View Single Post
Old 04-13-2017, 10:12 PM   #9 (permalink)
oldtamiyaphile
Master EcoModder
 
oldtamiyaphile's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,510

UFI - '12 Fiat 500 Twinair
Team Turbocharged!
90 day: 40.3 mpg (US)

Jeep - '05 Jeep Wrangler Renegade
90 day: 18.09 mpg (US)

R32 - '89 Nissan Skyline

STiG - '16 Renault Trafic 140dCi Energy
90 day: 30.12 mpg (US)

Prius - '05 Toyota Prius
Team Toyota
90 day: 50.25 mpg (US)

Premodded - '49 Ford Freighter
90 day: 13.48 mpg (US)

F-117 - '10 Proton Arena GLSi
Pickups
Mitsubishi
90 day: 37.82 mpg (US)

Ralica - '85 Toyota Celica ST
90 day: 25.23 mpg (US)

Sx4 - '07 Suzuki Sx4
90 day: 32.21 mpg (US)

F-117 (2) - '03 Citroen Xsara VTS
90 day: 30.06 mpg (US)
Thanks: 325
Thanked 452 Times in 319 Posts
Don't bother.

My van averages 6.7 city (16mph average speed) and on a really bad day 9.7 with a 500kg+ trailer.

If you work that out that's 0.006l/100km per kg.

Those are worst case figures because a trailer also adds rolling resistance, rolling inertia and completely ruins my aero (it's a big tall box). I also EOC normally but rarely do with the trailer.

My van had a 0.33 CD and I coast down tested the van+ trailer at 0.45CD

If I type those numbers into the calculator, I find that with a .33CD I should be getting ~6l/100km at 50km/h, and with a .45CD I should be getting 8.7l/100km. So it seems that my 500kg trailer is only costing me an aero penalty, the weight is doing little to nothing.

A lighter car will sit higher on it's suspension so could actually cost you economy at higher speeds.

So on my new van I happily fitted a heavier radio, speakers, sound proofing and even an active sub, as the comfort, convenience and enjoyment is worth the extra 0.000-0.001l/100km or so it might cost me.
__________________







Last edited by oldtamiyaphile; 04-13-2017 at 10:37 PM..
  Reply With Quote