2nd Generation Specific (1986-1992) 1986-1992 Discussion including performance modifications and technical support sections.

gas milage, wtf:

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Aug 28, 2005 | 03:28 PM
  #26  
jediknight7's Avatar
Coolant everywhere!
Tenured Member 10 Years
 
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 183
Likes: 0
From: bay area, ca
Originally Posted by emac
you're flooring it too much because of the mods
sure i have a bit more fun with it, but not always. even when most of my time is spent on the highway its still not any better
Reply
Old Aug 28, 2005 | 06:26 PM
  #27  
kennedy's Avatar
Full Member
Tenured Member 05 Years
 
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 68
Likes: 0
From: henderson ky
On my 85 se I used to get 21 if I babied it and 19.5 if I drove it hard. My 89 only gets 18-19 after a full tune up and O2 sensor. Automatic though, and it wont shift to the next gear until 5k or so.
Reply
Old Aug 28, 2005 | 09:27 PM
  #28  
inflatablepets's Avatar
Rotary Enthusiast
 
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 1,473
Likes: 0
From: St Louis
damn double post

Last edited by inflatablepets; Aug 28, 2005 at 09:29 PM.
Reply
Old Aug 28, 2005 | 09:29 PM
  #29  
inflatablepets's Avatar
Rotary Enthusiast
 
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 1,473
Likes: 0
From: St Louis
I would get around 25 mpg when driving nicely. These cars weren't known for fuel economy. Then again my wifes car (Kia Rio) gets a fuzz over 30 and my truck get 18-20
Reply
Old Aug 28, 2005 | 09:38 PM
  #30  
snub disphenoid's Avatar
Rotary Freak
Tenured Member: 20 Years
 
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 2,116
Likes: 1
From: Northern California
I actually hit 26mpg on the freeway coming back from Arizona on a TII with a ported motor...I averaged 23 overall because I hit serious traffic in L.A.
Reply
Old Aug 28, 2005 | 09:56 PM
  #31  
Makenzie71's Avatar
...94% correct.
Tenured Member 10 Years
 
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 1,283
Likes: 2
From: High Texas
When I got my SE to begin with, I accidently cruised 85 miles in 4th at 70~75mph abd got about 17mpg. Driving normally after that for the rest of the 540 mile trip I got close to 30.

sad thing is my 1.3 liter RX-7 put down just a hair more than half the horsepower than my bimmer and weighs 750lbs less, yet the bimmer gets 30~35mpg almost regardless of how I drive her.
Reply
Old Aug 28, 2005 | 11:42 PM
  #32  
BigMike85's Avatar
Full Member
Tenured Member 05 Years
 
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 231
Likes: 0
From: Alton, Godfrey, & Macomb IL
Originally Posted by Makenzie71
sad thing is my 1.3 liter RX-7 put down just a hair more than half the horsepower than my bimmer and weighs 750lbs less, yet the bimmer gets 30~35mpg almost regardless of how I drive her.
Probably because BMW has better fuel management computers than our FC's do...... or I should hope so.
Reply
Old Aug 28, 2005 | 11:48 PM
  #33  
Makenzie71's Avatar
...94% correct.
Tenured Member 10 Years
 
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 1,283
Likes: 2
From: High Texas
Originally Posted by BigMike85
Probably because BMW has better fuel management computers than our FC's do...... or I should hope so.
Well yeah...plus 10 years of tech on some fc's...but still. At the cost of bimmers and comparable sporting automobils it makes you question your fondness of older japanesse sports...
Reply
Old Aug 29, 2005 | 12:14 AM
  #34  
7romanstatesmen's Avatar
coolant leak that kills
Tenured Member 05 Years
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 411
Likes: 0
From: colorado
Originally Posted by blasterfoo
I get a bout 260 miles on my 88 n/a tank and it still has a little more than a quarter of a tank left........Mine usally gets about 24 mpg.


but that's after i leaned it out a bunch with an afc...still working on it.
Reply
Old Aug 29, 2005 | 01:21 AM
  #35  
Madrx7racer's Avatar
Banned. I got OWNED!!!
 
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 312
Likes: 0
From: San Jose, CA
180 miles and at half tank.........SAFC leaned out and easy 80 mph cruising for hours (hwy trip and mild city driving) whoooooooo...........had it been my TII it would have gotten 15 mph......will lwt you guys know what the MPG was for this tank sometime this week.......love the NA+safc (but i'm still looking for a cheap *** 30+mpg beater)
Reply
Old Aug 29, 2005 | 01:22 AM
  #36  
Madrx7racer's Avatar
Banned. I got OWNED!!!
 
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 312
Likes: 0
From: San Jose, CA
Originally Posted by BigMike85
Probably because BMW has better fuel management computers than our FC's do...... or I should hope so.
perhaps....but i'm willing to bet it's because the piston engine is more efficient than the Rotary engine....
Reply
Old Aug 29, 2005 | 08:25 AM
  #37  
capn's Avatar
Mechanical Engineering
Tenured Member 20 Years
 
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 1,618
Likes: 26
From: South Carolina
yeahhhhhh i hate gas, because when my motor was still in i got 12mpg...everywhere. highway, city anywhere. it sucked. but then again i guess a 4700lb monster that gets 20mpg is annoying too
Reply
Old Aug 29, 2005 | 03:43 PM
  #38  
homebrewer's Avatar
Banned. I got OWNED!!!
 
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 265
Likes: 0
From: Colorado
Yep, fuel management has little to do with the efficiency of the rotary engine. Yeah, our cars run rich but leaning the air/fuel mixture just shy of detonation would not help much with fuel economy.

The high ratio of combustion surface area to combustion volume (displacement) is the reason why our cars **** gas. Its nothing more than simple thermodynamics.

This is why I drive a car that gets 51 mpg at 70 mph,47 mpg at 80 mph, and about 40 mpg in hard city stop and go driving. My vert is driving only on weekends and mostly for a short cruise. Gotta keep the miles down, I don't want to break 26,000 miles until next year.
Reply
Old Aug 29, 2005 | 03:46 PM
  #39  
SmogSUX's Avatar
No money. No love.
iTrader: (12)
 
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 2,807
Likes: 0
From: SACRAMENTO
I'm not reading all that...but try shifting at 3-4k. Rotarys are more efficient at a bit higher rpms. Can't granny shift like in the piston cars
Reply
Old Aug 29, 2005 | 03:57 PM
  #40  
Sideways7's Avatar
Lives on the Forum
Tenured Member: 20 Years
Liked
iTrader: (7)
 
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 6,598
Likes: 10
From: Temple, Texas (Central)
Originally Posted by Madrx7racer
180 miles and at half tank.........SAFC leaned out and easy 80 mph cruising for hours (hwy trip and mild city driving) whoooooooo...........had it been my TII it would have gotten 15 mph......will lwt you guys know what the MPG was for this tank sometime this week.......love the NA+safc (but i'm still looking for a cheap *** 30+mpg beater)
Yep, I just got me a 30mpg beater. Now I finally have something to drive if the 7 goes down (like it is now )
My first car was an '89 Mustang GT, and I averaged 12 mpg mixed. I actually managed to get 8 mpg on one tank. Of course gas was only $0.80 a gallon back then....... My wifes car is a Geo Metro that gets 45 mpg with the a/c off, 35 with it on. Then again it cant make it up any kinda of hill without slowing down.

Originally Posted by SmogSUX
I'm not reading all that...but try shifting at 3-4k. Rotarys are more efficient at a bit higher rpms. Can't granny shift like in the piston cars
I find that very hard to believe. You have any data to back that up?
Reply
Old Aug 29, 2005 | 03:59 PM
  #41  
Sideways7's Avatar
Lives on the Forum
Tenured Member: 20 Years
Liked
iTrader: (7)
 
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 6,598
Likes: 10
From: Temple, Texas (Central)
Originally Posted by homebrewer
Yep, fuel management has little to do with the efficiency of the rotary engine. Yeah, our cars run rich but leaning the air/fuel mixture just shy of detonation would not help much with fuel economy.

The high ratio of combustion surface area to combustion volume (displacement) is the reason why our cars **** gas. Its nothing more than simple thermodynamics.
Yep, my dad's RX-2 (yes he actually owned one) got 8-10 before it died. For those who are wondering, I think it popped a seal at 30-35k.
Reply
Old Aug 29, 2005 | 04:55 PM
  #42  
Madrx7racer's Avatar
Banned. I got OWNED!!!
 
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 312
Likes: 0
From: San Jose, CA
Originally Posted by SmogSUX
I'm not reading all that...but try shifting at 3-4k. Rotarys are more efficient at a bit higher rpms. Can't granny shift like in the piston cars
that's just dumb....secondary injectors kick in above 3500RPMs so you're wasting more gas.
Reply
Old Aug 29, 2005 | 10:35 PM
  #43  
Terrh's Avatar
Thread Starter
STUCK. I got SNOWNED!!!!!
Tenured Member: 20 Years
Liked
Loved
Community Favorite
iTrader: (7)
 
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 8,737
Likes: 20
From: Windsor, On
according to my S-AFC in 1st gear cruising at 5500RPM my car pulls ~25% AFL.

same speed, 4th gear = 3.6% airflow.

the math is pretty easy to figure out here, I'm using WAY LESS fuel in 4th than in 1st..

I "granny shift" my car putzing in traffic all the time, 2200rpm shifts are normal for me.. I don't see the point in shifting higher!

my 12A was a different beast entirely though, I'd see 5000 on that all the time, and 4000+ just putzing.. that just LOVED to rev, my TII doesn't feel the same.

obviously, when driving fast I shift /way/ higher... I'm talking about putting around behind slow cars in traffic... but this engine has been introduced to the rev limiter more times than I can count.

12A's seem to get the best gas milage of any rx7, probably due to having a smaller motor... even the EPA estimates say 30mpg highway on s2 and s3 cars!
Reply
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
userjh5174
Alternative Fuels
1
Jan 9, 2016 08:49 AM
musker
New Member RX-7 Technical
1
Oct 1, 2015 05:58 PM
rattlehead
New Member RX-7 Technical
2
Sep 25, 2015 10:55 PM




All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:43 PM.