fuel consumtion navara d40

Submitted: Thursday, Dec 04, 2008 at 21:29
ThreadID: 64038 Views:3712 Replies:9 FollowUps:10
This Thread has been Archived
any info on fuel consumtion for my 2.5 diesil twin cab i travel 35 ks to and from work no trafic lights and 80 kl speed limit it is auto but alum tray that is much lighter than tub no other extras yet i get 16.8 lt per 100 with no load it goes back to dealer next week
Back Expand Un-Read 0 Moderator

Reply By: apwaddo - Thursday, Dec 04, 2008 at 22:24

Thursday, Dec 04, 2008 at 22:24
I have done 115,000 kms in mine and have averaged 11.5 over that time. 70% is Freeway driving at 113 kph ( 10.5), 20% towing a 2.5 ton van (between 15 and 20) and 10% 4WD (15-19).
Take it back its not right! Even town driving I get around 12.
Best is 9.5 at 100 kph freeway. Worst is 21 with van, head winds and hills.
AnswerID: 338329

Follow Up By: Navman08 - Thursday, Dec 11, 2008 at 17:51

Thursday, Dec 11, 2008 at 17:51
There is a good thread about fuel consumption here Site Link
0
FollowupID: 606785

Reply By: Member - Matthew C - Thursday, Dec 04, 2008 at 22:28

Thursday, Dec 04, 2008 at 22:28
Let me guess!!!!

Its an AUTOMATIC.????

Matt
AnswerID: 338331

Follow Up By: Member - warren G (VIC) - Friday, Dec 05, 2008 at 19:39

Friday, Dec 05, 2008 at 19:39
you dont have to guess just be able to read
0
FollowupID: 605958

Follow Up By: Member - Matthew C - Friday, Dec 05, 2008 at 19:53

Friday, Dec 05, 2008 at 19:53
The reason i said that was,every one that complains about fuel economy on a D40 is an automatic.

The manuals ROCK!!!!

MAtt
0
FollowupID: 605961

Reply By: donk - Thursday, Dec 04, 2008 at 22:28

Thursday, Dec 04, 2008 at 22:28
There is alot of D40 concerns to be found at this site

Some of infoSite Link might be relevent to your issue

Regards Don
AnswerID: 338332

Reply By: Member - Mick O (VIC) - Thursday, Dec 04, 2008 at 22:41

Thursday, Dec 04, 2008 at 22:41
I find that incredible. I just went back and checked my fuel record for my trip round the block in 2006 in the old D22 STR (2004 3L T/D) and my average for 40,000 km fully loaded and towing an off road camper trailer was 13 litres per 100 km. That covers about 15,000 km of serious dirt such as the Kimberley, Canning, Gunbarrell etc. Your result is amazingly bad. I averaged 10 litres to the hundred for a simliar trip to work over a 2 year period (34 km each way).

Hope you can get it sorted. Cheers. Mick
''We knew from the experience of well-known travelers that the
trip would doubtless be attended with much hardship.''
Richard Maurice - 1903

Lifetime Member
My Profile  My Blog  My Position  Send Message

AnswerID: 338334

Follow Up By: apwaddo - Friday, Dec 05, 2008 at 19:38

Friday, Dec 05, 2008 at 19:38
There is no relevance in comparing the D22 diesel and the D40 diesel. They are totally different engines using different technologies, transmitting through different gear boxes, difs, etc. Its like comparing apples and oranges
0
FollowupID: 605957

Follow Up By: Markymark - Friday, Dec 05, 2008 at 20:31

Friday, Dec 05, 2008 at 20:31
Of course there is relevance. The new model should be more economical than the old and in any model update, there is usually a comparison of increased power and better economy over the model it replaces.

Mick's response in very relevant!

Mark.
0
FollowupID: 605967

Follow Up By: Member - Mick O (VIC) - Friday, Dec 05, 2008 at 22:37

Friday, Dec 05, 2008 at 22:37
Hmmmm no relevance. Replace the D22 with the latest technology known as the D40. A motor thats 500 cc smaller, allegedly produces more Kw of power and 'x' newtonmetres of torque yet is apparantly 32% less efficient. Hmmmm relevance. You got me! Never the less there are a heap of questions to be answered. Perhaps it's just the manafacturers making outlandish claims (regardless of company, they all do it. 11 kpl for the V8 Toyota 79 series.....I think not!) and the circumstances as outlined by Warren are far from acceptable. Even my heavily loaded 3L T/D Pootrol provides better fuel consumption than that!

Cheers Mick.
''We knew from the experience of well-known travelers that the
trip would doubtless be attended with much hardship.''
Richard Maurice - 1903

Lifetime Member
My Profile  My Blog  My Position  Send Message

0
FollowupID: 605996

Reply By: True Blue - Friday, Dec 05, 2008 at 16:03

Friday, Dec 05, 2008 at 16:03
Mine is a manual so perhaps it's no so relevant to your question but here it is for all it's worth.

Unladen 100kph cruise control 8.5L/100

Towing a 1.6T pop top+ cruise control @95kph = 12.1L/100

Worst figure achieved was towing above van against strong head wind on cruise control in hilly terrain and that was 15.5L/100ks.

Test drove the auto at the time of buying and felt that all the advantages of the torquey diesel went out the window via. the auto trans. Just didn't like it. Drove the manual and bingo!

Car has done 37,000ks without a single problem apart from the dreadful lack of dust proofing in the rear tub (with canopy).

First gear is also a little too high when starting off on hills with the van.

True Blue.
AnswerID: 338415

Follow Up By: Member - warren G (VIC) - Friday, Dec 05, 2008 at 19:44

Friday, Dec 05, 2008 at 19:44
thanks for response but had no choice wife only drives auto
0
FollowupID: 605959

Reply By: Member - Matt (Perth-WA) - Friday, Dec 05, 2008 at 18:14

Friday, Dec 05, 2008 at 18:14
FWIW...

I have heard the 2.5 Nissans have a particulate catalyst in the exhaust...designed to burn up soot etc by getting very hot (like and incinerator). To get very hot the ECM does a burn while driving...ie it over fuels for a period, this raises the EGT and this heat makes the catalyst roast burning up trapped particulate. (now this is a genuine system on new TD but I havent varified this with Nissan and the 2.5 yet, just a valid guess with a bit of speculation thrown in)

Well that the simple theory anyway.

Is the 35km trip all you are doing on a regular basis?

A very speculative guess could be that the distance is insufficient to heat the catalyst during a burn and the over fuelling is just being wasted.

The other guess is the ECM can lose the plot and just goes into burn mode waaaay too often and that is contributing to the high fuel consuption.

Might be worth asking the dealer when you drop it off...I have heard of other people being told that is the reason for their high fuel consumption in the STX. (but again I havent varified it for myself, I hate speculation but it might help you in this case).

Good luck mate

Matt.
AnswerID: 338440

Follow Up By: Member - warren G (VIC) - Friday, Dec 05, 2008 at 19:57

Friday, Dec 05, 2008 at 19:57
Thanks for input. After 25 years in the building game I rarely ask a question without researching the answer first. Good theory, will put toward car dealer, be interested in their response. But obviously something is not right with car.
0
FollowupID: 605962

Reply By: Member - Marco T (VIC) - Saturday, Dec 06, 2008 at 00:02

Saturday, Dec 06, 2008 at 00:02
Hi Warren,

I have the D40 manual. But as a guide my fuel consumption is poor also.
Open road - 13.5L/100
City - 12.1L/100
Towing - 15+++L /100 on a 1.5 ton trailer

They seem to feel every kg you put into them. I am loaded to GVM day to day with a tool box and tools for those figures.

I am going to remove the tool box as I have a concern about the chassis (complaints corner)on the car and fuel consumption.

good luck

Marco



AnswerID: 338488

Reply By: oweee - Wednesday, Dec 10, 2008 at 22:46

Wednesday, Dec 10, 2008 at 22:46
I have just purchased a 2007 ST-X auto diesel, and drive it around town with the foot flat all the way - hard to make it feel like the Maloo I just down traded to the wife, but the power and torque are pretty good just the same? Economy is not my biggest concern - if you can afford $50k or a ute, don't complain about the fuel? If you want economy, buy a D22, which is smaller, lighter, easier to park, and cheaper to buy??? smaller turbo means smaller fuel burn???

The auto in the d40 is more sophisticated than any auto I have driven before, and in dumb speak, this is going to equate to losses in the gear change process, but it works because it allows the turbo to keep spinning at the right rev to pull hard. Using more fuel???

If you are getting 16l/100 on normal driving (normal means granny driving to church on Sundays) take it back - I get about 13-14 and that is pushing hard around town empty. I have not done a highway check yet, but the difference in our other fleet D40 manual is 9.5 highway versus close to 12 around town, so on that basis I should get between 10-11 on highway???

Alternately, back up the right foot. Do an experiment for yourself - don't let it rev over 2000 rpm for a week and see what the difference is, then you will have something to complain about???

See if you can borrow or buy a scangauge, and that will tell you the actual useage, and also show you where the high useage is coming in?

Again, if you can afford a $50k truck plus the extras, don't complain about the cost of running it? You never hear porche cheyenne drivers complain about the cost of tyres???

AnswerID: 339164

Follow Up By: Member - warren G (VIC) - Thursday, Dec 11, 2008 at 19:25

Thursday, Dec 11, 2008 at 19:25
Sometimes I dont know why I respond to some comments but here we go. Firstly, I was not complaining about the cost of fuel, its the fact that I bought a vehicle that is not doing what nissan represented it as/should do. And as so,I am gaining information thru this forum in comparison to other peoples vehicles to remedy this problem. I dont concern myself with fuel consumption when driving my 69 GT falcon, or the stateman my wife drives. Secondly, generally people go from a larger vehicle to a smaller vehicle for the fact of downsizing (which I have), I previously ran an auto petrol patrol for 12 years and are fully aware that autos are not as econimcal as manuals, If I wanted to run a vehicle with the current fuel comsumption I'm running, I would have bought a patrol with solid axles and a real 4wd.
Having driven for 30 years, I dont need a lesson in how to drive a vehicle in different methods to check fuel consumption. Lastly if I wanted a sarcastic and completely useless comment I would have asked one of my teenage children.
0
FollowupID: 606805

Follow Up By: Thermoguard Instruments - Monday, Dec 22, 2008 at 22:10

Monday, Dec 22, 2008 at 22:10
Go Warren! Hope you get some useful answers.

Ian
0
FollowupID: 608612

Reply By: oweee - Friday, Dec 12, 2008 at 14:24

Friday, Dec 12, 2008 at 14:24
Sorry Mr Warren G - Thanks for reminding me that I am a knob and I shall not waste any more of your time?
AnswerID: 339390

Sponsored Links

Popular Products (9)