News:

Please check the Forum Guidelines at the top of the Newbie section

Main Menu

LPG Stag Kit on 2.2

Started by tunnie, 28 September 2009, 19:57:43

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 0 Guests are viewing this topic.

Print
Go Down Pages 1 2 All
User actions

feeutfo

#15
29 September 2009, 18:13:52
can squeeze 52 litres in mine. Which gives about 180 miles driving like a knob, or 220 on a gentle run at sensable speeds. But thats a 3.2. Would guess that would be better in a 2.2 ?

tunnie

#16
29 September 2009, 18:25:40
Quotecan squeeze 52 litres in mine. Which gives about 180 miles driving like a knob, or 220 on a gentle run at sensable speeds. But thats a 3.2. Would guess that would be better in a 2.2 ?

220 miles from 52 litres? Thats only 19 mpg  :o

Is the the best you can get from gas?  :-/

Motorway runs 3.2/2.2 economy is roughly the same, 3.2 can even be better  ;D

Omegatoy

#17
29 September 2009, 18:30:23
gas is less calorific value then petrol so you have to use more to go the sme distance!! anyway if the bootspace is a worry just have 2 smaller tanks either side of the boot then you can still use the seatback fold down system!! did this on a supra many moons ago worked well, jm2pw :y

tunnie

#18
29 September 2009, 18:31:58
Quotegas is less calorific value then petrol so you have to use more to go the sme distance!! anyway if the bootspace is a worry just have 2 smaller tanks either side of the boot then you can still use the seatback fold down system!! did this on a supra many moons ago worked well, jm2pw :y

What puts me off is you can only get 20-25 mpg at best.... i'd rather get a 2.5TD and keep all practicality.

Omegatoy

#19
29 September 2009, 18:41:16
Quote
Quotegas is less calorific value then petrol so you have to use more to go the sme distance!! anyway if the bootspace is a worry just have 2 smaller tanks either side of the boot then you can still use the seatback fold down system!! did this on a supra many moons ago worked well, jm2pw :y

What puts me off is you can only get 20-25 mpg at best.... i'd rather get a 2.5TD and keep all practicality.

I definetly wouldnt argue against that!! :y there is a nice very low mileage saloon on ebay at the mo or was it autotrader ::) one of the two anyway!!!

tunnie

#20
29 September 2009, 18:50:57
Quote
Quote
Quotegas is less calorific value then petrol so you have to use more to go the sme distance!! anyway if the bootspace is a worry just have 2 smaller tanks either side of the boot then you can still use the seatback fold down system!! did this on a supra many moons ago worked well, jm2pw :y

What puts me off is you can only get 20-25 mpg at best.... i'd rather get a 2.5TD and keep all practicality.

I definetly wouldnt argue against that!! :y there is a nice very low mileage saloon on ebay at the mo or was it autotrader ::) one of the two anyway!!!

This one?

http://search.autotrader.co.uk/es-uk/www/cars/VAUXHALL+OMEGA/Ne-2-4-5-6-7-8-27-44-49-53-61-64-67-103-133-146-236,N-51-240-4294966638-4294966947/advert.action?R=200939342386750&distance=188&postcode=NN13+6ER&channel=CARS&make=VAUXHALL&model=OMEGA&min_pr=&max_pr=&max_mileage=&vehicleYearOfManufacture=2000&vehicleRegLetter=X

feeutfo

#23
29 September 2009, 21:56:26
Quote
Quote
Quote
Quotegas is less calorific value then petrol so you have to use more to go the sme distance!! anyway if the bootspace is a worry just have 2 smaller tanks either side of the boot then you can still use the seatback fold down system!! did this on a supra many moons ago worked well, jm2pw :y

What puts me off is you can only get 20-25 mpg at best.... i'd rather get a 2.5TD and keep all practicality.

I definetly wouldnt argue against that!! :y there is a nice very low mileage saloon on ebay at the mo or was it autotrader ::) one of the two anyway!!!

This one?

http://search.autotrader.co.uk/es-uk/www/cars/VAUXHALL+OMEGA/Ne-2-4-5-6-7-8-27-44-49-53-61-64-67-103-133-146-236,N-51-240-4294966638-4294966947/advert.action?R=200939342386750&distance=188&postcode=NN13+6ER&channel=CARS&make=VAUXHALL&model=OMEGA&min_pr=&max_pr=&max_mileage=&vehicleYearOfManufacture=2000&vehicleRegLetter=X

A Gls tracter? As Andy B said on another thread, i'd rather stick pins in my eyes.

So whats the pence per mile tracter v lpg 3.2?

Entwood

#24
29 September 2009, 22:10:08 Last Edit: 29 September 2009, 22:12:08 by entwood
Quotegas is less calorific value then petrol so you have to use more to go the sme distance!! anyway if the bootspace is a worry just have 2 smaller tanks either side of the boot then you can still use the seatback fold down system!! did this on a supra many moons ago worked well, jm2pw :y

Actualy incorrect... LPG has a higher calorific content when in liquid form .... ie ... gallon for gallon, but has a lower Specific Gravity .. ie it weighs less.

All engines actually burn a MASS of fuel.. ie .. a certain number of molecules...  not a volume ... and LPG in vapour form weighs less then petrol, which is why more volume is used per mile.

The best way to compare the 2 is NOT by a false volume/mile or mass/mile calculation .. but a cost/mile one...

ie how many pence /mile does it cost on petrol v gas.

On my conversion over 16767 miles .. the actual running cost on LPG is presently 14.25 pence/mile v an estimated 22.86 pence/mile on petrol... a saving of 8.61 pence for every mile travelled. (37.66%)

Due to rising petrol prices over the last 2 months it has actualy been  just over 10 pence/mile but that will change as prices change

HTH

tunnie

#25
29 September 2009, 22:21:53
Quote
Quotegas is less calorific value then petrol so you have to use more to go the sme distance!! anyway if the bootspace is a worry just have 2 smaller tanks either side of the boot then you can still use the seatback fold down system!! did this on a supra many moons ago worked well, jm2pw :y

Actualy incorrect... LPG has a higher calorific content when in liquid form .... ie ... gallon for gallon, but has a lower Specific Gravity .. ie it weighs less.

All engines actually burn a MASS of fuel.. ie .. a certain number of molecules...  not a volume ... and LPG in vapour form weighs less then petrol, which is why more volume is used per mile.

The best way to compare the 2 is NOT by a false volume/mile or mass/mile calculation .. but a cost/mile one...

ie how many pence /mile does it cost on petrol v gas.

On my conversion over 16767 miles .. the actual running cost on LPG is presently 14.25 pence/mile v an estimated 22.86 pence/mile on petrol... a saving of 8.61 pence for every mile travelled. (37.66%)

Due to rising petrol prices over the last 2 months it has actualy been  just over 10 pence/mile but that will change as prices change

HTH

On my calculations then, my 2.2 is being as economical as LPG.  :-/

On my first 3 days at Sky i used 1 tank of fuel (59.66L of fuel at 106.9)

Tank was brimmed before, and brimmed after, did a total of 445 miles on that fuel.

So that works out at 33.91 mpg or 14.33 pence per mile.

Unless you are adding other costs to you per mile calculation?

Entwood

#26
29 September 2009, 22:50:38 Last Edit: 29 September 2009, 22:52:09 by entwood
nope .. but I'm running a 3.2 that is driven pretty hard and tows a great deal !!!

The estimated way of doing things is this ...

Your petrol consumption is presently 33.91 mpg @ 14.33 pence /mile.

Estimated LPG would be 20% lower .. so 27.128 mpg. LPG is 52.2 p/litre here or £2.37 a gall  so the estimated LPG cost /mile would be 8.73 pence/mile !!!

A saving of about 5.6 pence /mile or 39% ... The fuel costs 50% less and you use about 20% more ...  whats to lose ??   :)

IF you went the DIY conversion for £700 ish .. it would be paid for in 8000 miles, if you do 16000 miles a year it is paid for in 6 months ... another way of looking at it is, all figures rounded for simplicity:

16000 a year = 1300 a month ... @ 33.91 mpg thats 33 galls a month thats 150 litres @ 1.06 = £160 a month in fuel.

1300 miles a month on LPG  @ 27.12 mpg = 46 galls = 209 litres @ 52.2 p = £110 a month ....

An instant saving of £50 a month ...  :)

feeutfo

#27
29 September 2009, 23:34:19
anyone got any diesel figures to compare?

tunnie

#28
30 September 2009, 09:14:42
Quotenope .. but I'm running a 3.2 that is driven pretty hard and tows a great deal !!!

The estimated way of doing things is this ...

Your petrol consumption is presently 33.91 mpg @ 14.33 pence /mile.

Estimated LPG would be 20% lower .. so 27.128 mpg. LPG is 52.2 p/litre here or £2.37 a gall  so the estimated LPG cost /mile would be 8.73 pence/mile !!!
A saving of about 5.6 pence /mile or 39% ... The fuel costs 50% less and you use about 20% more ...  whats to lose ??   :)

quote]

LPG is 57p here, so that works out at 9.5 pence per mile ish...

Not exactly massive savings, plus loss of boot.  :(
Print
Go Up Pages 1 2 All
User actions