ClubCJ - The CJ Lancer Club

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

Yeah my fuel economy isn't helped when I hit 5000rpm in 2nd

Well.. That probably explains a lot.

it's all down to the driver and how you drive the car.

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).

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

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

Not for short trips of only about 3km.

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!

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.

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.

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.

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

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.