***** ALERT - Nominations for your new ClubCJ Committee can be made here *****

RA vs NA?

Let Us Help You Decide What To Purchase.

Moderator: Senior Moderators

User avatar
aspir3
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 8374
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2009 6:15 pm
Location: adelaide

Re: RA vs NA?

Postby aspir3 » Fri Nov 18, 2016 9:37 am

The cvt is better on fuel than the manual.
I get over 750 km a tank around town and that is with a tuned 2.4l cvt
Image
Nice work Skip' now where the bloody hell is Sunny?

Please check out my GARAGE and feel free to leave a comment.

Online
User avatar
Lancer1993
Genius
Genius
Posts: 4446
Joined: Sat Dec 06, 2014 12:46 pm
Location: Caloundra
Contact:

Re: RA vs NA?

Postby Lancer1993 » Fri Nov 18, 2016 5:43 pm

Yeah my fuel economy isn't helped when I hit 5000rpm in 2nd :)
Image
My rides CJ VRX - CC coupe

User avatar
Mystique
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 1712
Joined: Mon Sep 30, 2013 8:28 pm
Location: Launceston, Tasmania, Australia

Re: RA vs NA?

Postby Mystique » Fri Nov 18, 2016 7:16 pm

Well.. That probably explains a lot.

it's all down to the driver and how you drive the car.
Daily: My14 Lancer LX
Weekender: 2009 MY09 Ralliart Hatch

Image
My Mod Thread: viewtopic.php?p=324612#324612
Instagram: http://instagram.com/mitsii_lx

User avatar
Skrallex
Lancer VRX/GTS
Lancer VRX/GTS
Posts: 355
Joined: Fri Mar 18, 2016 8:28 pm
Location: Australia

Re: RA vs NA?

Postby Skrallex » Sat Nov 19, 2016 12:29 am

I tend to go to 5000 RPM a lot too, I find it a better RPM for shifting up smoothly without having to consciously match revs (in the manual VRX obvs).

User avatar
sarusa
Lancer Legend
Lancer Legend
Posts: 1287
Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2015 3:22 pm
Location: melbourne

Re: RA vs NA?

Postby sarusa » Sat Nov 19, 2016 9:28 am

My car is 2ltr CVT and from traffic lights if in a hurry find, pushing up to 4000rpm, puts me ahead of the rest,
on most occasions. Hit accelerator slight gentle push then hit it not necessary to go to the boards.
sounds like I'm a led foot but no I'm not really.

Predominant almost entirely, short hops to the supermarket etc, I plus km to 3 plus km on last check = 13ltrs - 100km. Quite happy.
Some previous cars ran 19s and 20s

User avatar
Shaun Patterson
Lancer VRX/GTS
Lancer VRX/GTS
Posts: 378
Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2014 9:59 pm
Location: Rockhampton Australia

Re: RA vs NA?

Postby Shaun Patterson » Sat Nov 19, 2016 4:58 pm

na have run in the 14s
and 13\100 is really bad for an na lancer

User avatar
Skrallex
Lancer VRX/GTS
Lancer VRX/GTS
Posts: 355
Joined: Fri Mar 18, 2016 8:28 pm
Location: Australia

Re: RA vs NA?

Postby Skrallex » Sat Nov 19, 2016 7:27 pm

Not for short trips of only about 3km.

User avatar
sarusa
Lancer Legend
Lancer Legend
Posts: 1287
Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2015 3:22 pm
Location: melbourne

Re: RA vs NA?

Postby sarusa » Sun Nov 20, 2016 8:42 am

lol Most trips 1km. thanks for response. Have total usage tank full to tank full, on going over longer periods over many months.
will check them and post them. I sometimes leave the engine running for awhile on reaching 1km destination, till maximum working temperature is reached giving a few extra revs now and again. This wouldn't help things!! As I said I'm happy!

Online
User avatar
Lancer1993
Genius
Genius
Posts: 4446
Joined: Sat Dec 06, 2014 12:46 pm
Location: Caloundra
Contact:

Re: RA vs NA?

Postby Lancer1993 » Sun Nov 20, 2016 1:10 pm

I don't hit 5k in every gear or every trip, just depends on the situation. The main issue is a lot of my driving is short trips under 5km so the car doesn't have time to get up to optimal running conditions. When down to North Lakes the other day so mostly hwy driving at 100-110 so went down to 7.5lt per 100km.
Image
My rides CJ VRX - CC coupe

User avatar
Viking
Lancer ES/EX
Lancer ES/EX
Posts: 159
Joined: Thu Mar 05, 2015 11:32 am
Location: Notting Hill

Re: RA vs NA?

Postby Viking » Sun Nov 20, 2016 4:53 pm

Thanks for all the replies, folks. It's good to see that I'm not the only one in this situation of (relatively) poor economy around town.

Again, sorry for the hijack, so now back to the RA vs NA discussion. :-)

User avatar
sarusa
Lancer Legend
Lancer Legend
Posts: 1287
Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2015 3:22 pm
Location: melbourne

Re: RA vs NA?

Postby sarusa » Mon Nov 21, 2016 7:48 am

Shaun Patterson wrote:na have run in the 14s
and 13\100 is really bad for an na lancer


Hard to be accurate on one tank full to the next. So checked usage over last 9 months, and 2,074km,
all runs as prior predominantly 1km to 3km and occasional, country rd: run of 30km to 60km at speeds
ranging from70km 80km up to 100km per hour limits in hilly terrain. Reason for last 9 months its all I have recorded.
Achieved 11.63ltrs- 100km overall. Much more realistic and absolutely acceptable to me. :D

User avatar
Ronan.Butler11
Lancer VRX/GTS
Lancer VRX/GTS
Posts: 340
Joined: Sun Apr 17, 2016 9:38 pm
Location: Sydney, NSW, AUS

Re: RA vs NA?

Postby Ronan.Butler11 » Tue Nov 22, 2016 7:45 pm

Viking wrote:Thanks for all the replies, folks. It's good to see that I'm not the only one in this situation of (relatively) poor economy around town.

Again, sorry for the hijack, so now back to the RA vs NA discussion. :-)


changing the topic a little from where is currently is but hey...

first looking i was keen on a '10 RA sedan. loved the bodykit look, but now i have had my VRX, personally i would stick with my VRX, preference of manual, plus i landed one with the factory GPS and sunroof. most likely the only reason for me. if i had to buy again though, it would be tough deciding from my VRX or maybe a RA sportback, now that im a bit more civilised at the wheel hahaha
"When I Grow Up, I Wanna Be An Evo! (9 MR with a filthy BOV)

'09 Lancer VRX
Modifications:
De-Res Then a 2.5" Dual Exit X-Force Axle back Exhaust
18" King Rims
Ralliart Snorkel
LED No. Plate lights and interior
*insert further useless modifications to make it seem like i'm good at this*

User avatar
aspir3
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 8374
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2009 6:15 pm
Location: adelaide

Re: RA vs NA?

Postby aspir3 » Wed Nov 23, 2016 7:15 am

fisheye2 wrote:How many kws the engine puts out is irrelevant if the car doesnt see a few runs down the qtr mile.


What?

Are you serious.
Image

Nice work Skip' now where the bloody hell is Sunny?



Please check out my GARAGE and feel free to leave a comment.


Return to “Thinking of Buying a Lancer?”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: aussie027 and 1 guest