Aurion average fuel consumption approximation

[conroe]

Very extensive list indeed. Though, I hope you've made the error adjustment when calculating the fuel consumption running 235/40 18, since it has smaller rolling diameter than the 225/45 18, which again is about 1% smaller than the 215/55 17. The correct size for 18" rim is 235/45 18.

I'm interested to know your opinion with the Kumho KU27. For the life of me, I could not locate them anywhere in sydney, bar one in Penrith @ $265, so I ended up with the KU21 @ $180 instead.

the 1-2% difference will only make 0.1L/100km of difference.

225/45R18 are hard to source, since the only car with that size as standard (from what i know) is the Mazda RX8. Since they aren't mass produced, they will have a higher price.

225/45R18 for KU27 i got quoted at $272. I will write up a review soon and post it in this Tyres/Reviews.

Did you get the KU21 in 225/45R18 or 235/45R18?

No, according to the trye calculator, it is a little more than that.

http://www.1010tires.com/TireSizeCalculator.asp?action=submit

235/40 18 is out by almost 3.5%. Which means for every 100kms the odometer is showing, you've only travelled 96.5kms, compare to the standard rim size of 215/55 17 and in comparison the 225/45 18 is out by about 1.3%.

I actually did some research before I decided to go with the 225/45 18s. At the time one of the Jax stores in Sydney had a set of the KU27 for $265 each. But I decided to save the $85 x4 and went for the KU31 instead.

It took a week of getting use to the noise and it seems fine now. Although I'd like to get my hands on the KU39 for my next set.

Edited October 20, 2010 by conroe

[DeafDave76]

When I picked it up, it had full tank. It took about 15 days to get it to empty. I picked it up on 28th September and it went empty on last saturday 16th October. I then refilled it with BP Ultimate and now all the sudden nearly a week later i had just gone thru a quarter of tank. Hmm maybe it was the love for pedal to metal for power that caused my fuel usage to go up a bit.

[Vijith555]

Well my pile of receipts which I haven't entered into my spreadsheet was starting to get bigger in size, and seeing that there was another thread regarding fuel consumption, I figured I may as well do this again.

Oh noes though. My fuel consumption has increased by 0.2l/100km over the last 12,000km or there abouts. Either way though, it sure beats what my last Aurion was doing around the same point in it's life (was getting about 11.66L/100km after driving the last Aurion approximately 29,000km).

TRD Fuel Consumption (Excel Spreadsheet)

- At 5313km, my total fuel used was 500.99L and my average fuel consumption was 9.43L/100km

- At 9532km, my total fuel used was 909.91L and my average fuel consumption was 9.55L/100km

- At 17650km, my total fuel used was 1685.71L and my average fuel consumption was 9.55L/100km

- At 29083km, my total fuel used was 2837.00L and my average fuel consumption was 9.75L/100km

I just bought a 08' ZR6 few days back..i just love it..its got 15,200kms on the clock and been driving the whole weekend..i can see the fuel consumption stays between 9.7 to 10.5 depending on way i take off the lights..i am really happy with the fuel consumption with the Aurion because I am coming from a 02' V6 Camry which has higher fuel consumption that to with lot less power. I quite often put my foot down (heavy footed) but still got the tank avg around 9.9 most of the time which is nice..

And regards to your TRD Aurion DJKOR, i think thats really impressive consumption with all that power :)

[Aloysius]

First a general question:

Given all the data do we conclude that the "Tank Average" display is on the money or what?

Second:

Very hard to compare one persons driving with anothers particularly the City/Country divide.

I often drive 500k to Brisbane the first part of the trip is a little hilly and I don't use the Cruise - it's more economic to let the car speed up down hill and slow back a tad uphill. On this section the display hands me about 8.3l /100km that's driving as close to 107 as I can.

Once i hit the dual carriageway 110 zone I set cruise at 117 and have frequently arrived at the outskits of Brisbane with displays of 6.8 to 7.2.

It's a Presara with standard Michelin tyres inflated to 38 - 40 psi

I think this is stunning economy.

While towing a small poptop van - about 1400kg - at 80 - 90kph - no cruise - I get between 12.5 and 15.8 l/100

[Buff Hamster]

First a general question:

Given all the data do we conclude that the "Tank Average" display is on the money or what?

Second:

Very hard to compare one persons driving with anothers particularly the City/Country divide.

I often drive 500k to Brisbane the first part of the trip is a little hilly and I don't use the Cruise - it's more economic to let the car speed up down hill and slow back a tad uphill. On this section the display hands me about 8.3l /100km that's driving as close to 107 as I can.

Once i hit the dual carriageway 110 zone I set cruise at 117 and have frequently arrived at the outskits of Brisbane with displays of 6.8 to 7.2.

It's a Presara with standard Michelin tyres inflated to 38 - 40 psi

I think this is stunning economy.

While towing a small poptop van - about 1400kg - at 80 - 90kph - no cruise - I get between 12.5 and 15.8 l/100

1. Price of fuel will change so it's impossible to use price as the tank average. It's how many KMs you travel in 1 tank.

2. Everyone's fuel ecc will be different because of too many various reasons. City/country driving, how fast your accelerate, you weight of car, psi of tyres, wind speed, windows down or up etc.

Also using the fuel ecc on the speedo area is inaccurate. The best method to check for fuel ecc is see how many litres you use when at the pump and how many KMs you travel.

[Aloysius]

First a general question:

Given all the data do we conclude that the "Tank Average" display is on the money or what?

Second:

Very hard to compare one persons driving with anothers particularly the City/Country divide.

I often drive 500k to Brisbane the first part of the trip is a little hilly and I don't use the Cruise - it's more economic to let the car speed up down hill and slow back a tad uphill. On this section the display hands me about 8.3l /100km that's driving as close to 107 as I can.

Once i hit the dual carriageway 110 zone I set cruise at 117 and have frequently arrived at the outskits of Brisbane with displays of 6.8 to 7.2.

It's a Presara with standard Michelin tyres inflated to 38 - 40 psi

I think this is stunning economy.

While towing a small poptop van - about 1400kg - at 80 - 90kph - no cruise - I get between 12.5 and 15.8 l/100

1. Price of fuel will change so it's impossible to use price as the tank average. It's how many KMs you travel in 1 tank.

2. Everyone's fuel ecc will be different because of too many various reasons. City/country driving, how fast your accelerate, you weight of car, psi of tyres, wind speed, windows down or up etc.

Also using the fuel ecc on the speedo area is inaccurate. The best method to check for fuel ecc is see how many litres you use when at the pump and how many KMs you travel.

No argument here but I would like to know if folks think their ecomy displayed is reasonably accurate.

I should also add to my original post that all figures I quoted were using 98 octane fuel - it's actually cheaper per Km.

[Morequick]

I've found through receipt calculations that the fuel consumption readout on the speedo is optimistic to the range of 0.4-0.6litres/100km.

So the "actual" consumption would be closer to whatever number your read +0.6ltrs/100km.

[fuel miser]

Options don't count, they are like a**holes - every one has one.

The facts are (and I have said them before).

Anyone who thinks they can refill the tank to the same level every time is unrealistic. Fill to the first click, who hasn't had the bowser click off with only a few dollars put into the tank, ambient temp effect the expansion rate of fuel, etc.

Anyone who thinks the odometer readings is accurate doesn't consider variations in tire pressure, non standard tire effects, that every digital reading has at best a +/- error normally 2-3% plus a +/- of at least 1 of the least significant digit, etc.

The fuel gauge is a bi-metal device and indicates buy heating this strip, probably the least accurate device in the car after the driver.

The cars fuel economy is measured by the amount of fuel used through injector #1 then most likely multiplied by 6 to get the total and then used in the usual fuel calculation to get its result. Multiplying the injector fuel usage increases any error and then the odometer measurement with its own inaccuracy is used also. Answer is a bad result.

Fuel receipts are no more accurate than the cars own economy calculation. They are both only best guess estimations.

But please feel free to dispute these facts, you wont be the first.

[DJKOR]

But please feel free to dispute these facts, you wont be the first.

Why would we need to dispute those facts. Yes they are true, but so what if your average fuel calculation is going to be off by a small amount? For comparative purposes, the differences by around 1 litre per 100km will be more obvious showing once person getting a higher/lower fuel consumption than another. We aren't compiling figures for a scientific report.

[fuel miser]

yes Daryl, I thought you would be the first to reply.

you may spend your time on the site, but there a new members all the time that may not have taken the time to read all the previous posts "for those who keep receipts".

nor may they have read the other threads that reference the cars economy calculation.

open minds, free unbiased opinions, freedom of speach are the back bone of a truely progress site.

as for scientific research, there is none of that used to back anything anyone writes in the forums.

whilst the younger generation alway think they know best, consider this - if it wasn't for us older basteds who did the hard yards to get the technology and standard of living your generation take for granted where would we be now.

please respond with some patronising reply.

[DJKOR]

And I knew you would come back with a response like that.

What the heck is your problem mate. Once again I have made a reply that is not disagreeing with your own reply but I am just stating the point that even though the calculations presented here are inaccurate, it's enough for people here to make a general comparison. If our figures are going to be off slightly, what exactly are we losing?

You always turn simple statements of mine into something that makes it look like I'm trying to argue with you.

[fuel miser]

freedom of speech

i dont actually have anything against you Daryl.

you are more influenutal than most on the forum by your shear persistance in trying to help others, for that - well done and continue the great work.

as a technical analyist I am aware of how much data is needed to get a valid result. I am a realist also.

Edited October 29, 2010 by fuel miser

[DJKOR]

freedom of speach

Still doesn't explain what your issue with me is. I have never stated that I have any issues with you or any of your replies now and in the past. My replies to you either make a clear and obvious joke, or to explain the reasons for my actions. Never do they state what you have said is incorrect nor do I patronise you.

[SCOOTA44]

In my line of work the ecconomy of the Aurion is far superior to any other vehicle, having driven Fords in the past with their poor ecconomy 12- 15 l/100km there should be no argument that the Aurion is the best.

[Aloysius]

I've found through receipt calculations that the fuel consumption readout on the speedo is optimistic to the range of 0.4-0.6litres/100km.

So the "actual" consumption would be closer to whatever number your read +0.6ltrs/100km.

Aah thankyou that was the answer was looking for!!

If that is the case as some other poster noted then the Aurion does very well when compared to other vehicles I have owned.

The next best was a regular Mitsubishi Magn a V6 which indicated around 8.5 l / 100 on the same trip.

PS I didn't want to start WW3 with my queries!!

[DJKOR]

No I was going to give up on all this because of the whole deal with my figures not being perfect, thus pointless, however I will still continue with an update. Now I do understand that there can be many variables that can affect the final figure produced here, but I reckon I have reasonable justification to state my figures. For example:

1) The amount you fill up on each fuel tank can have some variation depending on environmental conditions etc. This may cause you to to more or less fuel in the tank at each fill. Well my response is that my fuel consumption figures as stated in this post are an average over 6378 litres of fuel. With that amount of fuel used to calculate the average, I'm pretty sure being off by a litre or two is going to throw things out of proportion by much.

2) The distance travelled may not be an accurate representation due to inaccuracies in the speedo etc. This is one factor that can really affect the final figures, but we can't have a perfect world can we. Besides, I'm not doing this for scientific research, so the readings provided by my odometer are sufficient for this purpose.

So with that out of the way, here are my figures:

TRD Fuel Consumption (Excel Spreadsheet)

- At 5313km, my total fuel used was 500.99L and my average fuel consumption was 9.43L/100km

- At 9532km, my total fuel used was 909.91L and my average fuel consumption was 9.55L/100km

- At 17650km, my total fuel used was 1685.71L and my average fuel consumption was 9.55L/100km

- At 29083km, my total fuel used was 2837.00L and my average fuel consumption was 9.75L/100km

- At 43105km, my total fuel used was 4230.59L and my average fuel consumption was 9.81L/100km

- At 64746km, my total fuel used was 6378.71L and my average fuel consumption was 9.85L/100km

Fuel consumption is still increasing but still good enough for me, especially considering that at the same distance travelled with my old Sportivo SX6, I was getting 10.98L/100km.

[11'AurionAtx]

Had my new ATX delivered with a full tank (no idea what fuel) and got about 600 km's from that tank, I than put in a small amount (shell vpower) to get me through a couple of days till my fuel card arrived and filled up from near on empty (over 60L) with shell E10. Drove with the air con on non stop and all city driving and got just over 550km's. Today I filled up from near on empty with shell 95. Car has 1100km's on it thus far.

I always test a few different fuels (refineries) in my own cars when new as I have found varied results with different manufacturers and the end result can be as high as an extra 80km's from a single tank. With the Aurion I am limited to shell due to company car policy with my workplace.

[VF-X]

Wow... With all these figures coming, I really need to clarify what people consider city / free way driving as my figures can be considered ''f***ed''.

Although I had 9-10L average of fuel cons. last time I went out of town.

[wushoes]

Drove from Melbourne to Port Campbell (12 Apostles) today via Great Ocean Road booting it all the way down giving it heaps around the twisty and windy bends and hairpins. I accidentally filled up with RON 91 today - I usually use RON 95 so was expecting bad results.

520 km round trip - 121 km cruising range left plus whatever fuel is left after zero cruising range. Average fuel consumption of 8.7 L/100 km. Not bad.

[TRD468]

I get around 10L/100km in stop start traffic/ city driving and i get about 8L/100km on the motorway, doin bout 120 km/h. I also tow a trailer which is about 750 kilo's and i average 12-13 L/100km's which i am very pleased about. Aurion is very economical compare to a holden or ford

[phantompisser]

I get around 10L/100km in stop start traffic/ city driving and i get about 8L/100km on the motorway, doin bout 120 km/h. I also tow a trailer which is about 750 kilo's and i average 12-13 L/100km's which i am very pleased about. Aurion is very economical compare to a holden or ford

What the hell am I doing wrong ? I get 14L/100km . Car has done 120K . Just had the fuel injectors cleaned and the tyre pressure is always correct . Car is seviced every 7500km . The best ever consumption I've ever got was 9L/100km on a long country drive sitting on 120 which is within 15% of you but my stop start everyday city driving is 40% thirstier . 14L/100km was what I used to get with my AU station wagon that had 150k on it by the time I sold it .

[Buff Hamster]

I get around 10L/100km in stop start traffic/ city driving and i get about 8L/100km on the motorway, doin bout 120 km/h. I also tow a trailer which is about 750 kilo's and i average 12-13 L/100km's which i am very pleased about. Aurion is very economical compare to a holden or ford

What the hell am I doing wrong ? I get 14L/100km . Car has done 120K . Just had the fuel injectors cleaned and the tyre pressure is always correct . Car is seviced every 7500km . The best ever consumption I've ever got was 9L/100km on a long country drive sitting on 120 which is within 15% of you but my stop start everyday city driving is 40% thirstier . 14L/100km was what I used to get with my AU station wagon that had 150k on it by the time I sold it .

What tyre pressure do you use? What engine oil do you use? Is your accelerator a on/off switch? I only use 11L/100km in the city and 7.5L/100km on the freeway and this is before i changed my engine oil to 5w30. I will find out next week how the new oil helps with my fuel ecc.

[CONROD]

Our consumption is almost dead inline with you (toyota pride). Just recently took a run from Newcastle to Melbourne. Filled up on the outskirts of Sydney and made it all the way to Laverton VIC (western ring road) on one tank before the fuel light came on and that was sitting on 110-115kph cruise control all the way,using 95 octane. Trip computer was saying 7.1 L/100 at one stage out around Gundagai,ended up 7.3 L/100 on the Western ring road prior to stopping for fuel.

Just thought I would add my 2 cents worth,

take care;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;

[Steven]

I get between 13-14L around town on BP ultimate with NO traffic just suburban driving, and up to 14.5L on regular. I don't boot it everywhere either, actually I'm very sedate. Those are the figures from the trip computer though if that has any effect?

Changing spark plugs and oil fairly soonish once they arrive and I get some free time, hoping that helps things. I run around 36PSI in the tyres.

Only thing I can assume for my "economy" is larger I'm a heavy ****d lad (125kg), with a few stereo amplifiers in the boot. Looking at other people's figures here I would still have assumed I'd get at least 12L per 100km.

***** sucks, all my cars end up chewing more fuel than they should. I bet if I bought a Nissan Leaf I'd still chew petrol <_<

[ALEXH-]

I get between 13-14L around town on BP ultimate with NO traffic just suburban driving, and up to 14.5L on regular. I don't boot it everywhere either, actually I'm very sedate. Those are the figures from the trip computer though if that has any effect?

Changing spark plugs and oil fairly soonish once they arrive and I get some free time, hoping that helps things. I run around 36PSI in the tyres.

Only thing I can assume for my "economy" is larger I'm a heavy ****d lad (125kg), with a few stereo amplifiers in the boot. Looking at other people's figures here I would still have assumed I'd get at least 12L per 100km.

***** sucks, all my cars end up chewing more fuel than they should. I bet if I bought a Nissan Leaf I'd still chew petrol <_<

That's alot of fuel. How many kms has your car done? I just clocked over 45,000 mark and around Gold Coast (traffic lights + heavy traffic) I get about 9.9 - 10.2 average and highway use goes down as low as 6.8 using 98 octane. I haven't seen mine go past 11.1L and I'm being honest. My tyre pressure is around 37 - 38psi.