Bulls bars

[Discotd5fan]

Hey guys

Just wanting to find out from people who have fitted bull bars (plastic or steel) to the front of their beasts, what impact it had on their fuel consumption? I have put my name down at a british offroad at Nambour who are a landrover wrecking company for one of the genuine range rover plastic bars but I am now really interested in the steel bars that some of you have had fitted recently. Is there much of an impact to fuel economy once you add a bull bar? If I go for a steel bar I won't fit a winch straight away but will possibility once I sell my old hilux.

Cheers

[intheozone]

Initially no significant increase to fuel efficiency with an xrox bar. Although it is one of the lighter steel bars available.

I wish I could say the same now as my fuel consumption has sky rocketed. Like 27 L/100km Not sure what has gone wrong still trouble shooting. I just gave the MAF a good spray with a MAF cleaner. Not sure where else to start

[Keithy P38]

I wouldn't expect it to be worse (if at all) as it sits in front of the car and at the same level as the bonnet at its highest point, slightly higher than the factory bumper at its lowest.

Having an awning attached to the roof would be worse for drag.

27L/100km is unreal! I wonder why that has happened Steve? Surely not related to the bullbar - that is a massive jump!

Cheers
Keithy

[Discotd5fan]

Wow! 27/100km that's horrible! My wife and I just went away for the weekend to 1770 with the ski on the roof and I returned between 14.5-14.7/100km which I thought was OK seeing it was really windy and sat on the speed limit 100/110km.

I must admit though I am a little worried about adding gear if the fuel economy is going to blow out to figures like that!

[TheTree]

Hi

During a discussion here recenctly is was agreed that wind resistance (eg a stacked up roof rack) has a much bigger effect than the weight being carried.

So i would imagine the genuine bars would make little difference, and after market bars would, in theory, have a slightly higher Cd than the factory job.

There is a little on modified front bumpers here Automobile drag coefficient - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Regards
Steve

[TheTree]

I wish I could say the same now as my fuel consumption has sky rocketed. Like 27 L/100km Not sure what has gone wrong still trouble shooting. I just gave the MAF a good spray with a MAF cleaner. Not sure where else to start

Hi mate

Do you have access to any kind of diagnostics? Even a generic ELM OBD connector and free app will give you some data about your engine

Steve

[rc42]

I recently got a steel winch bar fitted in place of the original plastic, I'm not sure what the weight difference is but with a 12,000lb winch it could be about 50Kg more.

Although heavier the new bar doesn't have the lower 'spoiler' section so I don't reaaly know whether wind resistance has increased or decreased but I haven't noticed any change in fuel consumption and I get around 17/100km around Brisbane, the only highway use is with a camper trailer and that also returns about 17/100km. Beach driving on Fraser (hard sand) was returning about 22/100km in high range and 34/100km in low range on softer sand.

I was getting about 21/100km around town but a couple of tanks of premium fuel with extra injector cleaner added has brought it down to 17 which seems OK for a 2000 4.6 with 160,000km on the clock.

[intheozone]

Sorry to hijack the thread....

Might have to run a course of tanks with some injector cleaner. Hope that helps a bit. Must say it is frustrating to be using so much fuel as it really takes the fun out of driving.

I don't have any kind of fault mate so don't know what the engine is doing.

[Discotd5fan]

RC42 you and I seem to be getting similar fuel consumption. At the moment around Brisbane mine is using about 20/21ltrs per 100km. I have just put one bottle of injector cleaner through it. Did you run a few tanks of 95 or 98 octane?

Cheers

[mtb_gary]

Sorry to hijack the thread....

Might have to run a course of tanks with some injector cleaner. Hope that helps a bit. Must say it is frustrating to be using so much fuel as it really takes the fun out of driving.

I don't have any kind of fault mate so don't know what the engine is doing.

Are you basing your figures on the dash readout or GPS distance? Don't forget running with your bigger tyres means you are actually travelling further than what is indicated on the dashboard - maybe around 9% giving actual usage of around 19l/100k

Gary

[Hoges]

Even if you don't have a diagnostic tool but you might have an Android phone? Then download the Torque App ...pay the $4 approx for the professional version and you can then get real time Fuel Trim /Short and Long Term fuel trim...
see Glenhendry's posts http://www.aulro.com/afvb/p38a-range-rover/172248-high-long-term-fuel-trims-why.html
very useful!
cheerrs

[rc42]

RC42 you and I seem to be getting similar fuel consumption. At the moment around Brisbane mine is using about 20/21ltrs per 100km. I have just put one bottle of injector cleaner through it. Did you run a few tanks of 95 or 98 octane?

Cheers

I've just finished the second tank of premium, 98 octane I think but its the most expensive stuff in the garages, each tank had a full bottle of injector cleaner so about twice the typical dose rate. We then went on a long trip to Fraser so over 3 hours on the highway each way and the engine seems much happier. I'll probably stick with the high octane fuel, it seemed to improve consumption as soon as I filled up.

I also gave the MAF a good spraying with MAF cleaner about a week ago but that didn't seem to make much difference at the time.

I'm also running 265/75R16 tyres which are about 9% larger than the original ones so actual economy may be around 15/100km but I haven't checked it on the GPS. The speedo was reporting about 7% high with original tyres but it now reading about 2% low, all factory speedos seem to report a higher speed than GPS though so that may be allowed for in the trip computer's fuel consumption calculations.

Whatever the true consumption I'm glad I don't use it as a daily driver, my BMW diesel can do about 7/100km so I'll do the daily commute in that.

[mtb_gary]

Ditto with the daily drive not being the p38. I have a Nissan X-Trail as a company car. Even better when someone else pick up the fuel tab ;).

Gary

[Discotd5fan]

Same here. The P38 is just the weekend toy and camping car. Our other vehicle is a very boring, yet fuel efficient Camry. I feel my cars are at two totally opposite ends of the scales haha

[Keithy P38]

Ditto for me too, but not for fuel consumption reasons! Our Dmax is a car that gets serviced by the mechanic, gets driven by wifey, and thus the Rangie spends all its time camping and 4wding when not parked in the garage. Plus I'm not a fan of short trips on two engines, would rather have one motor carbon up than two.

[Pete38]

Are you basing your figures on the dash readout or GPS distance? Don't forget running with your bigger tyres means you are actually travelling further than what is indicated on the dashboard - maybe around 9% giving actual usage of around 19l/100k

Gary

Fair point Gary. Yeh my 265/75/16 km2's at 100km/h show 90km/h on the speedo. And I think in standard form at 100km/h it used to show 102km/h. So I've always assumed about 12% error in fuel usage assuming it was right with standard tyres. Never bothered measuring the odometer and fuel usage accuracy though.

[intheozone]

My figures are based on what the car tells me. My tyres are 255/70r16 so bigger than standard When speedo says 100 gps says 97.

I also seem to get a vibration at above 95km/h I think I may have a slightly buckled wheel from my last off road adventure.

The car is my daily drive not that I drive much during the week ad I cycle or take transport leaving the p38 for off road and camping trips. That said with the recent rain it has been used a bit more often.

MAF cleaning has helped a fraction now down to 22L/100 on a 1 hour freeway drive. Still higher than the 14L/100 that I used to get.

Maybe bearing are going?

[p38brickus]

I was getting about 21/100km around town but a couple of tanks of premium fuel with extra injector cleaner added has brought it down to 17 which seems OK for a 2000 4.6 with 160,000km on the clock.

Must agree. I had a BMW 328i a few years ago. When I ran it on premium fuel, I drove it about 4 inches off the ground! :cool:
I know they have ignition timing adjusters for crappy fuel but it ran better on the dearer fuel and had better fuel economy.

[mtb_gary]

My figures are based on what the car tells me. My tyres are 255/70r16 so bigger than standard When speedo says 100 gps says 97.

I also seem to get a vibration at above 95km/h I think I may have a slightly buckled wheel from my last off road adventure.

The car is my daily drive not that I drive much during the week ad I cycle or take transport leaving the p38 for off road and camping trips. That said with the recent rain it has been used a bit more often.

MAF cleaning has helped a fraction now down to 22L/100 on a 1 hour freeway drive. Still higher than the 14L/100 that I used to get.

Maybe bearing are going?

When you were getting the 14/100 was that on road tyres? I get a large variation between tyre types, when I am on my road tyres I am getting around the 14/100k, but as soon as the muddies go on 20+ (GPS based) highway driving. I have put it down to tyre construction plus the larger diameter means the car is less spritely up the hills when running on the muddies. Interestingly when running the road tyres and towing a 2t boat I average around 18/100 on the highway, but I do drop the speed back to around 100 rather than the 110.
Gary

[MR LR]

Just my $0.02

But if you're worried about using an extral 0.05L/100km, then you wouldn't want to be paying 1k+ for a bullbar...

[intheozone]

The 14l/100km was with my muddies. I rarely change back to road tyres these days. I should probably sell them.