Now that my odometer is working 100%, finally got my first read on mpg. 12.5 mpg city driving. Lot of stop and go traffic. 88 HE V12 with super enhanced AJ6 engineering ECU. Is this normal?
Based on our experience with my wife’s 1990 XJ-S convertible (5.3L V12 with Marelli ignition) 12.5 MPG is roughly about what we experience, although maybe a bit higher.
We got our car in 2005 with 62K miles on it and it now has 131K miles on it. We keep a book in the car to record each time we add gas as well as some of the service and repair actions. We don’t calculate MPG each time we add gas, or an average over time, just actual MPG ( not just what the trip computer calculates) from time to time. Looking at those calculations over the past 14 years and 69K miles the low readings were around 10 MPG and the high ones around 17 MPG, (in US gallons not Imperial gallons). Most of the calculations appear clustered in the 13.5 - 15.5 MPG range.
My 1982 girl had appalling mileage initially but after fitting an upgraded ECU (Melbourne 2015) things got better. She now measures 13.5L/100klm (17.5 miles/USgal ) open road and 15.0 L/100klm (15.5miles/USgal) in town. Having said that my idea of city driving in the likes of Wagga Wagga probably doesn’t compare to the congestion of most.
The other factor that may be at play here the fact that many of these cars don’t get enough exercise. Much can be said for the Italian tune up.
Yes it’s normal.
A big factor is also how long of a drive you do each time, when the engine is cold it’s really bad… In winter you will see that it will be even thirstier.
In our windy country roads here I get about 14 to 15 L/100Km.
Thanks, good to know. Just wanted to make sure engine was running decently.
Yeah, my miles were two commutes to work, only 12 miles each drive with a lot of stop and go. So it’s probably the worst case scenario. I’ll take it. I was afraid I’d only get 10mpg.
Just checked my MPG again after 4 days of city driving. Now I’m down to 10.5 mpg.
BUT as a test, I am now running the vacuum advance off the butterfly throttle area instead of the regulator set up that advances idle timing, so idle timing is more retarded. I’ve also noticed at long idles, my temp is about 5F higher.
I’ll try going back to my 1988 HE vacuum advance system with regulator and dump valve and see what happens next week.
Yeah, that’s not good. An H.E. should get better than that.
But the whole point of my experiment was that I knew gas mileage would suffer if I had no vacuum advance at idle, right? Just I didn’t know by how much.
I’ll hook the regulator/dump valve back up this weekend and report gas mileage next Friday. If anybody cares
11-ish for city driving is not too bad.
12 mpg in town is on the EPA label, which IMHO is optimistic.
My car is 12 city, 16 hwy (granted, the differential is 3.54 but I have 4-speed electronic box with lock-up TC). Both numbers can be achieved, but if the driver has a heavy foot…a whole different story.
EDIT: My hwy average:
I played around with my ‘88 vacuum advance; I have an aftermarket advance unit and let me preface that I do not trust my timing marks. Testing the capsule with a vacuum pump showed the capsule was fully advanced by 15” (which is correct spec). My idle vacuum was 17” in stock configuration.
I removed the vacuum delay and dump valve, capped the throttle body port, and ran straight manifold vacuum to the capsule. I set the base timing using the vacuum gauge; advance to max vacuum with capsule connected and backed off 1” from that reading.
This gave me a smoother idle and better throttle response, and no spark knock on premium fuel. I do run mid grade a lot, and with that get occasional light spark knock (which I avoid by lighter acceleration). I have been averaging 13mpg around town, and can see17-18 on freeway steady speed.