Page 1 of 1

GQ Fuel Consumption

Posted: Sun Jan 08, 2006 4:38 pm
by challenger
We all complain about it! The TB42 petrol engine is very heavy on fuel.

Our learned colleague "Bogged" will say it's all been tried before and is a waste of time, but contrary to what he thinks there is no reason why good maintenance and performance tuning techniques cannot improve both the performance AND economy of these motors.

I have a 1990 Maverick with 4.2 carby petrol motor. Over the next 6-12 months I will be carefully measuring my petrol consumption BEFORE and AFTER some simple motor work. I will be upgrading the following:

1. The exhaust: fitting a set of 2.5 inch or 3 inch extractors and hi-flow mufflers;
2. The ignition: adding a CDI ignition system, high-energy coil, performance leads and modified rotor button. I will be staying with points however for bush reliability. Why? The CDI system removes the need for high current to flow through the points. The result is that the points should last 50K+ before needing to be changed. And if the CDI fails, I can still get home;
3. Adding a snorkel and opening up the air intake: to increase the volume of cooler air entering the carby;
4. A free-flow performance air filter;
5. Dyno tuning: to get the timing and carby absolutely correct;
6. High performance oil, such as Penrite 15W50;
7. Experiment with the spark plug range: normal, hotter, cooler

At each stage I will carefully check the consumption, and use my best judgement as to whether I have gained economy and/or power.

I would be very interested if anyone has attempted something similar. If so, please share your results.

Cheers

Dave

Posted: Sun Jan 08, 2006 4:45 pm
by blkmav
You can throw a lot of $$ at a TB42 for little improvement. The best thing I did to reducce my fuel comsumption was to lighten my right foot. :lol:

Posted: Sun Jan 08, 2006 4:50 pm
by challenger
Agreed, but I intend to try. Everything can be improved, with not too much $$ spend.
blkmav wrote:You can throw a lot of $$ at a TB42 for little improvement. The best thing I did to reducce my fuel comsumption was to lighten my right foot. :lol:

Re: GQ Fuel Consumption

Posted: Sun Jan 08, 2006 8:12 pm
by bogged
challenger wrote:We all complain about it! The TB42 petrol engine is very heavy on fuel.

But there is no reason why good maintenance and performance tuning techniques cannot dramatically improve both the performance AND economy of these motors.

I have a 1990 Maverick with 4.2 carby petrol motor. Over the next 6-12 months I will be carefully measuring my petrol consumption BEFORE and AFTER some simple motor work. I will be upgrading the following:

1. The exhaust: fitting a set of 2.5 inch or 3 inch extractors and hi-flow mufflers;
2. The ignition: adding a CDI ignition system, high-energy coil, performance leads and modified rotor button. I will be staying with points however for bush reliability. Why? The CDI system removes the need for high current to flow through the points. The result is that the points should last 50K+ before needing to be changed. And if the CDI fails, I can still get home;
3. Adding a snorkel and opening up the air intake: to increase the volume of cooler air entering the carby;
4. A free-flow performance air filter;
5. Dyno tuning: to get the timing and carby absolutely correct;
6. High performance oil, such as Penrite 15W50;
7. Experiment with the spark plug range: normal, hotter, cooler

At each stage I will carefully check the consumption, and use my best judgement as to whether I have gained economy and/or power.

I would be very interested if anyone has attempted something similar. If so, please share your results.

Cheers

Dave
people on patrol list have tried all this over the years, with little or not worthy improvement for the investment.

Posted: Sun Jan 08, 2006 8:44 pm
by challenger
OK, so what worked and what didn't?
----------------------------------------------------------
"...people on patrol list have tried all this over the years, with little or not worthy improvement for the investment."

Posted: Sun Jan 08, 2006 8:51 pm
by bogged
challenger wrote:Rather than being totally negative, what worked and what didn't.

Please qualify your comments for each suggestion.
----------------------------------------------------------
"...people on patrol list have tried all this over the years, with little or not worthy improvement for the investment."
go search the archives.. CBF.

Posted: Sun Jan 08, 2006 10:04 pm
by challenger
As some members seem to think they own this forum, if anyone else is interested or keen to offer constructive help and/or suggestions, please send me a PM, and we will keep what we learn to ourselves.

Posted: Sun Jan 08, 2006 10:10 pm
by bogged
challenger wrote:As some members seem to think they own this forum, if anyone else is interested or keen to offer constructive help and/or suggestions, please send me a PM, and we will keep what we learn to ourselves.
would you like a tissue?

Posted: Mon Jan 09, 2006 7:19 am
by challenger
Yes please.

Posted: Mon Jan 09, 2006 7:20 am
by challenger
Yes please, but would accept a new set of tyres instead.

Posted: Mon Jan 09, 2006 7:25 am
by mkpatrol
bogged wrote:
challenger wrote:As some members seem to think they own this forum, if anyone else is interested or keen to offer constructive help and/or suggestions, please send me a PM, and we will keep what we learn to ourselves.
would you like a tissue?

You can be such a tool sometimes Bogged :roll:

Posted: Mon Jan 09, 2006 12:23 pm
by bogged
mkpatrol wrote:You can be such a tool sometimes Bogged :roll:
:armsup: :armsup:

Posted: Mon Jan 09, 2006 12:55 pm
by mkpatrol
It wasnt a compliment :D

Posted: Mon Jan 09, 2006 12:57 pm
by bogged
mkpatrol wrote:It wasnt a compliment :D
i know

Posted: Mon Jan 09, 2006 1:51 pm
by mkpatrol
U made him go quiet :D