Factory MPG Figure, 1970 Stock 1.7L D-Jetronic |
|
Porsche, and the Porsche crest are registered trademarks of Dr. Ing. h.c. F. Porsche AG.
This site is not affiliated with Porsche in any way. Its only purpose is to provide an online forum for car enthusiasts. All other trademarks are property of their respective owners. |
|
Factory MPG Figure, 1970 Stock 1.7L D-Jetronic |
pbanders |
May 3 2007, 10:27 AM
Post
#1
|
Senior Member Group: Members Posts: 939 Joined: 11-June 03 From: Phoenix, AZ Member No.: 805 |
There are a lot of apocryphal MPG figures out there for the 1.7L 914's. I was wondering what the factory said the MPG was. I poked around on the web and finally found a reference at Automobile Atlanta that George took from some ancient factory brochure. Here's the image:
Pretty blurry! But you can see under the "Performance" section, the third entry is "Fuel Consumption", and it has a figure for the 1.7L. It's pretty hard to read, but if you blow it up, I've figured out that it's: approx. 26.2 mpg (9.0 l/100 km) If you use Google calculator, you can verify that 26.2 mpg is equal to 9.0 l/100 km, so it makes sense. There are no particulars on the driving conditions for this figure, it's probably reasonable to assume this is a combination of city and highway driving. Anyone else have other factory or EPA figures on the 1.7, 1.8, and 2.0L cars? |
Bleyseng |
May 3 2007, 11:05 AM
Post
#2
|
Aircooled Baby! Group: Members Posts: 13,035 Joined: 27-December 02 From: Seattle, Washington (for now) Member No.: 24 Region Association: Pacific Northwest |
just this ad
Attached image(s) |
Bleyseng |
May 3 2007, 11:07 AM
Post
#3
|
Aircooled Baby! Group: Members Posts: 13,035 Joined: 27-December 02 From: Seattle, Washington (for now) Member No.: 24 Region Association: Pacific Northwest |
2.0L MPG
Attached image(s) |
andys |
May 3 2007, 11:27 AM
Post
#4
|
Advanced Member Group: Members Posts: 2,165 Joined: 21-May 03 From: Valencia, CA Member No.: 721 Region Association: None |
It's been, well, 30+ years, but it seems my '73 2.0L got something like 29-31MPG all the time. More on long highway trips. Back then, MPG wasn't the concern that it is today, so little emphasis was placed on mileage. If you calculate it by today's California "specially formulated gas", you'll lose 2 or 3 MPG.
Andys |
smontanaro |
May 3 2007, 11:41 AM
Post
#5
|
Senior Member Group: Members Posts: 1,190 Joined: 3-June 05 From: Evanston, IL Member No.: 4,197 Region Association: Upper MidWest |
|
pbanders |
May 3 2007, 11:41 AM
Post
#6
|
Senior Member Group: Members Posts: 939 Joined: 11-June 03 From: Phoenix, AZ Member No.: 805 |
Good point about how oxygenated fuels reduce mileage. Looks like the 1.7L today would be just under 30 mpg, the 2.0L, just under 25 mpg. My newly rebuilt 2.0L has been getting about 21 mpg in mixed city driving recently, with no attempt at being economical - maybe I'll try running a bit leaner.
Edited - I read the ad for the 2.0L wrong, I thought it said 25 mpg, it actually says 23 mpg. Maybe 21 mpg with today's fuel isn't that bad. |
andys |
May 3 2007, 12:33 PM
Post
#7
|
Advanced Member Group: Members Posts: 2,165 Joined: 21-May 03 From: Valencia, CA Member No.: 721 Region Association: None |
I just read the '74 2.0L ad. It claims 350 miles on a tank of gas. Seems odd, as I remember being able to comfortable put down 400+ miles and still have gas left in the tank. Perhaps they purposely under rated them?
Andys |
pbanders |
May 3 2007, 12:57 PM
Post
#8
|
Senior Member Group: Members Posts: 939 Joined: 11-June 03 From: Phoenix, AZ Member No.: 805 |
Yeah - and I didn't recognize that the "29 MPG Porsche" ad isn't talking about the 1.7, it's talking about the 2.0, in the context of highway driving. 29 mpg for 16.4 gal is a range of 475 miles, so 400+ per tankful on the highway makes sense.
|
pbanders |
May 3 2007, 01:03 PM
Post
#9
|
Senior Member Group: Members Posts: 939 Joined: 11-June 03 From: Phoenix, AZ Member No.: 805 |
It would be interesting to tune a 1.7L (e.g. adjust the MPS) for as lean as could be tolerated, and do a 100 mile highway MPG test, then calculate the range. From some of the stories we've heard here, 40 mpg for a 1.7L isn't unheard of. At 40 mpg, that's a range of 656 miles - I'm pretty sure that's more than even the MB diesels!
|
Chris Pincetich |
May 3 2007, 01:26 PM
Post
#10
|
B-) Group: Members Posts: 2,082 Joined: 3-October 05 From: Point Reyes Station, CA Member No.: 4,907 Region Association: Northern California |
My 1.7 is running pretty lean and I get about 35 mpg hwy, less driving in the city and AXing (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)
My concern is that after an hour at 70 mph/3.5-4K rpms (195/50 tires) my oil temps are 200-210 F on the dip stick gauge, which is a decent thermometer. I'm afraid going too lean, driving up a long hill, head and oil temps would be needing a close watch. Please comment, as I wish to get the most MPG! I will have 1 5/8" Eurorace header on 1.7 stock D-jet, and will probably use a modified high flow air intake (K&N style) soon to support the header (IMG:style_emoticons/default/beerchug.gif) |
Root_Werks |
May 3 2007, 01:28 PM
Post
#11
|
Village Idiot Group: Members Posts: 8,337 Joined: 25-May 04 From: About 5NM from Canada Member No.: 2,105 Region Association: Pacific Northwest |
I have had a couple of stock injected 1.7 914's that have gotten over 30mpg average easy. If you keep them in good tune and everything is healthy, they should do well.
I am trying to buy back a 73' 1.7 car right now just to have something to sputter around in that is fun and gets good MPG. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/driving.gif) |
Demick |
May 3 2007, 01:30 PM
Post
#12
|
Ernie made me do it! Group: Benefactors Posts: 2,312 Joined: 6-February 03 From: Pleasanton, CA Member No.: 257 |
Back then, MPG wasn't the concern that it is today, so little emphasis was placed on mileage. Ummm. Ever heard of the 1973 Arab Oil Embargo? Price of crude oil quadrupled in 1974. Certainly the reason for "the 29mpg porsche" ad. MPG got plenty of attention in the mid '70's, and a whole lot more in the late '70's than it gets now. |
DSM |
May 3 2007, 01:38 PM
Post
#13
|
Newbie Group: Members Posts: 29 Joined: 28-April 07 From: NTX Member No.: 7,700 |
I regularly saw 35-36mpg out of a 1.7 with dual ICTs(?) back in the early eighties.
I keep thinking about building a 914 TDI. With a taller R&P I'm betting 50+mpg would be easy. My VW caddy gets 45. 52hp is no fun though... |
pbanders |
May 3 2007, 06:47 PM
Post
#14
|
Senior Member Group: Members Posts: 939 Joined: 11-June 03 From: Phoenix, AZ Member No.: 805 |
|
BarberDave |
May 4 2007, 06:10 AM
Post
#15
|
Barberdave Group: Members Posts: 1,605 Joined: 12-January 03 From: Wauseon Ohio Member No.: 135 Region Association: Upper MidWest |
(IMG:style_emoticons/default/smilie_pokal.gif)
I just returned from a 1,000 mile trip to Hershey and back. I got 27 mpg on my 1.7 . However 2 yrs. ago with another 1.7 and Weber 34 ITC's i regularly got 39 mph. Current engine has 40 Webers. Dave (IMG:style_emoticons/default/slap.gif) |
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 11th June 2024 - 12:46 AM |
All rights reserved 914World.com © since 2002 |
914World.com is the fastest growing online 914 community! We have it all, classifieds, events, forums, vendors, parts, autocross, racing, technical articles, events calendar, newsletter, restoration, gallery, archives, history and more for your Porsche 914 ... |