Printable View
Yes seriously... there is data to back it up.Quote:
Originally Posted by trout1105
Perhaps turn off you bias for a bit and do some research.
Granted driver training in Australia would need a damn good shake up!
Road rage is a catch-all for frustration, aggression and includes the frustration leading to taking increased chances or risks through others actions.
The data supports higher speeds, raised limits, shorter travel times. What it then doesn’t support is revenue.
Back to fuel economy - D4, full armour, full rack, awning, roof mounted recovery tracks, bullbar etc..
640km round trip Thursday - average speed 112km/h according to trip journey on GPS.
Confirmed fuel consumption (bowser vs dash readout) 10.1L/100km.
Sure I could have saved $8.96 and slowed to 80km/h and then driven for 8 hours (vs 5.7 hours) and been more fatigued - but that just wouldn’t be sensible would it.
Several thousand ks of towing the camper from Brisbane to Lawn Hill, Karumba and Coen, including plenty of unsealed roads, have confirmed our 110 is happiest at 2000-2500 rpm, which means changing down to 5th below about 80 kmh, as 6th is only for highway cruising. Fuel economy is best in that rev range.
So what were you towing during this trip?Quote:
Originally Posted by Tombie
If not towing the extra 20kph makes very little difference in fuel consumption, However If you are towing something substantial that extra 20kph will make a Huge difference in fuel usage.
Also unless you were travelling in the NT your "average" speed of 112kph indicates that you were breaking the law by exceeding the 110kph maximum speed limit[bigwhistle]
Towing the 2.4t Cat will cost an extra $28.00 for the same trip (I’ve done it before in this vehicle and remember the extra fuel burn).Quote:
Originally Posted by trout1105
Again - Saving that bit of coin and spending an additional 2 hours behind the wheel is not worth the perceived saving vs the Fatigue.
I always set my Cruise speed ‘optimistic’ which in this case was 116km/h. I never even get a cursory from the HWP as I pass them and I passed about 7 on this run.
Must make me completely evil and irresponsible [emoji48]
Fuel is the cheapest part of motoring, and I’m not giving away life in exchange for economy saving. In fishing terms - 2 hours more on the water vs 2 in the tow vehicle is a no brainer....
Hi Mike. So main good fuel consumption claims to fame are? I'd assume from previous comments that the Rocket Rod "chip" is one contender, plus being in SA the ground is reasonably flat.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tombie
For the following post of $28 for towing the 2.4T cat, what does that translate to in L/100 km?
Incidentally, from my experience, I suspect towing anything over 2/2.5T leads to exponential/geometric progressions in fuel useage with speed.
With the Cat on the back cruising at posted speed limits yields 13l/100km.
The run south is a series of continually changing ascents and descents.
With the van (around 2t - it’s small) on the back from Melbourne we averaged 13.2l/100km cruising posted limits the entire way.
Sometimes it’s just the aerodynamics of the combination that will do you in.
Interestingly - with the Bimini up on the Cat we do better than with it down - the Bimini deflects the airflow rather letting it vortex around inside the hull inducing drag.
My modifications are:
Decat & custom exhaust.
No EGR
Remap
When on highway towing left at normal height, when vehicle only I lower it on Llams and run -20mm
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/201...11b1719d3f.jpg
This is the combo.
Sorry, completely OT, is that a ham radio tower in the background there? ;)
Regional. Tv antenna.Quote:
Originally Posted by prelude
There’s a nice HAM set up just up the road though.