View Single Post
Old 01-06-2008, 11:43 PM   #17 (permalink)
Fuzzy
EcoModding Lurker
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: NoVA
Posts: 27

Spin - '03 Mazda Miata SE
90 day: 26.55 mpg (US)
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smoky View Post
...*Keeping weight down is absolutely necessary!!!!! Fuel economy is impacted most during acceleration where weight is the largest factor. Every vehicle gets decent mileage cruising. My 8,000 pound diesel truck (non ecomodded) gets 27mpg cruising at 85mph but accelerating from stops or slower speeds reduces the average to 18-20mpg.

Don't get me wrong, drag is important, but under 35-40 mph it is minimal compared to weight. We have done studies on taking 1200 pounds out of a "C" sized car and with the stock drivetrain and stock aero it got over 85mpg in EPA testing. The EPA rating was 32mpg before.
DrEMHmrk2 didn't mention speeds, and %highway. So essentially "everyone is right", since the problem isn't defined enough to determine if the aero improvement is worth the weight gain. Or more importantly at what weight the aero improvement of a tapered bed cover would not be beneficial.

DrEMHmrk2, is the 2001 Tacoma bed metal? I've heard the '06 Tacoma beds are "plastic" (most likely because of the aforementioned impact of weight). If it is metal, you might be able to "pad" your weight budget by replacing the bed with the newer plastic one (depending on cost of replacement/weight/fitment concerns, of which I have no knowledge).

BTW, what are the dimensions of the Tacoma bed? Specifically, length and width at the top of the bed. *And* the height from the top of the bed to the top of the cab, and the width of the cab at it's top? That can help us define the potential weight impacts better.
  Reply With Quote