tubby vs na fuel econnomy

Discussion and technical advice the SW20 MR2. 3S-GTE, 3S-GE, 3S-FE etc
Anything and everything to do with maintenance, modifications and electrical is in here for the Mk2.

Moderators: IMOC Moderators, IMOC Committee Members

StevenstonWullie
Posts: 141
Joined: Tue May 27, 2008 5:43 pm
Location: NORTHAYRSHIRE, SCOTLAND

Re: tubby vs na fuel econnomy

Post by StevenstonWullie »

i get about 35mpg on my rev3 tubby if im easy on the boost :)
Extubby
Posts: 397
Joined: Thu Jul 13, 2006 9:44 am
Location: Flitwick

Re: tubby vs na fuel econnomy

Post by Extubby »

Quite often get circa 350 miles from a tank. Filled to the brim to light on constant.
Apexi Induction, Gutted Cat, Departure Exhaust, Magnecor Leads, St205 cc, Blitz ebc.
Carbotech pads.
tiny big
Posts: 25
Joined: Sun Mar 08, 2009 3:55 pm

Re: tubby vs na fuel econnomy

Post by tiny big »

I get an average of 290-300 miles per tankfull on my n/a 3s-fe motor with mixed driving on a day to day basis and do not drive like a vicar/nurse probably due to the low bhp engine I presume the higher output motors drink a bit more or just get driven harder for more fun
marc GT Turbo
Posts: 2645
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2007 12:23 pm
Location: thornton cleveleys, blackpool
Contact:

Re: tubby vs na fuel econnomy

Post by marc GT Turbo »

ive just gone from n/a to turbo . and the tubby driven off boost is more or less the same as the n/a was on the motorway ! round town is more or less the same ! its when you hit boost ! the smiles per mile kick in :thumleft:
kevinTurboFR
Posts: 45
Joined: Tue Aug 26, 2008 12:02 am

Re: tubby vs na fuel econnomy

Post by kevinTurboFR »

when i was coming back to france, i made 3x 330/335 miles per tank, only apexi filter, bailey bov and bigger IC.. at 1.2b, i was happy if i done 220/230 miles!

maybe it ll change, i fit a mine's ecu, and a new greddy rs. :pray:

but with my previous N/A no more similar thing than the look... :mrgreen:
JeffD
Posts: 3575
Joined: Sat Feb 05, 2005 8:38 pm
Location: North West

Re: tubby vs na fuel econnomy

Post by JeffD »

Doing the same journey which is around 200 miles mostly motorway and not trying to drive particularly economically i get 37mpg in my N/A auto and 29mpg in the turbo. 29/37 = 0.78 so roughly thers a 1/4 saving by using N/A.

Ive done above based on a lot of journeys where ive filled up at start and re-filled up at end so I treckon its pretty accurate. If your fuel economy is poor yiu need to get your car serviced - these folks saying I only get 20mpg etc have got something wrong with their car! LOL
RobCrezz
Posts: 1509
Joined: Mon Jul 14, 2008 10:16 am
Location: Essex

Re: tubby vs na fuel econnomy

Post by RobCrezz »

JeffD wrote: If your fuel economy is poor yiu need to get your car serviced - these folks saying I only get 20mpg etc have got something wrong with their car! LOL


Or just running more boost...
JeffD
Posts: 3575
Joined: Sat Feb 05, 2005 8:38 pm
Location: North West

Re: tubby vs na fuel econnomy

Post by JeffD »

not trying to drive particularly economically
This is with some boosting!!! I can get 40mpg out the N/A driving carefully and around 35-37mpg out the turbo with "gentle" boosting.

If it helps the turbo has new genuine Toyota ignition leads, dizzy, rotor, lambda sensor, NGK plugs combined with an Apexi filter, decat and Departure non pro exhaust, uprated intercooler and Blitz EBC so no slouch with the mods. Honestly get your cars serviced!!! Too many people fit loads of mods without taking care of the basics which would most prob improve performance more than the hundreds of pounds theyve spent on aftermarket parts.
Tiny
Posts: 3111
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2007 7:00 pm
Location: Bordon

Re: tubby vs na fuel econnomy

Post by Tiny »

JeffD wrote:
not trying to drive particularly economically


This is with some boosting!!! I can get 40mpg out the N/A driving carefully and around 35-37mpg out the turbo with "gentle" boosting.

If it helps the turbo has new genuine Toyota ignition leads, dizzy, rotor, lambda sensor, NGK plugs combined with an Apexi filter, decat and Departure non pro exhaust, uprated intercooler and Blitz EBC so no slouch with the mods. Honestly get your cars serviced!!! Too many people fit loads of mods without taking care of the basics which would most prob improve performance more than the hundreds of pounds theyve spent on aftermarket parts.


+1 Seriously if you do not know when your ignition components were last changed go and replace them you can get the dizzy cap, leads, arm and plugs for under £100 and the Lambda sensor is about £60 online then just the the nuts and gasket from toyota circa £10 for less than £200 you may gain 10mpg and kill a few flatspots in your acceleration.
Extubby
Posts: 397
Joined: Thu Jul 13, 2006 9:44 am
Location: Flitwick

Re: tubby vs na fuel econnomy

Post by Extubby »

Just filled up after 368 miles. There was not much left in the tank mind!
Apexi Induction, Gutted Cat, Departure Exhaust, Magnecor Leads, St205 cc, Blitz ebc.
Carbotech pads.
dawolf
Posts: 2526
Joined: Thu Mar 17, 2005 4:36 pm
Location: Midlands

Re: tubby vs na fuel econnomy

Post by dawolf »

Driving both moderately hard, from my past experience:

N/A - Around 280 miles to a tank. Not that great when you think it only has 160bhp. You have to rev it high to get the power.

Turbo - Around 220 miles to a tank. Pretty good when you consider it has 240bhp. The thing with the turbo is you can change gear at 4000rpm and it still feels pretty damn quick.

I can honestly say it was definitely worth sacrificing 60 miles per tank due to the extra fun factor of the turbo.

Even the Honda S2000 is about the same as the turbo and it isn't quite as fast (in a straight line anyway).
JJ
Posts: 3825
Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2004 9:11 am
Location: Stockton-On-Tees

Re: tubby vs na fuel econnomy

Post by JJ »

I get around 220 miles.. but I've set mine up to run rich... and its 500 bhp worth !!

I could finish a tank in about 150 miles of hard driving ! Which isn't bad when you see the performance of it :mrgreen:
|| S256SX Airwerks Powered MR2 Turbo || V10 BMW M5 ||
Goto10
Posts: 3012
Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2004 1:33 pm
Location: Essex
Contact:

Re: tubby vs na fuel econnomy

Post by Goto10 »

I've managed 306 miles and still have 1/8th of a tank left - this was solely motorway cruising using no boost at all - they can be almost frugal ;)
Post Reply

Return to “MR2 MK2 1990 - 1999 NA & Turbo”