You missed your lunch break out of the calculation there! Different situation can understand why it works for you, its the moving the car repeatedly in some places that annoys me more as there just isn't anywhere you can leave it for more than a couple of hours.
Yeah sorry, should have defined that a bit better - older petrols, and most diesels (pre 2016 I think currently?)
Theres several reasons I try to avoid driving that far into London and use the tube instead, even if it is a pain carrying a rucksack of tools and another bag with me, its still preferable to driving in and trying to find somewhere to park.
I smell the influence of the motor trade. They don't want old vehicles passing new standards, they much prefer scrappage schemes.
I don't quite understand how it can be acceptable for the motor industry to build millions of cars per year and justify this production with a percentage reduction in tailpipe emissions.
Surely the environmental costs of construction need to be calculated and added to the tailpipe emissions over the lifetime of the vehicle to give true value for the environmental impact of car ownership. This would imply that a car that lasts longer will be less damaging.
To call them Zero emission is also wrong - they still produce brake dust and tyre debris both of which are particulates. I'd agree with you on the planes front too, they need to make the other options competitive somehow, though the only solution the idiots we currently have in charge will be to make the flights more expensive somehow which won't really solve anything.
Yep part of my growing budget is to have a proper LPG system fitted.
the current one is shyte..
wiring is a mare and tbh the range was hilarious, i got 100mi from £40 and it ran like crap, i did contemplate having it serviced by them, but their reception is less than stellar.
£40 to 100 miles you should be able to do on petrol, no wonder you say it doesn't work. Profess did have a bit of a reputation for problems though you don't hear much of them now
Wasnt too impressed with what was on offer at the last one they did at Newbury. Some bargains but nothing you couldn't find elsewhere without spending an entire day at it.
If it is the cat breaking up, you might find it can be dislodged to somewhere else in the exhaust with a run at higher revs, I had the same happen and it would consistently rattle at idle, a blast up the dual carriageway locked in 2nd stopped the rattle. Though its probably a sign of more to come if the cats started breaking up, and might dislodge more of it. Best solution would be to remove the cat and inspect it if possible, at least to see if anything comes out if you tip it on its end.
I don't exactly remember what it did to £40 on pez as i always filled it on payday..
£132 would get me 407mi which wasn't too bad.
That would equate to £32.43 per 100 miles on petrol then.....
I bet the injector nozzles are in the upper inlet manifold and not down near the petrol injectors like they should be. That'll give you poor throttle response.
Not only will that give poor response, theres the added downside of it being very easy to get banks mismatched like that due to the design of it. So you could have 2 cylinders on one bank and 2 on the other wired to a single petrol bank. You should be able to tell that by following injector wiring, but it may need reference to the software as well.
You'd probably benefit from getting hold of a lead for the lpg ecu and finding out what its objecting to as a first step, once you've cleared up the reason for it failing to switch over it may be worth seeing if you can switch a few cylinders over and monitor what happens with the engine when you do so, I'd suspect some will show up running much worse than others do (as one cylinder will get a double dose of fuel, while the other one in its pairing will get none at all in that state). If they are in the top bit of the tracts, once you know its working it would be an idea to improve the location of them anyway.
Agree on the MAF - The Thor I've got (though its a Disco rather than a p38) had some noname MAF on it when I first had it, and it was noticable that it was running rich, the proper Bosch replacement MAF made a noticable difference though had to change a few other things around the same time prior to that (both lamdba sensors being amongst them). I get around 300 miles to approx 95 litres of gas out of it, but the Disco is a bit lighter than the p38 is due to the lack of extra toys on it. I could get around 19.5 mpg on a motorway run on petrol using cruise control for the most part, if that helps compare (measured by filling tank and resetting trip, then filling again and calculating how many miles against fuel used when refilled)
BRC isn't really a good option if you want to DIY it as access to the software is difficult, though not as bad as Prins - Simon would be best to ask on this point, but my impression is the kit isn't particularly good in the mapping side either. Might help to replace some of the bits of your existing front end (we know its a stag ECU, but not what other bits have been used with it?) as well as address installation issues at the same time. But get petrol working correctly first or reassure yourself it is working as it should do.
Might help to check though, the split intake pipe you mention right at the top of the thread - has this been replaced or fixed in some way? If its split after the MAF you won't get anywhere until you seal it again somehow (ideally replace it with a decent hose) as you will have unmetered air getting in. A fault like that will only get more noticable on gas as it will generally throw the petrol ecu trims out, which the gas ecu will then compensate for, which in turn will throw them out further still till you get to a point where it won't run well if at all. Add the possibility of any install issues on the lpg side into that, and you can have both systems trying to correct what the other is doing which just will not work.
While we are on the point, what are you doing to manage to get it reading as low as 1.6mpg?
They're plastic bodied injectors
According to the invoice.
Lpg system is listed as "AC STAG PREMIUM"
The Reducer is OMVL
The installation in 2013 was £1879
In 2015 it had what seemed to be a £704 service.
Bit string imo!!
If you mean steep, then I'd agree yes it is. Are they these injectors (yours will be a bank of 4 not 3 like these, but Tinley don't have them listed anymore)
If they are those, they are the SL type - Which are capable and decent injectors. You can just see the nozzles fitted to the ones in the photos, I've got a Thor 4.0 running on 2 sets of them without a problem (and without nozzles fitted as per Simon's advice).
You really need to get a lead to look at whats wrong with it as it stands, Luckily Stag uses one of the common leads so if you do go down the route of swapping kit, you could probably reuse the lead (or swap pins around to reuse it otherwise)
I had a Golf showing 200.00 mpg weekend before last. Not sure what mpg the Series III in front that was towing it was managing, but suspect it was nowhere near that.
The data centres running those cloud services suck up an awful lot of electircity though, so the carbon footprint ends up
Ah, I see LPGC; But don't hybrid drivers get Emissions Zone 'breaks' anyway ?...
Incidentally the Hybrid drivers i have spoken with have major issues with their expected overall MPGs too......
eg. "Might be OK for pottering about but not on the open roads"...
Maybe you should watch the fuller video and/or.read the EV1 book though, as it was clearly GM who did it.with 'encouragement' from the oil lobby !
Not sure the Betamax/VHS analogy works too well here (as both were developed in parallel) but perhaps a DVD/Cloud comparison works better (?) in which case EVs will be leased-only and/or shared ownership.... wait.... that was GM's EV1 model ! (But to be fair their batteries were pretty bad 20 years ago....)
Seriously though kids don't want DVD's anymore - thanks to Netflix/Broadband etc of course and (- wait for it -) their need for smaller Carbon Footprints !
The thing with that is those services rely on huge datacentres, that guzzle electricity 24/7, so unless its coming from renewable sources, it would probabbly work out to giving a bigger carbon footprint than the traditional DVD type distribution.
I've seen a handful of Toyota Priuses (or however you describe more than one) filling with LPG at various times when I've been filling up - and every one of them has been a taxi. From speaking to the drivers, they say they will run around for about 6p/mile in fuel once converted. I can see hybrids having their place (makes more sense when your crawling through traffic on a longer journey to not be running the engine if you didn't need to, without having the problems of range/charging times/availability of charging points to consider).
It is quite hard to write a response whilst I am also peddling hard (and charging my PC with a bike dynamo) so bear with me.....
(and YES, that is also a 'joke'...)
but I am quite disturbed now to be informed that some of the stuff on the 'Net is just lies though ! Presumably this is a subset of the statement that "Bad News Travels Fast But Fake News Travels Fastest" !?
So, and very briefly..... For the record I detest Microsloth and have also lost count of the number of CC kids I have spoken with about iPhones from China and also the whole "financial backstories" on Lithium and Cobalt .... but I reapeat kids do think differently that we did as kids (Surprise Surprise) Just why that is is a Long Story of course...
perhaps 1,.21 or 31 years
And I meant any 'advantages' for hybrids not actually having plug-in facilities at all...
Damn... a puncture.... lights dimming.... should have bought a plug-in bike, obviously !
The only advantage i can see with a hybrid with no plug in facility is that if you are crawling though very slow traffic, you'd do a fair amount of it without burning fuel. Not all of the distance by any means, as the batteries are too limited, but you'd typically find somewhere like the approach to the Dartford tunnels for instance you'd cut a chunk off the overall emissions in theory. In practice, it probably balances out to make very little difference overall, as the extra weight of the batteries you have to drag around is always there (and bear in mind that lots of manufacturers have got rid of things like the spare wheel to reduce weight and in doing so increase economy). But if it took you 10 minutes of moving very slowly though a queue it might improve the air a bit around it. Though again you could offset that against the startup emissions of a now cold catalyst that won't be effective until its back up to temperature again.
With the ones suspended underneath, the retaining mechanism can be a major problem as well once corrosion sets into it. As far as the spare is concerned and its presence for a test, if it was required to have it for the car to be roadworthy, you'd technically have a car that wasn't roadworthy after changing it on the side of the road once it had gone flat. Might sound daft, but sometimes things have to be made completely clear to avoid anyone (Plod mainly) misinterpreting them.
I'd agree with the comment on the flat on the side of the road, I've had to change a tyre twice on the side of the motorway (once on the m1, once on the m25) due to sudden failure. In both cases a tube of gloop wouldn't have worked, as one of them had a hole in it large enough to put 2 fingers into, and the other was a failed valve stem. But a preferable option to waiting for someone to turn up to assist at any rate.
How old are your spark plugs and leads? Sounds like damp leads to me or worn out plugs. Or a coil pack also possible?
If all of the above are OK, it could also be your crank sensor dying.
(Again) Richard "Marketing B/S" would be if they said "you have to have one of these spacesavers because of Regulation changes"..... and (again) I will let you know what they say. I suspect it is down to Emissions changes and thus associated weight reduction or worse than that - eg. "car buyers are asking for more boot space" and similar nonsense... ie The real B/S: ~ 50% of new cars don't have spares and yet many drivers find this out 'the hard way' ?!
-And perhaps these manufactrers have not noticed all the potholes either - 'great' for sidewall damage - as these really don't seem to feature in their ads. !
Similarly I don't think the comparison with folks carrying spare bulbs (etc) is particularly valid, although isn't that a requirement in France ? (Along with a warning triangle... and which should also be compulsory too. along with a high vis jacket !)..... and a rubber mallet, long breaker bar for the wheel nuts, plus tow rope, shovel....bright hazard lights etc et. (or maybe that's just me !)....
Anyway, that Merc collapsable spare wheel is quite an expensive gimmick too of course.... and I hope they provide a good pump for it in the cars too (and presumably a vaccum pump is needed later so you can actually get it back in the well (?). Not a great believer in "runflats" either, another expensive gimmick, particularly as using them for 10 miles or so trashes them. 'Great' to get you to the nearets tyre fitter but guess what... "special order guv. - but we can get them in a day or two" !!
Perhaps overall the real answer is to ensure manufacturers for both ICE/Hybrid EVs quote MPG/range figures for real world..... a couple of passengers, some 'standard' luggage, a spare wheel and so on.... (and all the other things their lobby would avoid) !
Its probabbly more likely, that given a lot of people don't understand space saver spare wheels aren't suitable for use for an extended period (you must have seen cars running round on them which clearly haven't only just had a puncture, I see them fairly regularly, some of which you see more than a couple of times still with the spare in use) that they just stopped providing them. That and of course, that means if you damage a wheel you have to source another one from somewhere to replace it (and on a relatively new car, that will be a trip to the dealers parts dept to purchase one with plenty of potential for profit).
Bear in mind with the weight reduction it will make a slight difference - maybe only slight, but you only have to look at some of the other fiddles they were doing to boost emission figures to see it would be enough for them (testing with higher tyre pressures than normal, very little fuel in the tank, etc as was exposed with the VW situation)
This thread might help if you ignore the bits about plasterboard > https://rangerovers.pub/topic/1036-a-bit-of-a-list?page=1.0#pid16079
Took so long finding it that Morat already posted, but worth a read anyway.
I meant on the old one your removing that I had the bit fall out from just in case that wasn't clear.