Nissan 370Z Forum

Nissan 370Z Forum (http://www.the370z.com/)
-   Forced Induction (http://www.the370z.com/forced-induction/)
-   -   Fuel Economy with a GTM TT kit!!! (http://www.the370z.com/forced-induction/39488-fuel-economy-gtm-tt-kit.html)

GetYourWheels 07-13-2011 10:48 AM

http://images1.cpcache.com/product/6...x480_Front.jpg

Mr.Squeeze 07-13-2011 11:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nixlimited (Post 1214663)
Are these calculations based on the on-board computer, or based on actual fuel-usage figures (e.g. fill up and record mileage and gas usage)? I can see a scenario where the on-board computer would miscalculate gas mileage on the high-end. For example, if the on-board ECU used injector pulse length to calculate fuel use, but you had larger injectors, then when cruising the injector pulse would be shorter because the injector is larger, but you are probably using the same or more gas. I just have a very hard time believing that a TT sports car is rivaling hybrid gas mileage on the freeway.


You are 100 % correct the bigger injectors trick the stock ECU.

Kirkster 07-13-2011 11:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr.Squeeze (Post 1214785)
You are 100 % correct the bigger injectors trick the stock ECU.

Yep. Now we just need to figure out how to fix that...

Econ 07-13-2011 11:37 AM

interesting

bullitt5897 07-13-2011 11:52 AM

Guys I am doing my figures from pumping gas (I filled up 19 gal yesterday and drove 300+miles so far and I still havent reached 1/2 tank) and I am using info from the trip computer. both are correlating really closely maybe off by 1-2 mpg... still it does not negate the fact that at an increased hp level the car is under less strain to hold a given rpm...

for example:

maintaining 75mph in 6th gear stock required about 30+% throttle position...
maintaining 75mph in 6th gear TT'd required about 22% throttle position...

I am seeing an increase in motor efficiency and can sustain higher rpm's with less throttle input. Therefore, the motor is able to get higher fuel economy.

mike

btw rcz... I have been driving a TT G37 for 2 months now :tup:

bullitt5897 07-13-2011 11:59 AM

btw at 75mph i am just under 3k rpm and barely touching the gas maybe 6% throttle... The mileage to empty jumps around on me so I am not using that as my basis... After 200miles yesterday it went from 395 to empty up to 495 back to 450 and so on depending on my driving. Also I believe the trip computer is taking calculations at 1 mile increments and comparing the avg fuel consumption to give you the est. range. If i lay into it for a quarter mile the range doesnt change until a mile or two later and if I am coasting it doesnt change either.

Mike

wheee! 07-13-2011 12:02 PM

hmmmm.... I wonder if the wife will buy this logic! lol

... honey, the twin turbos are actually saving us money...!

bullitt5897 07-13-2011 12:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wheee! (Post 1214861)
hmmmm.... I wonder if the wife will buy this logic! lol

... honey, the twin turbos are actually saving us money...!

lol my wife to be is all over it haha but her nickname at work is Turbo cause she loves turbo cars hehehehe

Kirkster 07-13-2011 12:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bullitt@UAMotorsports (Post 1214848)
Guys I am doing my figures from pumping gas (I filled up 19 gal yesterday and drove 300+miles so far and I still havent reached 1/2 tank) and I am using info from the trip computer. both are correlating really closely maybe off by 1-2 mpg... still it does not negate the fact that at an increased hp level the car is under less strain to hold a given rpm...

for example:

maintaining 75mph in 6th gear stock required about 30+% throttle position...
maintaining 75mph in 6th gear TT'd required about 22% throttle position...

I am seeing an increase in motor efficiency and can sustain higher rpm's with less throttle input. Therefore, the motor is able to get higher fuel economy.

mike

btw rcz... I have been driving a TT G37 for 2 months now :tup:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bullitt@UAMotorsports (Post 1214860)
btw at 75mph i am just under 3k rpm and barely touching the gas maybe 6% throttle... The mileage to empty jumps around on me so I am not using that as my basis... After 200miles yesterday it went from 395 to empty up to 495 back to 450 and so on depending on my driving. Also I believe the trip computer is taking calculations at 1 mile increments and comparing the avg fuel consumption to give you the est. range. If i lay into it for a quarter mile the range doesnt change until a mile or two later and if I am coasting it doesnt change either.

Mike

If a TT got better gas milage than a stock motor everyone would put one in...

http://planetsmilies.net/smoking-smiley-5437.gif

Must be that new math they are teaching in school...

bullitt5897 07-13-2011 12:43 PM

Hey everyone said me and Semtex were applying ricer math when we quoted his exhaust, HFC combo on hp.... guess what we were right! My math is on target... I have been getting 500+ miles on a tank of gas when i drive it normal...

500/19=26mpg

550/19=28.9mpg

600/19=31.5mpg

so with my avg's being around 26-31 combined I should be right on target.

SharpByCoop 07-13-2011 01:03 PM

I have the same car/combination (essentially). I have to side with Bullitt, although I understand and won't completely trust the onboard computer (which reads around 29-27 mpg on cruise.) It just sips fuel when I'm not stepping into it.

That said, probably because of exhaust flow (no cats, straight out), the car is effortless at 70mph.

The new math: Having my cake and eating it, too. :D

Coop

bullitt5897 07-13-2011 01:07 PM

ricer math FTMFW!!! hehehe

ChrisSlicks 07-13-2011 01:17 PM

Turbocharged engines are generally considered to be more efficient than an NA motor of similar or slightly lesser HP level, but I've never heard of adding a turbo system to a car making it more efficient, although if the compression ratio is reduced then I guess it is theoretically possible.

RCZ 07-13-2011 01:36 PM

Come on guys...the idea behind saving fuel with a turbo engine is that you can produce same power with LESS cylinders or LESS displacement when compared to another engine. Bullitt, could you please explain why the car is more fuel efficient now?

pty370z 07-13-2011 01:42 PM

It's not like GTM needed more advertising to sell their S/C and TT systems.. hahahaha..

- Do you have a Z or a G?
- Are you having sucky gas mileage?
- The answer to your problem is Twin-Turbo!

IT WILL PAY FOR ITSELF WITH SAVINGS!

:ugh2::ugh2:


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:12 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2