| Author |
Message |
    
Dammad (Dammad)
| | Posted on Tuesday, November 05, 2002 - 12:47 pm: | 
|
Is there any info./advice out there on how to improve the MPG on 4.0L V8 DS2s? Or perhaps on running DS2 on regular unleaded (since there can't be much premium in the middle of the sahara).
What's the best RPM range for fuel economy? Or even has anyone 'chipped' the engine to improve its efficiency...
I know, I know.. I should get used to it.. But enquiring minds want to know. |
Eric N (Grnrvr)
| | Posted on Tuesday, November 05, 2002 - 01:51 pm: |
|
You could put it on a trailer and tow it  |
Parrish R. Blackmon (Discoveryfl)
| | Posted on Tuesday, November 05, 2002 - 02:15 pm: |
|
High flow cats
High flow exhaust
Headers
Super Chip
Fresh/clean O2 sensors
and the list goes on. Just live with it unless you want to make a severe investment in aftermarket parts. |
Jason Vance (Jason)
| | Posted on Tuesday, November 05, 2002 - 02:17 pm: |
|
I think Eric hit the nail on the head. A full-size Ford with the Powerstroke should get better mpg pulling a Disco up a hill.
As far as best RPM range, in town, keep it under 2000-2200 rpm. Even around the fast-paced Vegas surface streets, we can keep up by keeping the revs low.
Obviously on the highway, the faster you drive, the worse your MPG is...have you noticed your Disco will actually slow down when coasting down a hill? Aerodynamics are certainly not a strong point! |
Dana G
| | Posted on Tuesday, November 05, 2002 - 02:44 pm: |
|
"Is there any info./advice out there on how to improve the MPG on 4.0L V8 DS2s?"
Sure, get it converted to a 300TDi, should only cost you about $20,000 |
Parrish R. Blackmon (Discoveryfl)
| | Posted on Tuesday, November 05, 2002 - 04:53 pm: |
|
The plain stupidity of this question is amazing to me. My wife's Grand Cherokee with a 318ci V8 and all wheel drive gets almost twice the fuel mileage that my Discovery gets, and its a hell of a lot faster. I don't understand why Land Rover continues to fall way behind the curve on both horse power and fuel mileage. The best bet - sell it and buy a Honda Civic if you want fuel mileage. Otherwise, enjoy the empty pocket book and the line at the gas pump. |
Brian Friend (Brianfriend)
| | Posted on Tuesday, November 05, 2002 - 04:56 pm: |
|
Parrish,
The reason Land Rover continues to fall behind the curve is because they don't need to do anything about it...the gas milage is not a determining factor for most that consider them. |
gp (Garrett)
| | Posted on Tuesday, November 05, 2002 - 05:14 pm: |
|
and the statement could be turned around. the plain stupidity of buying a Grand Cherokee is amazing as well. |
Scott OZ
| | Posted on Tuesday, November 05, 2002 - 05:22 pm: |
|
In OZ I get about 550 kilometres out of 95 litres of premium (98 - RON). At a rough guess thats about 17-18 mpg - around town (V8 S2) Thats not too bad. However I get better economy that some I my mates with the same truck because mine is manual trans - that makes a big difference if you use it properly. At the end of the day the rover, driven properly gets better economy that a 4.5 litre landcruiser 6 cyl or 4.8 litre Nissan Patrol 6 cyl and only slightly worse than a Mist Pajero (Shogun in UK I think) which is bloody good. The trouble with the v8 in terms of economy and why so many people complain about it is that it sounds so bloody sweet when revved (like all rover v8s) and so people rev them out and so (with gear changes at or above 4 grand) they chew the juice.
I have a series 1 also. Its on LPG. I dont think you guys in the US use that stuff do you - here its about half the price of high octane unlead and has about 110-115 octane rating. You just use a small carburetter (in effect) in the air intake side of the plennum and that gas gets mixed in it. The engines actually run harder and cleaner on it. The downside is that mpg is slighty down because it is not injected. |
muskyman
| | Posted on Tuesday, November 05, 2002 - 09:02 pm: |
|
"My wife's Grand Cherokee with a 318ci V8 and all wheel drive gets almost twice the fuel mileage that my Discovery gets"
gimme a break
well tune your disco and let your wife drive it and you drive the cherokee and I'll bet they get about the same.
my wife gets 320 miles outa a tank in the disco i'm lucky to get 260
scott from OZ hit it on the head as did land rover in the owners manual...avoid hard acceleration |
Joe Still (Joedisco)
| | Posted on Tuesday, November 05, 2002 - 10:29 pm: |
|
The disco is much heavier duty than any Cherokee- Grand or otherwise. 4800# vs 3900#(my guess). I dumped a Cherokee at 20 mpg gladly for my 14 - 15 mpg Disco. The Disco frame is steel ladder while I believe the Cherokee is uni-body. While many of us LR guys don't get offroad much the ones that do would break a Grand Cherokee over time. |
M. Recke (Disco_Obsession)
| | Posted on Wednesday, November 06, 2002 - 03:50 am: |
|
I run on LPG on my dual fuel Disco and I get around the same Milage around town in general stop start everyday traffic as I do criusing at high speed on the Freeways. Highway/freeway driving involves faster travel and seems to use more fuel and apparantly thewre is more wind drag!. This is the opposite of what one expects on the average 2 wheel drive vehicle, where one gets improved milage on ther open road and less in traffic. That's my observation only with my Disco. |
Zak Ruck (Zak)
| | Posted on Wednesday, November 06, 2002 - 07:33 am: |
|
I also don't know what's the big deal with MPG with the Disco's. I feel they're not to bad, considering they are heavy, and full time 4wd. I had a 1991 Grand Wagoneer, with the 360 and a 4 barrel. Now that thing was SLOW, and got about 10-11 MPG on a good day. I'm quite happy with my 16-17 MPG on the highway. The 'round town driving kind of stinks, but oh well, it's a truck. I've heard a few times that a snorkel might help, but that's hearsay.
Just my $.02
Zak |
Leslie N. Bright (Leslie)
| | Posted on Wednesday, November 06, 2002 - 08:29 am: |
|
I agree with Zak there.... my '81 Wagoneer was a full-time 4x4 with the 360, and I usually was getting 8mpg.... going to 16mpg in a Disco doubled my mileage, and retained the heavy "tank" build and full-time 4x4 drivetrain.
FWIW...
-L |
Scott (Scott_Bowden)
| | Posted on Wednesday, November 06, 2002 - 08:41 am: |
|
And I thought Land Rover designed these trucks with engine assist braking. The slower you go the less you have to slow down. Makes sense on the trail. |
andy
| | Posted on Wednesday, November 06, 2002 - 12:04 pm: |
|
Zak of course a snorkle gets you better mpg, it will also get you more chicks per gallon (cpg) |
Zak Ruck (Zak)
| | Posted on Wednesday, November 06, 2002 - 02:17 pm: |
|
Oh yeah, forgot about the CPG!!! Got to get one now, just don't tell the with!!!
I hear that putting the white letters out also gets more MPG and CPG |
Parrish R. Blackmon (Discoveryfl)
| | Posted on Wednesday, November 06, 2002 - 05:15 pm: |
|
It always amazes me at the attitude of some people, whether it be in jest or otherwise. |
Will Pace (D1d90)
| | Posted on Wednesday, November 06, 2002 - 06:16 pm: |
|
Got V-10 super duty 4x4 crew cab w/ 4:27 gears. All time worst mileage was 5.6 loaded extremely heavy to the tune of 31,000lbs. After that 15-17mpg in a defender or discovery seems practically solar. |
Deron
| | Posted on Wednesday, November 06, 2002 - 08:22 pm: |
|
Finding regular unleaded in the Sahara is going to be harder than trying to get more MPG out of your disco because there is only leaded gas available in Africa. |
Just Me
| | Posted on Wednesday, November 06, 2002 - 09:59 pm: |
|
Will,
From hard experience, I can tell you that a Defender will never see 15-17 mpg. A Disco, maybe, but I don't think I ever got much better than 12 mpg in my old Defender. That, and the tiny ~15 gallon tank, means that NAS Defender drivers suffer from compulsive fuel-guage checking and, in rural areas, stop at about every gas station.
Cheers!
-Just Me |
Will Pace (D1d90)
| | Posted on Thursday, November 07, 2002 - 08:46 am: |
|
Just Me,
My brothers and I drove three D-90s from Mississippi to Colorado and back this summer and got between 15 and 17 the whole time. 17 definitely came with some good Texas/New Mexico tailwinds and a little drafting. As for compulsive fuel gauge checking, oh yeah. 1/2 tank on the gauge means empty to your imagination.
I didn't think it was accurate like the speedo was off reading more than actual miles but we had a gps as well confirming the miles traveled.
On the trails who knows, it could have been below 12 mpg for all I know. I just made sure it was full everyday.
2 or 22 mpg doesn't matter to me. They're great machines.
Will |
Just Me
| | Posted on Thursday, November 07, 2002 - 11:38 am: |
|
Will,
I had a chuckle when you said "1/2 tank means empty"... that's the Defender feeling, all right! I didn't measure my milage very often, but I know that I could only expect 180 to 200 miles per tank, with 220 risking being stranded. I think I may have gotten 13 to 14 mpg under ideal conditions (driving smoothly at 55 or 60), but I never expected more than 12 or 13 when doing a more normal 70 or 75 with a heavy foot. To get 15-17mpg would have been a dream - an impossible one! Perhaps the watered-down "oxygenated" gas we have here is partly to blame. In town and on the trails, it never seemed to matter what I was doing, it was 12 mpg. The milage didn't bother me as much as the tiny gas tank. I carried a small 2.5 gallon jerry can at all times, which saved me on 4 or 5 occasions, including once about 300 ft from the exit to the gas station. When in the back country, I'd bring ten more gallons and still feel paranoid. I think every NAS Defender owner sooner or later fantasizes about an auxiliary tank.
Cheers!
-Just Me |
Andrew Clarke (Aclarke)
| | Posted on Thursday, November 07, 2002 - 11:52 am: |
|
There's probably a noticeable difference in mileage between the automatic and manual defenders as well. I can usually get 16-17mpg with my 5spd Discovery on the freeway, travelling 75-80mph whereas I don't think that's very common with the automatics.
There might also be mileage differences between the Defender body styles, although likely aerodynamics is so poor anyways that it wouldn't make a large difference. |
Pugsly (Pugsly)
| | Posted on Thursday, November 07, 2002 - 11:54 am: |
|
Interesting thing is that the 110 has a larger tank but about the same cruising range as the 90! |
Usoff
| | Posted on Wednesday, November 13, 2002 - 10:39 pm: |
|
so WHAT does the Disco's 4L V8 excel in? one of my friends asked me how much hp it has and I told him about 180+ and he was shocked that it was a V8. then I told him but oh it makes a lot of torque, all 250lbs of it. and then he told me but a GM or Ford engine could do that. I was about to say it's reliable and could run through anything but then the sudden loss of power on the highway once came to my mind. and I was caught off guard and had nothing to defend my disco =( |
OLIVER CLOTHSOFF (Everythingleaks)
| | Posted on Thursday, November 14, 2002 - 12:18 am: |
|
The 4.0L can :
1. Purge it's own oil to make room for fresh oil
2. Cool the inside and the outside of the block
with coolant.
3. With the amount of carbon that builds up inside
it may make diamonds someday
4. Anyone that has worked on a 56 Buick can
repair the internals
5. The front cover for it costs as much as a
small block chevy overhaul |
OLIVER CLOTHSOFF (Everythingleaks)
| | Posted on Thursday, November 14, 2002 - 12:24 am: |
|
Oh yea, don't run the 87 either. With the 87 octane it will spark rattle when you first start it until it detunes the timing. A HP lose will be noticed with the 87 also.
Another tid bit is that if it goes to the dealer still under warranty and has any engine problems that they can attribute to the lower octane fuel they may deny warranty coverage. It states in bold letters in the warranty manual that damage due to improper fuel is not covered. May also be in owners manual. |
Peter Bullock
| | Posted on Thursday, November 14, 2002 - 12:35 pm: |
|
Gday Scott et al,
Here in OZ using effin expensive premium unleaded, I get about 350kms from full to fuel light. Not very good, not as good as my old 5 litre V8 in fact. Mines an auto which doest help. I was told by a couple of people that extractors do nothing to help fuel economy?! If I was to change exhaust or inlet air flow properties, would I have to get the efi remapped or will it do itself? Will a superchip give me any benefit with the standard exhaust and inlet set up?
Pete
Down Under Disco |
Paul D. Morgan (V22guy)
| | Posted on Thursday, November 14, 2002 - 12:44 pm: |
|
Why do you think I call it "The Pig"
Paul
'00 Pig |
JD
| | Posted on Thursday, November 14, 2002 - 12:56 pm: |
|
How much will adding bigger tires to a Disco effect gas milage. I used to get 300+ per tank now I am down to about 270 miles per tank. I went from the stock 255/65 R16 to BFG 255/75 R16?
Is this big of a change normal? (I also had my transmission fixed and want to make sure that the repair will not cause the change in milage.) |
JD
| | Posted on Thursday, November 14, 2002 - 01:03 pm: |
|
How much will adding bigger tires to a Disco effect gas milage. I used to get 300+ per tank now I am down to about 270 miles per tank. I went from the stock 255/65 R16 to BFG 255/75 R16?
Is this big of a change normal? (I also had my transmission fixed and want to make sure that the repair will not cause the change in milage.) |
Peter Bullock (Downunderdisco)
| | Posted on Thursday, November 14, 2002 - 01:28 pm: |
|
a bigger aspect ratio on your tyres should make your gearing taller, therefore increasing your mpg shouldnt it? is yours an auto? would there be an issue with the engine working harder to move the car away from a stop cause the gearing has got too tall? am I just saying this cause the novelty of seeing my name on such a big website hasnt worn off yet? who knows....
I know after getting my auto box reconditioned, it took noticeably less rpms to get me moving from a stop and the box does alot more changing and kicking down for gears where before it would just chug away in the gear it was in. That might be part of your decreased mpg? |
muskyman
| | Posted on Thursday, November 14, 2002 - 03:17 pm: |
|
wider tires will have more rolling friction and taller tires will have a reduction in gear ratio moving your motor out of its optimum range for best MPG.
also bigger tires,both wider and taller will increase the frontal area of the vehicle .
frontal area x drag coeffient= how much force it takes to push your vehicle through the wind. so even a small increase in frontal area makes a big difference in MPG and top end speed.
a couple years ago they narrowed the tires at indy by 1/2" to limit speed into the corners. the engine guys said that 1/2" was like getting 200HP for free because it took 200 less HP to reach the same top speeds. that then made INDY more dangerous but thats a whole thread in its self |
Mark & Bev Preston (Markp)
| | Posted on Thursday, November 14, 2002 - 03:36 pm: |
|
Hey, My Disco gets more MPG than my Scout's at about the same vehicle weight. HP is about the same but IH torgue is higher.
As for why the Rover V8, I saw a Land Rover guide to SUV's a few years back that had a comparison of Torque vs RPM for just about all SUV's. The LR V8 showed high torgue for low RPM. Now this was all gas engines, no diesels. The LR engine works well off-road. At least for me I'm not impressed with a 0-60 time for a Jeep.
- Mark |
JD
| | Posted on Thursday, November 14, 2002 - 03:57 pm: |
|
Correction I ment to say 245/75 R16 not 255/75 R16. |
muskyman
| | Posted on Thursday, November 14, 2002 - 03:58 pm: |
|
if its a stock scout you should be able to get pretty good MPG outa it.
on the highway my scout will get 17mpg with a built 392 and 35" mudders in 2wd |
Ken Dunnington (Ihwillys)
| | Posted on Thursday, November 14, 2002 - 04:12 pm: |
|
I'll second that. I just went on a little jaunt down to Penrose(I'm in Fort Collins, CO) to pick up a 196/T90/D20 and some Poncho parts(heads, manifold) with my "IHWillys", essentially a '77 Scout II. It's a stock 345, 3.54 R/P, 33x12.50 BFGs. Just under 17 mpg running ~75-80 mph(with the slippery aerodynamics of a '51 Willys wagon body) at 5K-7K feet. And the way back was loaded over 1K lb in the back.
Ken |
JD
| | Posted on Thursday, November 14, 2002 - 04:56 pm: |
|
Maybe I am getting better milage and do not know it. Would the size of the tires affect the odometer. I know that my speedometer is 4 miles per hour slow. I have also noticed that on one trip that was 110 miles my odometer only read 98. I will have to get the GPS out and track this. (I went from 255/65 R16 to 245/75 R16 tires.) Could someone help me out with this? |
muskyman
| | Posted on Thursday, November 14, 2002 - 04:58 pm: |
|
that sounds like such a fun truck ken,with the 3.54 and 33's i'll bet it idles down the highway ease.
IH motors make such great off idle torque they get good MPG and can get away with the not so low gears that there limited rev limit allows.
Ron you out there? whats the current status on Timm Coopers 2wd kits?
I still think there has to be some MPG in these things run in 2wd with free wheeling hubs |
Ron
| | Posted on Thursday, November 14, 2002 - 05:49 pm: |
|
Not sure if Timm has any now. I gave up and got a DII driveshaft and flange, then again the 110 concept has been changed to smaller tires and a moderate lift so no real need anymore.
BTW I got 16mpg flogging the crap out of my 96 5 speed disco
Ron |
muskyman
| | Posted on Thursday, November 14, 2002 - 05:55 pm: |
|
that pretty awsome MPG
a stick in the right hands will beat a slush box everytime |
Mark & Bev Preston (Markp)
| | Posted on Thursday, November 14, 2002 - 06:29 pm: |
|
Muskyman and Ken,
On the highway I have seen 17 MPG on a stock 75' Scout II with the 345. It was getting a little tired at 350K miles so I rebuilt it. It's a little tighter now plus I put in the RV cam. Runs good, MPG is down a little from stock cam. Around town (Colorado Springs)the MPG is in the 11-12 MPG range. The Disco is in the 13-14 MPG range. The best I've seen from the 98' Disco is 17.8 MPG across Kansas with a loaded roof-rack.
- Mark |
Brian Edwards
| | Posted on Thursday, November 14, 2002 - 10:02 pm: |
|
I would also like to get better milage out of a Disco, I told my wife that it would be better than my scout, but I LIED. Scout is 33" tires, built 304 w/ Jacobs and isky cam with 4.09's, 4 speed, runs 2800 rpm's at 65-70 mph, but is great off road. Milage on scout is approx 15. Disco is Approx 14. I guess I will put new plug wires, K & N and Borla exhaust to see how it does. Does anyone know how much it will improve a 99 series II?
Thanks,
Brian |
Alan Yim (Alan)
| | Posted on Thursday, November 14, 2002 - 11:37 pm: |
|
The best I've seen with my Disco is 19.4 mpg on the highway. Kinda freaked me out when it happened. I've come close a couple other times but it's not consistent. City driving I average about 14 mpg.
This is of course before I got my BFG AT's. Now it's gone down a bit.
BTW: 98 D1 |
R. B. Bailey (Rover50987)
| | Posted on Friday, November 15, 2002 - 04:57 pm: |
|
I've got it, how to actually get better MPG!
A really fast winch with a really long cable. |
Peter Matusov (Pmatusov)
| | Posted on Friday, November 15, 2002 - 07:17 pm: |
|
Parrish and all,
first, the 318 JGC does get a better mileage. On a number of long trips we've made with my brother (to the tune of 5kmi total), his 97 JGC with 318 makes to the tune of 3mpg better than my 96 disco.
now, how important is gas mileage?
my bro got his JGC soon after I bought the disco. the JGC was rear-ended three times, two out of them - with no apparent damage to the rear offender. All three times the grand went to the frame machine, and after the very first one it has never been its own same.
in comparison, my 86 rangie was rear-ended three times last winter. guess what - not a scratch. to avert all the BS about the crumple zones, in all three incidents with the rangie the passengers just laughed out loud, and nobody ever mentioned whiplash
now my bro and his wife every now and then say "we should've bought that 95 LWB..."
peter |
JESPER
| | Posted on Saturday, November 16, 2002 - 09:38 am: |
|
HAVE FOUND THAT BY REMOVING THE PATAGONIAN TOOTHFISH FROM THE INJECTORS HAS GREATLY IMPROVED MY MPG |
Peter Bullock (Downunderdisco)
| | Posted on Saturday, November 16, 2002 - 01:32 pm: |
|
Jesper,
Thats ridiculous and very juvenile. Everyone knows that while removing the toothfish from the injectors will give you more mpg it will be at the terrible cost of alot of extra emissions. The correct mod is to leave the toothfish and add a basking shark between the exhaust manifold and the cat.
If that doesnt work, fling the stock air cleaner and drop a bag of mule fish in there with some ice to keep them fresh.*
* - This is especially handy if you run out of room in the Engel. |
Brian Friend (Brianfriend)
| | Posted on Saturday, November 16, 2002 - 04:44 pm: |
|
JD,
I think you are right. The bigger tyres will create higher geearing and will increace gas milage if you drice it nicely, on the same time it will reduce your odomotor reading by the same percentage that you increased your gearing. At leaste that is my theory. I went to 265/75 and I am averaging about 16 1/2 mpg including hwy, town and trail. |
Dana G
| | Posted on Saturday, November 16, 2002 - 04:51 pm: |
|
Peter,
When you live 1000 miles from the nearest ocean, importing a basking shark can be cost prohibitive. Can you recomend any fresh-water fish that will make a proper substitute? |
Alan Yim (Alan)
| | Posted on Saturday, November 16, 2002 - 06:05 pm: |
|
guppies |
Peter Bullock (Downunderdisco)
| | Posted on Sunday, November 17, 2002 - 05:08 am: |
|
Dana,
'Fraid not. Fresh water fish are recomended only for Deisels. Mines a petrol. Try a key word search under "fish mods". If no joy try "battered cod".
Who started this silly thread anyway...  |
300i
| | Posted on Sunday, November 17, 2002 - 11:54 am: |
|
The diesel makes sense. My 300i uses about 10 liters over 100km, which is about 24 miles per U.S. gallon, in town or on the highway. It's slow but it works and sounds cool (like a Mack truck) and it's got plenty of torque. It will cruise happily at 140km/h (about 85mph) which is enough. |
Scott - OZ
| | Posted on Sunday, November 17, 2002 - 04:24 pm: |
|
Pete, it depends on the properties changed. If you give it better flow by ram feading the intake for example the hot wire air mass sensor will make adjustments accordingly. As to the super chip I am skeptical. I have been debating putting in a Uni Chip myself because it is programable - the factory chip is not. I know that the factory chip is a compromise for several markets and their respective emission requirments, but I rang uni-chip's recomended dealer in Queensland and they tried to tell me that my Disco 02 would get good fuel economy gains (and power) because it had a vacume advance and distributor! They were a little surprised when I told them that LR had moved on from there to coil packs with Bosh Motronic Engine Management!..My only suggestion is this - if you get one, make sure the fitter agrees to give you Dyno figures in the morning when you take you truck in; a printout. Then take that away and when you collect your truck have him put it back on the Dyno and confirm with him that he had not changed the calibration since the morning Dyno and have him print out the figures again. That way you will trully know if it has the gains that they claim. Before you leave the car and agree to the work, tell them that unless the Dyno figures show the increases that they say are likely they are to pull the thing off, restore the car to original and give you a full refund - thats fair given their claims.
Cheers
Scott from OZ |
Peter Bullock (Downunderdisco)
| | Posted on Monday, November 18, 2002 - 12:42 pm: |
|
Cheers Scott,
Another disco owner has recomended a few changes to me regarding the timing (ive got a '94) and so on but I dont know enough about it to feel confident arsing around with that stuff myself.
Ill look into the uni-chip option though.
Sounds like time to get the wallet out again |
DChrismon
| | Posted on Monday, November 18, 2002 - 07:32 pm: |
|
Have a better idea for better MPG don't drive the damn thing. |
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page