E10 has been available for a couple of months now, but I continue to use super unleaded in the MR2.
However, our other daily hack with a 1.2 TSI engine has seen a marked reduction in mpg over the last few weeks. On a frequent route that used to see an easy 50mpg I now struggle to reach 43/44.
I'm confident it isn't anything hardware related as the car is kept in rude health and running in oil that is less than 500 miles old.
Could it be that winter blend fuel has already reached the pumps? The official word on E10 seems to be a 3% increase in consumption, but if this is a lab figure I'm inclined to think that real world results are much worse. Maybe I'm just cynical.
Equally cynical here!
I would love to run my various cars on E5 Shell V-Power, but a combination of lack of Shell Garages in my neck of the woods, and a reputed price in excess of £1.60 I use Tesco Momentum on a regular basis(149.9 this am in my local branch)
E10? only when desperately stuck, + only in my stock '2' s if needs be
Yes, E10 is less efficient.
This is interesting or rather disappointing! Recently, as some of you know I drove upto Scotland in Ange's Honda Civic, previous trips the car was doing 50mpg over a 345 mile trip. Coming home the other week, 47.8mpg. I put it down to the strong headwind but perhaps it wasn't that afterall! :o It also cost £70 to fill up, it's never been that much either thanks to the pump prices! :'(
We seem to have conducted the experiment. 5% more 'green' alcohol reduces mileage by 5%.
Leave it to the politicians and mandarins to completely screw up on basic engineering. Again.
Quote from: Chilli Girl on November 19, 2021, 16:57This is interesting or rather disappointing! Recently, as some of you know I drove upto Scotland in Ange's Honda Civic, previous trips the car was doing 50mpg over a 345 mile trip. Coming home the other week, 47.8mpg. I put it down to the strong headwind but perhaps it wasn't that afterall! :o It also cost £70 to fill up, it's never been that much either thanks to the pump prices! :'(
Not forgetting that Scotland is, on average, higher than England so downhill on the way home, that would make the mpg differential worse.
Quote from: Carolyn on November 19, 2021, 17:38We seem to have conducted the experiment. 5% more 'green' alcohol reduces mileage by 5%.
Leave it to the politicians and mandarins to completely screw up on basic engineering. Again.
Please dont get me started on the f*ckwits
Water down standard fuel and save supposedly xxxx tonnes of CO2, but then we are using more fuel that probably wipes out those savings, in the meantime the treasury coffers grow on the basis the we are saving the world and evidence in the future may well show it to be bolloxx
Rob
Quote from: Carolyn on November 19, 2021, 17:38We seem to have conducted the experiment. 5% more 'green' alcohol reduces mileage by 5%.
I tend to recall, predicting this long ago.
Ties in very nicely with the clean fuel thread and a more recent e10 thread.
This thread has saved me digging those up. But as someone that records their every fill. (Read CDO) a stronger version of ocd. (The letters are in the right order.)
My mpg has noticeably reduced on my daily.
By about 5%. Shocker!
Which comes back to. Will your car "run" on E10? Oh yes, no problem at all.
Efficiently/optimally? Chuffing no chance.
Glad I'm not the only one!!
Turns out my original post was overly optimistic - having double checked the 'official' guidance it actually claims:
"You may see a reduction of around 1%, but it is unlikely to be noticeable in everyday driving."
Staggering.
I suppose time will tell if it is a winter fuel consequence.
I've done some sums!
not showing my sources (but they're easy to find on the internet)
so: e10 is 3.48 % less energy dense than petrol, so you will use about 3.48% more of it for a given amount of "work" in ideal circumstances.
assuming average 9 carbon atoms per petrol molecule, there is about 4.14% less carbon in e10 than petrol.
using % carbon by mass figures I found on interweb, that suggests 5.75% carbon in e10 than in petrol.
so, with e10 (that is, 10% ethanol) you'll use approx 3.5% more fuel but 4-5 % less carbon per litre of fuel used.
so it should reduce carbon a little. and it'll be 10% renewable fuel.
Screenshot 2021-11-20 at 11.25.24.png
I have used this fuel in my car from day one as it was mandated long ago in my country. The only thing you need to worry about is if you store your car seasonally because it attracts water and will cause phase separation which is a problem. You should use a fuel stabilizer but even more so if you have any small engines that use carburetors be aware it can make older rubber fuel lines brittle and gum up the jets.
Don't the fuel companies add anything already? Seems an obvious thing for them to do.
Edit: Additives I mean.
Quote from: jonbill on November 20, 2021, 11:32I've done some sums!
not showing my sources (but they're easy to find on the internet)
so: e10 is 3.48 % less energy dense than petrol, so you will use about 3.48% more of it for a given amount of "work" in ideal circumstances.
assuming average 9 carbon atoms per petrol molecule, there is about 4.14% less carbon in e10 than petrol.
using % carbon by mass figures I found on interweb, that suggests 5.75% carbon in e10 than in petrol.
so, with e10 (that is, 10% ethanol) you'll use approx 3.5% more fuel but 4-5 % less carbon per litre of fuel used.
so it should reduce carbon a little. and it'll be 10% renewable fuel.
Screenshot 2021-11-20 at 11.25.24.png
Nice!
Quote from: jonbill on November 20, 2021, 11:32I've done some sums!
not showing my sources (but they're easy to find on the internet)
so: e10 is 3.48 % less energy dense than petrol, so you will use about 3.48% more of it for a given amount of "work" in ideal circumstances.
assuming average 9 carbon atoms per petrol molecule, there is about 4.14% less carbon in e10 than petrol.
using % carbon by mass figures I found on interweb, that suggests 5.75% carbon in e10 than in petrol.
so, with e10 (that is, 10% ethanol) you'll use approx 3.5% more fuel but 4-5 % less carbon per litre of fuel used.
so it should reduce carbon a little. and it'll be 10% renewable fuel.
Screenshot 2021-11-20 at 11.25.24.png
Thanks for supplying the numbers to back up what I and others have been saying.
In a nutshell.
Less efficient and more expensive.
More expensive? About 10% more I reckon.
especially when you take into account you will be back at the pump x% sooner than you would otherwise have been.
obvs the pricing is completely independent of the chemistry.
Pricing yes.
More expensive as you are back there sooner. Getting less bang for your £€$
Quote from: Ardent on November 19, 2021, 22:59Quote from: Carolyn on November 19, 2021, 17:38We seem to have conducted the experiment. 5% more 'green' alcohol reduces mileage by 5%.
I tend to recall, predicting this long ago.
Ties in very nicely with the clean fuel thread and a more recent e10 thread.
This thread has saved me digging those up. But as someone that records their every fill. (Read CDO) a stronger version of ocd. (The letters are in the right order.)
My mpg has noticeably reduced on my daily.
By about 5%. Shocker!
Which comes back to. Will your car "run" on E10? Oh yes, no problem at all.
Efficiently/optimally? Chuffing no chance.
I still prefer a revival of the clean fuel thread as this one is simply the next page and all getting on that page for the first time will lack the previous chapters.
Bottom line is that it is the way it is and part of that is that the official information, whether from the manufacurers or gvt is at nest misleading. Nothing new there either.
Quote from: Petrus on November 21, 2021, 00:55Quote from: Ardent on November 19, 2021, 22:59Quote from: Carolyn on November 19, 2021, 17:38We seem to have conducted the experiment. 5% more 'green' alcohol reduces mileage by 5%.
I tend to recall, predicting this long ago.
Ties in very nicely with the clean fuel thread and a more recent e10 thread.
This thread has saved me digging those up. But as someone that records their every fill. (Read CDO) a stronger version of ocd. (The letters are in the right order.)
My mpg has noticeably reduced on my daily.
By about 5%. Shocker!
Which comes back to. Will your car "run" on E10? Oh yes, no problem at all.
Efficiently/optimally? Chuffing no chance.
I still prefer a revival of the clean fuel thread as this one is simply the next page and all getting on that page for the first time will lack the previous chapters.
Bottom line is that it is the way it is and part of that is that the official information, whether from the manufacurers or gvt is at nest misleading. Nothing new there either.
Went back and read that thread, missed it first time around but some interesting points.
Well, I may be a cynical grumpy old sod but it seems that from a politicians point of view its a win win.... They get browny points for carbon emission reduction and if some cars are recked by water in the fuel corroding the systems, hey, its less fossil fuel cars on the road, another browny point... Rant over 🤔.
Not forgetting some more beans for chancellor.
I am doing a very low mileage in the 2 so I'm thinking I should go totally premium unleaded E5 from now on despite the excessive cost. Theory being the extra cost will be less than a damaged engine?
There seems to be a large amount of misinformation on E10 and similar fuels. While some much older vehicles and a few cars built for limited markets could have issues, E10 has been sold in the US for 2 decades and is basically the only fuel available in most markets. Virtually none of the doomsday predictions being suggested in some literature have come to pass. After nearly 20 years of use, the effects (or non-effects) are well documented. E15 is now available in many areas and much more common than ethanol free. Initially, there were predictions of doom with E15, but people have been using E15 deliberately or even accidentally form years now with no issues.
https://axleaddict.com/cars/Is-E15-Ethanol-Bad-For-Your-New-Cars-Engine-Lets-Review-The-Facts (https://axleaddict.com/cars/Is-E15-Ethanol-Bad-For-Your-New-Cars-Engine-Lets-Review-The-Facts)
https://vitalbypoet.com/stories/what-you-need-to-know-about-using-e15 (https://vitalbypoet.com/stories/what-you-need-to-know-about-using-e15)
The one fact in all of the articles is the cars with no issues are built for US specifications and standards (excluding California). For the most part, if a car model is sold in the US, it is probably built to the same or similar specs world wide. If it isn't, then perhaps there may be an issue, but that situation should be pretty rare. If you examine Toyota's for example, fuel systems and other related systems are the same worldwide.
The other problem is cost. There are a very few stations in our area in the US selling ethanol free fuel and it is very hard to find, but it is more than 10% more expensive in an equivalent octane grade in E10. Even if it gives better real world mileage, it would be very hard to justify the extra cost, and the difficulty in finding it.
There are more EV charging stations than gas stations selling ethanol free fuel, and they are very hard to find as well!
Out of curiosity.
What is the unit price of fuel where you are?
See if we can have some fun with numbers.
It is priced per litre here.
Much variation across the country but lets say 143p/litre.
4.54l to the UK gallon
So 649.22p £6.49
3.785l to a US Gallon.
Things to play with.
UK gallon vs US gallon
£/p vs $/c
Exchange rates
Over to our US members for some local figures.
Over the last couple of years having had a van that I use daily which has an average MPG display I have noticed that the average fuel consumption will go down by about 2 MPG over the winter period and again increase as the weather warms up. Due to the van having a DPF and the fact that it is used over relatively short runs and very little motorway driving I tend to use BP ultimate diesel so can't really comment on E10 (I don't even recommend it to customers to use in their mowers). The point I'm getting to in my round about way is that an other factor to bear in mind is that engines probably run slightly richer in colder weather and fuel companies change the formula of fuel for winter use which I gather is slightly less efficient that the summer fuel but is more volatile to allow combustion at lower temperatures.
@Mikeymead I have to agree with your observations, with the proviso that historically, that would have been with E5.
With E10 will it be more pronounced? I can see it already.
Quote from: Mikeymead on November 26, 2021, 21:24Over the last couple of years having had a van that I use daily which has an average MPG display I have noticed that the average fuel consumption will go down by about 2 MPG over the winter period and again increase as the weather warms up. Due to the van having a DPF and the fact that it is used over relatively short runs and very little motorway driving I tend to use BP ultimate diesel so can't really comment on E10 (I don't even recommend it to customers to use in their mowers). The point I'm getting to in my round about way is that an other factor to bear in mind is that engines probably run slightly richer in colder weather and fuel companies change the formula of fuel for winter use which I gather is slightly less efficient that the summer fuel but is more volatile to allow combustion at lower temperatures.
That was one of my original points - have observed increased consumption in winters past but it seems more pronounced. Entirely unscientific, granted, but not many other factors have changed.
Here are some prices today at a local large independent convenience store chain station near us in US dollars and US gallons. The octanes (second column) are US spec. This station carries Top Tier fuel which has extra additives, but is common in our area. Some other stations are less, but not by much. Our state has one of the highest gas taxes in the US, so most other states are less.
E10 87 $3.63 (regular - used by nearly all cars)
E10 89 $3.93 (plus)
E10 93 $4.43 (supreme - most supreme is 91 octane)
E15 87 $3.38
E85 105 $2.98
Ethanol Free 90 $4.45
Auto Diesel $3.95
The conversion today from dollars per gallon to pence per liter is listed as 1 to 19.8, so (I think I have this right)
E10 87 - 71.8p / litre
E10 93 - 87.7p / litre
Ethanol free - 88.1p / litre
Prices change a lot, even day to day, so this is just today
Tracking fuel consumption can drive you nuts, as every station may have a slightly different automatic cut off at the nozzle, plus as noted, weather makes a difference as well as differences in summer fuel and winter fuel. Driving the same roads, getting fuel from the same station, our mileage will vary 1-2 mpg per fill up on every car. We just track it to capture any significant changes.
But here is a curious one. Years ago, we regularly drove up and down the Eastern US in the same vehicle (a mid size van), taking the same roads, and only stopping for fuel. The trips were normally about 1,000 miles in length each way. We regularly got 1-2 mpg better (about 5%) going north to south, than from south to north! It wasn't elevation change as that wasn't much. It wasn't speed as we used cruise control and ran the same speeds. The only conclusion was a difference in prevailing winds. The prevailing winds in the US are east to west, and going south, we always went slightly westward. This was somewhat confirmed when weather systems changed the wind directions, and the MPG was about the same in both directions, which would be the normal expectation.
Similarly, we just did a 500 mile trip this past weekend that was south to northeast, and then back southwest another 500 miles on the same roads with similar traffic. The mileage each way was different by over 1 mpg. We just noted the difference, not which way was better.
We also have 2 MRS (Spyders in the US). They are set up similarly and are driven on mostly the same roads. The 2002 regularly averages 32-34 mpg, and a 2003 regularly is 31 to 32 mpg.
After tracking fuel mileage 100's of thousands of miles on dozens of vehicles, our conclusion is it takes a very long time to find an average that is representative, and each tank can easily vary 1-2 mpg or more. We still track it mostly just for curiosity.
@Beachbum957 said:
"We also have 2 MRS (Spyders in the US). They are set up similarly and are driven on mostly the same roads. The 2002 regularly averages 32-34 mpg, and a 2003 regularly is 31 to 32 mpg"Remember that the PFL <2003 is a lighter car than the FL 2003>.
@Beachbum957Thanks for the numbers and conversions.
88.1p a litre ethanol free and we are paying 143p for e10.
Off to sit under the stairs in the dark and weep.
Maybe different RON ratings as well.
EU spec is generally 95
US spec seems much lower.
Is that where the diff ecu's come in. Plus the j spec is diff again.
Quote from: Joesson on November 27, 2021, 13:39Remember that the PFL <2003 is a lighter car than the FL 2003>.
There isn't much difference in the US models. The biggest difference was the weight of a 6 speed transmission compared to a 5 speed. Both of our cars are running manual 6 speed transmissions, have the same wheels and tires, and even the same small "bicycle" spare tire. But our 2002 has a lot of extra bracing added and the 2003 does not, so in our case, our 2002 may actually weight slightly more than our 2003.
EU, Japan, and Australia octanes are RON (research octane number), while US numbers are derived from an average of RON and MON (motor octane number), so a 95 RON in the UK is similar to 91 octane in the US.
The calculation for US octane is (R+M)/2. and the numbers typically are 8 to 10 numbers different. So a 91 RON would be about 83 MON or 87 octane in the US, which is the most common "regular" gas used by most cars.
The ECM's are different depending on the market, but how they vary seems to be a hidden secret.
Sorry about your fuel prices. US car owners constantly complain about gas prices, until they go to another country!
Quote from: Beachbum957 on November 27, 2021, 14:17Quote from: Joesson on November 27, 2021, 13:39Remember that the PFL <2003 is a lighter car than the FL 2003>.
There isn't much difference in the US models. The biggest difference was the weight of a 6 speed transmission compared to a 5 speed. Both of our cars are running manual 6 speed transmissions, have the same wheels and tires, and even the same small "bicycle" spare tire. But our 2002 has a lot of extra bracing added and the 2003 does not, so in our case, our 2002 may actually weight slightly more than our 2003.
OE, UK, PFL is lighter than the FL because of the transmission and the extra bracing on the FL, so an incorrect assumption on my part.
All F1 engine manufacturers have meanwhile confirmed that the new E10 reduces performance; less power, less range.
Cleaning the fuel system of my Husaberg. The gum is proving near impossible to clean from the fuel tap gauze. Had the taps soaking in a bowl with gasoline and.... it evaporated within 24 hrs!! Mind, it is cold here and 60% humidity.
Will get some agressive industrial degreaser. Should break down any residu, fingers crossed.
Not amused with modern gas.
I always use Shell V-Power ULD now at £1.639 per L, filled up this morning 34.22 Ltr @ £56.09 :( :( :(
I tend to ave late 30s MPG.
Not amused with modern gas.
Pay more, get less.
Quote from: TheTigerUK on February 4, 2022, 11:25I always use Shell V-Power ULD now at £1.639 per L, filled up this morning 34.22 Ltr @ £56.09 :( :( :(
I tend to ave late 30s MPG.
Hi John, I paid exactly that price last night down here - I only managed half a tank at that price. Thought, I'd see how Sapphire gets on with that for now but I don't think I'll be filling her up full at those prices. I may just put half and half in next visit.
Quote from: Chilli Girl on February 4, 2022, 15:04Quote from: TheTigerUK on February 4, 2022, 11:25I always use Shell V-Power ULD now at £1.639 per L, filled up this morning 34.22 Ltr @ £56.09 :( :( :(
I tend to ave late 30s MPG.
Hi John, I paid exactly that price last night down here - I only managed half a tank at that price. Thought, I'd see how Sapphire gets on with that for now but I don't think I'll be filling her up full at those prices. I may just put half and half in next visit.
I can't see me doing a full fill very often Jane, I sold a watch so I had a little extra cash in my pocket :) normally I put £20 in but I thought with a full fill I can check the MPG more accurately each time I fill.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F-yDKeya4SU
The sources aren't 100% kosher but it's still interesting and generally the guy doesn't spout too much sh*te, so it's interesting
Saw that a couple of days ago, actually watched it till the end...
Quote from: shnazzle on March 8, 2022, 11:53https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F-yDKeya4SU
The sources aren't 100% kosher but it's still interesting and generally the guy doesn't spout too much sh*te, so it's interesting
Have seen this guy's videos in the past, he talks sense and seems to know his stuff.
Ethanol used sold as for the environment has always primarily been about less dependence from oil.
Same thing we see now as an important reason to nót dampen the shockingly rapid fuel price rises. For western gvts it is a win-win-win: A politically cost free income generating incentive for the consumers to reduce the use.
What I am also interested in (now UK E10 introduction is a few months down the line) is: are there any examples of parts on the trusty VVTi 1.8 suffering yet as a consequence of the 'miracle' bio fuel (other thank water retention over time, which is a given in storage). I'm thinking fuel lines, injector seals things like that. Early days I guess, and as far as Toyota is concerned generally I take it they have said technically we can run it? (because I don't really trust the DVLA E10 compatibility tool at all - I consider that a random number generator really as it gives not detail or supporting evidence). A couple of vehicles I owned up until the middle of last year weren't compatible at all (mid1990s Suzuki and 90's K-series Rover block in a Caterham) - so I was pleased to hear Toyotas and Honda's post y2k should be 'safe' if filled up with the new stuff in comparison - but in reality, I really don't know how true this is long-term. Time will tell I am sure.
Welcome by the way. My '99 CB500 will remain on E5 and that was also backed up by my bike mechanic too :o
Yes quite right too for bikes - even my 2017 Ducati Supersport has to stay on E5 (in fact all Ducatis do really) - I guess its not to bad for bikes for 'fair weather riders' like me, as I don't do that many miles on them. My little 125 Honda Monkey summer commuter is fine on E10 though as thats a 2018 and Honda have been geared-up for E10 for a while now, especially on their 125's & 250s, and thanks for the welcome - what a great little forum ;)
Been covered on here a few times.
As you say too early to tell.
Will it run on e10? Yes.
Optimally? No.
Quote from: A7DUO on March 13, 2022, 22:48Yes quite right too for bikes - even my 2017 Ducati Supersport has to stay on E5 (in fact all Ducatis do really) - I guess its not to bad for bikes for 'fair weather riders' like me, as I don't do that many miles on them. My little 125 Honda Monkey summer commuter is fine on E10 though as thats a 2018 and Honda have been geared-up for E10 for a while now, especially on their 125's & 250s, and thanks for the welcome - what a great little forum ;)
My 2005 zx6r has to stay on E5, 2007 onwards are ok for E10 according to Kawasaki
Rob
Quote from: Ardent on March 14, 2022, 07:49Been covered on here a few times.
As you say too early to tell.
Will it run on e10? Yes.
Optimally? No.
Will you be able to tell the difference? Probably not on modern cars.
Most reports of changes are more anecdotal than definitive. For example, the actual measured energy difference be tween E10 and ethanol free is 3%. The repeatability of vehicle fuel mileage measurement is no better than +/- 2% even under laboratory chassis dyno conditions. All things being equal, any difference will be
very hard to measure.
The other factor is the electronics and O2 sensors adjust for different conditions, so that can mask any change as well.
Quote from: Beachbum957 on March 14, 2022, 13:41Will you be able to tell the difference? Probably not on modern cars.
Most reports of changes are more anecdotal than definitive. For example, the actual measured energy difference be tween E10 and ethanol free is 3%. The repeatability of vehicle fuel mileage measurement is no better than +/- 2% even under laboratory chassis dyno conditions. All things being equal, any difference will be very hard to measure.
The other factor is the electronics and O2 sensors adjust for different conditions, so that can mask any change as well.
Done to near death this.
Modern sensors will adapt to the fuel so mask it yes.
For the rest the ´noticeble´ is about how sensitive the driver is ánd about what he/she chooses to want to believe.
Just like with different tyres, geometry set up, some kilos more/less in the frump.
Just came back with the old Volvo 340 and it is most definitely noticeble. The 1.4 Renault engine has ´hotter´ cams, sports filter and less restrictive exhaust. It is véry sensitive to the fuel used. On 95 (no ethanol) it ´dieseled´ upon switching off. On E5 (95) it does not. On E10 there is an almost flat spot when the second stage opens.
Also to keep up the same speed up steep mountain passes it needs to switched to ´sports´ earlier on E10 than on zero ethanol.
So you can bet there is a difference.
Just masked and easier to miss/ignore with modern power house engines.
Quote from: Beachbum957 on March 14, 2022, 13:41Will you be able to tell the difference? Probably not on modern cars.
Might be true on a "modern" car MR2s are not modern.
My daily is 8 years old. A lot newer than my 2. But that is not really modern now either.
I could certainly tell the difference when the daily was fed some e10. And reflected in my mpg stats.
Quote from: Ardent on March 14, 2022, 17:12Might be true on a "modern" car MR2s are not modern.
My daily is 8 years old. A lot newer than my 2. But that is not really modern now either.
I could certainly tell the difference when the daily was fed some e10. And reflected in my mpg stats.
8 y.o. is at least a gen younger than the MR2. Has a newer gen OBD2 (code storing memory!*) too ánd should meet twó emisslon levels tougher.
For mé a red neon warning is the übergründlich Mercedes
´not E10 compatible´ list which is a quite clear ´88 and pre RüF cat, cut off.
E5 is probably too low a % to upset the apple cart or any parts but 10% is beyond the tolerance of the fuel design.
A ´chemical´ caveat: Ethanol is hygroscopic. Our much appreciated Jason used this to test the ethanol contents in pump stuff.
This has two sides for us. On the one it eliminates any water in the system by suckin´it up. The second, other side of that is that this renders the octane boosting of the stuff useless, in effect lowering the octane rating. If that is the case, the knock sensor of the engine will retard the ignition, prevent damage at the cost of performance.
* to clear the memory for MoT you need to drain the ECU capacitor. Is both off topic and illegal so not going deeper into it O:-)
so would I be right in thinking, form most, on a run - an Mr-2 mk.3 returns 50mpg at best on E5/Super and 45mpg on E10? Also was there any difference in fuel consumption on the facelift cars post 2003 or are they all the same generally? (although I suppose the 6th gear post 2003 could save a few MPG's on a run as it is a higher ratio over the 5 speed that added 6th)
I seem to average mid/late 30's using Shell E5
Quote from: A7DUO on March 16, 2022, 14:27so would I be right in thinking, form most, on a run - an Mr-2 mk.3 returns 50mpg at best on E5/Super and 45mpg on E10? Also was there any difference in fuel consumption on the facelift cars post 2003 or are they all the same generally? (although I suppose the 6th gear post 2003 could save a few MPG's on a run as it is a higher ratio over the 5 speed that added 6th)
Crikey, I don't think at best an MR2 has seen 50mpg - I did get 45mpg on a trip from southern England to Scotland once in my first facelift. My current pfl tends to be just over the 30mpg mark.
Quote from: Chilli Girl on March 16, 2022, 14:50Crikey, I don't think at best an MR2 has seen 50mpg - I did get 45mpg on a trip from southern England to Scotland once in my first facelift. My current pfl tends to be just over the 30mpg mark.
Fuel economy is as driver does ;D
Even mainly roof up vs mainly down makes a comparison futile.
For just about every make/model there are bell diagrams with a modal and average use with a wíííde max. - min. range at both sides.
E10 vs 100% petrol is only theoretically the caloric difference as the 1ZZ-FE is designed for 100% and suboptimal for anything else. About, a little over 5% is to be expected. Ditto the performance.
good points and good to know, thanks
44mpg the other day, nice run on M25 of 190 odd miles 19.76 litres fuel. Cant see a significant difference tbh between E5 and E10
Norman
I filled up yesterday (E5) and did a MPG check after I had stopped crying and my average was 31.5 MPG it goes to show I have been driving quite spiritedly of late, I shall have to go back to my more sedate steady driving :)
Quote from: TheTigerUK on May 7, 2022, 20:01I filled up yesterday (E5) and did a MPG check after I had stopped crying and my average was 31.5 MPG it goes to show I have been driving quite spiritedly of late, I shall have to go back to my more sedate steady driving :)
Using the throttle like an on/off switch, only way to do it in an mr2 :)
If you drive it gently 45+mpg is definitely attainable on a run.
Quote from: TheTigerUK on May 7, 2022, 20:01I filled up yesterday (E5) and did a MPG check after I had stopped crying and my average was 31.5 MPG it goes to show I have been driving quite spiritedly of late, I shall have to go back to my more sedate steady driving :)
It's the weight penalty of all your bling. ;)
Quote from: McMr2 on May 7, 2022, 20:31Using the throttle like an on/off switch, only way to do it in an mr2 :)
By Jove! Is there on ´off´ mode? Could you have enlightened me befóre I starved the engine of lubricating oil drifting?? >:D