Monday, Jun 27, 2005 at 18:25
Winger,
It is really a question of distance. by your own admission, you do a lot of low revving. I have a Dec 03 built petrol 3.4L SR5. I have more city driving and about 30% off road type driving. I have kept every single petrol receipt except for the twenty litres
Sydney City Toyota placed in the vehicle to drive it from Glebe Is terminal.
I have calculated the fuel economy to be 11.4 litres per 100 kms.
the formula for the data is: y = 0.007x + 11.411 - if you understand a little maths. That equates to the figure I quoted together with an increase in fuel consumption since purchase averaging just less than 1% annually.
I made a determination to keep an eye on what the large organisation (Toyota Motorcorp) would do in the way of protecting its clients - having had a corolla serviced for $670 and then breaking down ten days later - to the surprise of the NRMA.
If you do a lot of low revving, the average fuel use per kilometer is going to be lower...naturally. trying to compare mobile driving with low revving is not really a valid comparison. To this point, I would refer you to the fuel consumption stickers on the windscreen passenger side suggesting the claimed fuel economy. Finding out that the 4.0 L engine has exactly the same economy quoted on my SR5 when I purchase it in Jan 04 was really surprising to me. I live next to an aircraft maintenance engineer. He stated that the technology used simply improves the efficiency output per litre used - in the newer engine.
"Don't Panic" - as Corporal Jones would say...you'll never really know what your real economy measure is until enough data has been gathered so that you can average out your usage as I have done.
My graph of data looks like a jaggered line but the really important statistic is the 'trend' which the equation above refers to.
regards
Owenia
Owenia (a northern nsw rainforest tree with a grain more attractive than the original 'red gold' of red cedar.)
FollowupID:
373077