Difference in fuel economy
Submitted: Friday, Feb 05, 2010 at 13:20
ThreadID:
75795
Views:
3315
Replies:
4
FollowUps:
15
This Thread has been Archived
Wherehegon
Had to go to central coast yesterday with 2 washing machines in trailer for the old boy to pull apart and keep for spares (ex sparkie likes to play, retired). On the way up from here in Penrith to the Central Coast (
The Entrance) thought I would try out the difference in economy travelling at 110/113k on the way up and 97 on the way back. Ok I didn't have the 2 machines on the back of the trailer (which is a heavy duty 4wd trailer minus the camper tent on top) on the way back but the 2 machines would weigh approx 100kg = to 1 person ?? On the way up cruise set at 113 usage was 13.7L per 100, on the way
home cruise was set at 98 usage was 11.2L per 100 fair difference, 2.5 difference, even if you allow .5 for the machines not been on the back. So probably sitting on 95 without trailer I would crack the 10L per 100?? Currently does around 10.2/10.4 free way with out trailer sitting on 110/120k, will try on the next trip. I'm not looking at sitting on 90 k everytime I hit the free way but just wanted to try it out to see if sitting on 90K as they advertise is the best economy.Regards Steve Ps this was in a 01 prado T/D Grande Auto
Reply By: Madfisher - Friday, Feb 05, 2010 at 13:37
Friday, Feb 05, 2010 at 13:37
Got to be happy with that Steve. We where on the m7 then the m2 yesterday morning arround 7am. Actually spotted SIL in the traffic as
well. We where in Sals Nullarbor. Didnt do to bad for a petrol auto, filled up at Mt Vic, tried to stay at 100, went all the way to RNS and got back to
Bathurst on a bit over half a tank.
Its thristy but has been completely trouble free, and got to admit the auto is good in traffic. Biggest negative I reckon is lack of engine brakling coming up to lights,
mine seems to pull up a lot better but it is 200kg lighter to.
Cheers Pete
AnswerID:
402827
Reply By: Member - Graham H (QLD) - Friday, Feb 05, 2010 at 14:50
Friday, Feb 05, 2010 at 14:50
That is a completely unscientific way to do a fuel
test.
Due to variation of grades on hills and even which way the wind is blowing will alter things.
The only almost sure way is to do two identical trips at the different speeds.
Not using cruise control will give you even better figures.
AnswerID:
402836
Follow Up By: Member - Tony V (NSW) - Friday, Feb 05, 2010 at 15:55
Friday, Feb 05, 2010 at 15:55
Graham,
Your a spoilsport lol, Wherehegon never pretended that it was an accurate fuel consumption
test, it was an observation that has now got him thinking about the way he drives.
I have had similar epiphanies resulting in non scientific results, but on a long haul that 95 kms creeps up to 110 kms so easily and up goes consumption...
FollowupID:
672343
Follow Up By: Wherehegon - Friday, Feb 05, 2010 at 16:13
Friday, Feb 05, 2010 at 16:13
Graham you are correct but it was obviously not exactly the same conditions either way but would be failry close, 2 fairly long hills to pull up going either way, the wind was the same (very little) but was side on not driving into it or having it push me, had I been driving into the wind then yes would be a fairly difference in results, but I think over all it definately made a considerable difference in economy. Also was not peak hour either way so had a good run both ways. Regards Steve
FollowupID:
672351
Follow Up By: Member - Graham H (QLD) - Friday, Feb 05, 2010 at 16:25
Friday, Feb 05, 2010 at 16:25
Im not trying to be a spoilsport.
However the unknowing and inexperienced can take this as reasonable whereas experience shows that a reverse
test is inconclusive due to the factors I said Hills have different slopes etc.
Eg from Adeliade to Mt Compass and return The difference in the two sides of the Willunga
hill just for starters.
A very good example is going up the Stuart last year from Pt
Augusta to
Erldunda The road is similar undulating mildly all the way.
However one day we got barely 4kpl and the next day we got 7kpl
Why The wind changed Wasnt really noticeable till we filled up.
Incidentally I rarely use cruise and when i have the consumption usually rises.
We rarely tow at more thn 90kph and have turned in consistant consumption figures over 44,000k of towing
However if you are happy with the result fine.
Cheers
FollowupID:
672353
Follow Up By: Shaker - Friday, Feb 05, 2010 at 16:31
Friday, Feb 05, 2010 at 16:31
Graham, it is fairly obvious that if you drive a bit slower you will use less fuel. Sure it's not scientific, but is is an indication.
FollowupID:
672356
Follow Up By: Member - Tony V (NSW) - Friday, Feb 05, 2010 at 16:50
Friday, Feb 05, 2010 at 16:50
Graham the spoilsport comment was meant in jest.
Totally agree that Cruise control, consumes fuel.
I also agree that driving style is the key to fuel comsumption and conditions can appear to be equal but just slight changes in wind, atmospheric conditions etc can make big changes.
Its a good subject and one that will get a lot of debate
FollowupID:
672366
Follow Up By: Member - Graham H (QLD) - Friday, Feb 05, 2010 at 17:47
Friday, Feb 05, 2010 at 17:47
You're Ok I took it as that.
I reckon just keep to no more than 90kph and fill it up when it needs it LOL
$350 some days
Like $11,000 this trip.
Cheers
FollowupID:
672380
Reply By: Willem - Friday, Feb 05, 2010 at 16:46
Friday, Feb 05, 2010 at 16:46
I am interested in the 110/120kmh speed limit. Was up that way recently and did not see anything marked accordingly. Too many roadworks anyway...lol
That aside.... on the Barrier Hwy heading east at 110 on cruise control we scored 11/100
Going north from
Sydney along the Pacific Hwy at 95 on cruise control we scored 9/100
This in a 2.5lt Xtrail auto.
But in the scheme of things.....you have to have the fuel if you want to do the distance and it doesn't really matter what the consumption is. However when you get a good result you 'feel' better :-)
Cheers
AnswerID:
402862
Follow Up By: Wherehegon - Friday, Feb 05, 2010 at 18:42
Friday, Feb 05, 2010 at 18:42
Hi Willem, 120k speed limit obviously no such thing on the F3 or anywhere that I know of except NT 130, but my speed usually varies a bit eg going down the Mooney
bridge it will usually roll to about 125, I normally don't hit the throttle again till it the speedo drops back down to 110, fairly good pull up the other side, I do know the boys in blue sit on the left at the
lookout catching you come down the
hill & across the
bridge, probably just been lucky I would say. But even though conditions weren't the same for your self with the xtrail, it shows that keeping the foot up a bit obviously makes the difference. As I mentioned above I will be sitting on 110 when allowed to and conditions prevail, unless towing especially a van I think 80/90k would be quick enough, no rush. Regards Steve
FollowupID:
672397
Follow Up By: Steve - Friday, Feb 05, 2010 at 19:44
Friday, Feb 05, 2010 at 19:44
125ks? I've driven that freeway for 25 years and there's a fair few idiots on it, weaving in and out at silly speeds. Doing 125 doesn't give you much chance to avoid them never mind the damage you might do.
yep - there's quite a few that drive like that - I'll keep an eye out for you now that I've seen your photo. I understand the need to get there 5 mins earlier but that same difference also means the difference between being able to/or not, avoid one of the many bad accidents that the F3 has witnessed.
As for the boys in blue, they're the least of your problems on that stretch - and I'm not a timid driver, not by a long stretch.
FollowupID:
672401
Follow Up By: Wherehegon - Friday, Feb 05, 2010 at 20:51
Friday, Feb 05, 2010 at 20:51
I said 125k down the
hill unless you keep dabbing the brakes or drop it back a gear to slow it down to the legal limit, I would say probably 70% let it roll down that
hill and sitting at 115/125 I have had many a driver whiz pass me at a lot higher speeds actually accelerating, as far as weaving in & out there is no need to be doing that as most are above the speed limit even by 1k !!!.
""and I'm not a timid driver, not by a long stretch."" your point is ??
Been driving the F3 myself for 26 on a regular basis, semis, caravans,trailers,etc, 2 speeding fines in 26 years no at fault accidents and two involving some one running up my rear, so yeah I'm a real danger on the road. As I said maybe luck that I haven't been caught at 120k BUT the boys in blue have been there when I have gone past at that speed and haven't pulled me up so even they are aware that they would be pulling over probably 90% of drivers for been even 5k over. I also said that I had my cruise set at 113k while trailer was on which if going by the GPS my vehicle is doing 110, speedo out by 3k.So even cruising at 120 I'm actually doing 117, and yes is over the speed limit by 7k, and what you never have exceeded the speed limit in 25 years on that stretch of road ?? I've even made it easier for you I have exploroz cover on the rear wheel so you be able to see me passing you as I weave in & out !!!!!!!!!!!!!
FollowupID:
672419
Follow Up By: Wherehegon - Friday, Feb 05, 2010 at 21:27
Friday, Feb 05, 2010 at 21:27
And as far as 5 minutes earlier, I did mention in my above post that ""unless towing especially a van I think 80/90k would be quick enough, no rush"" !! So at 120 going by my speedo and comparing to my GPS as mentioned above I'm doing 117, 7 over, yes over the legal limit, so you have never done 67 in 60 zone, 87 in an 80 zone etc, never ?? My mother at 73 still driving and drives down to our place here in Penrith from the coast and tells me she never speeds, I have been in the vehicle with her many times and she has crept over the speed limit even in her camry some time by more then 5k guess she's been lucky in 50 odd years of driving.
FollowupID:
672434
Follow Up By: Madfisher - Friday, Feb 05, 2010 at 21:34
Friday, Feb 05, 2010 at 21:34
Steve,
I guess your the one siting in the right hand lane siting 20ks under the limit then.
Dont drive the f3 much, but in the right hand lane on the m4 everyone is siting on 120 in the 110 zone.But it is a better freeway granted.
Cheers Pete
FollowupID:
672435
Follow Up By: Steve - Friday, Feb 05, 2010 at 22:57
Friday, Feb 05, 2010 at 22:57
mf,
ha, that was a
well thought out post - but I was brought up to view lanes as a guide for some kind of order - not an opportunity to play dodgems. I'll drive on the limit with the best of em as I was also brought up in an environment where the traffic is far more hectic and more ordered than the
Sydney suburbs. Watching the idiots and frequent tragedies on the F3 has given me pause enough to realise the "crucial" 5 mins isn't worth it. When you see cars are whizzing up from your left into the tiniest gap and weaving in and out, regardless of the risk to others you know there is more order on Italian roads than the F3.
and 15 ks above isn't "crept over the limit". Still, carry on.
FollowupID:
672456
Follow Up By: Wherehegon - Friday, Feb 05, 2010 at 23:21
Friday, Feb 05, 2010 at 23:21
Never once mentioned crept over the speed by 15 K, the only time I have mentioned about creeping over the limit was when I was referring to my mother driving, and in that reply my words were
"" I have been in the vehicle with her many times and she has crept over the speed limit even in her camry some time by more then 5k"".
I will be travelling up there again on sunday so I'm just warning you now I'll be on the F3 again, keep your eye out for the explore wheel cover give me a beep and I'll give you a wave as I weave my way through. Have a great night !!
FollowupID:
672462
Follow Up By: Wherehegon - Friday, Feb 05, 2010 at 23:31
Friday, Feb 05, 2010 at 23:31
I apologize in regards to creeping over the limit, it was in my reply to Avan not your self.
FollowupID:
672463
Reply By: Avan - Friday, Feb 05, 2010 at 21:36
Friday, Feb 05, 2010 at 21:36
No doubt you would save fuel,
Look at it another way by reducing your speed by about 10kph has not only saved fuel and for every 100km you travel the extra travel time taken is 5-6 minutes (or pro rata)
AnswerID:
402903
Follow Up By: Wherehegon - Friday, Feb 05, 2010 at 22:08
Friday, Feb 05, 2010 at 22:08
HI there Avan, even when driving semis years ago where the bosses were pushing you to get from point a to point b by a required time I still sat on the speed limit (for sure crept over it here and there but only by a k or 2) once again maybe lucky, even speed limited trucks while under acceleration the speed limiters seem to allow the semi to creep up to 5 k over the limiter, never played with it didn't have a need to, hence why never ever got pinged for speeding when driving the trucks and like any truck driver I covered allot of klms, I got pinged back 24 years ago doing 67 in 60 zone then in 1999 for 108 in 100k on the Bruce Highway in QLD both were in my cars at the time. I'm not here saying speeding is safe by any means, and yes I probably risk it here and there by creeping over it knowingly so but there is a big difference driving like a maniac on a death wish and creeping over the speed limit. Around schools if anything I sit lower then the 40k limit, having a little one myself I know how quick and unpredictable they can be. Time doesnt bother me as we take stops with the little one anyway...Regards Steve
FollowupID:
672446