1985-1998 [Subscribe to Daily Digest] |
[Main 9000 Bulletin Board | BBFAQ |
Prev by Date | Next by Date | Post Followup ]
Member Login / Signup - Members see fewer ads. - Latest Member Gallery Photos
Re: cs vs cse mpg Posted by sam96CS [Email] (#852) [Profile/Gallery] (more from sam96CS) on Tue, 9 Dec 2014 10:16:45 In Reply to: cs vs cse mpg, william, Mon, 8 Dec 2014 15:25:06 Members do not see ads below this line. - Help Keep This Site Online - Signup |
Several possibilities:
1. The '97 computer hasn't finished adapting. It will command a richer fuel mixture until the monitors have run that are related to emissions.
2. There is mismatch between a '97 computer and a '96 resulting in greater fuel consumption. The difference between the computers is software. The ecu you should have is part number 4300836. The ecu you installed is either 4780250 ('97 CSE) or 4780268 ('97 Aero). You are in mostly uncharted territory. I don't think this should matter, but there is very little data from others who have put a '97 or '98 ecu into a '96.
3. Wind conditions weren't the same both runs. At 75 mph much energy is consumed to overcome wind resistance. Add a little headwind and you've got the equivalent wind resistance of cruising at 80 mph even though your actual speed is 75. As others have said it is better to track your mileage from tank to tank.
My '96 CS gets so-so mileage and always has. Changing it to a fpt made no difference.
No Site Registration is Required to Post - Site Membership is optional (Member Features List), but helps to keep the site online
for all Saabers. If the site helps you, please consider helping the site by becoming a member.