MS3 real world fuel mileage?
- Thread starter arkitek
- Start date
If you drive legally you should have no problems maintaining said fuel economy... if you drive like a little hellion your going to see a lot less than 18 MPG. Boost has a nasty way of requiring more fuel to match the air getting shoved into the cylinders. 28's just a best case scenerio. You'll likely see less if your a lead foot.
Here's one for the west coast guys... You guys dont have 93.. did they end up doing a tune for 91 for you guys? If not, do any of you other guys know if it'll run with out detonation on 91 octane fuel? Just wondering if the CA guys got a slightly detuned (less timing) version to run on thier pump fuel or not. Would be interesting to see California vs Eastern coast dynojet comparisons stock.
CTGrey02 said:
The manual specifically says it is designed to run on 91. For those who can get 93 or higher, I think it's just a bonus, but I guess we'll have to see what the CA/NV people say about the 91 performance. I'm thinking 93 will bump up the power rating to, say, 265 and maybe race gas will get you close to 270? FWIW, I will dyno this car in a few weeks.
Im not sure how this car will handle it but each bump in timing I made to my GT had the effect of about 10 rear wheel horsepower on the dyno. I doubt the computer will be able to distinguish the difference between 91 and 93/94 octane fuels. You'd have to have the computer reflashed to take advantage of it.
- :
- MP5T / 944
Disi Ftw
Once again, the Automobile dynos are faulty due to the fact that a fan in front of the engine does not simulate the ducted, hood down airflow over the intercooler.CTGrey02 said:
Could have sworn that the Torque/HP are to intersect at 5250. They messed something up on that print out.
any car that has a top mount will have that problem, all of you fanboys are obsessed with discrediting this dyno, despite the fact that you have never seen another dyno. How would you expect them to dyno the car, with the hood closed? I like the ms3, but I am not obsessed with discrediting numbers that do not meet my expectations.
Ahaaaa, there is another dyno on c o b b f o r u m s . c o m .
linky link, http://www.cobbforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=31522&page=2
linky link, http://www.cobbforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=31522&page=2
I could care less about peak numbers personally, the cars gonna put down what it's going to put down and the power curve is much more important. Every dyno chart I've ever seen has the torque and HP lines crossing at 5250. Either his scaling or smoothing was off on that chart. We also don't know if the numbers are SAE, standard or uncorrected. The peak numbers are inline with the standard 15-18% drive train loss belief however.
dread said:
No, I expect them to have a cooling fan on top of or aimed directly at the top of the TMIC. How is it going to work anything like it would on the road if the airflow is coming at a 90 degree angle to the surface of the TMIC? Why did the GTi result on the same dyno, same day show 11% less than claimed output (just like the NA Civic), while the MS3 showed 18% less? Under the new SAE standards for rating engines, it seems unlikely to me that either engine is under/over rated. Under the new standards, any number of manufacturers have had to increase/decrease claimed output. This leads me to believe that the TMIC should have been cooled properly. Put a box fan on it like the Subie tuners do.
But then I am a middle-aged fanboi, so I do my best make reality fit my expectations and to fend off the anti-fanboiz.(enguard)
BTW, just past 400 miles and this car just keeps getting better and better every day. The power feels stronger and the steering feels sharper as I work my way through the break-in period. I love it!
All I am saying is that who cares about the dyno numbers at most they are off by a few percent. If you want to look at numbers look at the quarter mile times. Glad to hear the car is improving with age. I am sure gas milage will improve as well. It typically takes mazdas 5k of break in before gas milage is at its best. So do you feel like you made the right choice in ditching the 6 for the 3? I really want the ms3 but might settle for the ms6.
dread said:
Yes, I really like the more connected road feel and steering. The 6 is just more isolated as a more upscale car should be, I guess. And I also like hearing the exhaust/engine. If I were to keep the 6, I would definitely go for an aftermarket exhaust that is more rumbly and a little louder. The 6 sounds like it's trying to roar with a gag on. But, if you've seen my comparo post, you know I think they are really close in all performance aspects. It comes down to more conservative image, having a little more elbow room and bigger back seat vs. more informal image, more driving fun, and hatch utility. I don't think about AWD because we don't have any snow here and I think it's only an advantage performance-wise for much faster drivers than I am. Of course, there's also the MS6's availability and massive discounting to consider. After everything is said and done, I'd still go with the 3.
