Precision fuel consumption measurement

FMS Gateway G2 plus
Inventure CAN solution
VS
OBD
OBD solutions

Tested with a Renault Clio II 1.5 dCi on the same, short trip multiple times with similar conditions (weather, traffic)

4,1
4,6
2,45
3
2
4,2
4,1
1
Trip
Difference
[%]
9,3
+32,9
Avg. fuel consumption OBD [l/100km]
+87,6
+67
4
2,4
7,0
Avg. fuel consumption based on reference measurement system [l/100km]
Distance [km]
Mazda 6 trial

The tests were reproduced later with a different car: Mazda 6 Skyactiv-G145 2.0

6
5
4
3
6,5
6,6
6,6
7,2
12,125
8,4
14,7
8,8
12,3
2
7,1
7,2
1
Trip
10,7
Avg. fuel consumption CAN [l/100km]
11,7
0,0
0,2
-1,4
3,4
-2,5
0,6
Avg. fuel consumption OBD [l/100km]
Difference
BC-CAN [%]
Difference
BC-OBD [%]
9,3
5,4
7,3
25,0
23,8
48,3
10,4
21,8
11
13,2
9,7
9,22
9,2
10,7
Avg. fuel consumption Board Computer [l/100km]
Distance [km]
8,45
14,33
9,1
fuel economy monitor mazda 6

Conclusions

Significant differences from the fuel consumption recorded via CAN (and dashboard if it’s shown there)

The difference varies in every vehicle.

The difference is not constant even for the same vehicle -> Can’t be calibrated.