Fuel Economy
#31
Originally Posted by ephemere
Would you care to elaborate? On paper, they're competitors and roughly comparable other than FWD/RWD. ..............
FWD *handling* will never seriously compete in a sport sedan segment.
Otherwise.... yes.
Last edited by InTgr8r; 11-06-2006 at 01:55 PM.
#32
Originally Posted by GEE35X
Your mileage will improve for sure. You gave the answer for your poor mileage above
. Checking out the acceleration swell
. During break-in you are constantly changing speed and varying RPMs to give a proper break-in. Also it's new and you can't help but give it a shot to test this new found power.
It will get better.
![Big Grin](https://g35driver.com/forums/images/smilies/biggrin.gif)
![Stick Out Tongue](https://g35driver.com/forums/images/smilies/tongue.gif)
It will get better.
This motor is a great motor, but like all designs there are deficiencies - in this case it is efficiency.
I have an '07 Sport now that I'll have for a few days [350+ mi] - I'll post the MPG when I dump it off on Fri.
Last edited by RLampke; 11-06-2006 at 09:03 AM.
#33
Im doing 16.5 MPG (per the fuel economy program on the navi) on the second tank full @ 482 mi on the odometer. I think thats pretty good considering it's still brand new. Thats with mixed hgwy/city driving. My 04 sedan (both 07 and 04 auto) avg about 17.5-19 MPG, so I think thats pretty good for a brand new car.
#34
Originally Posted by mhleung
I did. On my first, second and third fillups, I divided the mileage on the tripmeter by fuel used. I never got over 16mpg yet.
However, I did notice on highway driving on Saturday, that at 140km/h on cruise, I got about 9L/100km on the computer readout. That lasted for a while, then when I sped up and down it changed accordingly of course.
Just hope I will get better mileage as the car is gradually broken-in.
However, I did notice on highway driving on Saturday, that at 140km/h on cruise, I got about 9L/100km on the computer readout. That lasted for a while, then when I sped up and down it changed accordingly of course.
Just hope I will get better mileage as the car is gradually broken-in.
That mpg @140 kmph (~88 mph) isn't too bad !!
Please correct me if my metric-to-US translation is messed up !!
#35
#36
#37
Originally Posted by ephemere
Would you care to elaborate? On paper, they're competitors and roughly comparable other than FWD/RWD. I've driven each only once and didn't push them. The TL-S was a manual and G35 was an automatic, which made a comparison hard (a stick is always more fun). They both seem to have decent luxury and sportiness (unlike the ES 350 which truly is a different kind of car/fruit), roughly comparable features, size, and price. Just to be clear, I do think the G35 beats the TL-S in just about every way (other than mileage, which is the topic at hand). But I'd describe it as better, not different, so I'm curious what you meant.
Sorry, I guess this is OT. PM me if you're willing.
Sorry, I guess this is OT. PM me if you're willing.
I just find that they are completely different beasts. In some ways, I think the TL-S is actually SPORTIER than a G35. I just love honda and ferrari engines, you probably laugh when i make that comparison but they are both low torque high horse power engines(compare some ferrari and Type R dynos, they are very mathematically similar, add the E46 engine to that mix too) and I love it. When you get into the sports car arena, low torque is just relative(low compared to HP, not low as in lacking). The G35 on the other hand is always relaxed when accellerating; it has a bully feel to it(the engine). The TL-s on the other hand pulls nicely but never feels relaxed and it doesn't hit its stride until the upper end. I actually love that about the car. Both engines are great, and I say this because they have been perfected. The G35 is a large V6 which has been tweaked and tuned to deliver a lot of HP, but you can still feel what it originated as. The TL-S engine is originally a small displacement overachieving engine (way moreso in the past when it was still the 3.2L).
FWD vs RWD/AWD also makes a HUGE difference, but it isn't the only reason for my comment. The rides on both cars are very different, and I couldn't just categorize one as harsher and the other as softer, they have their own feel about them. I drove the TL-S, G35S, G35x, and 335i coupe and I just feel they are all great but different cars. I could not name any of them pareto optimal in entirety, they each have their own unique traits which make them special. It's very very rare to find a car that is better in every area than another car EVEN if you don't care about price. Sorry if this doesn't explain my thoughts any better...hard for me to articulate on this topic.
Last edited by JWangSDC; 11-06-2006 at 03:44 PM.
#39
Originally Posted by inTgr8r
That's the difference.
FWD *handling* will never seriously compete in a sport sedan segment.
Otherwise.... yes.
FWD *handling* will never seriously compete in a sport sedan segment.
Otherwise.... yes.
#40
#41
Originally Posted by max2k1
Maybe my math is rusted .... but isn't 9L/100 km something close to about 26 mpg ??
That mpg @140 kmph (~88 mph) isn't too bad !!
Please correct me if my metric-to-US translation is messed up !!
That mpg @140 kmph (~88 mph) isn't too bad !!
Please correct me if my metric-to-US translation is messed up !!
It did show 9L/100km while cruising, but obviously it went all the way down to 15L/100 ore more after I came back into town, doing 100% city driving.
I should report again when I fill up next time (almost all city driving).
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Hogbone
Engine, Drivetrain & Forced-Induction
2
09-28-2015 06:44 PM