I ran a 240 with a mixer LPG system for a number of years. It had already been converted when I bought the car.
My verdict was:
1) The fuel economy was certainly worthwhile. It gave an equivalent "fuel consumption" on a cost basis as if the car were doing about 45 mpg.
2) The mixer system was temperamental until finally set up and adjusted correctly. The main drawback was a tendency in certain circumstances to "pop back" in the inlet duct, risking destroying the convoluted plastic pipe. Switching over to gas required timing - it was best done when the engine was freely revving, not under load.
A vital improvement I made was to re-route the air intake to the engine-side of the radiator, as the ram-air effect in the normal position encouraged blow-back and caused uncertain running in gusty winds.
3) It was susceptible to icing-up when cold, and did not run well. It was best to start on petrol and switch over after about half a mile. Timing the point of switch-over was important - never switch on over-run or when pulling.
4) Spark plugs needed a smaller gap, regular cleaning and re-setting, and replacing at 10,000 miles regardless.
5) I inherited a small tank, but cleverly housed in a slot cut in the estate's rear underfloor locker. This needed an exhaust re-routing, but left the interior storage intact. A better location would be a toroidal tank in the spare wheel locker - but then you'd have the wheel loose in the back or be dependant on run-flat tyres.
5) Convenience of LPG outlets is crucial, but then you'll know that. My commute to work had only one garage selling LPG, which exploited its position by being very expensive. When it closed I gave up LPG anyway.
This was made worse by the small tank. Long trips required planning, my observation was that outlet numbers were dwindling.
Conclusion - worth having if your car comes ready-converted, but not worth doing if you have to pay for it yourself. It comes down to your annual milege - I was doing 30,000 miles pa then.
|