My '94 gets mid to low 40's.... The absolute worst it has ever gotten was 34. Of course I sort of butchered the car and it ain't as fun as a real Miata but it keeps me out of trouble.
My '94 gets mid to low 40's.... The absolute worst it has ever gotten was 34. Of course I sort of butchered the car and it ain't as fun as a real Miata but it keeps me out of trouble.
Swank Force One wrote: In reply to Vigo: I don't know. I think a lot of it comes down to driver. The base 2000 i had for two weeks did 33mpg on the way home, and the current owner is doing 30-31mpg with it. I'd still just do a megasquirt. Ms2 is cheap.
The cost in an MS and other engine management isn't money. It's time and knowledge. As you yourself pointed out, it's all the day-to-day stuff that's hard. Cold start, idle, AC compensation, etc. There are a lot of Megasquirt enablers online that completely gloss over this, and a lot of cars that don't run like they should.
My '95 approached 30 on trips, and approached 25 just driving around with some highway use.
In reply to Keith Tanner:
For sure. I should have clarified that the 2000 base had i/h/e but still on stock ecu.
And as you say, i've done a lot of work across three ECUs on two turbo Miatas to get them dialed in. It's not easy, it's time consuming, and in the end for a situation where you don't NEED a standalone ecu, it probably won't pay for itself.
In my case, i would and will do a megasquirt or Haltech on my current car because i still have the files from the previous cars.
This is the same forum that constantly has posts about how the cost of X choice can pay for X fuel. That's the problem here. Even if you drove your miata 12k/yr (which very very few do), something that improved your mpg from 25avg to 28avg would only save you $100 in the first year.
Im all for standalones and boost but dont say you're doing it for mpg. If you're talking about actual cost savings in a reasonable time frame, there is no fix. The car just sucks at fuel economy for a tiny car with a tiny engine.
First otter, hard top, 1.6 stock size tires, engine, etc, etc. got 33-37 with SWMBO driving, and 28ish with me driving. That was for everything from pizza delivery, mixed, highway. That said, we do most of our driving in a fairly rural area with the lowest speed limit being 45mph.
2nd otter, slipped timing belt, soft top, r-comps (205-225 width) still with stockish motor struggled to get 24. Both were fun as hell.
I've heard that boosted cars get better mpg, and the next otter will get an atomic hairdryer to test the theory. Heck I've read more than one place that the FM upgrade packages for the MS cars have improved mileage when driven like a sane human being.
In reply to Vigo:
I do it for power. The idea that it will verrryyyyy slowly pay for itself (or not, because premium fuel) is just icing on the cake.
Again, though. The base 2000 had no problems breaking 30mpg. The guy that owns it now reports the same. Stock ecu.
I'll see what my current 2000 does this summer.
You'll need to log in to post.
