GU Patrol 4.8ltr economy (or lack of) - Patrol 4x4 - Nissan Patrol Forum
Patrol 4x4 - Nissan Patrol Forum, Photos, Directory

 


Go Back   Patrol 4x4 - Nissan Patrol Forum > Nissan Patrol and Safari Models > Nissan Patrol GU/GR

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 23-02-2008, 07:44 AM
Newbie
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Karratha, West Aussie
Posts: 12
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default GU Patrol 4.8ltr economy (or lack of)

Hi,
Help wanted.
I have a '02 4.8ltr GU patrol auto (82,000k's) and can't believe how bad the economy is. It was @ 17.8 first measure but I thought I'd be able to get better nursing it but cant see any improvement.
I have looked at putting Beaudesert exhaust and headers and Unichip on but thinking I may be throwing money into a bottomless pit.
I'd be happy with 14 - 16 ltr per 100 but I am concerned the numbers won't improve.
Any wisdom out there would be appreciated, I read the forum regularly so I know there is some experience out there.

Thanks.

Last edited by MrPaul; 23-02-2008 at 08:32 AM.
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiTweet this Post!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
  #2  
Old 23-02-2008, 08:06 AM
g@z g@z is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 634
Thanks: 1
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Stick it on gas. About the only way you will reduce the damage to your wallet.

Regards,
g@z.
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiTweet this Post!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #3  
Old 23-02-2008, 08:09 AM
DBW's Avatar
DBW DBW is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Port Stephens, NSW
Posts: 152
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Hi there, that's pretty reasonable consumption for an auto. A friend has the 4.8, I have the 4.5 and his economy always slightly beats mine and his vehicle has oodles more power. We are both manuals, so your economy for an auto is really quite good. Another friend has an auto 4.5L and his economy is worse than mine and it's quite down on power in comparison. In all honesty, and no doubt it's out of the question a manual transmission would see you with better economy. I wouldn't waste money on $$$$ worth of exhausts etc etc where at the end of the day, those valuable $$ spent on mods equal a substantial amount of fuel!

What you can't discount (I don't mean to be smart) is the fact it's a 2.35T (unladen) vehicle with poor aerodynamics or that of a brick, with a 4.8L straight 6 cylinder petrol engine producing a healthy 185kw. Adding all these composites together is bound for bowser embarrassment!

I have difficulty keeping my Patrol from riding the gutters when nearing a petrol station, just seems to pull towards them!

For the record, I have mine down to 19L at present, with twin carriers, rack, winch, drawers 285's etc. I'm quite pleased with this considering all things!
__________________
__________________________________________________ __________-
www.danbricanvas.com
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiTweet this Post!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #4  
Old 23-02-2008, 08:55 AM
Newbie
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Karratha, West Aussie
Posts: 12
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Hi again,
I am keen on getting greater distances between fill so the 3k doesn't concern me too much but I wonder if the better exhaust, chip etc will improve things considerably.
Are these vehicles just chocked from factory to meet ADR?
I was hoping someone has done some mods to quote some improved numbers..
Fair call, this maybe reasonable economy but there must be some improvements worth while.
I don't mind the gas suggestion (from g@z) but that is over a dollar a ltr and maybe get less range.
Appreciate the input, at least I know now my car is no different to others.

Last edited by MrPaul; 23-02-2008 at 09:20 AM.
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiTweet this Post!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #5  
Old 23-02-2008, 11:00 AM
Double Locked and Loaded
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Moranbah, Qld
Posts: 1,290
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

MrPaul,

My 05 4.8 Auto was around 19lts with the Beaudesert system and turning 33" tyres. That is doing 110km/h on country roads. 16 to 17ltrs if you sat on 100km/h and take it easy with the overtaking and don't use cruise control.

But I used to love the power so I gave up of trying to get anything that looked like economy out of it. If it made to 550km out of both tanks I was happy.

The Beaudesert system gave me and extra 30km out of both tanks of fuel.
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiTweet this Post!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #6  
Old 23-02-2008, 12:57 PM
Yatesy's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Brisneyland
Posts: 139
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

i average 20 with mine.... so slightly higher, but that's to be expected with the extra length and weight (extended 750mm and converted into a styleside dualcab)... had a GQ on gas and while it was better $ wise, constantly had issues so the GU will stay on petrol.. am also contemplating an exhaust from beaudesert, more so for the extra power and note than then the improvement in fuel company.
__________________
02 TI dual cab ute (750mm chasis extension), 3" TJM lift, tough dog big bore adjustables, RTC steering dampner, poly airs, 147L long range tank, 25L stainless water tank, plus lot's more...
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiTweet this Post!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #7  
Old 23-02-2008, 05:04 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: BrisVegas
Posts: 224
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

I too get around the 18-20ltrs around town, and pretty mush the same on the highway. I doubt you'll get much better, and certainly won't get down to 14-16lts.

Even the lighter less powerful 4WD's get crap fuel economy, contrary to their advertised specs. For instance, the current 4ltr petrol Prado quotes 13.1lts as the combined - ask anyone if they get that.

If you're after better economy for longer distance between fills, I afraid you may need to consider a diesel or aftermarket tanks for the petrol (although the latter obviously gives the same fuel consumption, but still longer range if that is really what you are after).
__________________
__________________
Dan
Patrol - no longer
2008 Prado V6 now in the garage (sorry for the language!)
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiTweet this Post!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #8  
Old 24-02-2008, 06:58 PM
truckster's Avatar
Autos are Superior
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: SE Melbourne
Posts: 11,715
Thanks: 0
Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Send a message via MSN to truckster
Default

As others have already said Very heavy car + Very big 6cyl engine = dont expect anything else sadly.

One reason that the 4.8 is so cheap compared to the good diesel, is the economy. Most people who have the 4.8 are happy to pay extra for the power, so either be happy with the great power std, or flog it for a 4.2...
__________________
---

The Genuine Factory Built TD6 GU


Donate to Kids with Neuroblastoma like Dylan

for a chance in life.
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiTweet this Post!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #9  
Old 24-02-2008, 07:46 PM
Davo 4800 02 Pootroling's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brisbane Southside
Posts: 129
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Gents,

Must agree if you want economy get a 3ltr....
Best I have done is 15/100 nothing in it at 90khr.....boring.
Worst about 30/100 towing a mates 2.5t boat telling him how slow his landcruiser diesel utes tows hehehe....

I bought the petrol over the diesel at the time because it was 10-15 grand cheaper than a 4.2 of similar vintage ,,, plenty of extra fuel in that


Dave

Last edited by Davo 4800 02 Pootroling; 10-11-2008 at 03:17 PM.
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiTweet this Post!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #10  
Old 24-02-2008, 09:45 PM
Newbie
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Karratha, West Aussie
Posts: 12
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default Enonomy or power

Quote:
Originally Posted by truckster
As others have already said Very heavy car + Very big 6cyl engine = dont expect anything else sadly.

One reason that the 4.8 is so cheap compared to the good diesel, is the economy. Most people who have the 4.8 are happy to pay extra for the power, so either be happy with the great power std, or flog it for a 4.2...
Yes, I have, funny enough realised that it is nothing different to the rest of the 4.8's. I will put up and shut up, after all it is a nice car to drive.
As Dave mentions, there was a 4.2 turbo (same year) sitting near this one when I bought it but was 11k dearer.

I have a plan to go and trade it within the year on a newer one and by spending a few more $$, get near the money back.

I will be wiser next time.

Thanks to all who input.
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiTweet this Post!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #11  
Old 24-02-2008, 11:03 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 869
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

hey mrpaul
that 4.8 litre is the engine capacity, not the fuel consumption

jokes aside... it's scary to think that some people with the new 3.0 CRD are chewing roughly as much as you with your 4.8

at least with a 4.8 you get something in return for the fuel used
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiTweet this Post!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #12  
Old 25-02-2008, 01:34 AM
Sandgroper1971's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 192
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Go gas if you want to save a penny or 2.

I know my old 2002 4.8 get better on a long trip if I stay around 100kmhr
as soon as you go over and hit 120/130 its drinks like a mule if you ad a head wind to that your in for a rude shock

Good thing Im only paying 50 bucks to fill both tanks... would mail you some if i could ...feel sorry for my Aussie buddies paying so much tax. Im enjoying it while I can before I come back home to OZ. I dread the thought of 100bucks to to fill up a buzz box.
__________________
2002 4.8, dual bat, rear drawers, 2inch lift, 285/75/16 Coopers, plus other stuff I cant tell the misses about.
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiTweet this Post!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #13  
Old 25-02-2008, 07:20 AM
Darcy7's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 224
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

The lubricants used in the vehicle can make a significant difference to fuel ecconomy and well as drivability. Just by changing gearbox, transfer case, diff and engine oils can gain some improvements. Also the brand of lubricants can make a difference. I have heard several reports about vehicles getting significants improvements in fuel ecconomy using PM Lubricants and fuel additives.

Check your wheel bearings. Just one bearing on its way out will have a noticable effect on fuel ecconomy and drivability, let alone all four. Ensuring all uni-joints are well greased can help a little.

Other more expensive options like modified exhuast, remapped or chipped engine ECU, water injection, etc can also help.

Of course the cheapest and easiest solution is to drive like you're driving Miss Daisy. Well..maybe not quite as extreme as that but you get the picture.
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiTweet this Post!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #14  
Old 25-02-2008, 07:21 AM
Newbie
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Karratha, West Aussie
Posts: 12
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default Empty tanks would cost me over $200

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sandgroper1971
Go gas if you want to save a penny or 2.

I know my old 2002 4.8 get better on a long trip if I stay around 100kmhr
as soon as you go over and hit 120/130 its drinks like a mule if you ad a head wind to that your in for a rude shock

Good thing Im only paying 50 bucks to fill both tanks... would mail you some if i could ...feel sorry for my Aussie buddies paying so much tax. Im enjoying it while I can before I come back home to OZ. I dread the thought of 100bucks to to fill up a buzz box.
Yes, Where I live, in the Pilbara, Northern West Aust, the fuel is $1.68 ltr.
Empty tanks would cost me over $200.
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiTweet this Post!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #15  
Old 25-02-2008, 07:29 AM
Newbie
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Karratha, West Aussie
Posts: 12
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Thumbs up I thought about a 3.0ltr

Quote:
Originally Posted by jimsaq
hey mrpaul
that 4.8 litre is the engine capacity, not the fuel consumption

jokes aside... it's scary to think that some people with the new 3.0 CRD are chewing roughly as much as you with your 4.8

at least with a 4.8 you get something in return for the fuel used
I thought about a 3.0ltr but having a 4 cyl in a 4x4 of that size doesn't excite me.
Not far wrong with the 4.8 crack.
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiTweet this Post!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #16  
Old 25-02-2008, 07:52 PM
Nomad GU3's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 90
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Hi Mr Paul,

I have a 2002 4.8L auto with steel bar, winch, large steel ARB roof rack, rear draws and on LPG, almost 2.7 t in weight.
The best I've got in petrol is 16L/per 100 km around town, using premium fuel. The avaerge is 17.5 - 18.5l/per 100 around town. In the bush, fully loaded and 4wd'g it can be as low as 24 and as high as 34L/per 100km.
On the hwy I have not got better than 16L/per 100km.
On gas it uses about 25% more but I pay half the price. I do about 40,000km a year, that equates paying off the gas in 2.5 years.

Cheers,
John
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiTweet this Post!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #17  
Old 25-02-2008, 08:13 PM
truckster's Avatar
Autos are Superior
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: SE Melbourne
Posts: 11,715
Thanks: 0
Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Send a message via MSN to truckster
Default

If memory serves me correct, I remember one of the original tests on the 4.8 in one maggo, mentioned 54/100 in low range deep sand work... I personally dont believe anything could use that much!
__________________
---

The Genuine Factory Built TD6 GU


Donate to Kids with Neuroblastoma like Dylan

for a chance in life.
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiTweet this Post!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #18  
Old 25-02-2008, 10:13 PM
MY-TD6i's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: NSW Central Coast
Posts: 1,196
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Or you could moove to dubbi where the fuel is only a few cents a litre...sorry I was just being a smart @rse
__________________
IF THERE'S A WILL AND A WAY THERE'S A PATROL.........!!!!!!!!!
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiTweet this Post!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #19  
Old 26-02-2008, 07:17 PM
Nomad GU3's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 90
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Hi Truckster,
I have a copy in front of me as I write of 4wd Monthly edition 60 (Dec 03) "Best 4wds of 2003" (in which the 4.8L Patrol won) that claims the Patrol used 82, thats right, 82 L/per 100 km on sand at Stockton Beach (NSW). They also claim the Landcruiser used 77.5 L/per 100km and that the 4.2 L diesel Patrol used 64.6L/per 100km. What the heck they were doing to these trucks at the time I have no idea - or did they get it wrong?
Cheers,
John
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiTweet this Post!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #20  
Old 26-02-2008, 07:34 PM
sim79's Avatar
4x4 Addiction
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Jimboomba
Posts: 7,989
Thanks: 51
Thanked 136 Times in 116 Posts
Default

My turbo diesel 4.2 that lifted and runs 33s uses 10L/100klm on the highway and 11L/100klm around town.
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiTweet this Post!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Patrol 4x4 - Nissan Patrol Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in

Image Verification

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Fuzz's GU Patrol!!! Fuzz Members Rides 48 17-12-2008 05:26 PM
Looking to lift my GU patrol GuBlue Nissan Patrol GU/GR 45 24-07-2007 01:12 AM
Fuel economy (or lack of it :( ) rickwagupatrol Nissan Patrol GU/GR 29 13-01-2007 10:57 AM
Problems with front HUBs - GU Patrol 4.5GRX 1997 reubens Nissan Patrol GU/GR 5 21-07-2006 05:17 PM






Subscribe in NewsGator Online


All times are GMT +10. The time now is 04:57 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
SEO by vBSEO ©2010, Crawlability, Inc.

Garage Plus vBulletin Plugins by Drive Thru Online, Inc.