Nissan Patrol 4x4 (Africa)

Er.....black ones!
Seriously, the 17 inchers that came standard as new. I'll have to look in the morning
Regards
David

Clem wrote: What tyres are you on?

Clem wrote:I think I figured out this weekend how to get the 4.8 GRX fuel consumption down to a high 11's/low 12's per 100km while running a steady 120 to 130km/h. Seems unbelievable. Let me verify over the next six months or so and I'll let you know if I'm correct... .

Clem I forgot to ask - how long is 6 months??

I am, in confidentiality, available for a pm on interim results

Vellies wrote:

Clem wrote:I think I figured out this weekend how to get the 4.8 GRX fuel consumption down to a high 11's/low 12's per 100km while running a steady 120 to 130km/h. Seems unbelievable. Let me verify over the next six months or so and I'll let you know if I'm correct... .

Clem I forgot to ask - how long is 6 months??

I am, in confidentiality, available for a pm on interim results

I think if you keep the car stock standard, no lift, no big aggro looking tyres, no bull bars and no rook-rack, then driving like a tannie can do the trick on the 4.8.
Else it will be impossible to get "big 11's/low 12's per 100km"

Vellies and Alex, you're probably not going to believe this but it seems to me that the trick is to A. Get the car to a speed where the torque converter locks up and pretty much stays locked up. B. Fold in the wing mirrors and C. Stay off the speedo cruise and let the car drift back a bit naturally on uphills (roughly maintain the throttle position and don't open up a lot more) and picks up a bit of speed on downhills. Note that the car is stock standard with highway tyres and nothing extra on the outside. Also, suspect the later 4.8 engine has been improved - heard it said in some quarters. This way, on the open road through flattish country I seem to be consistently getting 400km on the first half of my tank and over 700km just on the main tank. The science is not exact but its very consistent. Note that the wing mirrors alone seem to account for 10% or more of consumption on the standard machine. My experience in this regard is consistent with studies elsewhere - search the web and you'll see.

Is that 700 km on the full 95 litres of fuel of the first tank?
On my car the light goes on at 80 litres, with about 15 litres to spare.

Now I am completely confused.

Changed from AT's to Muds - both 285 X 75 X 16 - and fuel consumption drops by exactly 10% ???????????

And due to the tread difference there is another 4% difference.............. WTF

David M wrote:Now I am completely confused.

Changed from AT's to Muds - both 285 X 75 X 16 - and fuel consumption drops by exactly 10% ???????????

And due to the tread difference there is another 4% difference.............. WTF

Hi David

What do you mean ? / the fuel consumption has dropped / do mean improved or deteriorates ?

It should have deteriorated considering that you are changing from AT to MT.

Just make it easier for us to understand. What was your consumption before, with ATs (+ size) and afterwards after you put MTs on (285 75 16)

Picasso wrote:

David M wrote:Now I am completely confused.

Changed from AT's to Muds - both 285 X 75 X 16 - and fuel consumption drops by exactly 10% ???????????

And due to the tread difference there is another 4% difference.............. WTF

Hi David

What do you mean ? / the fuel consumption has dropped / do mean improved or deteriorates ?

It should have deteriorated considering that you are changing from AT to MT.

Just make it easier for us to understand. What was your consumption before, with ATs (+ size) and afterwards after you put MTs on (285 75 16)

It is using less fuel which defies all logic.

All tyres are/where same size - 285 X 75 X 16

With AT's it was 5 km/l without fail or variance.

Is now 5,5 km/l with Muds.

Hm.... this is indeed strange

I guess the 5.0 on ATs was the average over a long period .

How many fillings since you have the MTs on ?

I just know that consumption on a Patrol can vary significantly depending of the kind of driving i.e highway, town or mixed cycle.

The fuel brand might also make a small difference.

David M wrote:Now I am completely confused.

Changed from AT's to Muds - both 285 X 75 X 16 - and fuel consumption drops by exactly 10% ???????????

And due to the tread difference there is another 4% difference.............. WTF

What tyres did you have on, what dit you replace them with (brand/manufacturer)?