32.9 miles per gallon driving my GT!!!

[chris15]

Originally Posted by pt06

Chris; wideband sensors claim to be more accurate. I've found no evidence to believe that statement. Unless each one is calibrated, it is a guessing game.

Sorry to say, but people have been using wideband setups from reputable companies for quite awhile now without issues. AEM's UEGO does not need to be recalibrated and Innovate's LC1 has a recall ration procedure for those who wish to do so.

[NitroPT]

Originally Posted by pt06

Hotblk; on a 2003 sebring 2.4 dohc n/a there is a factory service bulletin stating to change the plugs to RE16mc gapped to .040 and to replace the plug wires. I've had good luck with the factory wires [70,000 miles and still good].

Chris; wideband sensors claim to be more accurate. I've found no evidence to believe that statement. Unless each one is calibrated, it is a guessing game.

Hotblk; just realized I'm in the turbo forum, so, what I said may not apply to your car. OOPS!

Wide-bands are very accurate I suppose some may need to be check for accuracy within -.020(+/-.05). But I don't think we have ever had to do that? I have 5 in a 4 cylinder running one per cylinder for single cylinder ECU calibration and a single for my Innovate gauge.

Originally Posted by chris15

Sorry to say, but people have been using wideband setups from reputable companies for quite awhile now without issues. AEM's UEGO does not need to be re-calibrated and Innovate's LC1 has a recall ration procedure for those who wish to do so.

I honestly can't even remember ever needing to do any calibration on any of these ever? We even compare them to a tail pipe AFR tester and they are more accurate because of 0/2 contamination at the end of the exhaust and no way to completely quarantine it.

[chris15]

Originally Posted by NitroPT

I honestly can't even remember ever needing to do any calibration on any of these ever? We even compare them to a tail pipe AFR tester and they are more accurate because of 0/2 contamination at the end of the exhaust and no way to completely quarantine it.

Oh yeah, I agree completely. I'm not saying that I recalibrate mine, just that there are companies that offer wideband kits that can be recalibrated if the user chooses to. I regularly attend dyno shootouts/events as my friend owns a shop and they don't use the tail sniffer/sensor anymore. At some points it was reading a full point leaner than the wideband was indicating due to exactly what you mentioned. We're on the same page.

[pt06]

chris/nitro; some wideband sensors are self calibrating. The only info on the accuracy of o2 sensors that I could find are from " tunertools.com/articles/fordmuscle.pdf ". An interesting test that compares several wide band 'systems' at ~13:1 a/f ratio. Two brands were accurate to within .1 a/f ratio. Pretty impressive. Others, well......

My concern is about the narrow band sensors and which brand would be more accurate for stock applications with the factory system.

[philbaz]

I may have found the max possible MPG.
My computer was reading 137.4 MPG at one point during a recent road trip. Of course that was at the end of a 7 mile long 6% downgrade and I had reset just as I started down. Nevertheless, I hereby claim the best "documented" MPG for a GT Cruiser convertible. (and that was on 87 octane, I have compared and find no noticeable difference in mileage with 92 and I very rarely drive hard enough to see a difference in performance.)
In fairness, I admit my calculated MPG for 1600 miles up and down I-5 in Ca, Oregon and Washington was a more reasonable 24.4

[NitroPT]

philbaz To make the claim you need to post at least post a picture of the gauge showing your claim!

no excuses!! (poking fun @ u)




Depending on the gauge or monitoring device when in the idle throttle position they will default to there auto max indication. Some gauges will show a value of only 99.9 and then a -- or some font indicating off scale. Others could show a calculated MPG which if you look at your manual is not an actual but estimated from last usable settings. Also some have a injector shut off setting that if actuated will cancel the registering as instant MPG and not re-calculating in the average MPG.


The use of octane is not a performance component of a fuel to improve MPG but rather to maintain the reliability under a load which you will encounter driving in your vehicle. Bragging about using a lower octane in a vehicle where the engine output will exceed 87 octane values is not really worth noting. Pre-ignition does occur in the Turbo engines and it is why the computer compensates via ignition timing. The fuel octane value is vital to prevent as much as possible that condition of pre-ignition which pounds pistons to death. Also pre-ignition or pinging is happening long before the human ear can hear it! So think about that next time you fill your fuel tank with 87 octane when the sticker on the cap says a higher octane value?!

[rockandroller]

32.9 isn't that far-fetched!

Through 20 meticulously logged fillups, my all-stock 2004 Turbo Lite has had similar mileage a couple of times - 31 and 33 - but ONLY on a couple of long highway runs. I'm averaging 21mpg over the 3130 miles tracked to date... two of those 20 fillups I've done as poorly as 15 and 17 (all city).

Truly something of a Jekyll and Hyde character, when it comes to city/highway MPG. I wouldn't trade this machine for anything, though!

[rockandroller]

PS: my gas mileage has declined at least 10% since last summer when I put in the new computer with the Stage One tune. I can really feel that extra 40 horsepower, though - wouldn't trade it for anything!

[soonercruiser]

I can only blame the bad gas mileage on my right foot!
When I hear the blow-off "WHOOSH", my brain sends a signal to my right foot to do it again!
At least I've got happy brain cells.