Good info there Paul. I have lead in my right shoe so command shift and the Volvo short inline six is the bomb! What a sweet engine!

Motion_Inc,

I agree, I do really like the 3.2. (And it was built in the UK, don't tell the Volvo owners)

Looking at the graph that I posted it is interesting that the lightly shaded area on the left is limited to about 60 Horsepower.

That's only about 1/4 of the rated power.

Having the variable valve lift is like having two engines in one.

The 40% increase in fuel consumption just by changing the RPM from 2400 to 4300 was surprising.


I will try to repeat the test over a greater distance to confirm the results.


Thanks

Paul

FREE2 READERS,

The results are in and they are amazing

Note: this is with the cruise control set to about 100 KPH

My LR2 went almost 300 miles

26.9 MPG. American

32.3 MPG. Back home in the UK with a proper sized gallon

8.74 L/100 KM. Using units that only make sense for Soda over here

And this was done with a well used engine







The MPG was reset in my driveway before setting off the fuel tank was full and the brake pedal was only used a few times during the 300 miles.

After the 300 miles it was traffic in the city and the MPG went back to 18 or 19 US

I will measure the return trip at a higher speed and report that information here

The car traffic on the road was going 125 KPH which is what I will do

For the 100 KPH test I stayed in the lane for the big trucks and they are supposed to travel at 90 KPH so don’t think I was being a menace

Thanks

Paul

Freel2 Readers,

I didn't get a chance to take a picture.

At about 120 KPH the fuel economy dropped significantly.

23 MPG USA

27.6 MPG UK

10.23 L/100 KM


Summary

1. Traveling 20% faster required about 15% more fuel to go the same distance

2. A significant part of the increased fuel consumption is due to the efficiency of the engine, Variable Valve timing, Variable Valve lift and Variable intake runner length.

Conclusion

If you want low fuel consumption in the 3.2 then keep the RPMs 2000 or less

Take care

Paul

PS Any 3.2 that can duplicate the 26.9 MPG USA result is running very well, if your 3.2 can't do this on a flat road then its likely time for a tune up.

Think I'll stick to my diesel, at that speed ove a distance I'd be showing low 40s mpg 😁 Landrover - turning owners into mechanics since 1948

2014 Orkney grey Freelander SD4 GS.
2004 Zambezi silver Discovery 2 Td5 (Gone)
1963 Surf blue Morris Mini Minor Super de Luxe (my little toy)

My i6 on lpg does 24mpg at 0,57ppl beats your diesel  Common sense isn't very common.
_______________________________
2007 Land Rover Freelander2 I6 hse Auto

Had my lpg serviced yesterday, today i did a 222 mile round trip, mostly motorway cruising at 60mph towing a trailer (about 750k) averaged 28MPG that's close to 60mpg on diesel  Common sense isn't very common.
_______________________________
2007 Land Rover Freelander2 I6 hse Auto

axle wrote:

My i6 on lpg does 24mpg at 0,57ppl beats your diesel

There is't many filling stations here either, but it's not that often that i have to run on petrol.
Of course the economy suffers if you drive 75 instead of 60, our speed limits 70mph max.
Dirty Diesel
You can use the standard plugs but is better to have ones that run hotter.
Mine is dual fuel and was already converted when i bought it. I have had several cars converted and the price is between £1500.00 and £2200.00 depending on the car and how many cylinders. Down side to duel fuel is the tank, mine is in the spare wheel well so courses a problem with the spare. Common sense isn't very common.
_______________________________
2007 Land Rover Freelander2 I6 hse Auto