Author |
Share Topic Topic Search Topic Options
|
jato
Senior Member
Joined: 23 Feb 2012
Location: Kewadin, MI
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3227
|
Topic: Just completed 4,000 miles...avg of 10mpg Posted: 22 Aug 2019 at 11:49am |
Have just finished an 1100 mile trip from the thumb of MI to the UP (Escanaba) and back home. Thumb of MI speed 68 mph 11 mpg. UP, of Michigan and return: speeds from 55 to 67 mph 12 mpg.
|
God's pod
'11 model 177
'17 Ford F-150 4WD 3.5 Ecoboost
Jim and Diane by beautiful Torch Lake
"...and you will know the Truth and the Truth will set you free."
|
|
offgrid
Senior Member
Joined: 23 Jul 2018
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5290
|
Posted: 13 Aug 2019 at 9:11am |
To put it in perspective, if you get 14 mpg at 60 mph in dead flat no wind conditions like I do, you should get 12.8 mpg at 65 mph, and pretty much the same 12.8 mph at 60 into a 5 mph headwind. That's how significant the drag effect is.
Around here on the freeway, you're a road boulder whether you drive at 60, 65 or 70 anyway, so for that economy difference, I'll travel at 60 and they can go around me
|
1994 Chinook Concourse
1995 RV6A Experimental Aircraft
2015 Rpod 179 - sold
|
|
crankster78
Senior Member
Joined: 08 May 2018
Location: Minn
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 163
|
Posted: 13 Aug 2019 at 8:59am |
Greetings: I've owned two pods, a 171 and now a 2015 179. I tow with a 2007 F-150 with the 4.6 V8, 8 foot box. I get from 10 to 12.5 MPG towing at 60. I usually drive on 2 lane roadways but do use freeways. I stay in the right lane and let everyone go by. I've had few problems with traffic. Many trucks are driving at 65 or less. I went to 8 ply tires which I run at 65 PSI. They seem to improve mileage a bit.
Crankster78
|
Crankster 78 R-179 2015
|
|
Motor7
Senior Member
Joined: 09 Jan 2019
Location: E. TN
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 196
|
Posted: 13 Aug 2019 at 8:44am |
I wish I could tow at 60, but going that much slower than the rest of the traffic makes me uncomfortable. Even at 65 in a 70 means most of the other traffic is going 75 and 10 under has an impact on the other traffic as they try and get around me. It's my motorcycle background that makes me want to be travelling slightly faster than the average traffic speed where I feel the safest along with other threat detection and lane placement. I'm not knocking you guys that can go a bit slower at all, but I just can't do it.
I appreciate all the info from everyone and at least I know 10mpg is about right for my set-up and speed. Maybe a different TV is in our future, but for now it will have to do. I do like the Avalanche platform. It was innovative back in it's day and it's too bad they discontinued it in 2014.
|
2016 R-Pod 176T
|
|
mjlrpod
Senior Member
Joined: 27 Sep 2016
Location: Massachusetts
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1214
|
Posted: 13 Aug 2019 at 7:59am |
I tracked my MPG on the ride home from Niagra Falls a few weeks ago pulling the 195. I tow with a 2015 Nissan Frontier with a 4.0 L V6. I drove about 9 1/2 hours straight thru. Every time I stopped for gas, I recorded my mileage and how many gallons to fill up. I got a good spectrum of road conditions, uphill, downhill, a good rain storm for awhile, then warm and sunny. At times I drove into a head wind, other times a tail wind. I found I averaged 12 MPG.
|
2017.5 Rp-172
2020 R-pod 195
2015 Frontier sv 4.0L 6cyl
I'll be rpodding
|
|
Olddawgsrule
Senior Member
Joined: 20 Sep 2017
Location: New Hampshire
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1014
|
Posted: 13 Aug 2019 at 7:13am |
I tow with my Tacoma. I see a reduction in mileage of a 35% average when towing. Your mileage numbers it within what I see on mine.
Know, I drive tops just under 65mph. I'm the last one up the hill, typically. Cruise control only on the flats. I've been cross-country twice now (Canada and USA), so I've driven most all conditions.
|
|
|
offgrid
Senior Member
Joined: 23 Jul 2018
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5290
|
Posted: 13 Aug 2019 at 2:20am |
Originally posted by podwerkz
Originally posted by furpod
he found that the "spoiler" actually increased drag.. LOL
|
That's what rear spoilers do...they add drag to produce downforce.
|
That's what a wing is supposed to do. On a race car a wing creates negative lift at the expense of drag to increase downforce. Basically its an airplane wing flipped upside down.
A spoiler on a passenger vehicle is usually supposed to reduce drag. It does this by "spoiling" the airflow over a surface, changing the aerodynamics. Rear spoilers if done right reduce the steep downward angle the airflow sees from the rear roof edge, delaying airflow separation. The same thing that trailer tails on trucks are intended to do. The problem is that much of the time on passenger vehicles they don't provide any benefit other than (maybe) looking cool.
I'm not sure if the spoiler on the back of an rPod falls into this purely aesthetic category or not. Sounds like from furpod's post the answer is yes. It would be interesting to try to do a coast down test with and without it and see for sure. It you find a few miles of flat empty road on a windless day, accelerate to about 65 mph, put the vehicle in neutral, and then film the speedo with your smartphone while you coast down to a few mph, you can put the speed and time numbers in a spreadsheet which will calculate your drag and rolling resistance. Best to do several runs both directions and average them. I did it with my car once and it was reasonably accurate but I haven't tried it with my tow rig yet.
|
1994 Chinook Concourse
1995 RV6A Experimental Aircraft
2015 Rpod 179 - sold
|
|
podwerkz
Senior Member
Joined: 11 Mar 2019
Location: Texas
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 966
|
Posted: 12 Aug 2019 at 11:20pm |
Originally posted by furpod
he found that the "spoiler" actually increased drag.. LOL
|
That's what rear spoilers do...they add drag to produce downforce.
Just FYI, I typically get between 10 and 14mpg with mine, depending on wind, hills, and my right foot.
The difference is, with my 390hp V8, and 7 speed slushbox, the go pedal works quite well when I need it to, even when climbing hills.
|
r・pod 171 gone but not forgotten!
|
|
marwayne
Senior Member
Joined: 25 Oct 2011
Location: Edmonton AB Can
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1002
|
Posted: 12 Aug 2019 at 10:20pm |
Just came back from a 1550 mile trip, 75 % mountain driving, 2016 Tundra, average speed 60 mph, 12.25 mpg.
|
If you want something done right, do it yourself.
2011 RP172, 2016 Tundra 5.7 Litre, Ltd.
|
|
offgrid
Senior Member
Joined: 23 Jul 2018
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5290
|
Posted: 12 Aug 2019 at 7:57pm |
First a caveat when comparing fuel economy figures. It is very difficult to get an accurate and consistent fuel economy number because very slight changes in wind speed and direction can make a tremendous difference. That is because about 2/3 of the horsepower required towing at 60 is used to overcome drag. Drag goes up with the square of the wind speed and horsepower goes up with the cube of wind speed. Climbing and descending hills makes a big difference as well. Going up and down hills will kill you because you never get all the energy you put in going up when you go back down.
That being said, dead flat, 60 mph, no wind, I get just at 14 mpg towing my 179 with my Highlander. And thats not because the Highlander is a lighter vehicle, the difference in rolling resistance due to that is not very significant and the most of the power goes to overcome drag anyway.
I suspect you are right and are slitting at an unfortunate point on your engines horsepower curve at 65 mph in 4th gear which forces a downshift to 3rd. The additional pumping losses your engine is incurring at the higher rpm are eating into your fuel economy. Try slowing down to 60 or till wherever the truck stays in 4th gear. Pick a no wind day and a flat road, and get your fuel economy number again, see if it goes up to something closer to Glueguy’s and mine. If it does then that was the problem, if not then there might be something else going on with your drivetrain.
|
1994 Chinook Concourse
1995 RV6A Experimental Aircraft
2015 Rpod 179 - sold
|
|