View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
crusader Lifetime member
Joined: 13 Nov 2012 Posts: 411 Location: Kent
|
Posted: Sun Jun 30, 2013 18:35 Post subject: |
|
|
Be interesting to have a look at that one Ted. Thanks for your input with mine. _________________ On victory, you deserve beer, on defeat, you need it. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Google Sponsor
|
Posted: Sun Jun 30, 2013 18:35 Post subject: Google Ads keep this community free to join! |
|
|
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
jacksdad1963 *******
Joined: 26 Jul 2011 Posts: 1939 Location: Oldham, Lancs
|
Posted: Wed Jul 03, 2013 12:18 Post subject: |
|
|
Could this be 'the answer'
Any idea on fuel consumption as yet? _________________ 1999 3.0 TD Duty SWB
3" Body lift, 3" suspension lift, diff dropped, balljoints flipped, extended panhard, Tree sliders, Superwinch, +2" Pro Comps, 33" Mudders: Nearly finished! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Red Robbo Lifetime member
Joined: 17 Feb 2008 Posts: 4129 Location: Where ever I happen to be in my imagination but mainly Far East Sussex
|
Posted: Wed Jul 03, 2013 13:24 Post subject: |
|
|
jacksdad1963 wrote: |
Could this be 'the answer'
Any idea on fuel consumption as yet? |
Yep
Doncaster to Tunbridge Wells...........21.7 mpg |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Rhanagar Lifetime member
Joined: 12 Jan 2010 Posts: 4861 Location: Preston, Lancs.
|
Posted: Wed Jul 03, 2013 16:04 Post subject: |
|
|
That level of consumption would make me cry!
Thats 16.3 less than I am getting at the moment. _________________ 1990 Isuzu Bighorn LWB Mk.I 2.8TD Manual Lotus Edition
1994 Isuzu Bighorn LWB Mk.II 3.1TD Auto Lotus Edition
Deceased
1994 Isuzu Bighorn LWB Mk.II 3.1TD Auto LS
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
jacksdad1963 *******
Joined: 26 Jul 2011 Posts: 1939 Location: Oldham, Lancs
|
Posted: Wed Jul 03, 2013 16:47 Post subject: |
|
|
I suspected something was going to pee on things...
BUT, if you've got the reliabilty of the 3.1 and (almost) the power of the 3.0, is it worth the extra fuel?
I would say yeah but I only do tiny miles as my 3.0 is my second motor (or fifth after the bikes). I can wring 28 mpg out of the 3.0 so its not a massive difference _________________ 1999 3.0 TD Duty SWB
3" Body lift, 3" suspension lift, diff dropped, balljoints flipped, extended panhard, Tree sliders, Superwinch, +2" Pro Comps, 33" Mudders: Nearly finished! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
gary820 Lifetime member
Joined: 08 Apr 2007 Posts: 2427 Location: Yorkshire
|
Posted: Wed Jul 03, 2013 18:20 Post subject: |
|
|
Not bad mpg for a played with 3.1 _________________ landcruiser 80 series 4.5, 35's/33's for road, 2inch lift, discreet winch, sliders/armour, factory lockers, stainless side exit +++++ |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Red Robbo Lifetime member
Joined: 17 Feb 2008 Posts: 4129 Location: Where ever I happen to be in my imagination but mainly Far East Sussex
|
Posted: Wed Jul 03, 2013 18:31 Post subject: |
|
|
jacksdad1963 wrote: |
I suspected something was going to pee on things...
BUT, if you've got the reliabilty of the 3.1 and (almost) the power of the 3.0, is it worth the extra fuel?
I would say yeah but I only do tiny miles as my 3.0 is my second motor (or fifth after the bikes). I can wring 28 mpg out of the 3.0 so its not a massive difference |
Its better than the 20 mpg I got taking it up there 3.0 style
With the 3.0 in the best I ever got was 22-23 mpg mit muds on |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Red Robbo Lifetime member
Joined: 17 Feb 2008 Posts: 4129 Location: Where ever I happen to be in my imagination but mainly Far East Sussex
|
Posted: Wed Jul 03, 2013 18:32 Post subject: |
|
|
gary820 wrote: |
Not bad mpg for a played with 3.1 |
That was running hard for home so I expect a wee bit better,maybe/hopefully/whatever |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Red Robbo Lifetime member
Joined: 17 Feb 2008 Posts: 4129 Location: Where ever I happen to be in my imagination but mainly Far East Sussex
|
Posted: Wed Jul 03, 2013 18:35 Post subject: |
|
|
Rhanagar wrote: |
That level of consumption would make me cry!
Thats 16.3 less than I am getting at the moment. |
You think that's bad,muds etc,Tin tent on.bash last year 18 mpg |
|
Back to top |
|
|
TrooperDan *******
Joined: 01 Mar 2010 Posts: 2337 Location: Near York, E Yorks
|
Posted: Wed Jul 03, 2013 20:25 Post subject: |
|
|
Red Robbo wrote: |
jacksdad1963 wrote: |
Could this be 'the answer'
Any idea on fuel consumption as yet? |
Yep
Doncaster to Tunbridge Wells...........21.7 mpg |
I'm not normally a nervous passenger Ted cos if you drove it like you did our of Donny, all the way home.....i'm pleased with 21.7.
Thing is though its 60 seconds to wind fuel down for 30+ mpg and 90-100 bhp while you drive to the bash then 60 seconds to make it good again. Now i'm thinking of a dash mounted dial _________________ www.independentisuzu.co.uk |
|
Back to top |
|
|
omega63 ***
Joined: 06 May 2011 Posts: 157 Location: Greater Manchester.
|
Posted: Wed Jul 03, 2013 20:53 Post subject: |
|
|
At 50 > 60 mph constant, ie motorway driving for instance i average around 27 > 30 max. mpg , mines original/standard 3.1 manual lwb. At 70 > 85 mph it drops down to 20 > 22 mpg average, 95+ mph 10 > 12 mpg or alot less ..... |
|
Back to top |
|
|
omega63 ***
Joined: 06 May 2011 Posts: 157 Location: Greater Manchester.
|
Posted: Wed Jul 03, 2013 21:02 Post subject: |
|
|
As anybody else noticed this when your going some on a motorway the fuel gauge seems to go up , and when you come to rest it drops down considerably . I think the fuel tank sender unit must be positioned to the rear of the fuel tank, hence the reason for 1 or 2 of us running out of fuel on a steep inclines for instance .... |
|
Back to top |
|
|
gary820 Lifetime member
Joined: 08 Apr 2007 Posts: 2427 Location: Yorkshire
|
Posted: Wed Jul 03, 2013 23:19 Post subject: |
|
|
omega63 wrote: |
As anybody else noticed this when your going some on a motorway the fuel gauge seems to go up , and when you come to rest it drops down considerably . I think the fuel tank sender unit must be positioned to the rear of the fuel tank, hence the reason for 1 or 2 of us running out of fuel on a steep inclines for instance .... |
Nah mine just goes down usually as quick as it can lol.
19-20 mpg on a steady run and about 15-17mpg with the 35's on.
Round town is somewhat worse as is putting your foot down lol. _________________ landcruiser 80 series 4.5, 35's/33's for road, 2inch lift, discreet winch, sliders/armour, factory lockers, stainless side exit +++++ |
|
Back to top |
|
|
DYLAN Moderator
Joined: 25 Sep 2006 Posts: 5115 Location: Chesterfield, Derbyshire
|
Posted: Wed Jul 03, 2013 23:42 Post subject: |
|
|
Red Robbo wrote: |
Rhanagar wrote: |
That level of consumption would make me cry!
Thats 16.3 less than I am getting at the moment. |
You think that's bad,muds etc,Tin tent on.bash last year 18 mpg |
Don't forget it's now capable of running BIO/SVO _________________
2002 S-TYPE JAGUAR 3.0 SPORT |
|
Back to top |
|
|
jacksdad1963 *******
Joined: 26 Jul 2011 Posts: 1939 Location: Oldham, Lancs
|
Posted: Thu Jul 04, 2013 9:00 Post subject: |
|
|
Good point there Dylan!
I used to make bio for my old pug 405 non turbo, ran it for 2 years before it died of rust: the beauty of the old rugged oilers cannot be ignored
OH NO! I'm going to the other side........ _________________ 1999 3.0 TD Duty SWB
3" Body lift, 3" suspension lift, diff dropped, balljoints flipped, extended panhard, Tree sliders, Superwinch, +2" Pro Comps, 33" Mudders: Nearly finished! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|