Mazda 787B Instrument Cluster/Panel

  • Thread starter bman1984
  • 11 comments
  • 5,023 views
135
United States
United States
Hi All. Long time reader, first time poster. Got the game at launch and finally joined.

After some searching here and the rest of the web, I really didn’t find the answers I was looking for so here I am. Since we can’t individually select what we want to display on-screen, if I decide to turn it all off including the map, I rely on the fuel gauge (if it’s a functioning one) so I don’t run out of gas and plan ahead. Strategize if you will. That’s all good except in the Mazda 787B. So far this is the only car I’ve come across without a gauge, but a number. If I’m correct the two numbers on the left are MPG (or KM/G in this case) on top and fuel level on the bottom. Well how in the heck am I suppose to figure out how much fuel I’ve used/have left if the number starts at 50 goes to 00 then restarts at 99?? I ran the tank dry and the fuel number seemed to restart atleast 8-10 times. Is there a formula or secret Mazda numbering system? Maybe it’s a three digit readout and it’s missing one digit? There isn't even an idiot light to say "hey dummy your running low!"

Also, if the number above the lap time indicator is the instantaneous fuel consumption (7.0), then why does the MPG (KM/G) readout display “32.00” on the Mulsanne Straight? I have the pedal to the plastic and I doubt it almost gets better MPG (32 km = 19.88 Miles) at 8000+ RPM then my real car at cruise speed (22+ MPG) lol. Shouldn’t it read 07.00 (4.6 miles = 7.4 km) or close to it?

Here’s the link and excerpt I found…. http://www.roadandtrack.com/racing/motorsports/salon-mazda-787b/page_3_-_salon-3a_mazda_787b_page_3

“Facing the driver is a single display where several data items can be called up, though engine speed and instantaneous fuel consumption are permanently displayed. Next to the main cluster, large digital instruments indicate the fuel level, the average fuel consumption and lap times.
Above them is a handwritten sticker reminding the driver that, at Le Mans, fuel consumption is 7 liters per lap. Remember that in 1991, Le Mans was run to a fuel consumption formula, Mazda's 7 liters/lap equating to around 4.6 mpg.”

Sorry for the long post (details help) and if this is silly to some but believe me I’ve read sillier things on here from childish comments to what you all call “flaming” or “trolling”. I’m not a hardcore racer nor seen any of the races the cars in the game participate in like LMP, DTM, GT300/500 or V8 Supercar (I’m sure I missed some). Thanks in advance for your responses. Drive clean lol.
 
A such a beautiful world in the cockpit mode I dont even know about and I have to miss out on it because of the damn buggered wheel animations
 
Same as the second post, thanks! I really didn't knew what that 6.0/7.0 numbers were 👍
About the fuel level, I haven't seen any premium car's fuel instruments (needle or numbers) in the cockpick view working, besides on the "new" Schulze GT-R. :grumpy:
I just hope PD does something about it because that way we wouldn't need to keep the HUD on just to check how much fuel the cars have, especially during endurance races.
 
No problem. I find it neat and like the little details. Feels more life like since this is probably the closest I'll get to driving alot of these cars in real life. I try to ignore the wheel animations and do enjoy the cockpit view. It's funny that Schulze GT-R has TWO working fuel gauges, the one on the left by the window/side mirror and the one next to the Tach. Yet the others don't have one working gauge.:odd: It must not be to hard to program one to work if two is possible.

Anyone have an idea how that digital fuel readout works?
 
Bit of an update for those interested. I ran on Circuit de la Sarthe 2009, no assists except ABS @ 1. I haven't perfected ABS 0 yet, though I seem to "stall" or disengage the clutch with ABS 0 quite well lol. Anyway... I found that every "50" ticks ended up being 7 liters. After my first lap I pitted and needed 10 liters @ a reading of 75, same on lap 2. Finding the number odd, I used up exactly 50 ticks and needed 7 liters. Then 100 ticks (50 to 0, 99 to 50) and needed 14 liters. After 150 ticks needing 21 liters. So it appears every 50 ticks is 7 liters and if my math is right on the 6 1/2 cycle you might wanna think about fuel having less than 10 liters left.
 
Bit of an update for those interested. I ran on Circuit de la Sarthe 2009, no assists except ABS @ 1. I haven't perfected ABS 0 yet, though I seem to "stall" or disengage the clutch with ABS 0 quite well lol. Anyway... I found that every "50" ticks ended up being 7 liters. After my first lap I pitted and needed 10 liters @ a reading of 75, same on lap 2. Finding the number odd, I used up exactly 50 ticks and needed 7 liters. Then 100 ticks (50 to 0, 99 to 50) and needed 14 liters. After 150 ticks needing 21 liters. So it appears every 50 ticks is 7 liters and if my math is right on the 6 1/2 cycle you might wanna think about fuel having less than 10 liters left.

Ha, that's amazing! Good work!

About the instantaneous fuel consumption: sometimes the ratio is flipped, so that it's volume per distance (consumption), rather than the usual distance per volume (efficiency, e.g. miles per gallon). The readout, then, might be in litres per 100 kilometres; 32 l / 100 km is about 7 mpg (US). The readout would need to be about 50 for 4.6 mpg, which is also only an average. So, still not quite right.

Any thoughts?
 
Bit of an update for those interested. I ran on Circuit de la Sarthe 2009, no assists except ABS @ 1. I haven't perfected ABS 0 yet, though I seem to "stall" or disengage the clutch with ABS 0 quite well lol. Anyway... I found that every "50" ticks ended up being 7 liters. After my first lap I pitted and needed 10 liters @ a reading of 75, same on lap 2. Finding the number odd, I used up exactly 50 ticks and needed 7 liters. Then 100 ticks (50 to 0, 99 to 50) and needed 14 liters. After 150 ticks needing 21 liters. So it appears every 50 ticks is 7 liters and if my math is right on the 6 1/2 cycle you might wanna think about fuel having less than 10 liters left.

Then I ask you this...

How can I run up to 11 laps on La Sarthe in the 24hr endurance with a 787B without the need to re-fuel???
I keep full throttle whenever possible!

I think your math is a bit off... :dunce:
 
Ha, that's amazing! Good work!

About the instantaneous fuel consumption: sometimes the ratio is flipped, so that it's volume per distance (consumption), rather than the usual distance per volume (efficiency, e.g. miles per gallon). The readout, then, might be in litres per 100 kilometres; 32 l / 100 km is about 7 mpg (US). The readout would need to be about 50 for 4.6 mpg, which is also only an average. So, still not quite right.

Any thoughts?

Thanks. I do have to apologize but I'm not sure I fully understand what you are saying. What you're saying makes more sense as to why as my RPMs increase so does the 32 number I have. I'm using more fuel the faster the engine rotates. But then what is that number telling me? How far I'd be able to go in distance at that pace?


Bit of an update for those interested. I ran on Circuit de la Sarthe 2009, no assists except ABS @ 1. I haven't perfected ABS 0 yet, though I seem to "stall" or disengage the clutch with ABS 0 quite well lol. Anyway... I found that every "50" ticks ended up being 7 liters. After my first lap I pitted and needed 10 liters @ a reading of 75, same on lap 2. Finding the number odd, I used up exactly 50 ticks and needed 7 liters. Then 100 ticks (50 to 0, 99 to 50) and needed 14 liters. After 150 ticks needing 21 liters. So it appears every 50 ticks is 7 liters and if my math is right on the 6 1/2 cycle you might wanna think about fuel having less than 10 liters left.
Then I ask you this...

How can I run up to 11 laps on La Sarthe in the 24hr endurance with a 787B without the need to re-fuel???
I keep full throttle whenever possible!

I think your math is a bit off... :dunce:

In my defense I never said how many laps I could do. If your referring to the 6 1/2 number, that's the number of times the digital fuel number would go from 99 to 00. It starts at 50, goes to 00 then restarts at 99 down to 00. As I said, after my first lap I stopped to top off the tank and needed 10 liters. Same for lap 2. So at that rate I would get 9 comfortable laps, 10 if I pushed it and had good throttle control. I too may even stretch 11 laps if I had better throttle control coming out of corners. I could still be wrong, but the pattern seems pretty solid.
 
As Griffith500 says, in metric countries fuel consumption is measured as 'litres per 100 kms', not 'kms per litre' as you would expect.

A higher number just means you are using more fuel to go the same distance. (ie 100kms)
 
As Griffith500 says, in metric countries fuel consumption is measured as 'litres per 100 kms', not 'kms per litre' as you would expect.

A higher number just means you are using more fuel to go the same distance. (ie 100kms)

Got what you're saying, thanks. So in this case (the metric way) the fuel is the variable not the distance.
 
Back