Chrysler 300C & SRT8 Forums banner

1 - 20 of 32 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,862 Posts
Discussion Starter #1 (Edited)
Had the car for a couple of weeks now, still working out how to use all the buttons on the dash but when I found this I thought I was on funniest home videos. Surely I should be getting more than 190km's out of a tank of fuel this can't be the norm with the 5.7i anyway I have spoken to Craig at Chysler AUST and he reckons something is wrong also, no fault lights on the dash, I was thinking one or both o2 sensors were faulty, waiting to hear back from my local Dealership here also. It's my first tank of fuel too and I drive like im driving Miss Daisy around also, car hasn't even been over 100 km/h yet :pat:







 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,431 Posts
Unless you have been stuck in traffic jams for hours every day, I would say the sensor is wrong. One way to find out is have a full petrol can in the boot and drive the car until it runs of of petrol. When the "Wheel" magazine did the photo shot of the new Commodore Statesman in Sydney, the fuel consumption was similar to your reading. Same is the latest Turbo Territory, people lucky to get low 20s from it in everyday use.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
23,441 Posts
Like I said in your other thread about this, there are modules and sending cards for each side of the fuel tank. Sounds like one of them is bad. I'm betting you still have one side still full. The modules are under the rear seats. Someone else recently had this same problem.

Bernie
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,862 Posts
Discussion Starter #4 (Edited)
Like I said in your other thread about this, there are modules and sending cards for each side of the fuel tank. Sounds like one of them is bad. I'm betting you still have one side still full. The modules are under the rear seats. Someone else recently had this same problem.

Bernie
I can see your angle Bernie thanks for the info, I will take it down to the Servo and refuel it when I can, hopefully the fuel tank is still half full otherwise I can see this sunday driving is going to be and expensive hobby :arms:

 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
403 Posts
I was thinking one or both o2 sensors were faulty
FWIW they have four o2 sensors.

How many km's are on the odometer? A brand new car will certainly use more fuel on the first few tanks of fuel, but sounds like you bought the car second hand?

Also, you say that the tank has lasted 2 weeks? With lots of short trips when cold the fuel consumption will go up, & low road speeds may mean the MDS is not activating.

Just giving a little insight, these are the type of questions the dealer will ask :)

Does sound like somethings not quite right though.

Cheers
Phil
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,862 Posts
Discussion Starter #8
FWIW they have four o2 sensors.

How many km's are on the odometer? A brand new car will certainly use more fuel on the first few tanks of fuel, but sounds like you bought the car second hand?

Also, you say that the tank has lasted 2 weeks? With lots of short trips when cold the fuel consumption will go up, & low road speeds may mean the MDS is not activating.

Just giving a little insight, these are the type of questions the dealer will ask :)

Does sound like somethings not quite right though.

Cheers
Phil
Cheers Phil, I haven't looked closely, I was assuming there are only 2 o2 sensors not 4 .

24,300 km's on the clock, car is a early 2006 build.

Yeah about 2 weeks on the first tank, a few short trips but not cold here, ambient temp is already 35 degrees +, yeah even if the MDS is not activating I had a 5.7 in my Statesman and not even when I drove it like a stole it did it crack above 20lts/100km

Thanks for the heads up Phil :), got Chyrsler AUST involved with this one too
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,862 Posts
Discussion Starter #14
He'll lead us to believe that but I recently woke Steve at 5am. :24:

To my defence, it was dead on 6am in Sydney. And Steve had previously told me he woke earlier than that normally.

Sorry Steve!!!
LOL, that's why he is on the BIG bucks :biggrin:
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,268 Posts
I am surprised someone else hasn't considered the excessively low average speed.

Work it out.

185 Kilometres
divided by
13 hours
= 14 klm/hr

That is a hell of a lot of standing and idling.

With the HSVs and Holdens in my past the trip gave you the average speed. My last Holden was a Supercharged V6 and that returned around 16 Lt/100 at an average speed of about 28 klm/hr.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,862 Posts
Discussion Starter #16 (Edited)
I am surprised someone else hasn't considered the excessively low average speed.

Work it out.

185 Kilometres
divided by
13 hours
= 14 klm/hr

That is a hell of a lot of standing and idling.

With the HSVs and Holdens in my past the trip gave you the average speed. My last Holden was a Supercharged V6 and that returned around 16 Lt/100 at an average speed of about 28 klm/hr.
Cheers John, thinking into it a bit more now there is no way in the world I have had driven the car for 13 hrs including standing/idling since I got it, I know there were a few electrical faults that the Dealership Rolfle Motors in Canberra fixed for me, I am thinking that they had the ignition on for extended period of times repairing it for me.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,862 Posts
Discussion Starter #17
Like I said in your other thread about this, there are modules and sending cards for each side of the fuel tank. Sounds like one of them is bad. I'm betting you still have one side still full. The modules are under the rear seats. Someone else recently had this same problem.

Bernie
Might of found the drama, thanks Bernie, waiting to hear back from Chrysler now.

 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
23,441 Posts
Might of found the drama, thanks Bernie, waiting to hear back from Chrysler now.

Yep! Looks like the left side is full. Faulty module or sending card.

Bernie
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,268 Posts
Ummm, not sue I see anything wrong in this last photo. The RH tank is used first and then the LH tank. The capacity is in the 180 - 200 range, therefore the trip would be telling you "low fuel" with those readings, which is right.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,334 Posts
I could be wrong but I suggest that the reading of 29.4 litres per hundred represents real fuel going through the system and this is supported by the amount of fuel you had to replenish. I would be looking at major fuel leaks on the fuel pump side as I have had tow of them.
I don't think you guages are wrong!
 
1 - 20 of 32 Posts
Top