Thread: My 2006 TDV6 HSE

Too many other factors here to draw conclusions.

Driving mix, prevailing weather conditions, roof rack design etc etc

You can't make any direct comparisons unless you copy conditions exactly.

For instance,

The D3 has a cd of .41. But two cars with the same cd, but of different body design, will be affected differently by altering the air flow.

I live in a fairly windy part of the world (so much so that it regularly attracts events such as world flying 15 championships).

My D3 is kitted out with bullbars, wheel carriers etc and weighs around 3tn, so any extra resistance will have a different effect than for a 2tn car.
Very few things in physics follow linear relationships.

My driving is also a mix of very slow speed stop-start; 110kph hwy driving; and gravel road driving. The fuel figures I've quoted are averages.

TD5 more fuel efficient than a TDV6, who knows! I'd hazard a guess and say no if the two motors were slotted into two identical cars and compared like with like! It's a pity the TDV6 is available in the new fender in order to make a better (although not perfect) comparison.

If you want fuel efficiency, without the rear carrier, aux tank and roof rack; I was getting as low as 7.5l/100km!

Sounds pretty damn good, fully loaded my parents Rav4 wouldnt return those figures with a smaller engine and lighter car.

If you are ever in Lithgow drop me a line before you head over, or let me know and you are welcome to drop in for a chat. Matt

Originally Posted by aquarangie

Don't drive my Rangie then.

A sluggish 3.5 EFI fitted with a 'crapper flapper' system, 33' tyres, 4 inches of lift (body and springs overall) ad std gearing, if I get 400 kms from a 110 tank I'm doing bloody well

Back on topic, that's bloody good fuel economy I must say.

Trav

Hang about! I'm getting 400 + (just ) with carbies and 35's AND a TF727 with a standard 85 or whatever litre tank. Maybe your extra fuel capacity is a false economy.

I think I'm brain dead actually! My odometer/speedometer hasn't been adjusted. I'm probably getting 200k's to the tank.

With all internal combustion engines there is a range of rpms and loads at which maximum engine efficiency is obtained. If you out side this area you fuel economy will get worse (got to take aerodynamics into account of course). It depends on how the computer is programed too. This is why taller gearing doesn't always give better economy. Sounds to me like LR pretty carefully matched to tuning to stock car.

Basicly i just said there is lots of factors at work

WR

when all shiny, new and efficinet, the 1984 range rover 3sp auto carb engine in std trim unladen was said by LR to have 92.6kw, held 89L of fuel and useage figres were:

Simulated cycle :19.5L/100km
constant 90kph speed :12.2L/100km
constant speen 120kph :15.2L/100km

As quotedfrom the oringal LR owners manual.

so you could say range rover owners are envious of those TDV6 figures.

Hi Folks,
I picked up my D3 SE TDV6 on 29/12 (complianced 12/06, MY07) and I have now over 900 km it. I did two trips from Bangor down to Culburra Beach and back, to drop off my daughter for NYE celebrations with her friends. I got 8.8L/100km on the trips. Through light traffic around the suburbs, I was getting about 11L/100km.

They are also sooo quiet and refined... makes my BA XR6 sound and feel like a truck! Am i happy - you bet!


Cheers,
Rob