|
200 Series General Forum for the Volvo 240 and 260 cars |
Information |
|
New (to me) 1980 Volvo 244Views : 2025255 Replies : 4092Users Viewing This Thread : |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
Sep 26th, 2020, 16:23 | #1771 | |
VOC Member since 1986
Last Online: Yesterday 22:15
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Leicestershire
|
Quote:
__________________
Time flies like an arrow, fruit flies like a banana ..... |
|
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to john.wigley For This Useful Post: |
Sep 26th, 2020, 16:45 | #1772 |
Premier Member
Last Online: Oct 26th, 2023 20:42
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Thurrock
|
And re fuel consumption, taking as given that top up to top up is still not an absolute way of measuring
.... there is then that when some people report their car's consumption it sounds a bit like I popped down the road and up to see aunt Ada and chucked in a few squirts of gas so the mpg is increased to X mpg and therefore the job I have just done has achieved an improvement. Yes that is a, small, exaggeration of some posts. I guess a fair few members keep a notebook and average out over time and miles. For the same purpose. I find useful an app. MPG Calculator. (The results are worrying me. I am working on it, slowly.) Comrade Stephen Edwin . Last edited by Stephen Edwin; Sep 26th, 2020 at 16:54. |
The Following User Says Thank You to Stephen Edwin For This Useful Post: |
Sep 26th, 2020, 18:38 | #1773 | |
Premier Member
Last Online: Apr 18th, 2024 06:15
Join Date: Jan 2020
Location: Corby del Sol
|
Quote:
You are right: the instantaneous fuel consumption is pretty irrelevant, and that is more or less where all this came from. The XJ40 4.0l I had about 25 years ago was the first car I'd owned with an onboard computer, one of its functions was instantaneous consumption, which I recalled could be a bit scary. Coincidentally Dave and I had both owned XJ40s in the past, and shared similar recollections of the onboard computer (which was still novel at the time). I can't remember the exact figure, but the average consumption wasn't too bad for such a big and comfortable car. I sometimes used it to commute from Newbury to Feltham (so 90% motorways and dual carriageways) and I'm pretty sure it did well over 20MPG - probably 25MPG. It was supremely comfortable with a cabin like an Edwardian mans' club. We have discussed the RB's thirst previously - I'm pretty happy with 25MPG, particularly as I use it exclusively for shorter journeys. I don't measure it accurately: I just reset the odometer whenever I fill up and divide the mileage by the fuel bill after converting litres to gallons in my head. Now the RB is largely sorted out it has settled on 25MPG. Best wishes, Alan Last edited by Othen; Sep 26th, 2020 at 18:40. |
|
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Othen For This Useful Post: |
Sep 26th, 2020, 19:07 | #1774 | |
Premier Member
Last Online: Yesterday 12:22
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Lakenheath
|
Quote:
Purely as a point of interest or a side point, depending on level of interest, mine was a 3.6 Jag Sovereign Alan, on an F/1989 registration. One of the last 3.6s to come off the line i believe before they stretched it to the 4.0L version - both engines examples of the better straight 6 Jaguar fitted to the XJ40 and XJS (there was never an XK straight 6 in the XJS) but the/your bottom line is the RB is largely sorted and returning a consistent 25mpg - that's your known datum so anything consistently higher is a bonus (and cause to question your arithmetic maybe) and anything significantly lower, especially if it's worsening or remains low over a prolonged period is cause to investigate things. I've just filled my beast up, taking into account a near-end of period top-up and the fact it was idling for ~1hr during the MoT test yesterday and overall, it averaged a smidge under 24mpg. Knowing the previous tank averaged 20mpg on similar running except for a 130 mile round trip, i took the 130 off the miles i'd done, divided by 20 to get fuel used over the rest of the tankful and worked out during the 130 mile trip that i averaged a whisker under 29mpg at a cruise-controlled (indicated) 77mph and a GPS 70mph on what was mainly a dual carriageway trip. The MoT did reveal something that points to the higher than average consumption, the CO was reading 1.88% so a bit on the high side. After the test i got the tester to put the machine on manual and tweaked it down to 1.17% so that should help matters!
__________________
Cheers Dave Next Door to Top-Gun with a Honda CR-V & S Type Jag Volvo gone but not forgotten........ |
|
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Laird Scooby For This Useful Post: |
Sep 26th, 2020, 20:08 | #1775 | |
Premier Member
Last Online: Oct 26th, 2023 20:42
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Thurrock
|
Quote:
Er. Did you forget to mention your visit to Aunt Ada? Comrade Stephen Edwin . |
|
Sep 26th, 2020, 20:20 | #1776 | |
Premier Member
Last Online: Oct 26th, 2023 20:42
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Thurrock
|
Quote:
What conversion factor do you, usually, use in your head? Anyway as you are an Apple or i phone user. Go get the app. It does all the calculations and will give a result in mpg. Comrade Stephen Edwin . |
|
Sep 26th, 2020, 21:49 | #1777 | |
Premier Member
Last Online: Apr 18th, 2024 06:15
Join Date: Jan 2020
Location: Corby del Sol
|
Quote:
29MPG is excellent for a large car - you must have it just about sorted now. I'll have to think of some reason to take the RB on a longer journey to see what it is like on a run. Bob and I are planning to visit some friends (including his best friend Bella) at Pentney (near King's Lynn) some time in October, that would be about a 130 mile round trip - mostly on the A47. Normally we would use the Skoda estate for that trip, but we might just use the RB this time just to try it out. It might be interesting to see what average consumption we get on a longer run - watch this space. Alan |
|
The Following User Says Thank You to Othen For This Useful Post: |
Sep 26th, 2020, 22:24 | #1778 |
Premier Member
Last Online: Yesterday 19:11
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: S****horpe
|
The XJ I had was the straight six 3.2 AJ 16 engine-rather than the earlier AJ 6 as fitted to XJ40s.I used to average 27mpg with it. Average fuel consumption doesn't bother me per se[otherwise I wouldn't run the cars I do]but as others have said it can be a useful indicator of problems if it begins to vary fom the norm.Much like when I buy a new[to me] car I drive it about for a week without the radio on listening for the noises it makes,then I can detect even with the radio on if it starts making different noies which might warrant investigation.
|
The Following User Says Thank You to Dippydog For This Useful Post: |
Sep 26th, 2020, 22:34 | #1779 | |
Premier Member
Last Online: Apr 18th, 2024 06:15
Join Date: Jan 2020
Location: Corby del Sol
|
Quote:
With the RB (40 years old) I do the opposite and turn the radio up a bit so I can't hear the noise! Alan PS. I'm joking about the last bit :-) PPS. I misremembered the bit about the aluminium chassis, that was the later X350, not the X300. It must be the dementia setting in :-) Last edited by Othen; Sep 26th, 2020 at 22:42. |
|
The Following User Says Thank You to Othen For This Useful Post: |
Sep 26th, 2020, 22:42 | #1780 |
Premier Member
Last Online: Yesterday 19:11
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: S****horpe
|
Turning the radio up certainly "cures" a lot of problems! Can't recall what the X300 weighed I know my Omega[in Elite trim so heaviest of the range] tops a ton and threequarters but will return mid 30s on a gentle[60-70mph]long run and low 20s round town.
|
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Dippydog For This Useful Post: |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|
|