View Single Post
  #31  
Old 08-28-2008, 05:16 PM
777funk's Avatar
777funk 777funk is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,031
Quote:
Originally Posted by nhdoc View Post
These fuel economy threads are getting to be like oil threads. How many of them do we have to deal with? Here's the facts again, you CANNOT ACCURATELY MEASURE FUEL ECONOMY THE WAY YOU DID IT, PERIOD.

Can we be any clearer than that? You will not consistently get 48 MPG from a 300D so don't think it will happen again. Maybe low 30's, MAYBE if you are lucky.

At some point someone will post that they filled the tank to the brim, drove a mile and it was still full so they conclude their car doesn't burn any fuel and gets infinite MPGs.

Seriously, you just can't accurately measure MPGs by doing small trips and topping off the tank, almost everyone here knows this. Even one full tank is not significant statistically...you need to do several full tanks and average them to get anything that resembles an accurate measurement.
I think everyone here has said the same thing as you just did. The point has been heard. That's cool and No sweat there...

There weren't any math or major number errors in my measurements (73 miles by map) and 1.53 Gallons at a slope with the filler neck at the highest point. Topped to the brim. But of course this is a 73 mile trip. I do realize this.

The only factor that could have thrown in error, that I can think of, is what PawoSD had stated with the expansion of the fluid. And he has a good point.

But... but... but... if one person can squeak 33 miles per gallon out of a w123 300d powered by a 617, I'll still bet (not realistically, I don't bet and I might loose lol) that a 300d powered by a properly tuned 603 will do closer at least 40MPG with easy driving and staying around 60MPH. The 124/603 combo is typically known for better fuel economy and power than the 123/617.

And slightly advanced timing almost always results in better fuel economy. I don't think anyone would argue that.

Of course take my post with a grain of salt. It's not meant to be salt in a wound to anyone. I know fuel economy is a sensitive issue. It is to me! I'm not meaning to offend anyone here. Great place, Great people, and the point for me is never to start an argument.

But this is a forum and I'm posting what I've tried. I'll of course take a longer sample in the future and of course a best of 3 as in any good experiment.
__________________
-E300d '99 350k
-Suburban '93 220k
-TDI Jetta '03 350k
Sold
-F250 '96 7.3
-Dodge Ram 12V
-E320 '95 200k
-E320 Wagon 1994 155k
-300d Turbo '87 187k miles
-E320 1994 200k
-300d Turbo '84 245k (sold to Dan62)
-300d Turbo '84 180k
-300sd '80 300k
-7.3 Powerstroke Diesel 15P Van 500k+ miles
-190d '89 Non Turbo 2.5 5cyl 240k (my first MB)
Tom's Imports of Columbia MO Ruined the IP in changing leaky delivery valve O-Rings - Refused to stand behind his work. Mid-MO MB drivers-AVOID Tom's.
Reply With Quote