> Daryl Walford internode.on.net> wrote in
> news:poOdnbhqP80bb7LVnZ2dnUVZ_hudnZ2d@posted.internode:
>

>> Noddy wrote:

>>> "Daryl Walford" internode.on.net> wrote in message
>>> news:x4ydnUp6m97OJbPVnZ2dnUVZ_hzinZ2d@posted.internode...
>>>

>>>> Its a very long way from it.
>>>> 1.6lts/100klms less at 80 kph more is a huge difference and IMO the
>>>> only way anyone could get that economy reading would be just after
>>>> he backed off at 190kph or he had a 200kph tailwind.

>>>
>>> They have a *very* tall 6th gear.
>>>
>>> Next time I speak to him I'll ask him what rpm the engine was doing,
>>> but considering they sit on 110km/h at around 1600rpm or so I
>>> wouldn't be surprised if what he was telling me was true.
>>>

>>
>> Unless the latest versions are very significantly better on fuel than
>> 5.7lt engine a few years ago I'd say they would have no hope of
>> getting that economy at that speed, I say that based on the many klms
>> I spent driving the mates Calais, at light throttle at legal hwy
>> speeds the economy was fantastic but as soon as you pushed it the fuel
>> consumption increased dramatically.
>> The average fuel consumption over the 3 yrs he had the car was about
>> 12.5lts/100 which IMO is excellent for a large car with a V8, that
>> includes all sorts of driving conditions including regularly towing a
>> tandem trailer with his Lotus 7 on board and occasionally towing
>> another mates 2 tonne boat.
>>
>>
>>
>> Daryl
>>

>
> I agree.