Page 1 of 1

should rockys be so uneconomical?

Posted: Thu May 08, 2008 2:26 pm
by rockyman
my truck is really uneconomical to go 20ks it uses half a tank..........please help

Re: should rockys be so uneconomical?

Posted: Thu May 08, 2008 2:50 pm
by Sadam_Husain
that sounds like 1km per litre or less, how much fuel does your tank hold?

Re: should rockys be so uneconomical?

Posted: Thu May 08, 2008 3:02 pm
by rockyman
60 litres

Re: should rockys be so uneconomical?

Posted: Thu May 08, 2008 3:14 pm
by Sadam_Husain
If your going through 1.5 litres per 1 km you must have a pretty big leak? The chev in my truck uses about 0.25 litres per 1 km on the road :?

Re: should rockys be so uneconomical?

Posted: Thu May 08, 2008 4:25 pm
by rockyman
yea i just cleaned out the fuel filter and this black sludge came out so i bought a new one and it is alot better

Re: should rockys be so uneconomical?

Posted: Thu May 08, 2008 8:33 pm
by Jerry
Drain the fuel tank, there should be a drain plug in the bottom, if it comes out nastly looking it may need a clean out and refill....., some tanks have a filter in them as well....

Re: should rockys be so uneconomical?

Posted: Thu May 08, 2008 11:24 pm
by monmendoza
rockyman wrote:my truck is really uneconomical to go 20ks it uses half a tank..........please help

There is something very wrong with your vehicle. There might a fuel leak, or your odometer does not give you
the correct distance. I have yet to encounter a vehicle even the big gas guzzler V8's that consume 1.5 liters per kilometer.
There must be a logical answer to your problem. Do another recheck , to find out whats wrong.

Re: should rockys be so uneconomical?

Posted: Fri May 09, 2008 6:26 am
by albundy
Get some of the Moreys fule additive, it will clean your injectors plus add a biocide to the fuel to kill sludge.
Al

Re: should rockys be so uneconomical?

Posted: Fri May 09, 2008 10:06 am
by rockyman
yea i drained the tank last night and more black sludge came out i replaced the hoses and added injector cleaner. ill take a drive after work and post back with my results

Re: should rockys be so uneconomical?

Posted: Sun May 11, 2008 11:53 pm
by 2roky
mines started doing the same thing think it might be a fault with the fuel gauge or the electric system, can put a full tank in it and 10min of town driving starts trying to tell me i have less than 1/2 a tank left.

Re: should rockys be so uneconomical?

Posted: Mon May 12, 2008 12:28 pm
by rockyman
ahh so that would be why. because i cleaned all my fuel system and it kept doing the same thing

Re: should rockys be so uneconomical?

Posted: Mon May 12, 2008 1:12 pm
by NJV6
This must be talking the piss.... :?

Surely after you have driven 20km and decided to fill your tank and only put 3ish litres until the fuel pump switchs off you'd realise something was up... :roll:

Re: should rockys be so uneconomical?

Posted: Tue May 13, 2008 10:42 am
by surf_tomo
Using it - unlikely
Loosing it - You would notice petrol all over the ground, check for leaks
Buggered Fuel gauge - most likely, as NJV6 hinted at.

Re: should rockys be so uneconomical?

Posted: Tue May 13, 2008 5:55 pm
by rockyman
yea it seems to be alryt around town. its just not very economical at 100kms its soo shocking

Re: should rockys be so uneconomical?

Posted: Thu Jul 10, 2008 8:09 pm
by freshtrax
I get about 500-560 km on one tank, which at the most is 48 litres diesel. prob get further if i ran it to empty.

Re: should rockys be so uneconomical?

Posted: Thu Jul 10, 2008 8:20 pm
by KiwiBacon
freshtrax wrote:I get about 500-560 km on one tank, which at the most is 48 litres diesel. prob get further if i ran it to empty.


A mate thinks his one is using about 12 litres/100km, but we need to confirm that. Half a tank for the 180km ski trip last weekend. My rangie does better than that.

Re: should rockys be so uneconomical?

Posted: Thu Jul 10, 2008 8:54 pm
by freshtrax
i use 9-9.5 l/100km all the time..think the worst its ever been was about 9.8L/100km. I got about 8.6L/100km by going a constand 80km on the open road. Rugger/Rocky?Fourtrak are very economical usually. They just have a small tank so dont seem as economic. Not too many 4wd will get better..grand vitara diesel, sportage softroader diesel, jimny, terios, maybe korando, and a few diesel softroader. Rocky, Jimny and Vitara are the most economic real offroader. Some of the utes arent too bad..actyon and rodeo best.

Re: should rockys be so uneconomical?

Posted: Thu Jul 10, 2008 9:39 pm
by 2roky
hes talking about the petrol feroza/rocky that runs the 1600 motor. and if your only getting that for the diesel id be having a bit of a look at it. ill get 400-450 depending on where im going and how im having to drive to get there thats in a fez though

Re: should rockys be so uneconomical?

Posted: Thu Jul 10, 2008 10:04 pm
by freshtrax
the official fuel consumption for a diesel Rocky / Foutrak is 25-35MPG..combined 30 MPG (thats about 9-9.5L/100km)

so if i getting 8.5 L/100km i think im getting a pretty good deal! Only thing i dont like is only being able to get 48L max when its supposed to be a 60L tank..my old rugger was the same.

think official fuel consumption for Feroza/Sportrak is 9L/100kms combined.

Re: should rockys be so uneconomical?

Posted: Thu Jul 10, 2008 10:12 pm
by freshtrax
Daihatsu Fourtrak (84-02)
2.8 TDX-SE Independent 3d



General
Production 1 Nov 1996 to 2 Feb 2000
Length 4165 mm
Width 1780 mm
Height 1925 mm
Weight 1780 kg
Fuel Delivery Turbo injection
Transmission Manual
Gears 5 Speed
Performance
Engine Size 2765 cc
Cylinders 4
0-60 mph -
Power Output 96 bhp
Valves 8
Torque 245 Nm
Top Speed -
Costs
MPG 30
Insurance Group 8
Euro Emissions Standard II
CO2 Emissions 248 g/km
Road Tax Band -
Click here for road tax costs
Click here for company car tax costs
Practicality
Wheelbase 2530 mm
Luggage Capacity -
Fuel Capacity 60 L
Turning Circle 11 m
Unbraked Towing Weight -
Braked Towing Weight 3500 kg

http://www.parkers.co.uk/cars/specs/Det ... eriv=12682

Re: should rockys be so uneconomical?

Posted: Thu Jul 10, 2008 11:16 pm
by skid
BUY A TOYOTA

:wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen:

Re: should rockys be so uneconomical?

Posted: Thu Jul 10, 2008 11:21 pm
by Jerry
IT IS A TOYOTA SKID :D

Re: should rockys be so uneconomical?

Posted: Thu Jul 10, 2008 11:24 pm
by skid
shorry jerry

whooooooops\
]

Re: should rockys be so uneconomical?

Posted: Fri Jul 11, 2008 6:45 am
by freshtrax
Toyotas are boring. :D

Re: should rockys be so uneconomical?

Posted: Fri Jul 11, 2008 9:09 am
by KiwiBacon
freshtrax wrote:Braked Towing Weight 3500 kg


Anyone game to try. :lol:

Re: should rockys be so uneconomical?

Posted: Fri Jul 11, 2008 4:27 pm
by 2roky
ive towed me rocky F75 (2.8d) on an Aframe with my feroza/rocky f300 (1.6 petrol) and lets just say i wouldnt be bame to go much heavier than that unbraked trying to stop can be interesting and you have to be watching and thinking about whats coming up a long way ahead

Re: should rockys be so uneconomical?

Posted: Fri Jul 11, 2008 5:48 pm
by freshtrax
KiwiBacon wrote:
freshtrax wrote:Braked Towing Weight 3500 kg


Anyone game to try. :lol:



this is the diesel not the feroza/sportrak.

Re: should rockys be so uneconomical?

Posted: Fri Jul 11, 2008 6:03 pm
by 2roky
i know im just saying what my experience is
the brakes on these things are pretty good its just the weight lets them down that and big tyres

Re: should rockys be so uneconomical?

Posted: Thu Jul 24, 2008 3:06 pm
by rockyman
a wee bit off topic. but whats the top speed? with all the mods? i.e headers exhaust, freeflow filter and such

what are the petrol terios like

Posted: Fri Feb 07, 2014 9:28 pm
by philip121
are the terios 1200 petrol big fuel drinkers