Mpg on a modified impreza
04 December 2013, 12:19 AM
#31
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Essex
Posts: 599
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Your mpg experience sounds spot on.
When mine was a standard 2005 Sti the best I ever got was 26 mpg - once. And that was on the 60 mile motorway run down to the mapper at 55 mph the whole way!!
I'm now at 330 Bhp and have never once seen more than 25 mpg across a tank. I get around 240 miles between fill ups and do a mixture of short trips to the shops and long motorway cruises.
I do remember an interesting article on fifth gear about remapping - most cars are produced to run on any old fuel, so if you take your Ford Mondeo to Romania or Mexico it would survive no problem - a remap will adjust the car to benefit from the decent grades we get in western Europe and hence both more mpg and bhp. However the problem with an Sti is that it is already geared up to run on high grade juice straight from the factory, so there are virtually no mpg gains to be made on a remapped impreza.
When mine was a standard 2005 Sti the best I ever got was 26 mpg - once. And that was on the 60 mile motorway run down to the mapper at 55 mph the whole way!!
I'm now at 330 Bhp and have never once seen more than 25 mpg across a tank. I get around 240 miles between fill ups and do a mixture of short trips to the shops and long motorway cruises.
I do remember an interesting article on fifth gear about remapping - most cars are produced to run on any old fuel, so if you take your Ford Mondeo to Romania or Mexico it would survive no problem - a remap will adjust the car to benefit from the decent grades we get in western Europe and hence both more mpg and bhp. However the problem with an Sti is that it is already geared up to run on high grade juice straight from the factory, so there are virtually no mpg gains to be made on a remapped impreza.
Last edited by romford-boy; 04 December 2013 at 12:20 AM.
04 December 2013, 04:15 AM
#33
As said those figures sound about right. No matter how hard you try, trying to achieve half-decent mpg is a lost cause on these cars. But one thing I must pick upon... you say you owned a 330ci and it was thirsty? How so? Those can easily achieve 28 around town and upto 38 on a run. If you think the 330ci was thirsty then why would you buy an Impreza? 
Perhaps it's your driving style? What figures were you achieving with the bm?
Perhaps it's your driving style? What figures were you achieving with the bm?
04 December 2013, 07:04 AM
#35
Tubbs said he got somewhere around the 30 mpg mark, I think maybe a little more a few months back from his mapped 05 STI on a long run.
I can't emphasise enough how big a part throttle control plays in getting decent mpg, If i'm booting my lowly WRX PPP I can see as little as 16 mpg, normal mixed driving can see as little as 22 mpg, the PPP map is known for not being the most economical as well, and my STI Type r was similar and that has the short ratio box, I can up that to 28 mpg normal driving with the odd squirt and 34 mpg with the Blob at 80mph the Type R won't do over 30/31mpg because of the short 5th which means 70/75mph is about 4k rpm.
As I said before, it's going to be your pops and bangs that's REALLY not helping you, and just by having the odd squirt on the by pass or a couple of quick overtakes/ traffic light derby can see the figure tumble.
I don't think it's un-reasonable to want to get slightly better mpg when your just tootling about or commuting, I take it easy most of the time until the mood and conditions are right then i'll have a bit of a blast and remind myself why I own one of these cars, but to be honest if I did more miles i'd go for a re-mapped diesel for a daily instead of the blob wagon and just have the Type R in the garage for weekend and track.
At the end of the day "you gota pay to play"
I can't emphasise enough how big a part throttle control plays in getting decent mpg, If i'm booting my lowly WRX PPP I can see as little as 16 mpg, normal mixed driving can see as little as 22 mpg, the PPP map is known for not being the most economical as well, and my STI Type r was similar and that has the short ratio box, I can up that to 28 mpg normal driving with the odd squirt and 34 mpg with the Blob at 80mph the Type R won't do over 30/31mpg because of the short 5th which means 70/75mph is about 4k rpm.
As I said before, it's going to be your pops and bangs that's REALLY not helping you, and just by having the odd squirt on the by pass or a couple of quick overtakes/ traffic light derby can see the figure tumble.
I don't think it's un-reasonable to want to get slightly better mpg when your just tootling about or commuting, I take it easy most of the time until the mood and conditions are right then i'll have a bit of a blast and remind myself why I own one of these cars, but to be honest if I did more miles i'd go for a re-mapped diesel for a daily instead of the blob wagon and just have the Type R in the garage for weekend and track.
At the end of the day "you gota pay to play"
04 December 2013, 07:18 AM
#36
So with the blob tank being larger than the Evo sure I should be able to achieve 200 at least to most tank fills by time the fuel light comes on.
Think when I get it remapped I'll get pops and bangs removed or moved up high in the revs so it actually pops when giving it we'll rather than tootling about.
I don't drive it hard much in fact I've been driving it more steady too see what I can actually achieve to most tanks of fuel but so far 190 is my best and that's will a few 50 60 roads thrown in.
My Evo mostly did town driving and 200 wasn't hard to achieve on a smaller tank, majority of the time I'd only be using gears 1 to 3 with traffic and the odd blips from commuting to work and home etc.
Hopefully a fresh map will sort it, otherwise I'd fear some else may be causing it :/
I know these aren't cars to expect a good mpg from but surely I should be expecting more to a tank is what I'm getting at especially compared to likes of an Evo which I've heard are heavier an juice and harder to drive off boost with turbo being easier to spool etc
Think when I get it remapped I'll get pops and bangs removed or moved up high in the revs so it actually pops when giving it we'll rather than tootling about.
I don't drive it hard much in fact I've been driving it more steady too see what I can actually achieve to most tanks of fuel but so far 190 is my best and that's will a few 50 60 roads thrown in.
My Evo mostly did town driving and 200 wasn't hard to achieve on a smaller tank, majority of the time I'd only be using gears 1 to 3 with traffic and the odd blips from commuting to work and home etc.
Hopefully a fresh map will sort it, otherwise I'd fear some else may be causing it :/
I know these aren't cars to expect a good mpg from but surely I should be expecting more to a tank is what I'm getting at especially compared to likes of an Evo which I've heard are heavier an juice and harder to drive off boost with turbo being easier to spool etc
06 December 2013, 02:36 PM
#37
Scooby Newbie
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: cilcain, near mold
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've had 30 out of mine, not sure what the thing is though lol. Told it was a type r engine replacement on a wrx. Running at 315bhp. 55 on the motorway though and I'm getting 30.
06 December 2013, 04:59 PM
#41
Scooby Newbie
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Warwickshire
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
With regard the brakes binding. I don't think the brakes are binding as all the pistons are free and retract as they should.
But the wheels are very hard to turn when the car is in the air. It takes a supprising amount of effort, I put this down to the 4wd drive system, has anyone else noticed this?
But the wheels are very hard to turn when the car is in the air. It takes a supprising amount of effort, I put this down to the 4wd drive system, has anyone else noticed this?
Last edited by Trailking; 06 December 2013 at 05:04 PM.
06 December 2013, 08:01 PM
#42
I require my fun cars to do long road trips, and a sub-150 mile range at pace is simply not usable enough.
I've been on two trips with Spec Cs and the lack of range was always a concern. There's no point having a fast car if you can't drive it fast because you are worried you won't make it to the next fuel station.
08 December 2013, 09:10 PM
#44
Scooby Newbie
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Warwickshire
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was extremely careful on a run yesterday, i Managed to get around 32mpg! It seem that my mpg is improved at about 60mph... So there you go, you can get economy out of these cars, you just have to go very slow!
10 December 2013, 11:02 PM
#49
Mapped 2.1 stroker, turbo upgrade plus supporting mods, bhp: adequate
Long run (with occasional squirts): 23 mpg
Fun run: 20 mpg
There is no direct correlation between mapped bhp and mpg. It's down to how often and for how long you call for big power with your right foot.
You can map and carry big bhp and still get reasonable (for a Sube) mpg by cruising on a light part throttle and using anticipation to avoid using your brakes. When you're on a motorway on a long run, see how many miles you can go without using your brakes. It improves economy no end.
Long run (with occasional squirts): 23 mpg
Fun run: 20 mpg
There is no direct correlation between mapped bhp and mpg. It's down to how often and for how long you call for big power with your right foot.
You can map and carry big bhp and still get reasonable (for a Sube) mpg by cruising on a light part throttle and using anticipation to avoid using your brakes. When you're on a motorway on a long run, see how many miles you can go without using your brakes. It improves economy no end.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Jonny mac
ScoobyNet General
10
09 October 2015 12:25 PM