amounts of fuel getting through. In the context of fuel economy, fuel loss in this manner is practically considered negligible. In my own guesstimation, we're probably talking micro-liters of lost fuel due to permeation in a span of years... or even the whole life of the vehicle.

Your post is riddled with inaccuracies and partial-truths. Allow me the pleasure of a rebuttal.

Let's stick to facts and simple physics... Newer vehicles are built with lighter materials, employing tighter engine tolerances, more efficient transmission gearing, and closed-looped, computer-controlled ignition systems that delivers precise fuel and air quantity as required, among many others. Why would you say that newer [internal combustion] cars are NOT more fuel efficient compared to older [internal combustion] vehicles?

Don't get me started on 'safety', as that is a different topic altogether.



There's this thing called the Evaporative Canister or EVAP (Controlling Emissions - How Evaporative Emission Control Systems Work | HowStuffWorks), which you briefly mentioned but I'm not sure you understand how it works. As the fuel in the tank generates vapors due to elevated heat or as a result of fuel sloshing around, the EVAP (charcoal) canister absorbs the vapors for temporary storage. Two ways these vapors are released; First, when the fuel tank temperature cools down, the vapors in the tank contract and pulls the stored vapor from the EVAP canister. Second, the collected vapors are purged every now and then by the ECU and sent to be burned by the engine. As required by environmental laws, raw fuel vapors ARE NEVER vented into the atmosphere.

Additionally, modern vehicles have a 'closed' fuel system. In fact, while the engine is running, the fuel tank is maintained at a slight negative pressure (vacuum). If there's a leak (ie. faulty EVAP, loose or faulty fuel filler cap, etc.), a vacuum will never happen, tripping a pressure sensor and sending a Check Engine Light to the driver while a DTC is triggered (P�452 EVAP System Pressure Sensor/Switch Low DTC)



That was true with carbureted engines of old (open throat with float tank, technically exposed, etc.) NOT so with modern EFI engines with a closed fuel system.



True, but you'll have to blame the government for that. The fact is, fuel pumps in more progrssive nations have a vapor recovery system to prevent displaced vapors from venting into the atmosphere (https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=...95yajg&cad=rja)



Again, true, but not really a serious problem. We're talking about tinier than trace amounts of fuel getting through. In the context of fuel economy, fuel loss in this manner is practically considered negligible. In my own guesstimation, we're probably talking micro-liters of lost fuel due to permeation in a span of years... or even the whole life of the vehicle.

What? Puro naman FICTION mga pinagsasabi mol
Almost everything about EVAP, EGR and Vapor Canister are lies. May vent ang fuel tank. Kaya nag auautomatic shut off yung nozzle ng gas station hindi dahil puno na ang tank kundi dahil naharangan na ng liquid yung vapor vent. Gasoline Volumetric Expansion rate is 4x more greater than water. The Fuel Cap relieves excess pressure (2 PSI)& vacuum build up in the fuel tank. Ano ba tawag mo sa mga magkakatabing pipe na mataas sa gas station?

Permeation is not serious problem if your fuel tank is made of metal. Made of plastic na kaya mga fuel tank ngayon.

[desertst0rm]

There's this thing called the Evaporative Canister or EVAP (Controlling Emissions - How Evaporative Emission Control Systems Work | HowStuffWorks), which you briefly mentioned but I'm not sure you understand how it works. As the fuel in the tank generates vapors due to elevated heat or as a result of fuel sloshing around, the EVAP (charcoal) canister absorbs the vapors for temporary storage. Two ways these vapors are released; First, when the fuel tank temperature cools down, the vapors in the tank contract and pulls the stored vapor from the EVAP canister. Second, the collected vapors are purged every now and then by the ECU and sent to be burned by the engine. As required by environmental laws, raw fuel vapors ARE NEVER vented into the atmosphere.

True, but you'll have to blame the government for that. The fact is, fuel pumps in more progrssive nations have a vapor recovery system to prevent displaced vapors from venting into the atmosphere.

Again, true, but not really a serious problem. We're talking about tinier than trace amounts of fuel getting through. In the context of fuel economy, fuel loss in this manner is practically considered negligible. In my own guesstimation, we're probably talking micro-liters of lost fuel due to permeation in a span of years... or even the whole life of the vehicle.

What serious problem?
Hydrocarbon can be extracted from air.
co2 disolves in water.

Do you know what's the real reason why plastics were banned worldwide? Because it can be converted to oil.

[jut703]

I thought that this year's Christmas rush was worse than last year's. To validate this, I compared my city fuel consumption from Nov-Dec 2015 and Nov-Dec 2016. Turns out traffic conditions are still roughly the same:

2015: 7.82 km/L
2016: 7.76 km/L

In fact, the whole idea that Christmas brings far heavier traffic compared to the rest of the year doesn't seem to be true if you look at the data.

This is my average city FC for June-Dec 2015 (got my car May 29) and the entire 2016:

2015: 7.80 km/L
2016: 7.71 km/L

Practically the same as my FC during Christmas season. Comparing year on year, there's only a 0.1 km/L impact of the supposedly worse traffic conditions in Manila.

Just goes to show that our notions can deceive us, especially if the data proves otherwise. Numbers don't lie after all. 😉

Note: FC is from 48% heavy traffic (8-13 kph average speed, think BGC to Pasig at 7pm), 35% moderate traffic (13-18 kph, think EDSA Makati to Fairview at 6pm), while only 17% is light traffic (above 18 kph avg speed, think Alabang to BGC).

Sent from my SM-N9208 using Tapatalk

[StockEngine]

7.5km/l 300ish km and 43.4 liters

Aggressive driving...

Not bad coz the damn innova needed an oil change. Its hella smoother now though.

[StockEngine]

12.66 km/l

Tplex-sctex-nlex 200ish km?

16.8 liters..

101kph throughout

[Ppopex]

17 - 22 km/L

Honda City 1.3 Manual

[baludoy]

i was wondering if my reading would be inaccurate if i refueled just a notch or 2 below the half-tank mark as opposed to running the car on empty (figuratively speaking) and then topping-up fully for gas

[_Qwerty_]

Honda BRV S
Total Kms = 217
Total Fuel = 24.42
Average = 8.88kpl
Edsa - Makati Mandaluyong and back, tipong 6 kms in 1 hour (with 1 trip to Dasma)

[kircchoffs]

2016 Hyundai Accent CRDi 7DCT

168Km run 9 Liters consumed
Route: Batangas City to Calamba ( STAR Expressway ), Calamba to San Pablo, San Pablo to Malvar
Driving mode: Normal (di masyadong aggressive, may overtake kung kailangan )
Tires: Always at specs ( checked every morning )
Fuel: Caltex Diesel
Mods: K&N Air Filter

[StockEngine]

Did about 597km yesterday before the low fuel warning light lit. 91ron used. averaging 2000rpm. Consuming 37.3liters

Elantra 6sp 2.0

16kml or 6.25l/100

I think a corolla with cvt can do 18-20 on the same route.

[yubby24]

Kaya ba ng full tank mobilio from Manila to Ilocos Sur? 7 passengers inluding driver. 5 adults 2 kids. Thanks.

[StockEngine]

367km? Kaya yan one way. Mahal nga lng ang fuel ata sa ilocos? I dont remember...