Range...

This is the Forum for all your Citroen Technical Questions, Problems or Advice.

Moderator: RichardW

Post Reply
Rhothgar
Donor 2023
Posts: 1758
Joined: 22 Nov 2004, 00:21
Location: Nottingham - UK
My Cars: 2013 Peugeot 3008 Allure 1.6HDi - FD63 FWA VF3**************[VIN obfuscated, can be read by forum staff]
1995 Citroen Xantia 1.9TD S1 - M728 GDL VF7**************[VIN obfuscated, can be read by forum staff]
1996 Citroen Xantia 1.9TD SX S1 - N707 MGP (Currrently laid up)
2000 Citroen Xantia 2.0 HDi S2 - X435 JGJ VF7**************[VIN obfuscated, can be read by forum staff] (Clutch died Dec 2017 - Resurrected Easter Sunday 2021)
1997 Citroen ZX SX TD - P788 AJL
1959 Landrover Defender S2 - Two owners from new
1968 Triumph Vitesse Convertible 2.0
1980 Ford Escort RS2000 Customer - 2nd Owner
1988 Saab 900 T16S - A 1980's exercise in understated Hooliganism...
Oh! and two Harley Davidsons - A 1990 Sportster and a 2003 Fatboy 100th Anniversary (the only vehicle I have owned from new)
x 78

Re: Range...

Post by Rhothgar »

Stepto1 wrote:I find the biggest problem is finding out the real distance travelled.

Which one do you go by?
I see what you're saying. I have just measured the journey I travelled on Google Maps and it is 2.5% shorter at 277 miles. This makes 1 mpg difference. But you go with your odometer for real life accuracy. As previous post, get it calibrated if it concerns you that much.
Stepto1 wrote: Or speed?
Xantia says 90mph
GPS on Tom Tom, Garman handheld GPS AND IPhone -all read 80mph.
Irrelevant for measuring MPG but Satellite Technology is going to be far more accurate over a distance than the speedo (providing you are driving at a constant speed - the discrepancy will remain the same).
Stepto1 wrote:Then we are assuming the pump measures right.
Of course it does if you are talking about the petrol station pump. They have to comply with the Weights and Measures Act. Of course, it could be out but highly unlikely.
Stepto1 wrote:AND that we know exactly how much fuel we have used.
See my method previous described.
Stepto1 wrote:AND that road conditions remain the same.
They never are. See 'Butterfly Effect' on Wikipedia.
Stepto1 wrote:AND that the road is level and there is no rise or fall in altitude overall.
Irrelevant.
Stepto1 wrote:AND that there is no wind helping or hindering economy.
Irrelevant.
Stepto1 wrote:AND that we're not sitting behind trucks. (20% saving in fuel by some reseach)
Irrelevant.
Stepto1 wrote:By the way, driving on the motorway knowing that you are about to run out of fuel is bloody dangerous!
Agreed so don't do it!
Rhothgar
Donor 2023
Posts: 1758
Joined: 22 Nov 2004, 00:21
Location: Nottingham - UK
My Cars: 2013 Peugeot 3008 Allure 1.6HDi - FD63 FWA VF3**************[VIN obfuscated, can be read by forum staff]
1995 Citroen Xantia 1.9TD S1 - M728 GDL VF7**************[VIN obfuscated, can be read by forum staff]
1996 Citroen Xantia 1.9TD SX S1 - N707 MGP (Currrently laid up)
2000 Citroen Xantia 2.0 HDi S2 - X435 JGJ VF7**************[VIN obfuscated, can be read by forum staff] (Clutch died Dec 2017 - Resurrected Easter Sunday 2021)
1997 Citroen ZX SX TD - P788 AJL
1959 Landrover Defender S2 - Two owners from new
1968 Triumph Vitesse Convertible 2.0
1980 Ford Escort RS2000 Customer - 2nd Owner
1988 Saab 900 T16S - A 1980's exercise in understated Hooliganism...
Oh! and two Harley Davidsons - A 1990 Sportster and a 2003 Fatboy 100th Anniversary (the only vehicle I have owned from new)
x 78

Re: Range...

Post by Rhothgar »

Stepto1 wrote:I drive at at least 80mph on the motorway as that means it takes me about four hours to get home. I don't want to sit in a car for any longer then that. Sitting at 60-70 on the motorway is like torture to me.
It may seem impossible to you but just for the smile next time you drive home, drive as steady as you can at 70mph and anticipate overtaking long before you need to overtake and don't accelerate to overtake, simply maintain the same speed. You can even lose a little speed on inclines and catch up on the downward side fast enough without using anymore fuel but don't put your foot down on inclines.

You need thin soled trainers to get a feel for the pedal sensitivity - don't do it in your walking boots!

It's only one journey in your life but I bet you that if you drive at an indicated 70mph on your SatNav that it will not take you much longer than if you are driving at 90mph on your speedo. I BET YOU!

That one journey will change your perception to driving in one fell swoop.

By driving at whatever speed you drive to do it in 4 hours dead, you are averaging 70mph but must be doing over 90 in my book. Having said that there is a very large proportion of motorway for you. By driving at 70mph, your average speed may only drop to 65mph.

You'll save a lot of fuel, feel more relaxed and then start driving like it all the time.

It's not a crime to drive smartly! :-D
Rhothgar
Donor 2023
Posts: 1758
Joined: 22 Nov 2004, 00:21
Location: Nottingham - UK
My Cars: 2013 Peugeot 3008 Allure 1.6HDi - FD63 FWA VF3**************[VIN obfuscated, can be read by forum staff]
1995 Citroen Xantia 1.9TD S1 - M728 GDL VF7**************[VIN obfuscated, can be read by forum staff]
1996 Citroen Xantia 1.9TD SX S1 - N707 MGP (Currrently laid up)
2000 Citroen Xantia 2.0 HDi S2 - X435 JGJ VF7**************[VIN obfuscated, can be read by forum staff] (Clutch died Dec 2017 - Resurrected Easter Sunday 2021)
1997 Citroen ZX SX TD - P788 AJL
1959 Landrover Defender S2 - Two owners from new
1968 Triumph Vitesse Convertible 2.0
1980 Ford Escort RS2000 Customer - 2nd Owner
1988 Saab 900 T16S - A 1980's exercise in understated Hooliganism...
Oh! and two Harley Davidsons - A 1990 Sportster and a 2003 Fatboy 100th Anniversary (the only vehicle I have owned from new)
x 78

Re: Range...

Post by Rhothgar »

c.morewood wrote:Rhothgar I'd like some more info on that econometer please.
Simply type in Econotest on a search engine.

I bought mine from a garage dealership bankruptcy. Cost me £14.

The model I bought connects to a Psion Organiser which looks to be not working but I can pick one up for a £10 on Ebay.

Hopefully, I'll get around to looking at it at some point this year and keep everyone informed. It looks to be a useful tool.

Just found this comment on their website regarding the history:-

"Econotest 1 approved by PSA group (Citroen/Peugeot) worldwide. They order 400 units for their dealership. network"

Your local Citroen garage probably has one!!!
Rhothgar
Donor 2023
Posts: 1758
Joined: 22 Nov 2004, 00:21
Location: Nottingham - UK
My Cars: 2013 Peugeot 3008 Allure 1.6HDi - FD63 FWA VF3**************[VIN obfuscated, can be read by forum staff]
1995 Citroen Xantia 1.9TD S1 - M728 GDL VF7**************[VIN obfuscated, can be read by forum staff]
1996 Citroen Xantia 1.9TD SX S1 - N707 MGP (Currrently laid up)
2000 Citroen Xantia 2.0 HDi S2 - X435 JGJ VF7**************[VIN obfuscated, can be read by forum staff] (Clutch died Dec 2017 - Resurrected Easter Sunday 2021)
1997 Citroen ZX SX TD - P788 AJL
1959 Landrover Defender S2 - Two owners from new
1968 Triumph Vitesse Convertible 2.0
1980 Ford Escort RS2000 Customer - 2nd Owner
1988 Saab 900 T16S - A 1980's exercise in understated Hooliganism...
Oh! and two Harley Davidsons - A 1990 Sportster and a 2003 Fatboy 100th Anniversary (the only vehicle I have owned from new)
x 78

Range...

Post by Rhothgar »

Here's a screenshot of my app.
Attachments
ImageUploadedByTapatalk1336509201.775488.jpg
Rhothgar
Donor 2023
Posts: 1758
Joined: 22 Nov 2004, 00:21
Location: Nottingham - UK
My Cars: 2013 Peugeot 3008 Allure 1.6HDi - FD63 FWA VF3**************[VIN obfuscated, can be read by forum staff]
1995 Citroen Xantia 1.9TD S1 - M728 GDL VF7**************[VIN obfuscated, can be read by forum staff]
1996 Citroen Xantia 1.9TD SX S1 - N707 MGP (Currrently laid up)
2000 Citroen Xantia 2.0 HDi S2 - X435 JGJ VF7**************[VIN obfuscated, can be read by forum staff] (Clutch died Dec 2017 - Resurrected Easter Sunday 2021)
1997 Citroen ZX SX TD - P788 AJL
1959 Landrover Defender S2 - Two owners from new
1968 Triumph Vitesse Convertible 2.0
1980 Ford Escort RS2000 Customer - 2nd Owner
1988 Saab 900 T16S - A 1980's exercise in understated Hooliganism...
Oh! and two Harley Davidsons - A 1990 Sportster and a 2003 Fatboy 100th Anniversary (the only vehicle I have owned from new)
x 78

Range...

Post by Rhothgar »

Here's a screenshot of the drive to Austria. From driving from 23/12 to 10/01 is predominantly driving in mountains. I'm not talking the English idea of mountains like Ben Nevis in Scotland. We're talking MOUNTAINS! Our village is 1022 metres above sea level and we're driving more than 800 metres higher than this upto Hoeher Koenig. It's a respectable average MPG.
Attachments
ImageUploadedByTapatalk1336509551.818012.jpg
Stepto1
Posts: 349
Joined: 10 Oct 2010, 22:37
Location: Plymouth/Nottingham
My Cars:

Re: Range...

Post by Stepto1 »

Rhothgar, do you really believe that driving uphill is as easy as driving downhill, or that driving into a headwind is as easy as driving with a talewind? Or that having a huge lorry sitting in front of you thereby reducing drag doesn't help?

I agree that a miss reading speedo does not effect an mpg figure, that's blindly obvious. What it does effect though is when someone says they're getting 50mpg AT 70mph. Then it's very relevant as it makes the claim false as they are really doing 63mph for example.

Anyway, if people are happy THINKING they are getting 60+mpg then that's fine by me.
I'm happy KNOWING what I'm getting.
Xantia SX 1.9TD Gone to the breakers
Xantia LX 2.0HDI Taxed and MOT'd at last!
Xantia 1.8 16V SX On loan to brother-in-law
Sportrack off road toy
Series One Land Rover
Thundercat race boat
Stepto1
Posts: 349
Joined: 10 Oct 2010, 22:37
Location: Plymouth/Nottingham
My Cars:

Re: Range...

Post by Stepto1 »

By the way, I see you're getting about the same mpg figure as I do! ;-)
Xantia SX 1.9TD Gone to the breakers
Xantia LX 2.0HDI Taxed and MOT'd at last!
Xantia 1.8 16V SX On loan to brother-in-law
Sportrack off road toy
Series One Land Rover
Thundercat race boat
Rhothgar
Donor 2023
Posts: 1758
Joined: 22 Nov 2004, 00:21
Location: Nottingham - UK
My Cars: 2013 Peugeot 3008 Allure 1.6HDi - FD63 FWA VF3**************[VIN obfuscated, can be read by forum staff]
1995 Citroen Xantia 1.9TD S1 - M728 GDL VF7**************[VIN obfuscated, can be read by forum staff]
1996 Citroen Xantia 1.9TD SX S1 - N707 MGP (Currrently laid up)
2000 Citroen Xantia 2.0 HDi S2 - X435 JGJ VF7**************[VIN obfuscated, can be read by forum staff] (Clutch died Dec 2017 - Resurrected Easter Sunday 2021)
1997 Citroen ZX SX TD - P788 AJL
1959 Landrover Defender S2 - Two owners from new
1968 Triumph Vitesse Convertible 2.0
1980 Ford Escort RS2000 Customer - 2nd Owner
1988 Saab 900 T16S - A 1980's exercise in understated Hooliganism...
Oh! and two Harley Davidsons - A 1990 Sportster and a 2003 Fatboy 100th Anniversary (the only vehicle I have owned from new)
x 78

Re: Range...

Post by Rhothgar »

Stepto1 wrote:Rhothgar, do you really believe that driving uphill is as easy as driving downhill, or that driving into a headwind is as easy as driving with a talewind? Or that having a huge lorry sitting in front of you thereby reducing drag doesn't help? .
I'm getting slightly confused with this. You said,

"
Stepto1 wrote:As an engineer I'm well versed in what makes a machine efficient, weight does not, neither does drag.
Of course, driving uphill uses more energy so I am not sure where you think I said it is easier than driving downhill?

I understood your quote above to mean that you do not believe drag has ANY bearing on fuel economy. Of course it does.
Stepto1 wrote:I agree that a miss reading speedo does not effect an mpg figure, that's blindly obvious. What it does effect though is when someone says they're getting 50mpg AT 70mph. Then it's very relevant as it makes the claim false as they are really doing 63mph for example. .
Not sure what you are getting at. Are you saying you want to record your MPG for a set average speed? There is no point in this. The topic thread is about range and from that effectively what people achieve on a tank regardless of any other dynamics involved.

All you need to do is record a baseline for your own vehicle and this will help you assess over time if for some reason it is using more fuel than normal and therefore if there may be a running problem.
Stepto1 wrote:Anyway, if people are happy THINKING they are getting 60+mpg then that's fine by me.
I'm happy KNOWING what I'm getting.
I am sure some of the Forum members will be getting 60+ mpg.. Your style of driving is different to theirs as it is to everyone else's. No two people can drive the same road identically. If I followed your route back from Plymouth. I would see different MPG. If I followed you back and completed the journey in the same time. I would probably still do more MPG than you. I dare say if I drove your car back at the same speed I would probably get more MPG.

Eco-driving takes years of practice.

Just record your tank mileage. It doesn't matter if you fill up before the light comes on as long as you fill to the brim. Your MPG will be accurate for your needs.
Rhothgar
Donor 2023
Posts: 1758
Joined: 22 Nov 2004, 00:21
Location: Nottingham - UK
My Cars: 2013 Peugeot 3008 Allure 1.6HDi - FD63 FWA VF3**************[VIN obfuscated, can be read by forum staff]
1995 Citroen Xantia 1.9TD S1 - M728 GDL VF7**************[VIN obfuscated, can be read by forum staff]
1996 Citroen Xantia 1.9TD SX S1 - N707 MGP (Currrently laid up)
2000 Citroen Xantia 2.0 HDi S2 - X435 JGJ VF7**************[VIN obfuscated, can be read by forum staff] (Clutch died Dec 2017 - Resurrected Easter Sunday 2021)
1997 Citroen ZX SX TD - P788 AJL
1959 Landrover Defender S2 - Two owners from new
1968 Triumph Vitesse Convertible 2.0
1980 Ford Escort RS2000 Customer - 2nd Owner
1988 Saab 900 T16S - A 1980's exercise in understated Hooliganism...
Oh! and two Harley Davidsons - A 1990 Sportster and a 2003 Fatboy 100th Anniversary (the only vehicle I have owned from new)
x 78

Re: Range...

Post by Rhothgar »

Stepto1 wrote:By the way, I see you're getting about the same mpg figure as I do! ;-)
Cheeky! [-X

No I'm not. I'm averaging 42 mpg and you're achieving less in an HDi. My Citroen Owner's Manual states 40.4 at 75mph and 53 mpg at 56 mph and 37.2 around town.

My mileage largely consists of around town driving but if you look at my figures for the Xmas break to Austria, you will see I did 47mpg. so I achieved nearly 20% more than manufacturer's 75mpg figure.

I covered the 1003 miles in 16 hours 25 minutes. Average speed of 61 MPH but that excludes waiting for the Channel Tunnel.

Previous year I did 39 MPG and I covered the 800 miles to Calais in 10 hours. So still achieving more than manufacturer's figures. The only difference between the two journeys was that at times I was doing an indicated 127mph on the Autobahn where safe to do so. It was an indicated 122mph on the SatNav. Quite an achievement for a car that is only supposed to do either 111 or 115mph depending on spec, don't you think?
Last edited by Rhothgar on 09 May 2012, 20:56, edited 1 time in total.
Rhothgar
Donor 2023
Posts: 1758
Joined: 22 Nov 2004, 00:21
Location: Nottingham - UK
My Cars: 2013 Peugeot 3008 Allure 1.6HDi - FD63 FWA VF3**************[VIN obfuscated, can be read by forum staff]
1995 Citroen Xantia 1.9TD S1 - M728 GDL VF7**************[VIN obfuscated, can be read by forum staff]
1996 Citroen Xantia 1.9TD SX S1 - N707 MGP (Currrently laid up)
2000 Citroen Xantia 2.0 HDi S2 - X435 JGJ VF7**************[VIN obfuscated, can be read by forum staff] (Clutch died Dec 2017 - Resurrected Easter Sunday 2021)
1997 Citroen ZX SX TD - P788 AJL
1959 Landrover Defender S2 - Two owners from new
1968 Triumph Vitesse Convertible 2.0
1980 Ford Escort RS2000 Customer - 2nd Owner
1988 Saab 900 T16S - A 1980's exercise in understated Hooliganism...
Oh! and two Harley Davidsons - A 1990 Sportster and a 2003 Fatboy 100th Anniversary (the only vehicle I have owned from new)
x 78

Re: Range...

Post by Rhothgar »

Steve,

Now I understand why you think I believe headwinds, hills and slipstreaming doesn't affect fuel efficiency. It's because I answered "Irrelevant" on a few of your points.

We're at cross-purposes here.

You seem to want to measure MPG to a finite level when all anyone else is advising you to do is simply measure what you can achieve. You're sort of arguing against yourself because the member that claims he can achieve 60+mpg, and I have no doubt he can in an HDi, is driving very different to you.

You cannot gain a huge benefit for slipstreaming a lorry because you would have to be dangerously close for the wind eddies to totally miss your car and being that close would not be conducive to planning well ahead.
Stepto1
Posts: 349
Joined: 10 Oct 2010, 22:37
Location: Plymouth/Nottingham
My Cars:

Re: Range...

Post by Stepto1 »

I give up.
Xantia SX 1.9TD Gone to the breakers
Xantia LX 2.0HDI Taxed and MOT'd at last!
Xantia 1.8 16V SX On loan to brother-in-law
Sportrack off road toy
Series One Land Rover
Thundercat race boat
Rhothgar
Donor 2023
Posts: 1758
Joined: 22 Nov 2004, 00:21
Location: Nottingham - UK
My Cars: 2013 Peugeot 3008 Allure 1.6HDi - FD63 FWA VF3**************[VIN obfuscated, can be read by forum staff]
1995 Citroen Xantia 1.9TD S1 - M728 GDL VF7**************[VIN obfuscated, can be read by forum staff]
1996 Citroen Xantia 1.9TD SX S1 - N707 MGP (Currrently laid up)
2000 Citroen Xantia 2.0 HDi S2 - X435 JGJ VF7**************[VIN obfuscated, can be read by forum staff] (Clutch died Dec 2017 - Resurrected Easter Sunday 2021)
1997 Citroen ZX SX TD - P788 AJL
1959 Landrover Defender S2 - Two owners from new
1968 Triumph Vitesse Convertible 2.0
1980 Ford Escort RS2000 Customer - 2nd Owner
1988 Saab 900 T16S - A 1980's exercise in understated Hooliganism...
Oh! and two Harley Davidsons - A 1990 Sportster and a 2003 Fatboy 100th Anniversary (the only vehicle I have owned from new)
x 78

Re: Range...

Post by Rhothgar »

I don't blame you.

Watch this space though as when I put the HDi on the road that I recently bought, I'll be reporting 60+mpg - fingers crossed! Certainly well over 50mpg without too much effort. :-D
Citroenmad
Posts: 8125
Joined: 04 Dec 2008, 22:08
Location: Northeast
My Cars: 07 Citroen C6 V6 HDi Exclusive - Red
07 Citroen C5 HDi VTR - Red
09 Citroen C3 1.4i VTR - Silver
01 Citroen Saxo 1.1i Forte - Mango Orange
93 Ford Mondeo 2.0i GLX
19 Hyundai i10
x 110

Re: Range...

Post by Citroenmad »

Sorry to pick up on this thread again, however something was bugging me from earlier in the postings.

The world record (maybe not the most current, but one of) MPG figure was 114.8mpg over 3500 miles in a Vw Lupo 1.2TDi 3L. A tiny little car with a tiny engine, but a standard car and it shows what can be done. No doubt it was very accurately measured as it set a world record. Im sure Peugeot set a more recent record, my memory seems to think it was with a 1.6HDi 308. ... Ill look it up.

Many modern diesels are easily capable of 60mpg+ and you will see that in a 2.0HDi Xantia & C5 if your trying.

Edit: Yes, the 308 achieved over 126mpg! I wouldn't mind getting that :lol:
Chris
07 Citroen C6 V6 HDi Exclusive - Red
07 Citroen C5 HDi VTR - Red
09 Citroen C3 1.4i VTR - Silver
01 Citroen Saxo 1.1i Forte - Mango Orange
.
93 Ford Mondeo 2.0i GLX
19 Hyundai i10
User avatar
DickieG
Monaco's youngest playboy
Posts: 4877
Joined: 25 Nov 2006, 09:15
Location: Buckinghamshire
My Cars:
x 38

Re: Range...

Post by DickieG »

Rhothgar wrote:You cannot gain a huge benefit for slipstreaming a lorry because you would have to be dangerously close for the wind eddies to totally miss your car and being that close would not be conducive to planning well ahead.
Too true, I know from cycling and slipstreaming buses (tried it a couple of times, never again) that in order to gain anything worthwhile in reducing drag you have to be dangerously close to the vehicle ahead and positioned centrally, at least when cycling I could hear the exact moment the bus driver lifted off the throttle (rear engined) I could start to brake. As for positioning slightly offside to gain vision beyond the vehicle you're tailgating you've immediately lost at least half of the slipstream advantage.

The other thing to mention on this dubious tactic is that if you've ever followed a HGV/bus in a flat fronted van at speeds in excess of 40 mph you'd realise just how much debris they throw up into the path of your vehicle, they act as a vacuum cleaner picking up everything below them and project it into the path of the following vehicle. Whenever I'm following an HGV I always leave an extended following distance for the reasons above not to mention the benefits in improving my own vision beyond the vehicle ahead, to do otherwise in an attempt to save a couple of pennies is just plain madness in my books.

As mentioned earlier in this thread unless the roads have been cleared of all other road users including pedestrians it's impossible to replicate the same 'drive' twice along the same section of road as there are so many variable conditions/circumstances each time you drive it and it's that that makes it all but impossible to achieve the perfect drive, never observed or managed to do one myself.

As for how much time you save by driving at say 80 compared with 65, from my personal experience it's very little especially when you factor in the higher levels of concentration/stress required to maintain the higher speed, you may arrive 10 minutes earlier on a journey of say 80 miles but you then spend that gained time in de-stressing :lol: The advantage blues and twos gives you is rarely having to stop, you have a legal exemption from most red ATS (not train/tram level crossings), speed plus keep left and provided the driver ahead actually uses their rear view mirror (quite rare for a significant proportion of drivers) you maintain a high average speed by not getting baulked by clusters of slow moving traffic.

I'd be very interested to know the reality of the the effect on fuel consumption of some of the tactics mentioned here such as rarely going above 2,000 rpm as causing an engine to labour can't be good for consumption, most new manual gearbox vehicles have an indicator to suggest the most suitable gear for the speed/circumstances and remaining in too lower gear can trigger the 'change down' indicator. I'd have thought that remaining below 2,000 rpm in a XUD TD would have a negative effect upon consumption as the peak torque figure is reached @ 2250 rpm. Another one I wonder about is slowing down on uphill sections, yes the mpg figure won't drop as low during the climb but as the climb now tales longer the lower mpg is maintained for a longer period of time so does that now have a negative effect on the average journey mpg compared with maintaining a set speed?

The key to achieving high mpg figurers is quite simple, use advanced driving techniques, lift vision, anticipate and plan for the road ahead.
13 Ram 1500 Hemi
14 BMW 535D Tourer
19 BMW i3s
06 C3 Desire 1.4
72 DS 21 EFi Pallas BVH
User avatar
Xaccers
Posts: 7654
Joined: 07 Feb 2007, 23:46
Location: Milling around Milton Keynes
My Cars:
x 184

Re: Range...

Post by Xaccers »

Interesting you should mention about the rev's Richard, I'm sure there was a discussion before and in my mind's eye it makes sense to me to run just inside the turbo range so as you say 2000-2250rpm.
The TD doesn't compress as much as the NA, so increasing the volume of air by having the turbo running would improve the efficiency of the combustion wouldn't it? A teardrop of diesel compressed with 10L of air should burn more efficiently than a teardrop of diesel with only 1L of air - more oxygen molecules giving more chance of reaction.
Of course at higher revs the engine is being fed higher levels of fuel.
Also 2000ish in 5th is about 56mph
1.9TD+ SX Xantia Estate (Cassy) running on 100% veg
1.9TD SX Xantia Hatchback (Jenny) running on 100% veg for sale
Laguna II 2.0dCi Privilege (Monty)

DIY sphere tool
Post Reply