Outer Limits 4x4 Board

Just thought we could all make some comparisons to see where some people are doing better than others, and how they've done it. I'm thinking of making some polution gear disappear, help it run better ect. Also taking about diff ratios, tyre diameters, aspiration, the list gos on.

Lets us know your;
-Engine size
-Year/Model
-Aspiration (if not factory)
-Ks you expect -on the highway -in the city -in the bush
-What you've done to make it better/worse

My Rangies a 3.5lt '89, bog stock ,
70lts gets me 420ks... or 6ks per litre
Not 100% on city/bush yet, but obviously less

S111 - 109"
186ci 3.0lt
1600kg soft top loaded
high speed transfer case - 2900 @ 100Kph
31" cheese cutters
70 litre = 500k min (hwy)

removed engine fan for noise but also good for econ

also i dont know if this is right but hot air = better economy
ie: snorkles not the best for hwy
big tyres suck
power steer + air con suck
full time 4wd sucks
old school efi sucks
carbies suck
extra weight sucks

91 3.5 V8 Disco, 35's 4.11's, average 200-250k's 60-70l's, off road, usually 150-200k's.
What do i do about it? Nothing. It's a weekend car anyway!

300 tdi in defender ute 35's, 2.5 straight off the turbo. approx 11l/100km
v8 4.4 fuel injected petrol, extractor ,no mech fan, rover heads, mild cam, lt95 box, on 31's around 18l/100km
38's approx 20-25l/100km (all off road and freway trip s)

honda city - 1l 4cyl. extra wieght carrying passengers, always redlined snapped through the gears, 20 l tank- 280 km WTF..????

110 County - 4BD1 NA ISUZU Diesel (3.9L):
road pattern 235/85/16's
Best 8.2L/100km
Worst 13.6L/100km
Average 9.5L/100km

Figures didn't change much when I switched to 33" MTRs (average maybe 9.7 instead of 9.5).

109" IIA ute - 2.25D
33" MTRs
Average 9L/100km

Same truck when it had a 2.25P averaged 15-17L/100km

popeye wrote: 1600kg soft top loaded

Are you sure? - I doubt that for a military 109 - more like 1800+

Are you sure? - I doubt that for a military 109 - more like 1800+

yeah, its about right. I have weighed it twice, same both times.
no way 1800kg that is fat ???

if anything the mil spec would be lighter as they are stripped of anything not essential.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
94 3.9 V8 Disco,
34's 4.11's,
Snorkel
Highway 5.5 kpl.
City ~ 5 kpl
Bush - who knows the wheels always travel further than the actual distance covered anyway

Thsi is wat i observed with my rangie
89' 3.5 EFI, ZF Auto, 3.54 diff gears.
Stock - 29" Tyres - 450ks City, 500ks Hwy
6" Springs 33" Rubber - 400ks City, 470ks Hwy
5" Springs 35" Rubber - 350ks City, 420ks Hwy
4" Springs 37" Rubber - 350ks City, 380ks Hwy

wierd how the milage drop in the city but didnt change when i went to 37s, actually think it got better ks around town but noticably worse on the highway.

never really calculated offroad but i do know that i once got about 220ks on the beach with the 35s
I also once chewed half a tank in half a day out ormeau (max distance traveled 40ks).

RR 1986
engine Holden 355 ci (5.7lt) 250KW
ZF auto
LT230 with 1.003-1 h/range gears
diffs 4.3-1
tyres 35 s/stones.

50mm body lift
75mm spring lift.

H/way 11.6 - 13.3 lt per 100k
city 15 - 18 lt per 100k
Off road worse. but fun

Michael

RR 1993
engine 3.9L with bling cam and wolf 3D engine computer
ZF auto
LT230
diffs 4.11
tyres 33 slicks and 35 off roadies

50mm body lift
75mm spring lift.

i get about 100 to 300 k from 80l tank off road on 35's
and on 33's on hwyway anout 380 to 450 from 80l around town 350 a tank

Bwahahaha fuel economy!

BIg StEvE wrote:Bwahahaha fuel economy!

BWHAAAA not on its side

Stock 89 3.5 efi with long range tank got 700km from 97ltrs on last trip from Adelaide to Melbourne, loaded with gear = 13.85ltrs per 100 sitting on ave 115km/h

best ive done on highway = 13.3ltrs per 100

around town more like 15 - 20 ltrs

Decent figures reason for not touching anything yet as motor is still very strong after 257,000km

s3111107@ wrote:Stock 89 3.5 efi with long range tank got 700km from 97ltrs on last trip from Adelaide to Melbourne, loaded with gear = 13.85ltrs per 100 sitting on ave 115km/h

best ive done on highway = 13.3ltrs per 100

around town more like 15 - 20 ltrs

Decent figures reason for not touching anything yet as motor is still very strong after 257,000km

Thats not bad! Cant complain to much there.

mickrangie wrote:

BIg StEvE wrote:Bwahahaha fuel economy!

BWHAAAA not on its side

Bwahahahahaha that has to be the joke of the week! Congratulations! Meh as if i give a fark about fuel economy.

I'm not overly concerned about economy either, but if I can spend less and/or go better I want to know where and how to do it. When it does come time for a new/fresh/different engine this will be some handy info too..... 4.6s????

popeye wrote:

Are you sure? - I doubt that for a military 109 - more like 1800+

yeah, its about right. I have weighed it twice, same both times.
no way 1800kg that is fat ???

if anything the mil spec would be lighter as they are stripped of anything not essential.

Military landies are heavier than the same body type in civi - stock for stock. Military landies have a one-ton chassis with extra reinforcing, heavy bullbar, extra axle-tube reinforcing, extra electrics (blackout lights, etc...). A mates stock x-mil IIA (converted to a ute with canvas canopy), tips the scales at 1970kg (with 2 31" spares).

Hijack off...

Fuel economy, well, I'll do my best.

1983 Rangie 4 door, 3.5 L V8 with std stombergs and no extractors. 32 inch MT/R's (235/85R16's)

With previous LT95 4 speed- 22-25l/100kms (about 320-340 a tank, sometimes a LOT less )

ZF auto about 25-27l/100 kms, about 300kms to a tank on avg. Never botherd to take notice. Once the fuel light somes on, time to refill .

With the 4.4 Leyland job, will be interesting how good it is, not excpecting much and will be enjoying the extra bit of power to bother with.

Trav

are you guys measuring your km's with a gps or off the speedo... because if it is with speedo, dont forget that different tyre sizes will change your speedo reading in km/h and distance travelled...

landy_man wrote:are you guys measuring your km's with a gps or off the speedo... because if it is with speedo, dont forget that different tyre sizes will change your speedo reading in km/h and distance travelled...

Yer i reckon i was waiting for someone to bring this up.

removed engine fan for noise but also good for econ

also i dont know if this is right but hot air = better economy
ie: snorkles not the best for hwy
big tyres suck
power steer + air con suck
full time 4wd sucks
old school efi sucks
carbies suck
extra weight sucks

Hot air = better economy? How the hell do you figure? hot air will make it run richer, meaning you'll be under acceleration for longer. The colder air is, the denser it becomes, and the more power you get (assuming it doesn't go too lean, which is unlikely) If you assume fuel to be a constant, you get more power with colder air, and you accelerate for a shorter time, due to the extra power.

As far as removal of engine fan - if you get stuck in traffic, be careful. If you do only highway driving, there is no reall problem with removing the fan, but if you have stop start driving, be careful. Perhaps fit thermo fans off something?

BIg StEvE wrote:

landy_man wrote:are you guys measuring your km's with a gps or off the speedo... because if it is with speedo, dont forget that different tyre sizes will change your speedo reading in km/h and distance travelled...

Yer i reckon i was waiting for someone to bring this up.

yep... with a stock 29" tyre and with 37's now, that is around 30% difference..

So.. Anthony, your figures appear quite good if you were using your odometer and not adding the correction in.

landy_man wrote:are you guys measuring your km's with a gps or off the speedo... because if it is with speedo, dont forget that different tyre sizes will change your speedo reading in km/h and distance travelled...

on 35's and 4.11 diffs my speedo is 100% and with 33 it's 5% under

s3111107@ wrote:Stock 89 3.5 efi with long range tank got 700km from 97ltrs on last trip from Adelaide to Melbourne, loaded with gear = 13.85ltrs per 100 sitting on ave 115km/h

best ive done on highway = 13.3ltrs per 100

around town more like 15 - 20 ltrs

Decent figures reason for not touching anything yet as motor is still very strong after 257,000km

13.85 @ 115km/h

My car would almost be at 1lt - 1km by that stage
115km/h Constantly

Mick

mickrangie wrote:

landy_man wrote:are you guys measuring your km's with a gps or off the speedo... because if it is with speedo, dont forget that different tyre sizes will change your speedo reading in km/h and distance travelled...

on 35's and 4.11 diffs my speedo is 100% and with 33 it's 5% under

yeah, but you only have 2 pedal positions... on or off
and dont really care about economy... well, offroad anyway

raginrover wrote:

Hot air = better economy? How the hell do you figure? hot air will make it run richer, meaning you'll be under acceleration for longer. The colder air is, the denser it becomes, and the more power you get (assuming it doesn't go too lean, which is unlikely) If you assume fuel to be a constant, you get more power with colder air, and you accelerate for a shorter time, due to the extra power.

As far as removal of engine fan - if you get stuck in traffic, be careful. If you do only highway driving, there is no reall problem with removing the fan, but if you have stop start driving, be careful. Perhaps fit thermo fans off something?

I could be wrong but this is how i figure it : hot air is less dense than cold air. efi systems will definatly pick up on this and pump less fuel. dont know how carbies deal with the situation. less power = better economy. the air fuel ratio will (should) remain the same but volumetric efficiency will drop hence the drop in power and the increase in economy. Dont know about acceleration but you dont do much on the hwy, mostly constant throttle. FWIW i'd rather have the extra power. i have fitted a vp commo fan - no dramas with overheating (except when i forget to turn it on )


hijack back on:
Ben wrote:

Military landies are heavier than the same body type in civi - stock for stock. Military landies have a one-ton chassis with extra reinforcing, heavy bullbar, extra axle-tube reinforcing, extra electrics (blackout lights, etc...). A mates stock x-mil IIA (converted to a ute with canvas canopy), tips the scales at 1970kg (with 2 31" spares).

series 2 landies had a completely different chassis to the series3, which could account for the weight differance, also holden mtr.
mine has the same axles as the civi versions + only difference in the chassis is the removable x-member + galvonising afaik. all extra wiring has been removed, as has the bull bar. Bare bones 1300kg is acheivable.
130+ rwhp = yee haaa (yeah i know)

OK, I'll throw a spanner in the works.

79 RR, 4.4, dual fuel, 31s.

My fuel EFFICIENCY is:
20L/100km on petrol,
20L/100km on gas.
These are a combination of hwy/city.
I don't measure bush figures.

I drive 99% on gas, so my fuel ECONOMY is $10/100km (50c/L)

110 3.9 Isuzu LT85 1.003 3.54 235/85R16

From memory;
Best = 8L / 100 KM
Worst = 13.5L / 100 KM
Average = 9.5l / 100 KM


90 2.8 Isuzu (4JB1-T) ZF auto 1.222 3.54 255/85R16

Between 8 - 9.5L / 100 KM (once again from memory will check when I am home)

I drive 99% on gas, so my fuel ECONOMY is $10/100km (50c/L)

I drive the 90 everywhere so fuel economy is AU$21/100km (£0.969/L, ~2.35 exchange rate)

1995 disco V8
Stock motor and gearing throughout, stock tyre size (geez, I'm almost embarassed to admit that)
Average 20l to the 100km pretty much wherever I drive.

Disco 1995 300Tdi

~Stock sized tyres (BFG AT 235 75 R 15)

Best 9.2l/100km (combination of highway off road and city)

Worst ~11 l / 100km.

Depends on tyre pressures and head winds at "speed" and usually better just after the oil change.