Range? 4.5 V8
Range? 4.5 V8
Author
Discussion

mars

Original Poster:

10,107 posts

243 months

Monday 15th January 2007
quotequote all
How many (road) miles do you get from a tank of fuel? I filled up to the brim and having made a few short journeys over the week, mostly to demonstrate the effectiveness of the car to get from A to B without there being any time lapse at all , I reckon I'm looking at about 250 miles from a tank.

I haven't had a V8 before so I was a little taken aback. eek


Edited by mars on Monday 15th January 09:31

gazzab

21,640 posts

311 months

Monday 15th January 2007
quotequote all
Gosh you did well to get 250 !!!
I get a little less than that but you do get more on a long journey with little throttle action. There are claims of 25 mpg plus!

gazzab

21,640 posts

311 months

Monday 15th January 2007
quotequote all
Isnt yours remapped ?
You should be geting better than us normal 4.5s.

simonkd

1,387 posts

260 months

Monday 15th January 2007
quotequote all
That's nearly 17mpg, not bad if you were putting the car through it's paces over 250 miles.
Regards
Simon

c3ber

4,714 posts

252 months

Monday 15th January 2007
quotequote all
filled up three times in three days so you need to drive a little harder to drop your fuel figures.

FUBAR

17,065 posts

267 months

Monday 15th January 2007
quotequote all
I allow 200 miles per tank to take account for 'spitited' driving. And also 'cos I dont trust the fuel gauge and dont like to let it drop too near the 'empty' mark.

I expect if I was on a long run, and was sensible (me? never! hehe) it may stretch to 250 miles?

simonsparrow

1,599 posts

291 months

Monday 15th January 2007
quotequote all
Thats probably about right. I get about 220 to a tank in a mixture of motorway and London traffic. Have seen almost 300 miles to a tank on the way to LM at a steady 80-100mph.

I'm curious, do any of the people who have had re-maps or Emerald ECUs seen an improvment in fuel consumption? I recall when Evo installed an Emerald ECU on their 340R they went from 20 to 27mpg with the same driving style.

Cyclone1

2,614 posts

275 months

Monday 15th January 2007
quotequote all
It should do 15mpg ish on short journeys with spirited driving (e.g. 10-15mile journeys each way), on longer journeys with spirited driving nearer 20mpg, and on the M1 it should do 25mpg.

Jules.

TooTall Paul

938 posts

276 months

Monday 15th January 2007
quotequote all
simonsparrow said:
Thats probably about right. I get about 220 to a tank in a mixture of motorway and London traffic. Have seen almost 300 miles to a tank on the way to LM at a steady 80-100mph.

I'm curious, do any of the people who have had re-maps or Emerald ECUs seen an improvment in fuel consumption? I recall when Evo installed an Emerald ECU on their 340R they went from 20 to 27mpg with the same driving style.


I've seen vast improvements from having mine mapped etc, i'm getting up to 300 miles to the tank, on the other hand i've seen 5 mpg when pushing it

Steve_T

6,356 posts

301 months

Monday 15th January 2007
quotequote all
Mapping does help, since the standard 4.5 mapping is quite rich. I definitely noticed an improvement in fuel consumption post mapping, but it's not exactly a strong point of the Cerb anyway. I just tend to fill her up at 1/4 left on the gauge. I get 18-20 mpg most of the time, more over decent distances, less when booting it.

Steve.

mars

Original Poster:

10,107 posts

243 months

Monday 15th January 2007
quotequote all
The Emerald certainly improved the economy of my Se7en - quite noticeably, however the real gains were made after the mapping session. Whilst it's true that the mapping gave me lots more power and definitely better economy, I bought a wideband lambda and started to log the AFR against the speed and load sites, and made a few small changes to the map from there. That gave me even better economy. I went from about 180 miles to a tank (much smaller tank than the Cerb) to about 220 miles.

And of course, you're right that I was "entertaining" my passengers on relatively short runs which would definitely drink more thirstily but I think my surprise was going from 220 miles for a 25 quid tank to about 250 miles for (about) a 60 quid tank.

Not complaining. Just curious. It's only money. You can always make more but you can't get more "life".

Steve_T

6,356 posts

301 months

Monday 15th January 2007
quotequote all
How heavy was the seven Mars? - I should think that has a major bearing on it.

mars

Original Poster:

10,107 posts

243 months

Monday 15th January 2007
quotequote all
Steve_T said:
How heavy was the seven Mars? - I should think that has a major bearing on it.
I don't disagree. I wasn't searching for reasons. It's a V8 with more than double the capacity and the whole car is slightly more than double the weight.

thegreengoblet

1,040 posts

245 months

Monday 15th January 2007
quotequote all
Steve_T said:
I just tend to fill her up at 1/4 left on the gauge.


Top Tip.
I try and never let her get below 1/4 tank following a recent "oh sh*t, I've run out of petrol" incident. The guage isn't that reliable! In fact I now carry a full can of Tesco 99 in the boot.

Steve_T said:
I get 18-20 mpg most of the time, more over decent distances, less when booting it.


Similar for me. 14 mpg most of the time and 17 mpg for a longer runs involving motorways.

Steve_T

6,356 posts

301 months

Monday 15th January 2007
quotequote all
Ought to have said, my gauge does seem to be reliable (it moves in a predictable manner - unusual from what I hear), but if it wasn't I'd go for the mileage approach too. I have a second rule, which is to fill to the brim before 5pm on trips in France, to avoid being stranded. I've done the running on fumes looking for a hotel at 1am thing and I don't recommend that!

Steve.

Scrooloose

888 posts

245 months

Monday 15th January 2007
quotequote all
I reckon that i get 120/130 miles tops from a full tank.

That's just driving to and from work everyday, most of which is around 30mph.

On a long run i see much better economy at normal speeds 60/70mph.

This drops to a pathetic level when cruising at 120 for long periods.

I've got an Emerald ECU and the car is putting out about 391bhp at the fly.....

RUSSELLM

6,002 posts

276 months

Monday 15th January 2007
quotequote all
I do short runs to work and back, and get 150 miles out of a tank (12mpg).

Last year in Italy I managed 27mpg on the motorway driving.

Steve_T

6,356 posts

301 months

Monday 15th January 2007
quotequote all
Scrooloose said:
I reckon that i get 120/130 miles tops from a full tank.

That's just driving to and from work everyday, most of which is around 30mph.

On a long run i see much better economy at normal speeds 60/70mph.

This drops to a pathetic level when cruising at 120 for long periods.

I've got an Emerald ECU and the car is putting out about 391bhp at the fly.....


Must confess that I don't do much town only driving in the Cerb, but that does seem really low fuel economy. Have you got lambda plumbed in to the Emerald, it might help your economy. (I believe this has been supported for a while, but don't know if this is part of the current Cerb implementation)

Steve.


Edited by Steve_T on Monday 15th January 14:27

mars

Original Poster:

10,107 posts

243 months

Monday 15th January 2007
quotequote all
The Emerald will run a normal narrowband lambda but these devices only work around stoic values, plus or minus a very small percentage, and their influence on the map is simply to say "too rich" or "too lean" but not to say how far rich or lean it is.

For max power, the engine will be mapped marginally rich, too rich for the narrowband lambda's preference, so it will always try to pull you towards stioc, effectively leaning-off your map. This is why (I think) the Emerald will probably not be running in closed loop. If it were, then you would never be running on the values in the map that were input at the mapping session.

If you hook up a wideband lambda (they are cheap now - and I can put you in touch with a guy who can source them even cheaper than most others), and attach that to the Emerald's AUX input, you can accurately measure your AFR. This way you can determine whether you are close to your *required* AFR and not simply either side of stoic. Once you have tuned the map so that at each speed & load site you are achieving your chosen AFR, you will be achieving the best economy for the map.

Sounds complex, but it's really simple.

The next gen Emeralds will do self-mapping according to your chosen AFR values. Not sure when this will be applied to the AJP version of the Emerald though. It's a little different to the "conventional" Emerald owing to the unusual angle of the AJP "V". It might be that the software/firmware is universal. I haven't contacted Emerald yet to ask. I haven't had any tweaking time with the new car yet... and I don't know what the target AFRs should be for this engine. I suppose I would start by measuring what AFRs are being output today because the engine runs well and as it's been mapped already by trackcar it's bound to be right.

I'm not sure how you'd get on mapping with 2 wideband lambdas. It's almost unecessary to have 2 lambdas other than to check you are getting consistent results from both (as you have mentioned above). For mapping, you cannot make the ECU delivery different fuelling to each bank so as long as you can run a few tests against the consistency of your two banks, you only really need map with one wideband.

Captain Beaky

1,389 posts

313 months

Monday 15th January 2007
quotequote all
mars said:

The next gen Emeralds will do self-mapping according to your chosen AFR values. Not sure when this will be applied to the AJP version of the Emerald though.


When I spoke to Jools recently I got the impression that this is possible - in fact has was busy plumbing a wideband sensor in at the time. It will need a firware upgrade for older Emeralds (like mine).