Fuel consumption
Discussion
At risk of being drummed out of the forum for being a poor person, let me first state that this is a genuine question to which I have found no answer.
I noted today someone else posting about their car and mentioning the diabolical inefficiency of the engine in terms of the amount of fuel it uses.
I've just had three years of driving an SL55 AMG. It was not economical but in its defence, the engine was pulling over 2 tons, was 5.5 litre, supercharged, over 500 BHP and over 500 lbft of torque.
Now I've got a 4.3 Vantage - much lighter, naturally aspirated, much less power & much less torque - yet it is using more fuel than the Mercedes under the same driving conditions.
Whereas the Merc was giving about 17-18 on average over 1000 miles, the Vantage is returning 15 - 15.5. More than this, using "instant" readout, cruising at 80ish the Merc was high 20s/low 30s but the Vantage is again mid 20s at best.
Can anyone explain this to me?
I noted today someone else posting about their car and mentioning the diabolical inefficiency of the engine in terms of the amount of fuel it uses.
I've just had three years of driving an SL55 AMG. It was not economical but in its defence, the engine was pulling over 2 tons, was 5.5 litre, supercharged, over 500 BHP and over 500 lbft of torque.
Now I've got a 4.3 Vantage - much lighter, naturally aspirated, much less power & much less torque - yet it is using more fuel than the Mercedes under the same driving conditions.
Whereas the Merc was giving about 17-18 on average over 1000 miles, the Vantage is returning 15 - 15.5. More than this, using "instant" readout, cruising at 80ish the Merc was high 20s/low 30s but the Vantage is again mid 20s at best.
Can anyone explain this to me?
Variable valve timing and more modern engine design on the Merc, different gearing ratios, increased torque of the forced induction engine, having to rev the Aston harder to make progress and so on.
The Merc's slushbox would have automatically put you in the highest gear possible whenever possible as well.
The Merc's slushbox would have automatically put you in the highest gear possible whenever possible as well.
Actually money aside, the significant issue is range - when the V12 arrives to replace my V8, that's my big concern
If you're doing 500-700 miles a day, having to fill up every 200-250 is quite a big deal, not just in time but also worrying where the next station is and not risking going to empty.
If you're doing 500-700 miles a day, having to fill up every 200-250 is quite a big deal, not just in time but also worrying where the next station is and not risking going to empty.
yeti said:
Variable valve timing and more modern engine design on the Merc, different gearing ratios, increased torque of the forced induction engine, having to rev the Aston harder to make progress and so on.
The Merc's slushbox would have automatically put you in the highest gear possible whenever possible as well.
Agree on the first part - the Merc was a cruiser for sure, straight line it was quicker than the Vantage, but the latter is much more fun! The Merc's slushbox would have automatically put you in the highest gear possible whenever possible as well.
The auto box was smooth but in sport mode when it learned your style it was not prone to upshift too quickly - think it was limited to about the same maximum revs as the Aston and I did hit the limiter fairly regularly.
I've only had it two months, still learning about it (hence checking sometimes to see what it's returning) - the petrol consumption doesn't bother me, it's more bemusement!!
steveatesh said:
drmw said:
At risk of being drummed out of the forum for being a poor person,
god don't let Michael G see this, you'll be on his list!michael gould said:
its ok, i dont mind the occational poor person .......i had an SL55 previous to the DB9 and I agree with the OP....Astons are very thirsty
Maseratis were worse. My 4200 was shocking! Delibeartely low geared so it still pulled well in top...What a car for the money though!
yeti said:
michael gould said:
its ok, i dont mind the occational poor person .......i had an SL55 previous to the DB9 and I agree with the OP....Astons are very thirsty
Maseratis were worse. My 4200 was shocking! Delibeartely low geared so it still pulled well in top...What a car for the money though!
Jonby, to answer your post BR conversion consumption figures. To be boring I decided to undertake a 60 mile plus drive and stay within the confines of the speed limit. The roads were a bit of this and that, so dull I even switched on the music. Believe me 30.2 mpg! Never before and never again. My S seems to hover around 22mpg, prior to the BR exhaust job that figure was probably about 20mpg. So if you are fancying another 34 bhp based on fuel consumption figures ,go for it.
Driving upto Yorkshire this weekend for some fun and frolics , will keep you posted on both the car and my fuel consumption!
Driving upto Yorkshire this weekend for some fun and frolics , will keep you posted on both the car and my fuel consumption!
yeti said:
michael gould said:
its ok, i dont mind the occational poor person .......i had an SL55 previous to the DB9 and I agree with the OP....Astons are very thirsty
Maseratis were worse. My 4200 was shocking! Delibeartely low geared so it still pulled well in top...What a car for the money though!
I think I know where you are coming from Lewis. We went for a bit of a Hoon to Beaulieu last Sunday. I simply cannot resist the urge to unleash the ponies, including my new high spirited ones!! Honestly I have little or no interest in fuel consumption, as long as she is happy heading for rev limiter that will do for me.
yeti said:
jonby said:
what kind of effect do the BR mods to manifolds, cams, cats, etc have on consumption ?
Extra torque for no extra engine load means you'll be more economical. But will the mods change your driving style..? That's the question and the biggest factor
That;s what I've found with chipping my diesel audis - great on a long run but you are tempted to drive more aggressively on the country lanes
my big fear is range on a continental tour- I guess the answer is on long motorway runs, I may be better off, certainly should be no worse. On the twisties.......
Gassing Station | Aston Martin | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff