MX-3.com

I guess if you never floor it and the turbo is agtomizing the air you can get a little more mpg but why would you have a turbo and not floor it? lol

trust me my mx6 gets way better mileage then my 3. i just figure if the turbo is not beneficial in terms of daily driving then a klde/ze is just the trick to dump my tired a-- k8 and GET A CIVIC!?!?!? never thats blasphemy!!!!! u should be banned from mx3.com just for speaking such non sense loln but yeah i just want to do something to not be left at lights so easly and i hate getting asked "how much hp does that thing have?" and when i tell them there like lol i thought it had more it looks faster but i was inquireing about the turbo because mainly i thought m more mileage in todays crazy world, i love the sound of bovs, and maybe i wouldnt have to lie (sometimes i tell people 205 lol) about my hp

kulluminati777 wrote:trust me my mx6 gets way better mileage then my 3. i just figure if the turbo is not beneficial in terms of daily driving then a klde/ze is just the trick to dump my tired a-- k8 and GET A CIVIC!?!?!? never thats blasphemy!!!!! u should be banned from mx3.com just for speaking such non sense loln but yeah i just want to do something to not be left at lights so easly and i hate getting asked "how much hp does that thing have?" and when i tell them there like lol i thought it had more it looks faster but i was inquireing about the turbo because mainly i thought m more mileage in todays crazy world, i love the sound of bovs, and maybe i wouldnt have to lie (sometimes i tell people 205 lol) about my hp

lol YOU should be banned from mx3.com just for speaking such non sens... (i want a turbo for better gas milage) fail!

if you like the sound of a bov you should just buy a bov and a ebay "turbo" wisthle for you exhaust and your all set! dont forget to mount your bov on your front exhaust header and take out the spring in the bov lolll...

Oh!...and lying about the HP you have in your car... ya you really should get a civic! it aint a tight car if it aint a type R

mikeinaus wrote:in what world do you think a 2.5l engine that is essentially the same as a 1.8l (give or take) only bigger use less fuel. i think you have the whole engineering idea backwards. you want better mileage? swap in a 1.6l i4 from the 92 rs, or buy a civic...

Actually my ZE got me way better milleage than my K8, lots of us local guys used to be able to hit 500km on a tank with our ZE's, Devlin I thing got even hit 600 once, and she gave great milleage no matter how had you drove, it was a great motor. There's a thread a while back about milleage. I did a trip from Ottawa to Port Colborne in 4.5 hours (which is stupid fast), regularly hit over 200km/h, and still averaged about 33mpg I believe. In the end, bigger doesn't necessarilly worse milleage, the bigger motor isn't working as hard. This does NOT apply to cars that have been supercharged/turbocharged, that's a totally different ball game. He is literally talking about using a turbo solely to get better milleage, that doesn't happen. I think he's been skewed by the Ford "Ecoboost" thinking it will improve efficiency

Is it just me, or am I find it sad that people here with cars getting 30mpg+ (GS) or 40mpg+ (RS) want to spend money for better fuel economy?

I find people measure fuel mileage success in "tanks" wheras your Dodge cummins 7.1L gets 700 per tank, it costs $170 to fill, whereas I only get 300-500, and only costs 30-40 to fill.


cars nowadays have larger tanks to make people feel like they're getting better milage, you know, those commercials where cars drive past the gas pumps, which apparently means they use less fuel.

So maybe he's been tricked by the BS marketing. 300/tank sounds bad, but its not so bad on a 50L tank.

ok there john mx3 i had a simple question and your getting offended pretty easily i mean i would to if i had the ugliest 3 on the site and supported honda but hey no harm done cant we all just get along

kulluminati777 wrote:ok there john mx3 i had a simple question and your getting offended pretty easily i mean i would to if i had the ugliest 3 on the site and supported honda but hey no harm done cant we all just get along

you want power and gas milage. 2 things that dont go hand in hand. more power equals more fuel burned. that being said engine load does come into the equation where bigger motors can run faster using less fuel but for basic stop and go city driving the smaller the motor the better. if your motor is in that bad of shape that you get horrible gas milage and no power then yes upgrading to a 2.5l could give you an improvement, but upgrading to a better stock motor would also give you an improvement. you need to ask yourself if you want a fast car or an economical car.

i really dont get why people b---- about gas prices all the time. you have a car, cars run on gas. if you cant afford gas dont drive a car. $40 to go 300+kms in the comfort of your own vehicle is nothing to cry about. you can easily spend more then that to stand on some crappy bus surrounded by crack heads, and wait in the freezing cold/rain for 30min when your bus is late. if it costs you more then that its time to ditch the huge suv or whatever else your driving.

i purposely drove as economical i could on this tank to see how much milage i could get out of my car. i normally get around 300km when my fuel light comes on. ive been doing almost completely highway driving and using cruise control at 80-95km/h instead of the usual 120km/h, and shifting at 2500-3000rpm(max). so far im at 360km and i think ill make it pretty close to 400km before my fuel light comes on. all in all it should work out to almost 30% increase in mileage. that is substantial, but the extra $5-$8 or so ill spend to drive the way i like makes more sense to me.

Your milage sucks man. I've had 500 before the light... that was unusual though. Normally closer to 400 before the light.

Yeah i know it sucks. i think its cuz of my high flow 2.25" catback. everything else is prime so i cant figure it out. new o2's, no cels, proper tire pressure, good wheel bearings, no dragging e brake, short-ram intake, new plugs/plug wires, fuel filter and the motor is in pretty good shape (doesnt blow smoke or burn too much oil). i average 10l/100km or 23.5mpg which isnt horrible but not very close to what everyone else is averaging. it used to bug me but ive accepted the fact that my car doesnt get great milage. and hey atleast its better then the 200km a tank my old k8 was getting. i am however expecting an increase in mileage when i finally do swap to a 2.5l. if youve got any ideas on what could be causing my gas problems id love to hear them...

p.s. maybe you just drive like a grandma as thats close to what im getting in grandma-mode. 400km anyways, i doubt my car would ever hit close to 500kms unless it was 1 long trip downhill 90% of the way.

johnmx3ze wrote:WHAT? you want a turbo kit to save on gas?

buy a civic...

Ever heard of a buick GNX? Pretty much anything in that era was a turbo to provide milage without the expense of power. Its all about gearing and where your turbo will kick in. Not to mention atleast here in NY where they dump as much ethanol into a tank as legally possible a tuned turbo motor will run better and get better milage than a normal K8/DE producing the same power.

Just my 2 cents, and kudos for thinking outside the box kulluminati777, personally I still prefer the triangle...

Buy a 2 cyl geo metro. Around 40 mpg!

Sleeper6 wrote:Ever heard of a buick GNX? Pretty much anything in that era was a turbo to provide milage without the expense of power. Its all about gearing and where your turbo will kick in. Not to mention atleast here in NY where they dump as much ethanol into a tank as legally possible a tuned turbo motor will run better and get better milage than a normal K8/DE producing the same power.

What are you talking about? Of course it'll give decent milleage because it was a V6, not because it was a turbo. The turbo was there to give it that extra power. It's no different than todays plethora of turbo 4cyl cars; good 4cyl milleage for regular driving, but power with the turbo when you need it. The concept exists for pretty much anything with a turbo. Guaranteed that the GNX didn't give it BETTER economy because of the turbo.

We're not talking about having good economy with power on a turbo'd car, we're talking about IMPROVING fuel economy by ADDING a turbo....literally like the K8 getting 30mpg, and he adds a turbo to magically get 40mpg.

Nd4SpdSe wrote:It's not a diesel...

When you put in MORE AIR (from a turbo), you need to add the same radio of fuel, thus pump in MORE FUEL.

Not sure about you, but typically, when you have to dump more fuel into a motor, your not using less.

Depends. My car got stupid awesome fuel mileage with my boosted ZE. But when I was beating the hell out of it man it sucked back gas really fast. As a matter of fact I got around 680km to a tank of gas on 91octane.

Remember on a boosted car your only needing that more air and fuel when your boosting and at WOT. When your just cruising and sitting in vacumn your engine is running alot more efficient than it ever can.

My boosted mx3 was tuned pretty good and sat around 15.5 AFR's at idle and crusing was between 16-17.5 AFR's Under full boost at WOT I was pig rich at 11.5-12.0 AFR's. I believe that a turbocharged car with proper tuning can get better gas mileage than an N/A car. But remember whne your forcing pressure into your engine at full boost fuel mileage don't exist then.

mx3autozam wrote: Depends. My car got stupid awesome fuel mileage with my boosted ZE. As a matter of fact I got around 680km to a tank of gas on 91octane. When your just cruising and sitting in vacumn your engine is running alot more efficient than it ever can. I believe that a turbocharged car with proper tuning can get better gas mileage than an N/A car.

Indeed, it's just not about the fact that your turbo'd that you got better milleage, it's because you had Megasquirt and tuned the car. Regardless if it's N/A or turbo, you'll improve over the factory system if you spend the time and money to tune the car. We know a good tune will yield more performance and better economy.

You're also saying that it get good if not better economy when you're cruising in vacuum, but your turbo isn't actually involved in the process, so your turbo isn't contributing to the improved economy.

As per the topic. It's about Turbo FOR Milleage, not Turbo AND Milleage.
- Turbo For Milleage : No
- Turbo And Milleage : Yes*
*when tuned


However, that's not the argument. We're saying a turbo in itself will yield better economy.

Wow... add a Turbo for mileage... well, that ain't workin' so lets dump in almost 1 more Litre of motor! Um... yeah. Mileage FAIL on both accounts!

Bashing people for their comments on how funny your concept of internal combustion engines vs gas mileage isn't going to win you any brownie points.

You need to read up on motors..... allot.