Fuel Usage

Submitted: Saturday, Nov 29, 2014 at 18:48
ThreadID: 110285 Views:2014 Replies:9 FollowUps:2
This Thread has been Archived
FYI

I have just completed a small trip of approx 300km's each way, with my van.
As it was nearly all freeway driving, I decided to look at different driving techniques.

I have a 2014 Triton GLXR ute (Diesel, Auto) & a Jayco Starcraft OB, I am going to travel around the country next year, so always interested in fuel savings.

On the trip up, I used the manual mode in my transmission, with no cruise control & tried to maintain approx. 100kph. The onboard fuel monitor showed I was getting around 18lts/100km's. This has been roughly what I have been getting on past trips.

On the trip back, I used manual mode in my transmission, but set the cruise control at 90kph. The onboard fuel monitor showed I was getting approx. 16lts/100klm.

Obviously my fuel monitor is not a definitive record of fuel usage, but I was very please with the numbers none the less. Will certainly try this again as it will represent a huge saving on my trip.

Tony
"For the Rover's life has pleasures, that the townsfolk will never know" - sort of from Banjo Paterson

Lifetime Member
My Profile  My Position  Send Message

Back Expand Un-Read 1 Moderator

Reply By: cruiser 3 - Saturday, Nov 29, 2014 at 19:30

Saturday, Nov 29, 2014 at 19:30
Hi Sanantone
I tow a Roadstar with an 80 series petrol Landcruiser and return 21 litres per 100ks.
So my old petrol is not that thirsty after all.
AnswerID: 542336

Reply By: Dennis Ellery - Saturday, Nov 29, 2014 at 20:42

Saturday, Nov 29, 2014 at 20:42
Doesn’t sound real good to me.
I tow a 3 tonne van with the tow vehicle loaded to another 3 tonne at 18 litres per 100K
AnswerID: 542338

Reply By: Kumunara (NT) - Sunday, Nov 30, 2014 at 05:38

Sunday, Nov 30, 2014 at 05:38
Sanantone

Pretty poor economy but 300 kms is not enough to give an accurate picture.

Towing a camper trailer at 100km/h my Amarok returns 12 lts/100 km.

The StarCraft is lighter than my camper trailer but would have more wind resistance. I would expect better economy than you are getting. May be worth having a look at the pressure of the tyres on your caravan.



Tjilpi


Life's great and it just keeps getting better

Member
My Profile  Send Message

AnswerID: 542349

Reply By: Life Member-Doug T NSW - Sunday, Nov 30, 2014 at 07:02

Sunday, Nov 30, 2014 at 07:02
Hi Tony, it sure makes a difference when the speed is reduced, if your not in a hurry, and if your on holiday then you shouldn't be in a hurry try dropping another 10Kph down to 80Kph,you'll be amazed at the savings, but make sure you allow traffic to overtake. When I left Perth after retirement I towed my 20ft Van across the Nullabor at around the 80/85 in (5th gear) , I fueled up at Southern Cross 360lts and did not buy any more fuel until Pt Augusta, 2000 Klms .
I know there will be some that are horrified at my statement about 5th gear but why rev the guts out of the engine in 4th when with a slight tail wind the old Troopy cruised along with about 3/4 in of pedal, as soon as I detected a rise and more throttle was needed I'd drop into 4th , when I was doing Pilot/Escort work with the sign up in 5th sometimes the pedal was near flat trying to maintain 90 to 95 Kph so I believe the vehicle was doing it easier with the Van on tow. Haaa that's my theory and I'm sticking with it.

.
still going strong with 836,179 K's

Lifetime Member
My Profile  My Blog  Send Message

AnswerID: 542351

Follow Up By: Member - Sanantone - Sunday, Nov 30, 2014 at 07:40

Sunday, Nov 30, 2014 at 07:40
Hi Doug,

Yes, that was the point I was trying to make, with the reduced speed, it certainly seemed to improve my fuel consumption.
I would only operate this way on a 2 lane road.
But I do drive for fuel economy these days.
Tony
"For the Rover's life has pleasures, that the townsfolk will never know" - sort of from Banjo Paterson

Lifetime Member
My Profile  My Position  Send Message

0
FollowupID: 828631

Reply By: cookie1 - Sunday, Nov 30, 2014 at 08:09

Sunday, Nov 30, 2014 at 08:09
I think you will find that once the engine has a few KM on it, it will return better fuel economy, being 2014 it is a new vehicle and a bit tight. I have found on my 200GX that the fuel economy started at 23L/100 but is now down around the 13-14L /100 2 years later - a lot better than I ever got with my 3L Patrol.

cheers
AnswerID: 542358

Reply By: Phil B (WA) - Sunday, Nov 30, 2014 at 08:47

Sunday, Nov 30, 2014 at 08:47
Don't forget to factor in head, side and tail winds - they can make a huge difference

There is a lot of difference between
‘Human Being’ and ‘Being Human’.





Lifetime Member
My Profile  My Blog  Send Message

AnswerID: 542362

Reply By: Member - mark D18 - Monday, Dec 01, 2014 at 17:22

Monday, Dec 01, 2014 at 17:22
Don't worry about your usage

Just put it in as you need it .

I cant believe how so many people worry about fuel economy .

And how some fudge there Figures .

More to worry about , I would have thought

Cheers

AnswerID: 542438

Follow Up By: Member - Sanantone - Monday, Dec 01, 2014 at 18:08

Monday, Dec 01, 2014 at 18:08
Geeze Mark,

Perhaps read my post before you reply with crap.

I merely commented on what a different driving technique achieved with fuel economy. I also mentioned it was one small test, but will practice the 90kph driving again.

As for "Not worry about usage", well I am soon to embark on a 30,000km's+ trip around the country, tbh fuel usage is very relevant to me.

Not sure why you bothered.
Tony
"For the Rover's life has pleasures, that the townsfolk will never know" - sort of from Banjo Paterson

Lifetime Member
My Profile  My Position  Send Message

0
FollowupID: 828793

Reply By: Member - mark D18 - Monday, Dec 01, 2014 at 18:31

Monday, Dec 01, 2014 at 18:31
Sanantone

Didn't really mean to have a dig at you.
Must have sounded harsher then what I meant

Your figures would be fairly close I would have thought.

I cant work out why some people want to boast about fuel figures when they are clearly not accurate or maybe they travel at 60 km per hour.


Cheers
AnswerID: 542440

Reply By: Bobjl - Tuesday, Dec 02, 2014 at 18:17

Tuesday, Dec 02, 2014 at 18:17
Tony
As others have indicated [expect you know anyway], as the engine loosens up economy will improve, however if like several new diesels I have had, that may be 20-50,000 k's.

In the meantime as suggested by others, the Tyre pressures will effect the rolling resistance so you may need to beef them up to say 75% of what the tyre max pressure is. Some trial and error needed and your light weight single axle Van may not need as much. I am running 60psi [on highways] on my 3.5 tonne van and it seems to enable reasonable handling and optimum fuel economy.

I have found that my long tall van creates significant exposure to head and side winds so much so that my fuel usage varies significantly dependent upon prevailing conditions from as low as 17 litre's per hundred to 30 litre's per hundred [I have 200 series twin turbo diesel with some extras - such as bull bar draws chunky tyres etc so weight is at high end].

Like you I have tried various [manual] gear selections and after several trips around Australia and lots of other trips of 10-15000 k,s, I now use 4th gear at 95kph [my self imposed maximum speed - unless I am about to encounter a long hill and need to get a run at it]. That speed gets me reasonable average usage - low 20's litres per 100 when towing. The diesel is happier with the revs higher when lugging big loads and I believe it produces better economy - at least in my rig.

I note your van is much taller than your Ute, so you will be experiencing lots of wind drag/resistance. You may achieve some long term benefits from fitting a wind deflector to the back of the Ute so as to channel the air over the top of the van, truckies have been using such gadgets for ages simply because they reduce the drag and improve economy. You may want to look at something like Aeroplus - www.purpleline.com.au. or make something yourself but ensure you get the design right.

Don't want to bore you but my experience has been that fuels aint fuels - some produce much better economy in identical driving conditions. I bought a load of about 100 litres when I filled in a remote servo with no name fuel on my trip north this winter.
I had averaged 21 litres per hundred for 3000k's - my computer resets after a refill so usually settles in to real usage after 10-20 k's. I averaged 26 litres for next 200k's that day, then back to 25 litres over next 300 or so k's. Refilled with well known brand next day and soon after was back around 22 litres per hundred. Almost identical road and wind conditions overall, so I am convinced that quality diesel is the imperative.

So at say at least an extra 4 litres per hundred was gobbled up, 20 litres more than I should have - uhhm that was about $30 something dollars wasted, that could have been spent on some vice.

Enjoy your travels.

Bob



AnswerID: 542478

Sponsored Links

Popular Products (13)