Just curious about fuel consumption '87 760GLE

Hi all,

I've got a trusty '87 760GLE with a B280F that seems to still keep on (lets
not say ticking, cuz thankfully it is not!!) running.

I'm at 290K kms (181K miles or so).

My daily trip to work is 50 kms one way. During the summer I can expect to
use 10.75-11.5 L/100kms of fuel. I'd get a total of about 450km per
tank/47L or so fill. So roughly, I drive 10km city and 40km hwy during my
drive to work, then back home.

So winter is here, and I have my Pirelli Winter Carving winter tires on...
it's below 0 C and now my fuel consumption has shot up to 13.5L/100km NO
matter how easy I am on the throttle. The best I've done is 13L/100....
woa.. from 10.75 to 13?? that big of a difference?? Now my tank gets about
350-380 km or so range. (I guess it works out to be 22 miles/gallon during
the winter).

Is this about right? I love the car, but I'm travelling myself, and I
really wish I had a more fuel efficient car...

Honestly, I'd feel just as safe if I was driving a Toyota Echo hatchback.
I've raced cars for 10 years, have driven big and small, and if a transport
truck slams into me on my way to work.. well, I don't think my 760 is gonna
be any safer than a modern small car with air bags. BUT I do like the 760..
don't get me wrong .. I love RWD too!!

So, any other 760 B280F or B28F owners out there with some observed fuel
consumption?!? (BTW: I typically travel about 110km/h steady at highway
speeds. Got the AW71, no brake drag, good tire pressure, good alignment,
everything should be good to go. Diff seems good, no dragging/worn
bearings. ....

 

The V6 is just a dog, that and the slushbox will both give a substantial
fuel economy penalty. Turbo with a 5 speed in the same car give more
power and much better economy, N/A 4 cyl gives even better economy but
is a bit under powered for such a big car.

As for safety, I'm sure an Echo is decent, but given a choice between
the two, I'd take the 760 hands down, airbags aren't magic, nothing
replaces a good solid passenger cage and large crumple zones.

 

I'm guessing you're posting from Canada and I'm not sure about the
engine configuration there. To me Canadian models are quirky, sometimes
delivered as Europen models and sometimes as North American models. So
the information given is more generic then model specific.

The biggest mileage killer would be a lazy or inoperative (stuck open)
thermostat that would cause the fuel injection control unit (if it has
an electronic fuel injection fitted) to run excessively rich. If it has
the K-jet system fitted the control pressure may be staying low due to a
burned out heater on the control pressure regulator. A similar effect
could be produced by an inoperative heater circuit on the O2 sensor or
simply an O2 sensor sorted to ground from excessive carbon build up on
the sensing element, if you have one. A low or aged battery will force
the alternator to work harder longer thus adding power losses during the
warm up period when the engine is consuming extra fuel.

Low or insufficient tire inflation pressure will induce excessive drag.

A higher profile tire (i.e. larger circumference) will yield fewer miles
on the odometer than the tires previously installed and produce a larger
number when doing the consumption calculation.

Switching to synthetic oil in the motor and differential will give
noticeable improvement in consumption. At 60-65mph (~100 kmph) you
should see a drop of about 100-200 rpm for the same speed.

If you know the exact mileage recorded between two points as logged on
summer tires, compare it to the same mileage as logged by the winter
tires over the same distance to rule out a distance measurement error
before checking the engine performance parameters.

Bob

 

1) New filters on air system
2) Get the car tuned and sparks replaced if not recently
3) Make sure that the tires are correctly inflated (colder temperatures
= less air pressure)
4) Check cooler/heater system (thermostat, pump, hosing, change fluids)
5) Check electrical system
6) Check choke (might be sticking)


BTW, are you letting the car sit and idle (er warm up)? If you're 5-10
KM from the highway (like me in Aurora), the easy drive to the 404 is
mor than enough to warm the engine and car.

My usual routine on days when the car is frosted or snow covered is to
start the motore, clean the windows and then drive away.

Went from 1994 850 to 2001 V40 with no change in mileage figures,
except for long hauls on the highway.

 

I have an 88 model 760GLE B280E auto in the UK, it only goes short distances
and is rarely nice and hot, I get around 17mpg and on a 50mile trip it may
touch 20mpg, as far as I know it is all running ok and passes MOT's etc!
If I didn't love it so much I would take up lighting cigarettes with £5
notes, i'm sure it would be cheaper!! And I don't even smoke!

On another subject I have to change the leaky bearing water pump, I have all
the bits but my Haynes manual says "first remove the inlet manifold!" surely
I don't really have to, do I? Any comments would be greatly appreciated.

Regards, Bob Green.

 

Glad I'm not the only one!!

Si - 740GLE B230E

 

Hi James,

Thanks for the reply. Yeah, the V6 isn't perfect, but I don't mind it
actually. Makes "ok" power, good torque, and is quiet.

Reading some of the other responses makes me think that I'm doing ok for
fuel mileage .. as bad as I think it is.

Ahh, and on the Echo note, most new small cars would fair better in an
accident just due to FEA calculations made easier using modern
computers/software. I'm SURE the 760 would do quite well in an accident...
and actually, I don't love air bags (we don't use them in racing, that's for
sure) at all (kinda happy that my 760 doesn't have them).

There is an interesting video on Google's video search page, type in SMART
CRASH.. they crash a Smart ForTwo into a wall at a slight angle at 70 mph!!
Amazing, the doors open and close. The occupants would have died from
internal injuries no doubt, but I was amazed at how the structure survived
the accident.

If Volvo made a "Echo hatchback" (sold as '99-05 Yaris/Vitz in other
markets) kinda car, I'd buy one for sure... btw: I think the Echo sedan is
quite ugly.

Volvo V30?? hmmm

 

Our 960 gets similar mileage from its Inline 6 engine... 10-11L/100kms city
in the summer and 12.5-14L/100kms city in the winter. On the highway it gets
8.9-9.2L/100kms summer and around 11L/100kms winter.

 

I like the engine in the 960. I'd love to find a later version of the car,
maybe a S90, but the resale value is QUITE high in Ontario! (probably
elsewhere as well). I can buy a newer BMW 330 for just a few bucks more.
The 960 isn't quite as big as a 5 series, but I'd say it's a bit bigger and
more luxurious than the last generation 3 series.

Surprisingly, the 960 was quite expensive for me to insure, I guess the
insurance companies think it's expensive to fix body panels on it. But they
forget that they will be paying out less in accident benefits.

Cheers

 

I've found the 960 didn't hold its value like the 240's did... Tho they
aren't too bad. Haven't looked at S90 prices.

I think they were as much or more expensive then a BMW 330 tho... Our 1993
960 was $42000 when it was new.

Insurance is cheap on our 960... I was paying $1800 on it per year - it's
back in my parents name (it was always their car, but it was cheaper for
them to insure my car under their name and me to insure their car under my
name for quite a while) and they pay something like $700 a year for it, plus
$500 for my brother as 2nd driver. Right now I'm sitting at $2200 on a 99
Golf.

 

Going from the 1995 950 to the 2001 V40 took me from 900/year for
insurance to 1300.

Sounds like its time to shop around if your insurance rates are really
out of whack and you don't ahve lots of kids or tickets.

This morning's drive in all that snow just had another possible reason
for the lesser mileage figures: traffic patterns. During July and
August, wide open roads and everyone moving; now, even without the
snow, its slow with lots of stops and starts.

It's the starts that will eat the gas.