Nominate 'tank' as a new measurement

steptoe · Post by **steptoe** » Fri Apr 17, 2009 2:12 pm

I'd like to nominate a new measure officially known as the 'tank' to communicate the fuel efficiency of our cars. In keeping up with the times , it should be included in the everday use of metric measurement. I know it IS part of our everyday language, but it is too vague if you want help or trivia

Lets use it only for motor cars, as motor mowers, motor boats and motor cycles could have the measure 'tanklet'

Anything bigger can use the measure of 'tanker'

TANK is as bloody variable as an inch. There was about 20 different lengths of an inch before present time. "Hey babe, look at this fish i just caught - it is 20 inches long", says he , hiding his French inch rule where an inch is only about 19 or 20mm long !

Too many come in here asking how good is everyone elses fuel consumption coz mines bad sort of post, so many km to a tank does not describe efficiency other than having to waste time filling the bugger up again!

PLEASE use the current accepted measure of litres per hundred km or kilometers to the litre or even MPG (G = 4.546litres in Australia) when that intro is out of the way then maybe add that you ran dry out of fuel at 390km and refilled 55 litres

WHINGE over, run out of time

Jonno

BlackMale · Post by **BlackMale** » Fri Apr 17, 2009 3:45 pm

I'll take a a TANK(ers worth)... thanks

Seriously though rant accepted (by me at least) as many variables influence.

Now catch ya later cause i am off to get tanked!

Ben · Post by **Ben** » Fri Apr 17, 2009 4:24 pm

I usually get 8-900km from a Tank...

My tank holds 125L

steptoe · Post by **steptoe** » Sat Apr 18, 2009 10:04 am

Ben wrote:I usually get 8-900km from a Tank...

My tank holds 125L

That equates to

8km divide by 125 litres = 64 metres to the litre

900km divide by 125 litres = 7.2 litres per hundry

Yeah, that is the sort of info we need to compare, eh ?

Thalass · Post by **Thalass** » Sat Apr 18, 2009 10:49 am

I agree. Standardised numbers are standardised for a reason. :P

A "tank" could be a 5L lawnmower tank, or could be a 300L truck tank.

also: I got 13.889L/100km from 900km and 125L :P

Subyroo · Post by **Subyroo** » Sat Apr 18, 2009 1:38 pm

Is this enough info?

jim · Post by **jim** » Sat Apr 18, 2009 9:13 pm

this might be a little off topic but i think it has relevance, sometimes when i fill up (from pretty close to empty) the bowser measurement is more than the tank capacity. i think the tank capacity for an L series is 40 litres (please correct me if i'm wrong, i'd like to know).

1. am i wrong with the tank capacity? 2. is the bowser wrong? 3. does factory allow a little extra on top of there capacity rating? 4. is the extra taken up by the tank filler pipe?

sorry if this is a bit of a thread whore but i think it adds to the argument

cheers

Chang3r · Post by **Chang3r** » Sat Apr 18, 2009 10:39 pm

Jim, I'm pretty sure the l series have 50L tank at least i think thats whats in the manual says but in saying that when I fill mine up from empty it takes roughly 40L so must be 10L reserve or a misprint.

steptoe · Post by **steptoe** » Sun Apr 19, 2009 2:43 am

forty litres may be what it takes to fill an L tank when gauge hits E for the first bit , specs are generally 55litres for L sedan, think same for wagons

GOD · Post by **GOD** » Sun Apr 19, 2009 3:59 am

Subyroo wrote:Is this enough info?

Ah, spreadsheets. If there's a question that can't be answered with a good Excel formula, it ain't worth answering. But since you asked, it lacks any information on the driving conditions (town/country, driver, load, etc). Otherwise very comprehensive

steptoe wrote:forty litres may be what it takes to fill an L tank when gauge hits E for the first bit , specs are generally 55litres for L sedan, think same for wagons

60L according to my wagon owner's manual, but I've never seen more than 35L go in.

Dane.

steptoe · Post by **steptoe** » Sun Apr 19, 2009 12:29 pm

OK

I give up

I downloaded it - where am i gonna find it on my XP OS?

It is OK now, I found it. First time I have had a spreadsheet on a PC to look at. Can I clear its data and use it for myself? Or does it all just stay there ?

steptoe · Post by **steptoe** » Sun Apr 19, 2009 12:39 pm

the only way i have to measure capacity of my tanks has been to have known measure of fuel on board in an approved container, drive until run out of fuel cough,cough , splutter - could be dangerous if not on quiet open road at the time. Use all of spare tin to get going again and fill up at nearby servo, add fill to container, work out kilometres, consumption, reduce litres by an average consumption for distance covered from tin supplementation to bowser. Or push/roll or tow to bowser for a fill to measure. I have done thre out of four methods:) and coulda swore i got 60 litres in the Brumby whose owners manual states tank cap at 55 litres , maybe i put $60 in? not 60 litres.

Thalass · Post by **Thalass** » Sun Apr 19, 2009 6:08 pm

I know from experience that I can drive a good 60km after the fuel warning light comes on. More, if I baby it. The most I've gotten into a tank is 60L, I think. The book says 64L, but probably only 62 is usable.

Subyroo · Post by **Subyroo** » Sun Apr 19, 2009 9:39 pm

GOD wrote:Ah, spreadsheets. If there's a question that can't be answered with a good Excel formula, it ain't worth answering. But since you asked, it lacks any information on the driving conditions (town/country, driver, load, etc). Otherwise very comprehensive

Dane.

With the exception of the Sheets designated TSV & Melb with the trips and dates, the driving is has been Town/Highway with 2 x Pax 98% (large majority Male driver) of the time the other 2% would be with either 3 - 4 Pax, the vehicle has been off road maybe twice in it's lifetime.

I like to keep reasonably good records as you can see but I'm not pedantic about it.

Phizinza · Post by **Phizinza** » Mon Apr 20, 2009 3:24 pm

lol at people defending the use of "to a tank" measurement