FrenchyArnaud

FrenchyArnaud

Member
Hi guys (and girls? possibly? I doubt it but who knows...) A bit of context : about a week ago, I bought a LR 2003 "Kalahari" : diesel 2.0 TD4, auto, 90000 miles. A few known minor issues (back widows and roof faulty... shocker!) drives fine, turbo kicks in, auto gear is smooth, nothing out of the ordinary. Except for one thing, but that is a big one! with the first top up of diesel (about 30 liters) I barely achieved 150 miles, which, unless my maths are beyond dubious, puts the consumption at 15L+/100km or just shy of 18/19mpg. And needless to say, I am not exactly flooring it, in fact, I am the quiet driver if there is one - and that is mostly countryside roads due to my job. Any lead on what is likely wrong there ? Thanks !
 
Madmustang said:
Have a look round the forums
https://www.landyzone.co.uk/land-rover/low-mpg-td4-diesel.171847/
Click to expand...
Very useful thread it looks like. Thanks for the link, I actually searched for something like that but did not search well enough, clearly.

Turboman said:
I assume all filters etc. are recently changed, and that it is running the correct grade of oil ?
Click to expand...
No. It was actually noted it needs all of this done and it's booked in at a LR specialist for next Wednesday - I did not consider that a needed service could impact consumption THAT much. I mean, I am clearly missing 10mpg+.
Side note : it will be set as traction only on the same day. Not sure if this will improve anything.
 
Mpg does depend on many factors, including gauge repeatability.
I've monitored my own facelift TD4 auto for the last 2 1/2 years and 13,000 miles. Mine has averaged 28.4 Mpg over that time.

Your best bet is to use an Mpg calculator app or brim the tank, drive it till it's low then brim the tank again. The amount of fuel put in the second is the divided by the miles done. This is going to be more accurate than simply putting in X amount if fuel driving Y distance, guessing the gauge is back to where it started. ;)
 
Last edited:
+1 for brim-to-brim check and do it at the same pump in the same station. The angle off-horizontal can (by my reckoning) make a 3-4 litre difference to the fill. After that, there's a number of issues which can affect the economy and added together they can make a big difference.
 
So, I waited for the fuel light to come up and filled the tank as much as possible - that was 53.9L. ODO set at 0 then, we'll see... Hopefully I should hit the 400miles mark but I actually doubt it. Anyways, as I said, it's being serviced / 2X4'd next week, so I'll have a good idea if it makes any difference...
 
I seem to get between 480 and 550 miles per full tank depending on how I drive. My FL seems to go much faster on the way home from work. :D
I wouldn't say I have a delicate foot on the pedal. :D

I have a synergy set on the middle setting.
 
I'd be thrilled and more than ok with 450miles. I saw several mention about synergy settings, trying to figure out what this is about - if anyone has a link at hand to educate me, I'll happily study it.
 
FrenchyArnaud said:
I'd be thrilled and more than ok with 450miles.
Click to expand...

You'll not see 450 miles from a tank in an auto. I get about 370 miles between fill ups, which works out at about 28Mpg. I'd get more if I drove more duel carriageway, but it's hilly Cornish A and B roads for me, most of the time.
 
i can get 380mi from £138 in me RR :eek::D

A while ago I had a 1.8 K series that would average 29mpg :rolleyes:

TBH i thought the TD4 would be a tad better!!
 
Thermostat, fans, filters and oil would be immediate call, then look towards likes off MAF being badly out of spec.

I'd bet its thermostat and MAF gone. I had a 75 auto only did 26 mpg when both had went.

After that your into tyres, stiff vcu and worst of all, driving style =o
 
FrenchyArnaud said:
Side note : it will be set as traction only on the same day. Not sure if this will improve anything.
Click to expand...
I don't understand what this means?

Does it mean you're changing it to FWD? If so, then it makes no difference to the MPG, but will invalidate the insurance, unless you tell your insurance company. Mine wanted to charge me an additional £80 per year as they classified it as a higher risk modification. The Freelander drives better as a 4WD, so I'd not both running FWD myself, unless I needed to due to a fault that was due to be fixed.

To get 28 Mpg, do as above with thermostat, MAF, crankcase filter, air filter, oil filter, fresh 10w40 oil and clean the inlet manifold, oh and put a diesel cleaner in the fuel too.
 
Nodge68 said:
Does it mean you're changing it to FWD?
Click to expand...
Yes, sorry my english is not up to scratch...yet.
Actually it's the LR mechanic who proposed it straight away. His argument was simple and to me, made perfect sense : if the car does not actually off-road, the car in effect is a FWD. At 90000miles, the risk of VCU failure outweights the benefits of having 4x4. Hence, it makes sense to take it of. The loss in weight + the reduction of mechanical friction should have a marginal but positive impact on mpg. It sounded sensible to me, the removal costs essentially nothing (charged 20mn of labour), I went for it. As for the insurance, this won't be an issue. (already quoted)

This being said, it's not done yet so if there is a trade-off I should be aware of, now looks like the right time !
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

M
Mark 1 Freelander TD4 AUTO SPORT
Replies
2
Views
615
damian46
damian46
M
2003 Freelander TD4 Automatic Rear Axle Forward Bush
Replies
10
Views
1K
mudinuri
M
M
2003 Freelander TD4 Serengeti automatic.
Replies
0
Views
475
mudinuri
M
J
Options for adding CDL - 2003 D2 V8 Auto
Replies
4
Views
811
sierrafery
sierrafery
P
FL1 TD4 Auto vacuum hose issues
Replies
5
Views
2K
PDase
P