206+ 1.4 HDI also suitable for fuel consumption?

206+ 1.4 HDI user manual says do not exceed 90-100km / h for ideal fuel consumption. However, this vehicle reaches this speed in 3000th gear in 4th gear. At a speed of 90-100 km to make it less, when you shift to 5th gear, the speed drops a lot (2000rpm). As a result, I know that at low revs, it both increases fuel consumption and reduces the life of the engine in diesel in the long term. I think instead of going to the 5th gear instead of going with 90-100 instead of going and going with 110-120km / h at 2500 rpm, I think it will burn less. How about you?

There is a mistake, it consumes less fuel at low speed. & Nbsp;

[QUOTE = text] You have a mistake, it consumes less fuel at low rpm. & Nbsp;

If he was already working at the turbo in the most efficient 2000 rpm, then three or five or more are the same account in 5th gear, 90-110 is better;)

5th gear 90-100km speed 4.0lt / 100km, maybe you will burn less

[QUOTE = KenBlockJR] 5th gear 90-100km speed 4.0lt / 100km, maybe you burn less [/ QUOTE]

& Nbsp; & nbsp; I think the ideal consumption is the 5th gear 2000 rpm. If 2500- 3000d / d is done as you say, the speed of the vehicle will reach 130 km / h. While the engine consumes a certain fuel to move the vehicle, it will have to fight with the increased air resistance as the speed increases. This will increase your fuel consumption.

& Nbsp; & nbsp; Even the 4th gear can be more economical than going with 70 km / h at 2000 rpm, the 5th gear can be more economical than going with 2000 rpm wind resistance will decrease! If I had a trip computer, we could find our answer from instant data. & nbsp; What do you guys think? & Nbsp; Has anyone tried this by looking at the trip computer?

It says in the manual that the ideal fuel consumption is 90-100km / h. Since our old 2500-3000 rpm car was petrol, I took it as a reference, but the diesels were a little different.

So as a result, the first option you call me is the 5th gear 2000 rpm ideal.

1.6 gasoline xt & nbsp; I have & nbsp; & nbsp; me first time & nbsp; head to head & nbsp; I'm going to take this transfer event but & nbsp; I no longer wear it ... to the state of the road & nbsp; 2000 - 3000 & nbsp; in & nbsp; variablev. .3 down 5 up & nbsp; economical consumption .. arada & nbsp; with the remaining difference & nbsp; how rich you are & nbsp; nor & nbsp; poor car ... & nbsp; without being overwhelmed and screaming & nbsp; thousandths of & nbsp; let it go guys ...

I think you can use the best cycle according to the conditions of the road from 2000 to 2500, i.e. 90 to 115 km. I have seen the lowest 3.8 so far with this use in my own 206 but I can have an average of 4 4.5 liters.

[QUOTE = jack67] I think you can use the best speed according to the conditions of the road between 2000 and 2500, i.e. from 90 to 115 km. / QUOTE]

I live in Dikmen Keklikpınar where I am a student, I go to zongulda every 2 weeks. A warehouse diesel is enough for 2 weeks, this corresponds to approximately 1000 km. I wondered what your average is now, where do you live now?

Last year, I came to Amasya, Istanbul, with an average of 3.6 LT of 3.6 LT. speed between 100-110 km Serco05 2012-11-28 17:41:59

[QUOTE = jack67] Dikmen I am sitting in the partridge, I am a student here, I go to zongulda every 2 weeks.A warehouse diesel is enough for 2 weeks. As yours is a bit heavier. I wondered what your average is now, where do you sit now? [/ QUOTE]

My value is semi-suburban and semi-urban value only if I use it here, calm usage is not around 5 liters.

[QUOTE = text] You have a mistake, it consumes less fuel at low revs.

Let me ask here without opening any other title, if appropriate. Well, maybe the friends were asked before but I was afraid I was afraid. Now if I take cruise control and fix it to around 90, will it burn less or do I use it as a maual? I think I have gained advantage by cutting off the gas when necessary, and when I feel uphill, I try to balance it by trying not to reach 90 and on the long road. When this cruise control feels uphill, I will increase the throttle and try to fix it to 90, and I will increase the speed or I think it's very simple. smiley1.gif "border =" 0 "alt =" Smile "title =" Smile "/>.

First of all, let me say that we managed to introduce cruise control to my same engine 206 as a result of long efforts, if & nbsp; If your accelerator pedal is electronic (it is) and the socket in your brake sensor is 4-wire, it will be certain. 2 wires are made by pulling the cable, but it is very risky and demanding.

If we talk about fuel, the vehicle is in the cruise control, while it travels at 100 km on the straight road, it consumes less fuel, and I use 3.9 km at the airport, which I use continuously. but if we consider all the road conditions, it does not think about the economy because there is no money out of the cruise pocket:) & nbsp; You will say that I increase the fuel on the slopes with a continuous effort of 100 km speed, and when I use it, I will decrease the speed a little and decrease the fuel. For example, last year I burned 4.2 LT at 3,200 km without CC, this year I burned 4.4 LT at 3,450 km with CC. As a result, if I say 100`s and grab the slope and go, CC will consume more fuel, but if you say that you can rest on the slopes, CC will consume less fuel. I have written too long, I am sending it without checking, I will find a lot of errors if I check the message.