101RRS
18th February 2018, 10:38 PM
Something that has intrigued me for some time and I thought I would finally ask.
Now the the RRS (L320) and the D3 have basically the same floor plan, except the RRS has 5.5inches taken out near the back wheels. This results in the RRS having a wheelbase of 108.1" and the D3 a wheelbase of 113.6". Both vehicles have the same fuel tank of 84litres.
Now given the RRS engine and gearbox unit is in the same position in the chassis as the D3, the extra length in the D3 chassis is just in front of the rear wheels in the area where the fuel tank is.
So if there is technically space for a 5.5" longer tank in the D3 which would probably provide an extra 10-15litres why didn't they put a 5.5" longer tank in the D3 - obvious answer economies of scale in production etc or is there another reason.
Also, seeing there is space for an extra 5.5" what is there - nothing (wasted space) or something else? I have never been under a D3 so not been able to check.
Why is it so??[thumbsupbig]
Garry
Now the the RRS (L320) and the D3 have basically the same floor plan, except the RRS has 5.5inches taken out near the back wheels. This results in the RRS having a wheelbase of 108.1" and the D3 a wheelbase of 113.6". Both vehicles have the same fuel tank of 84litres.
Now given the RRS engine and gearbox unit is in the same position in the chassis as the D3, the extra length in the D3 chassis is just in front of the rear wheels in the area where the fuel tank is.
So if there is technically space for a 5.5" longer tank in the D3 which would probably provide an extra 10-15litres why didn't they put a 5.5" longer tank in the D3 - obvious answer economies of scale in production etc or is there another reason.
Also, seeing there is space for an extra 5.5" what is there - nothing (wasted space) or something else? I have never been under a D3 so not been able to check.
Why is it so??[thumbsupbig]
Garry