FTO AUSTRALIA

nicholas wrote: I've heard people say that they get more distance out of higher RON fuel... I'm not too sure about that, but I think its quite clear that the engine runs better and produces more power on the higher RON fuels (why else would Mitsu recommend the use of 98?)

this is true also the moter runs a lot cleaner as well.
I ran my last car with 98rom and after 230'000km I got the injecters cleaned and throtal body and so on and they called me a lier when they asked me how meany times I get them cleaned, I and I tolled them never first time.

How do you clean the injectors and throttle body??

I do a lot of night driving as well so not a lot of cars on the road to stuff me up or red lights

So true, so true. I know a lot of the time it isn't possible, but you'd be amazed what a difference it can make if you delay a majority of your driving until after 8pm or so.

As for cleaning throttle body etc, isn't it mostly a case of getting some sort of aerosol upper engine cleaner and spraying it into the intake manifold at idle?

you can get them electo cleaned at you mechanics or a spray cleaner.
once you do that use a high RON fuel every tank or as often as you $ alows you to

I'd rather live on water and plain jatz rather than put <98 RON in my car...

And considering my account balance / credit card balance right now, that's about where I'm at

mmmm plain water and jazz crackers. Mate I'm already there, and my cars not on the road lol

checked fuel prices today at work $1.49.9 for standard fuel what a joke

i love how they make the .9 on the end.. like a marketing pitch to keep it looking cheap as its not saying $1.50.0

sh*t, in brisbane its around the 145.00.... and thats for High oc/unlimited or what ever the 2 petrol stations call it

Hey Ethix, thats because we have a fuel subsidy up here.

The state government pays 10c a litre for us. SOmething like that anyway. Not sure of the exact amount.

I drive my version R fairly harshly but mind you I don't really have to drive with much traffic and do a fair bit of highway driving but I would have a pretty awful tank to do 14l per 100km. usually I get closer to 10.

The only engine mod on my car is an exhaust.

when I get my car back I will do a L / 100km test on it and let you know how it gos

Delvance wrote:

tadasu wrote: -Spray "Subaru upper engine cleaner" into intake while engine is idling to clear out carbon deposits. Obtainable from Subaru for around $17 apparently

Or do what i do and have a mate at STi to get it for you for free =D

geez if you guys are complaining about fuel consumption in a 2.0L then obviously you should be driving a Suzuki or something.

14km per 100 is not that bad. In a 4 litre your looking at prob 17-18 with the same driving route and time. In a V8 your be hitting 20L per 100kms.

My fuel light switches on at about 430kms, thats 100% peak hour driving. Normal roads way into the city, citylink on the way back.

I got 520kms out of the tank. I remember last time I pushed to even high kms for a tank filled up and I only got in 54 litres.

No matter what 2.0L it is, one thing is dont complain about the fuel usage.

Payaya,

Sorry, but not quite correct. I've driven a 4L straight six for years, and the fuel consumption, bad as it was, never went near 17-18 litres, not even when I was towing half a tonne of boat. Hell, I even took it down to Melbourne earlier this year on a tank of fuel - approx 9l/100km!

Going back to the OP and the topic at hand (yeah I know, we've moved on from there ) the point was that his fuel consumption was relatively high - it doesn't matter what sort of 2L it is, 14L for an stock motor is quite high. Agreed, in the scheme of things, it's nothing to complain about but if my car was supposed to be doing 9l / 100km and was doing 14, I'd want to know why too.

nicholas wrote:Payaya,

Sorry, but not quite correct. I've driven a 4L straight six for years, and the fuel consumption, bad as it was, never went near 17-18 litres, not even when I was towing half a tonne of boat. Hell, I even took it down to Melbourne earlier this year on a tank of fuel - approx 9l/100km!

Going back to the OP and the topic at hand (yeah I know, we've moved on from there ) the point was that his fuel consumption was relatively high - it doesn't matter what sort of 2L it is, 14L for an stock motor is quite high. Agreed, in the scheme of things, it's nothing to complain about but if my car was supposed to be doing 9l / 100km and was doing 14, I'd want to know why too.

As for your 4L ford getting 9...only if u drive on straight highway, not cbd. The 4L car like a ford is killed by weight and the stop start..peroid.

No, definitely, I agree. If you're the type of person who enjoys driving an FTO, they're horrible cars.
The point I was trying to make, is that 14L/100km is a little unusual for an unmodified 2.0L FTO, when that is what I'd average for city driving in a 4L six.

no... something is wrong 14L per 100km is just wrong...

i get 12.5 and i fang it everywhere

nicholas wrote:No, definitely, I agree. If you're the type of person who enjoys driving an FTO, they're horrible cars.
The point I was trying to make, is that 14L/100km is a little unusual for an unmodified 2.0L FTO, when that is what I'd average for city driving in a 4L six.

cool. I tend to agree. If hammer my FTO around these days cos its fun and I get about 13lt / 100km.

My ford gets 14l / 100 in the CBD without hammering

My line is about 12. Thats with only a few hard launches per drive... If I drive it hard it can goes to 15lt / 100km.

I use 98 in the FTO, 95 in the ford and 102 mix of elf race fuel in the line. No point runnning more than 95 in the ford I found.

jonowong wrote:no... something is wrong 14L per 100km is just wrong...

i get 12.5 and i fang it everywhere

thats about 480km / tank. I get 650. But only about 450 when hammered around all day.

Maybe his O2 Sensor is totally shot.

nicholas wrote:Payaya,

Sorry, but not quite correct. I've driven a 4L straight six for years, and the fuel consumption, bad as it was, never went near 17-18 litres, not even when I was towing half a tonne of boat. Hell, I even took it down to Melbourne earlier this year on a tank of fuel - approx 9l/100km!

Going back to the OP and the topic at hand (yeah I know, we've moved on from there ) the point was that his fuel consumption was relatively high - it doesn't matter what sort of 2L it is, 14L for an stock motor is quite high. Agreed, in the scheme of things, it's nothing to complain about but if my car was supposed to be doing 9l / 100km and was doing 14, I'd want to know why too.

Me too! I have a Ford I6 and also an FTO. I drive both cars exactly the same way carrying exactly the same load, on exactly the same roads, at exactly the same time.

With 4 passengers, peak hour traffic and my driving style my Ford uses 3-4 litres per 100kms than the FTO. My friend has a Gen 3 Commodore sometimes sees 20+ litres per 100kms.

Again how do you judge that my Fords I6 is fuel hungry?? Do you drive on the exact same route I do with the same amount of load???

I dont know where you live, but poeple have to understand its pointless comparing fuel figures to another car, as their daily tasks are different.

12-14 litres per 100kms is my average. I know if I baby the car, take the car back to stock weight, and live in NT do you truely believe the figures will be the same? 9 litres per 100kms could be possible.

"Melbourne earlier this year on a tank of fuel - approx 9l/100km!"

You know what? I've taken my car to Albury from melbourne I got around 9L too! i dont know why my car uses more when im in the city part must be the pollution??? Strange isnt it.