Welcome to the Australian Ford Forums forum.

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and inserts advertising. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features without post based advertising banners. Registration is simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Please Note: All new registrations go through a manual approval queue to keep spammers out. This is checked twice each day so there will be a delay before your registration is activated.

Go Back   Australian Ford Forums > General Topics > The Pub

The Pub For General Automotive Related Talk

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 19-03-2007, 11:15 AM   #1
csv8
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
 
csv8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Central Q..10kms west of Rocky...
Posts: 8,309
Exclamation Camry Fuel Consumption !!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Missus had to go to Perth and she hired a Camry. Not happy with the fuel consumption. She said "it's about the same as our Fairmont V8" modern 4 cylinder cars don't have as good a fuel consumption as our dinosaur ?

csv8 is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 19-03-2007, 11:26 AM   #2
pb02
inconceivable!
 
pb02's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 517
Default

What economy do you get with your Fairmont? Also what was she getting with the Camry?
pb02 is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 19-03-2007, 11:30 AM   #3
csv8
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
 
csv8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Central Q..10kms west of Rocky...
Posts: 8,309
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pb02
What economy do you get with your Fairmont? Also what was she getting with the Camry?
Fairmont averages 22mpg around town and 29mpg open road.
Camry emptied its tank in 400kms, Fairmont does 500kms a tank
csv8 is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 19-03-2007, 11:57 AM   #4
Poetic Justice
NOT A TOYOTA :/
 
Poetic Justice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Eastern Suburbs, Melb
Posts: 2,554
Default

Might want to consider the tank size there champ.. I think you'll find the Fairmont has a bigger tank.

I had a Camry over the weekend just past. Was pretty happy with it to be honest. I put $20 in it on Saturday and last me from Ringwood to Melton to Altona and back to Keilor before I needed to put more petrol in it.
__________________
06 LandbargeCruiser Sahara
Managed to remain in the v8 fraternity
Poetic Justice is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 19-03-2007, 11:59 AM   #5
XR8-260
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 2,558
Default

I don't think a 4cyl camry would use more fuel than a V8 Falcon/fairmont. But I heard that it uses more fuel that it's bigger brother, the V6 Aurion...
XR8-260 is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 19-03-2007, 12:04 PM   #6
vztrt
IWCMOGTVM Club Supporter
 
vztrt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Northern Suburbs Melbourne
Posts: 17,799
Valued Contributor: For members whose non technical contributions are worthy of recognition. - Issue reason: vztrt is one of the most consistent and respected contributors to AFF, I have found his contributions are most useful to discussion as well as answering members queries. 
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by blackout
Might want to consider the tank size there champ.. I think you'll find the Fairmont has a bigger tank.

I had a Camry over the weekend just past. Was pretty happy with it to be honest. I put $20 in it on Saturday and last me from Ringwood to Melton to Altona and back to Keilor before I needed to put more petrol in it.

The old Camry's had a bigger thank than my BA, but my God father was telling me that his camery (previous to the new model) was getting 7's. Was the Camry carring extra weight?
vztrt is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 19-03-2007, 12:07 PM   #7
MITCHAY
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Canberra
Posts: 13,455
Default

I get more than that even when boosting my car :
MITCHAY is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 19-03-2007, 12:24 PM   #8
The G6ET Spot
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 3,412
Default

Have to agree with csv8,my brother traded his AU fairmont ghia in on a 4cylinder camry and has also said that the fuel economy is worse. So much so that he is going to sell the Camry (only 4 months old) and buy a BF mk2 Fairmont Ghia.
The G6ET Spot is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 19-03-2007, 12:26 PM   #9
new2ford
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
 
new2ford's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Shoalhaven
Posts: 3,161
Default

Anti Camry though I am I'd have to say in fairness some hard figures are need to support this argument! Like litres per 100 km (or mpg if you must).
__________________
Officially Fordless
new2ford is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 19-03-2007, 12:32 PM   #10
TheSneakiness
Adapt or perish...
 
TheSneakiness's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Dip!@#$
Posts: 7,954
Default

Doing some research on Carsales...

Both 2005 model vehicles (BF XT and Camry Altise)

Falcon fuel tank - 68 litres
Camry fuel tank - 70 litres
__________________
Carless
TheSneakiness is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 19-03-2007, 12:52 PM   #11
uranium_death
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
 
uranium_death's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Gren A Waverrey
Posts: 2,410
Default

Based on the previous model of Camry, they found that the difference in driving a 4 cylinder Camry compared to a 6 cylinder Camry was something like a 4 dollar saving for refill.

However, given the comparative stress placed on the 4 cylinder motor when pulling the Camry compared to the 6, I'd take the 6 anyday.

I drove a Pulsar and it was the most unresponsive piece of poopie I ever drove. After that, I knew that 6s and 8s RWD were the only way for me.
Anything else will simply not suffice.
uranium_death is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 19-03-2007, 01:35 PM   #12
sgt_doofey
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
 
sgt_doofey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Barossa Valley, South Australia
Posts: 3,381
Default

Common Rail Turbo Diesel FTW!
~900 kms out of a 60L tank. :
The Peugeot is averaging about 6.3L/100kms, which I believe translates to about 44MPG?

My brother has a 4cyl '02 Camry and he gets about 600kms out of a tank of petrol. His Camry also tows a 750kg unbraked trailer OK. A bit sluggish, but it gets going eventually.
Maybe the one the OP's partner had was a bit under the weather?
__________________
Cheers,
Sam.
sgt_doofey is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 19-03-2007, 02:15 PM   #13
mustang70
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 241
Default

my work vehicle is a 1996 2.2litre camry.engine is from an 02 camry.somewhat older than mentioned but christ theres no way in the world it drinks as much as the V8. i dont bother working out economy though,as work pays the bill so why would i care. it does however not use alot considering its a fairly decent sized car, goes ok if not loaded up ,and has a good sized rear area (wagon)not much smaller than a commodore of similar era, if only it wasnt so dull looking ...
mustang70 is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 19-03-2007, 02:18 PM   #14
Ridin-High
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Penrith, Sydney
Posts: 301
Default

from my 60L tank, 70% highway driving i get 600-650 from full tank if im babying it
__________________
"I've got 2 Blow off valves, their for the chicks bro"

Ps. Yes i have used the search button mum....
Ridin-High is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 19-03-2007, 03:56 PM   #15
The Monty
Just slidin'
 
The Monty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Brisvegas
Posts: 7,791
Default

My old 1.8L Camry, 1987 model 12.5L/100k's average.
AU fairmont 4.0L, 1999 model 10.4L/100k's average
__________________
MD Mondeo - For the family
NP Pajero - For the adventure
The Monty is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 19-03-2007, 08:16 PM   #16
freedom_
Starter Motor
 
freedom_'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Sydney
Posts: 25
Default

if its been treated like s***, wouldn't be surprised of high fuel consumption.

I've heard of this problem with camrys, simply because the car wasn't taken care of.
freedom_ is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 19-03-2007, 08:27 PM   #17
Steffo
LPG > You
 
Steffo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Sydney, NSW, Australia
Posts: 4,277
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sgt_doofey
Common Rail Turbo Diesel FTW!
~900 kms out of a 60L tank. :
The Peugeot is averaging about 6.3L/100kms, which I believe translates to about 44MPG?

My brother has a 4cyl '02 Camry and he gets about 600kms out of a tank of petrol. His Camry also tows a 750kg unbraked trailer OK. A bit sluggish, but it gets going eventually.
Maybe the one the OP's partner had was a bit under the weather?
6.3L/100km = 37.6 MPG.

Last year I had a 2005 Camry 2.4 Auto hire-car when the Fez was getting its rear bumper replaced (rear ended). For two weeks. Best fuel figure was 12L/100km combined, with worst at 14L/100km combined. Not the most economical 2.4L 4-cyl I've ever driven.
__________________
LPG Lovers Association President & Member #1.

:
Steffo is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 19-03-2007, 08:36 PM   #18
XR Martin
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
 
XR Martin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Canberra Region
Posts: 9,007
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sgt_doofey
Common Rail Turbo Diesel FTW!
~900 kms out of a 60L tank. :
The Peugeot is averaging about 6.3L/100kms, which I believe translates to about 44MPG?
I get 400kms out of $30 of fuel. I win :P
__________________
2016 FGX XR8 Sprint, 6speed manual, Kinetic Blue #170

2004 BA wagon RTV project.

1998 EL XR8, Auto, Hot Chilli Red

1993 ED XR6, 5speed, Polynesian Green. 1 of 329. Retired

1968 XT Falcon 500 wagon, 3 on the tree, 3.6L. Patina project.
XR Martin is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 19-03-2007, 08:42 PM   #19
Dezza
Parts bin special
 
Dezza's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Narre Warren, Vic
Posts: 8,276
Default

When at cruising speeds, the 6 cylinders and V8s can be better with fuel because the engines don't have to work hard. On the highways, I've been able to get about 600kms out of a tank. This in what was essentially a stock EA Ghia (not so stock any more). Fuel economy is still great on the highways, as at 100kph it's only doing 2000rpm. Comparitively speaking, I've found a lot of 4 cylinders seem to be revving quite high when at 100 kph. On the other hand, driving around the city I'd struggle to get 400kms out of a tank. You'd probably find that the Camry would be more fuel efficient for city driving, the Falcon would be better for highways etc.
__________________
Weekender 1964 US Falcon Futura convertible - Rangoon Red
260 Windsor V8, 4 speed manual, LHD, Electronic ignition, Mustang wheels
https://fordforums.com.au/showthread.php?t=11470868

Daily 2014 SZII Territory diesel - basic runabout

Previous Cars 1990 EAII Fairmont Ghia - Tickford engine, 5 speed, SVO wheels, bodykit, much more
2000 AUII Fairmont - XR wheels, Ghia interior
2010 FG XR50T ute - XR8 bonnet, Streetfighter intake
Dezza is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 19-03-2007, 09:14 PM   #20
QualityCounts
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 152
Default

Don't know about the Camry. But my mate bought an Aurion a month ago. So far he has put in more than 3000 km. He's rapt with the fuel consumption. It consistently shows from 9.8 to 10.3 L/100km.
QualityCounts is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 19-03-2007, 09:19 PM   #21
coyote
Paint Repairs Spoilers
 
coyote's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 476
Default

Ok got nothing to do with camry's except I hired one in Sydney recently and hated it.

My Gt averaged 12l/100K on the fpV run to Melbourne (with some motivated convoy cruising) and our XR6 averages 11.3 here in Brizzy (99% highway driving) 1% flat stick
__________________
Tyre smoke - nah must be smoke from the running in oil / Sorry officer, just put some tyre shine, did not think it would do that.
Unfit - How could I be, always running off at the mouth and jumping to conclusions
coyote is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 19-03-2007, 09:37 PM   #22
MITCHAY
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Canberra
Posts: 13,455
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ea_silver_ghia
When at cruising speeds, the 6 cylinders and V8s can be better with fuel because the engines don't have to work hard. On the highways, I've been able to get about 600kms out of a tank. This in what was essentially a stock EA Ghia (not so stock any more). Fuel economy is still great on the highways, as at 100kph it's only doing 2000rpm. Comparitively speaking, I've found a lot of 4 cylinders seem to be revving quite high when at 100 kph. On the other hand, driving around the city I'd struggle to get 400kms out of a tank. You'd probably find that the Camry would be more fuel efficient for city driving, the Falcon would be better for highways etc.
My 4cyl (turbo) revs at 2800 at 100 and I get excellent economy both city and highway. I don't drive it like a grandma either. Goes just as good as a 6 or 8 too.

You have to remember that 4cyl's generally aren't in really heavy cars too which sort of voids the engine working hard argument IMO.
MITCHAY is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 19-03-2007, 10:21 PM   #23
jdg
Aussie cars rule!
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Sydney
Posts: 138
Default

I think both the Toyota Camry and Aurion get 9.9L/100km on the combined cycle...depends how much city/country driving you do.
jdg is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 20-03-2007, 07:37 AM   #24
sgt_doofey
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
 
sgt_doofey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Barossa Valley, South Australia
Posts: 3,381
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by XR6 Martin
I get 400kms out of $30 of fuel. I win :P
Sorry, I still win. 942kms out of $62 of diesel. Or if I go LPG in the Falcon, 418kms for $28.57 :P

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steffo
6.3L/100km = 37.6 MPG.
Hmmm. My spreadsheet calculates that as being 44MPG.

Using example above of 942kms and using 52.37 litres:
(Kms / 1.61) / (Litres / 4.55) = (942 / 1.61) / (52.37 / 4.55) = 585 Miles / 11.5 Gallons = 50.869MPG
__________________
Cheers,
Sam.
sgt_doofey is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 20-03-2007, 08:09 AM   #25
Steffo
LPG > You
 
Steffo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Sydney, NSW, Australia
Posts: 4,277
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sgt_doofey
Sorry, I still win. 942kms out of $62 of diesel. Or if I go LPG in the Falcon, 418kms for $28.57 :P


Hmmm. My spreadsheet calculates that as being 44MPG.

Using example above of 942kms and using 52.37 litres:
(Kms / 1.61) / (Litres / 4.55) = (942 / 1.61) / (52.37 / 4.55) = 585 Miles / 11.5 Gallons = 50.869MPG
Just whack it into google... anyway... this is how I calculate it...

6.3L/100km...

So, 6.3 / 3.79 = 1.6622691292875989445910290237467 gallons

100km is 62.5 miles, so,

62.5 / 1.6622691292875989445910290237467 = 37.59920634920634920817545351474 miles per gallon, or 37.6.

Google returns 37.3 mpg if you type in 6.3L/100km in mpg. I think they use more precise gallon and mile figures then I do, but stuff trying to remember all those numbers, 3.79L = 1 Gallon is good enough for me.

Oh and btw... 942km from 52.37L = 42.6 MPG.
__________________
LPG Lovers Association President & Member #1.

:
Steffo is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 20-03-2007, 08:33 AM   #26
Cheech
HELL YES
 
Cheech's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Penriff
Posts: 647
Default

There is a difference in gallons:

Imperial gallon = 4.54609 Litres
US Gallon = 3.7854 Litres

Imp gallon on 6.3l/100 = Approx 43 mpg
US gallon on 6.3l/100 = Approx 36 mpg
Cheech is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 20-03-2007, 09:45 AM   #27
ltd
Force Fed Fords
 
ltd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Enroute
Posts: 4,050
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cheech
There is a difference in gallons:

Imperial gallon = 4.54609 Litres
US Gallon = 3.7854 Litres

Imp gallon on 6.3l/100 = Approx 43 mpg
US gallon on 6.3l/100 = Approx 36 mpg
Exactly, but what is the etiquette?
I mean, MPG is a term used to describe fuel economy in the USA, and in the USA the gallon is 3.8 litres. So describing a US measure, should we use the US parameters for said measure?
Describing aussie fuel consumption is done in litres per 100klm, so depending on which definition you use there is no really correct unit of measurement in Australia with mpg. Sort of reminds me of that tree falling in the forest thing.
__________________
If brains were gasoline, you wouldn't have enough to power an ants go-cart a half a lap around a Cheerio - Ron Shirley


Quote:
Powered by GE
ltd is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 20-03-2007, 09:48 AM   #28
sgt_doofey
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
 
sgt_doofey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Barossa Valley, South Australia
Posts: 3,381
Default

Not being part of the US, I would assume that we would use the Imperial measurements. Who knows? I'll stick to the Imperial, that way my figures look more impressive! :P
__________________
Cheers,
Sam.
sgt_doofey is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 20-03-2007, 10:34 AM   #29
flukey77
Regular Member
 
flukey77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 313
Default

I will make my bias clear from the start, I hate camrys cause they are zero identity cars and they are stealing sales away from the more superior falcon, lol.

I know from experience that the falcon 6 can be very good on fuel if driven right. I borrowed my mums au3 forte for a few months back in 2005 to drive it to work and I averaged 12km/L or about 8.3L/100km. The trip was about 15km highway and 15km through town. I was driving conservatively as I didnt have much dosh back then (still dont lol) plus it wasnt my car but I was still very impressed. It only sits on 1700rpm at 100, my foot was barely on the throttle.
flukey77 is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 20-03-2007, 10:36 AM   #30
csv8
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
 
csv8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Central Q..10kms west of Rocky...
Posts: 8,309
Default

Missus isn't a lead foot and she has had the Camry for a week, trips to Bunbury etc. Hates the auto , prefers the Fairmont's auto.
From GOOGLE..
Fuel consumption ratings for the four-cylinder are 9.8 litres/100 km (29 mpg) in city driving; 6.57 litres/100 km (43 mpg) on the highway. The V6 delivers 10.7 litres/100 km (26 mpg) in the city; 7.0 litres/100 km (40 mpg) in highway use. Both engines meet ULEV II (ultra-low emissions vehicle) standards
must be something wrong it..tell HERTZ when she takes it back..
csv8 is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Reply


Forum Jump


All times are GMT +11. The time now is 07:16 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Other than what is legally copyrighted by the respective owners, this site is copyright www.fordforums.com.au
Positive SSL