Improve your Fuel Economy and Performance

(18-10-2012 09:45am)IvorRedOne Wrote:  Well, I use my SD4 Manual on the motorways and stick to 60MPH (Northern Ireland) The A & B Roads where permissible I also drive between 50-60 MPH and I was getting nowhere near what your getting and your driving an Automatic?

Yeah I have the Auto box. Got to say that on the opposite side of the scale, if I'm in a rush on the way back home from the office! It drinks the fuel, worse than my Audi S4! But very happy with the fuel economy!

Guys.. I know that fuel is a tad more expensive in the UK then in NA.. But its still something we all watch carefully..But I'm avg 8-8.5L per 100km.. What is that 32-35 imperial mpg.. Short of going hybrid.. That is amazing for a company call Land " blow my wad on fuel " Rover of just a few recent yrs ago.. In fact.. Performance Fuel consumption is different for every person.. ..Cliamte.. style..Atmospheric conditions also affect fuel..my 997 get 12-14.5l/100km.. And that is driving normal..lol..my wife's Lexus -21 mpg on avg.. That is bad..

I for 1 am thrilled at the milage I'm getting ..I've never been a fan of after market tweaks.. Ford pumps billions of $$ into getting everything out of that engine..

I for one am a happy camper..

Matt


PS ..just ordered my winter package.. I have a lake house in the hills and we get dumped tons.. And a very steep driveway.. Now that should be the real test of my Evoque..

Matthew, those are photographs I for one, would like to see.

(14-10-2012 04:39pm)FujiSan Wrote:  I was neither patronising nor condescending. If however you feel that way then I apologise.

But even so, there seems to be some general agreement that firstly, these sort of units will always be a compromise over the vehicle manufacturers recommended set up, otherwise, as we both have said, LR would do this themselves. So users should be VERY, VERY wary of exactly what those compromises are likely to be.

And secondly, if these units are so very good, why would their manufacturers always seem to advertise them as being easy to remove when you vehicle goes in for a service, and untraceable in use, and invisible to diagnostics units, and many other such phrases? Surely the vehicle manufacturers would to have a problem with them?

My guess is mainly because the nature of the compromises invalidates the manufacturer's warranty on the vehicle. Whether this may be justified or not is irrelevant, it would be LR's prerogative to invalidate the warranty if they thought it justified.

Uninformed owners of new vehicles need to fully understand what they are doing and what the potential consequences may be, which is why I and others are discussing the 'other' aspects of fitting such devices. It's not all positive, there are negatives as well.

I don't doubt for a second that on balance these units will do what they say they will do (except for over inflated MPG claims) my issue is how they do it, and the nature of the compromises that are made.

Regarding the comments, " land rover would do it themselves ". I tend to disagree; correct me if I am wrong but, land rover have probably restricted the engines to meet EU emissions laws, and to allow the vehicle to be an attractive company car purchase. Many manufacturers produce various models with the same engine except for different power outputs - achieved by differents ecu maps. I'm no expert but I would guess the Evoque motors are good for a few extra bhp/torque.