Why such bad gas mileage?

I really think it has to do with how they are built. These are not comparable to a BMW engine. Even an M3. If it were, it would make similar Italian symphony noises. Although Ferrari builds ironclad engines, they're not built to please the environment crowd.

If cars like the M3 got mileage in 430 territory, the idea of it as a DD would be comical for many.

 

I don't think I get 11 per gallon. I'm at the gas station a lot.

 

High revs through the gears. There's no free lunch.

Mike

 

I don't drive like a grandmother, but I have usually gotten good milage in my Ferrari's.

On a recent trip where I averaged 90, with a number of sprints to over 140, I got 26 mpg.

I just filled up after a few hundred miles around town and I got 16.5.

Driving style counts for allot.

 

That's a good question. The 430 is lighter, more aerodynamic, and the engine has dual TBs with dual MAFs, which are more fuel efficient than 8 TBs and no MAFs. Both in manual pretty much have identical ratios, turning the same speeds per rpm in top gear. And with all of those advantages, the 430's 11/16 figures are much worse than the already dismal 14/20 for the M3. Doesn't make sense to me either... unless the EPA uses a different test for exotics. Hmmmm.

 

You don't really care though do you?

I remember when my mother-in-law first saw my 360........

Oh, she said, that's beautiful, really beautiful. Will you get good mileage?
No, I said with a big cheesy grin.
Oh well, she said, it's really just a big toy isn't it?

 

Simply Ferrari's engines deliver their Power and torque using a Higher fuel consomption

 

+ 1.
I think that the 11mpg is almost being generous. Its probably more like 8-9. And I'm not peeling out of parking lots and exit ramps. Every time I get in the car it seems like I have 2-3 less bars on the gauge. Gas station fill ups are as common as they are with my Escalade.

 

I've been keeping track just for fun, and it seems like I get ~12mpg regardless of how I drive. It's not that bad but it's kinda annoying how early the fuel warning light shows up, I seem to get it at around 240 miles.

Some kind of trip computer would be nice!

 

I haven't calcuated gas mileage on the CS yet, but I've actually been "surprised" at how infequently I fill up...two things impact that of course, not getting to drive it as much as I'd like (!) and the huge 25 gallon tank...my Maser GS with its (i think) 4.3 liter gets 11mph in my around town usage...but that got me thinking...

I suspect the 3.6 liter gets MUCH better mileage than the 4.3 liter in the 430/Maser. Sure, the 430 has 20% more power too...so not much of a surprise, but I'm guessing 360 average around town will be 15 mpg or thereabouts and closer to 20 mpg on the highway...displacement matters I guess (duh) but interesting how much it does...

Also, I've never found any of my cars to be close to the EPA numbers...I'd be interested in real-life averages if anyone bothers to calculate them on the F-cars when they fill up.

I am guessing the v12s get under 10, right?

Before anyone says "who cares", yes, its true exotic car owners by definition generally don't care about mileage...I'm just curious and this is a "chat board"...

 

My carbed Boxer gets about 10/12 on the freeway, maybe 8 mpg around town, and on a spirited drive in the twisties, maybe 4 or 5 mpg.
But well worth it!
John

 

Right, Last weekend I went to a country called Wales. Great roads but big problems. Lots of van drives and wannabees right up your trumpet if you dont speed, then cops that are everything and set up speed TRAPS (like long range camera pointing at the bottom of a steep hill where the limit goes from 50 to 30).

I didnt like it so I took the Pi$$ and drove very slowly, and in an ultra chilled manner. result of which I should have the maximum possible MPG measurement. Just re-filled the tank and it was

180 Miles
41.6 Litres

9.15 UK Gallons
10.98 US gallons

= 19.69 UK MPG
= 16.39 US MPG

also = 14 Lrs/100KM for sensible SI units

6.9K for a Litre
or about 5 K per £

gulp?!

This was start stop country up down traffic lights driving. 6th gear continuous motorway at 50MPH I think 30MPG (UK) should be possible.

Why so bad? Tight tolerances, high friction surface area and losses to oil pump. Also inherent inefficiencies when operating out of the design bandwidth

design bandwidth = foot to floor

 

Yeah, my reaction to this thread was similar as I was about to respond to the OP and the M3 driver that my experience was different...

My 3.6L Stradale gets 20.5 mpg highway averaging about 100 mph, including some spirited sprints. My 3.2L M3 gets about the same mpg averaging about 90 mph, completely unable of equivalent sprints. I attribute the Stradale's superiority there to its aerodynamics.

OTOH, driving on the track, my Stradale gets 4 to 6 mpg. I doubt my M3 would get less than 12 mpg, but I haven't accurately measured that. I attribute that to the MUCH higher redline combined with the somewhat higher displacement.

Note that the latter is also contrary to the 430 driver who gets the same no matter how he drives... I can't imagine that being correct... but if it is, that would say they've done something weird with the 430 that causes it to get really low mpg even when unnecessary.

Finally, back to the OP, my Stradale gets waaayyyy better gas mileage on the highway at 100mph than my similarly-aged SUV's do averaging 75mph. I think some of the latest SUVs might beat it, but not if you try to keep them at 90mph+ (not sure on that)... and they've been optimized for gas mileage... whereas I don't think Ferrari gave that any thought with the CS. (They could have merely added one higher gear to allow 90 mph to be at 3000 rpm and I bet I'd be getting 23mpg or so on long jaunts... but then so few ever do long jaunts in their CS's.)

 

We must have similar driving styles, since we both have CS'. Mine is more than reasonable. At the track, all bets are off...... 6mpg...... but its way fun!

 

Just like arizonaitalian, I found this slightly comical.

My Maserati, with it's 4.2 litre V8 producing 390 bhp and a curb weight of 3,700 lbs averages 17-18 mpg.

My Ferrari, with it's 3.6 litre V8 producing 400 bhp and a curb weight of 3,200 lbs averages 12-13 mpg.

That's with equal driving of both. Sure the Maser is a 6-speed and the Ferrari is F1, but I'm sure there's much more than that to account for the difference.

Just to clarify, I'm not complaining one bit. I love hopping into these Italian machines and listening to their music. I was curious as well, from an engineering perspective, what it is that causes such a difference in fuel efficiency.

 

Great...I was trying to do a few Google searches on the fuel efficiency of Ferrari 360 motors and this thread was the only legitimate article that kept coming up....hope one of our members can enlighten us

 

I daily drive the car so generally do mixed driving. I would say 12-16 is typical depending on how hard I am driving and how much stop and go I have to do.

I don't see that as any worse than most of the SUVs on the road.

 

I recently averaged 13 mpgs in my 360. not far off of my DD x5 which gets around 15. FWIW my friend's e92 M3 is only averaging in the 15-17mph range. So really our cars aren't far off.

 

Both offer dismal fuel economy , especially highway. A Vette looks like a Prius by comparison < ha ha>. But that's the way they are. With such a high compression, can't run that lean to begin with. One of those engineering enigmas .

 

Gear ratios and fuel/engine management in regards to fuel consumption was at the very bottom for the Ferrari engineers.