Fuel requirements D90 Puma - Birdsville/Poeppels Cnr to Innamincka

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lagerfan

This is a good idea, also much easier to put up top if you are storing them on the roof, saw a lot of folks doing this in the NT. Personally had no trouble using the 20l (metal) Jerrys up & down from the roof and re-filling from them but ask me again in 10 years... Just make sure to use any jerrys from up top asap to get that centre of gravity down closer to where it should be and minimise stress on the roof rack.

After our experience I would start with a 400km per full tank on the D90 and work from there, with the standard 60l tank basically assume 15l/100km and then anymore is a bonus. Better to have it and not need it than need it and not have it!

---

Lagerfan,

Not much extra info on the fuel requirement for this trip, but you can achieve pretty decent range in a 90 with jerries without spending the money on the aux tanks. I used to carry 55 liter (main) + 35 liter (Front Runner LHS) + 80 liter in 4 jerries as per the picture. The previous owner installed the aux tank as I would never have been able to afford it in those days!

The 90 has always been happy carrying the jerries on the roof regardless of people's opinion on centre of gravity. I worked and toured with that configuration for many thousands of kilometers through Africa. The tent, 4 jerries and the luggage obviously overloaded the roof (not too clever), but the 90 took it all in its stride.

The pictures are from a Botswana tour around 1998 with the LROCSA...

Cheers,

Lou

Hi Lou,

I've got no problem with jerries up top, just very limited experience! But they worked a treat for us recently, so much so I'm keen to get another double holder and do exactly what you've done in those pics. I was just passing on the advice we got which was to use the ones from up top first and as soon as is practical to get the weight down.

MuzzyDelta was saying about having some stored inside the 90, not sure I'm keen on that option, space & stink!

Cheers,
Heinz

Recently did Mt Dare to Birdsville via Rig road and Warburton Crossing which was 750 odd kms, and would be pretty much the same split of dunes and flat as what you've got planned.
Used 95L in the county, and a Puma 110 we were travelling with was getting similar but usually slightly better consumption on other legs so I'd guess it would have been about the same for that.

Steve

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lagerfan

Hi Lou,

I've got no problem with jerries up top, just very limited experience! But they worked a treat for us recently, so much so I'm keen to get another double holder and do exactly what you've done in those pics. I was just passing on the advice we got which was to use the ones from up top first and as soon as is practical to get the weight down.

MuzzyDelta was saying about having some stored inside the 90, not sure I'm keen on that option, space & stink!

Cheers,
Heinz

---

Hi Heinz,

Yes agree with you on using the "rack" fuels first to drop the weight as quick as possible. I still carry a coil of transparent 3/4" reinforced hose for siphoning the fuel straight from the jerries while on the rack. As the guys posted, far too heavy to try and pour! I usually use the two outer ones first as well to reduce the rolling moment, however that's relatively small.

I've got a "jiggle" valve fitted on the suction side and a stopcock (90 degree full shut) about 500mm from the bottom end for more control over the flow. The "jiggle" valve is often a PITA though and I usually end up siphoning "old school", hence the transparent hose... Australian diesel is IMO the worst tasting in the world! (Maybe I'm just getting old...)

Cheers,

Lou

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by steveG

Recently did Mt Dare to Birdsville via Rig road and Warburton Crossing which was 750 odd kms, and would be pretty much the same split of dunes and flat as what you've got planned.
Used 95L in the county, and a Puma 110 we were travelling with was getting similar but usually slightly better consumption on other legs so I'd guess it would have been about the same for that.

Steve

---

Interesting, I just ran the French West to East in a Puma 110. Track was in poor condition and I averaged 17.9/100 in the sand (ie 91l for 507km).

To the OP, you'll get much better running the K1 as it parallels the dunes. Birdsville to Peopels is pretty easy going - our speed tripled over this section compared to the earlier sections of the French.

You won't get any fuel smells using metal jerry cans.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Leroy_Riding

cant say I have ever been out that way (although it is planned!)
general rule for me at least if I am traveling in a place like that is to take my cars worst fuel efficiency, then work out KM's to that then double it so.

if im going 500kms and my worst consumption from a tank has been 13l/100km then I would take 130Lts of fuel, this way I know I have enough, in event of super bad consumption, loosing one jerry to a puncture or something like that.

Thats just me, I am sure other people will have differing opinions though.

Leroy

---

I agree. I now have 140 litres of fuel in tanks and I can carry 2 x jerries on my Rijidij rear bar. I usually carry water on the rear. i have always found my 90 would do 400km for a standard 60 litre tanks no matter what the terrain. With the extra tanks I can now plan safely on 1000km. I am not a fan of carrying jerries in the vehicle. They leak and make a horrible mess. If you don't want to get extra tanks get a rear carrier or strap them to your roof rack. You can buy plastic fuel tanks that you could put on the floor in the back or strap to the roof. Remember, that when driving over sand, let your tyres down to at least 30PSI or even 20PSI and you will get much better fuel economy. I was shocked that the standard pressure in my 90 is up around 40 PSI.