Hi,
I have a (european) Forrester 2.0 liter manually shifted. The fuel usage is always about 10 km/liter (=23.5 mpg). During long trips on the highway (not going above 120km/h (= 75mph) the economy can increase to 12 km/liter (=28 mpg).
I think this is quite high, are these numbers normal? Can the engine be tuned to be more economic?
greetings Rob
Which gallon are you converting to, Imperial or American?
The general rule for measur> Hi,
American, obviously, since he said 10 km/l was 23.5 mpg, (rather than
28.3)
Except that is a silly counter-intuitive measure. I prefer to say that my Subaru does 9 - 11.5 km/l and my BMW 16 - 21 km/l, rather than deal with numbers such as 5 - 6 l/100km.
-- Bruce
If I was the only one who preferred km/l to l/100km as a measure then you might have a point, but it seems that I am *far* from the only one.
Doesn't really bother me all that greatly since I can do the reciprocals to practical accuracy in my head anyway (or convert between F and C depending on who I'm talking to), but I do prefer km/l for my own purposes.
Perhaps it's a difference in attitides to driving? For Europeans, driving is very expensive, so they only drive as much as they really have to. When faced with a necessary journey the question is "How much of that expensive fuel do I need?". For we antipodeans (and Americans), on the other hand, the question is "I've filled the tank, where can I get to before I need to worry about looking for a town with a gas station?"
-- Bruce
Since Messeurs "Shit" and Hoult are being less than helpful today, I thought I'd chime in and say that
-- Dominic Richens | snipped-for-privacy@alumni.uottawa.ca "If you're not *outraged*, you're not paying attention!"
Hi, I have an Eropean Forester 2.0 as well. Fuel consumption as mentioned is normal and i.a.w. the owners manual. To "shit happens in a Renault" (quite an indication of intelligence) and Bruce: stop this non-discussion and answer the question. Greetings Wabby
"robf" schreef in bericht news:bqdmro$31q$ snipped-for-privacy@news.cistron.nl...
I would be interested to hear your explaination of this.
Fair enough.
This is a sweeping statement and I guess another personal view?
You really get used to any measument, mpg, L/100 km or km/L. All 3 are interchangeable for me, it's like speaking 3 languages. By the way, to convert mpg (Can. gallon) to L/100 km and back, divide 282.5 by the number, 282.5 divided by mpg gives L/100 km, and vice versa. Ed B.
I presume you are using these figures as examples, 21 km/l is 59 mpg (Can gallon) or 47 mpg (US gallon), only the BMW Isetta would maybe get that !
Yep, like converting pounds, shillings and pence to dollars, however what your suggesting is buying a colour TV and watching it in black and white.
Your rules mean noth> You really get used to any measument, mpg, L/100 km or km/L. All 3 are
In fact my BMW R1100RT does that (or even a little better) on the open road with two people and luggage, if I stick to no more than 105 - 110 km/h and am careful with the throttle while overtaking.
It does 16 km/l on the 5 km trips from home to work, where the engine doesn't get a chance to warm up properly.
The figures for my Subaru Legacy 250T (2.5l auto wagon) are also correct.
-- Bruce
?! sorry, don't get the metaphor ?!
I like l/100km because it makes it easy (in Canada) to figure out how much $$ (also CDN) it's going to cost me for a given trip. km/l requires me to do fancy division.
(and it's "you're", the contraction of "you are", not "your", the possessive form of "you")
-- Dominic Richens | snipped-for-privacy@alumni.uottawa.ca "If you're not *outraged*, you're not paying attention!"
MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.