How many miles you get each tank of gas?

[VampNSXX]

So now that I have got a SC nsx I notice that I get about 160 to 190 miles for each full tank of gas depending if I drive the car hard. I guess that is what you get when you want a fast car. I wanted to know how many miles you get out of a full tank with your SC nsx and Turbo nsx. I also want to know what power you put down to see how bad some of us have it when it comes to gas.

SC 160 to 190 miles for tank. 446whp

So if my car holds 18 gallons and I get 190 miles that means I get a awsome 10.55 MPG. Take that Honda civic.

 

[chudson1549]

So now that I have got a SC nsx I notice that I get about 160 to 190 miles for each full tank of gas depending if I drive the car hard. I guess that is what you get when you want a fast car. I wanted to know how many miles you get out of a full tank with your SC nsx and Turbo nsx. I also want to know what power you put down to see how bad some of us have it when it comes to gas.

SC 160 to 190 miles for tank. 446whp

So if my car holds 18 gallons and I get 190 miles that means I get a awsome 10.55 MPG. Take that Honda civic.

When I had my Comptech. I would get close to 330 highway/maybe 225 city.
Running about 340hp to the wheels here.

 

[E-Nough Logic]

So now that I have got a SC nsx I notice that I get about 160 to 190 miles for each full tank of gas depending if I drive the car hard. I guess that is what you get when you want a fast car. I wanted to know how many miles you get out of a full tank with your SC nsx and Turbo nsx. I also want to know what power you put down to see how bad some of us have it when it comes to gas.

SC 160 to 190 miles for tank. 446whp

So if my car holds 18 gallons and I get 190 miles that means I get a awsome 10.55 MPG. Take that Honda civic.

There is no reason for a FI NSX not to be capable of getting stock like gas mileage. 10mpg sounds very low, is it that bad even with a lot of highway miles?. What are your AFR's when you are cruising around town?

 

[Cozmo]

The worst I've ever measured with my turbo is 17mpg.. and that was me driving around in boost like a psycho for the entire tank. I usually get 20mpg.

 

[VampNSXX]

Really? When I check on line to see what stock 1991 nsx mpg this.


City MPG: 16 Highway MPG: 22 Combined MPG: 18



I do not understand why a FI nsx give you stock mpg. When you FI you car you use more gas so why would it stay the same? By this logic I could have a 1000 whp car that gives stock mpg.

 

[haveblue]

Yeah, but you're not using 1000hp ALL THE TIME.

If it takes 15hp to overcome friction/drag to keep your car cruising at a constant 70mph, then your specific fuel consumption would be very similar regardless of if your car is NA or FI.

However, if you're at redline the entire time, a FI NSX with 50% more power should use 50% more gas than a NA NSX.

Power output ~ gas used.

 

[VampNSXX]

I am going to check again but this time I will fill up then drive it all day then fill up again to see what I am getting.

I might not have been checking corectly since I think I have been resetion my miles and not remmbering.

 

[omega2]

I haven't calculated the MPG on my car, but lower MPG on a supercharged car makes sense. Turning the SC compressor requires some HP too. I imagine the turbo cars would get a better MPG provided they aren't driving at full boost all the time.

 

[E-Nough Logic]

Really? When I check on line to see what stock 1991 nsx mpg this.


City MPG: 16 Highway MPG: 22 Combined MPG: 18



I do not understand why a FI nsx give you stock mpg. When you FI you car you use more gas so why would it stay the same? By this logic I could have a 1000 whp car that gives stock mpg.

The key word is capable. I mean with reasonable driving it can do it, obviously when you get on it and use more power than stock it will consume more fuel.

It is very possible to have 1000whp and get stock mpg, or even better than stock if it has a great tune on it. A car will required a certain amount of power to move at a given speed. Lets say the NSX requires 100hp output from the crankshaft to stay at 70mph. The factory engine without any positive pressure can produce this. There is likely a small restriction from the turbocharger but with the likely free flowing header and exhaust i would doubt it's being as restrictive as a stock exhaust with catalytic converter. The same amount of air if required for the engine to produce 100hp so the same amount of fuel is required as well. So even if the turbo system is capable of producing 1000whp on demand, when 100hp is needed it won't require any more air and fuel than a stock engine.

 

[BTL3.0]

24mpg on ctsc 6lbs whipple. My nsx gets better mpg then my 2001 auto prelude, 20mpg city..

 

[Hrant]

Recently I noticed a drop in my CTSC mileage too, close to about 220 on a tankful even when mostly crusing on HWY! The range should be closer to 350 miles if crusing.

The rear bank sensor threw a slow response code a few weeks ago so we suspect that might be the cause - it is the OEM 98 sensor with several track miles and total 60K miles. So we replaced it today and we will see if that does the trick. YMMV.

 

[Dhalsim]

I got 378 miles the other day.....gas light was on.....but I made it

 

[mrbozo]

I get a minimum of 200 miles to the tank with mostly city driving. That is driving it like anyone else would with 500 hp on the street!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Onsoku]

About 350 miles to yellow light [all freeway] CTSC 9#...120,000 miles on the CTSC, 210,000 miles total

 

[jorligan]

When I drove to XPO in Vegas, got 28 mpg with cruise control at 75 and never stopped except to get gas or sleep. Typically, city 22 mpg and this is with Lovefab at 600+ RWHP. Spirited driving, close to 10 mpg so you must do ALOT of spirited driving.:biggrin:

 

[mlambert890]

CTSC whipple, absolutely *zero* impact on gas mileage. I mean come on... you *know* when you are in boost. You can *hear* the SC whine. It is direct throttle/belt driven. If you care about mileage, stay out of boost. No whine, no boost, no impact on gas mileage.

I had two NSXs that I drove for thousands of miles each prior to my current CTSC car. I havent put any real mileage on the CTSC in the years I've owned it, but what I have done has been about 1000 highway miles across about 8 trips. Thats enough data to know that there is absolutely no difference in MPG for the current CTSC car vs my prior ones.

As always, it is *all* in how you drive it.

 

[goldNSX]

As always, it is *all* in how you drive it.

DITO

I'm new to CTSC and had the same 23-24 mpg on my first tank that I used to have before. No surprise. I use the supercharger but less than 1% of my driven miles because it's faster at the speed limit now than before.

 

[TomCat]

Yeah, but you're not using 1000hp ALL THE TIME.

If it takes 15hp to overcome friction/drag to keep your car cruising at a constant 70mph, then your specific fuel consumption would be very similar regardless of if your car is NA or FI.

However, if you're at redline the entire time, a FI NSX with 50% more power should use 50% more gas than a NA NSX.

Power output ~ gas used.

I'm assuming by your name that you can relate...The Tomcat with full internal fuel could "stay aloft" for over two hours...but in full blower...8 minutes!

 

[Vega$ NSX]

When I stomp on the accelerator I can actually see my fuel gauge meter move. :smile:

 

[stevenlee]

My '94 twin turbo only got 13-14 MPG in combined city/highway driving with very little use of boost. I never figured out the reason for the low mileage.... even after several retunes for higher mileage. But then I don't know the reason for burning a quart of oil every 350 miles. The engine is currently being rebuilt by another builder. Hope that cures the oil and fuel consumption problems.

With the wide range of fuel consumption, it would be interesting to know if the motors were built and who built them. I'll be the first. My motor was built to 3.2 liter by Factor X with 93mm Darton sleeves and Weisco pistons, with stock: cams, rods and crank.

Hrant, I'm looking forward to hearing if your mileage improves.

 

[lowellhigh79]

On my last trip down to Autowave, I covered 280 miles and still had 1/8 tank left. I'm guessing 24 mpg for highway droning at 70 mph, no boost. On boost is a different story.

Regards,

Danny

 

[Hrant]

Recently I noticed a drop in my CTSC mileage too, close to about 220 on a tankful even when mostly cruising on HWY! The range should be closer to 350 miles if cruising.

The rear bank sensor threw a slow response code a few weeks ago so we suspect that might be the cause - it is the OEM 98 sensor with several track miles and total 60K miles. So we replaced it today and we will see if that does the trick. YMMV.

It appears that changing the OBDII sensor for Bank 1 may have resolved my poor mileage. Will report after I empty the second full tank

You may want to look into this is you are getting only 250 miles or less without being on it.

 

[Myaddiction]

415 miles per tank all day long on the hwy @ 70=28mpg
300-330 miles per tank in the city = 20/22mpg

Stock bottom end

 

[Hrant]

415 miles per tank all day long on the hwy @ 70=28mpg
300-330 miles per tank in the city = 20/22mpg

Stock bottom end

Yes, this should be the norm: 20/22 is more like city HWY mxed. Hence when ones sees the range dropping to low 200 miles, something must be amiss.

 

[SexyRed]

I also get 160-190 full tank. My city driving lots of 1/4 mile light to light. Oh yeah I pull 8k rpm a lot times. You also have to qualify city as city driving for me means a lot of 1/4 mile lights. city driving for others probably means miles to miles traffic lights.

425 rwhp sc 10 pound boost.