Yeah, found it now. Bit obvious really. :-)
There was some oil in there but below the level shown in the Haynes so I've topped it up. Air filter looks clean enough but will replace on general principles seeing as they're probably about 5p for a crate of a hundred.
But the consumption figure calculated between fill-ups is only accurate if the pump cuts off at more or less the same fuel tank level each time. Which is what I'm asking - how much variation is there between pumps in that cut-off point? Or even variation with the *same* pump at different times?
That's what I'm saying, if you run your car for a same mileage and returnm to the pump a few times, if you note the pump's stated delivery on it's dials when you hold the pump in smae psition etc you should get a comparison, provided your drivingis quite consistent and your mileage comparable.
Doesnt surprise me- its probably well out of tune, and the SU long overdue of a rebuild, new jet and needle- the needle is biased by a spring and rub together- effectively sawing away at each other.
Tim..
What, after 45,000 miles?
FWIW I think the little bastard has got a cat on it, if this adds anything.
Cat on the carb? haha
well, anything beginning with Cat would be good anywhere according to me ma's bf, but as for me, I don't think it makes a difference.
The message from "Billy H" contains these words:
Yes, on that particular model of Metro the did. 1.1 K-series engine, with an SU carburettor and a cat. No, really.
Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.
Ask the community — no account required