Hi Peter,

We tow a smallish van of about 1700kg with a 2016 BT50 auto. I have read stories of people getting great economy of between 12-14 l/100km going uphill with a head wind. But I'm yet to meet those people so at the moment they are just stories.

Personally, we get on average about 15-17 l/100km. Some days it's 20+ l/100km, other days might be only 12 l/100km. Depends on conditions, terrain and traffic. I reckon your fuel economy is probably about average.

Regards
Robert

Mine is the same as the previous post
1700 kg van and 2013 BT50
Averaged out over the last 3 years and 53,000 km towing I have averaged just under 14 l/100km.
Total for the 3 years is 68,000 km at an average of 12.8 l/100 km.
These are calculated figures, not from the car readout.
I find that wind is the main drain on economy. Adelaide to Canberra with a tail wind towing I can get down to under 12, but the return trip with a head wind can bump it up to 16 or 17
( I have done this trip about 10 times in the last 3 years)

Hi Peter

Have a read of this article:-

caravan.hemax.com/Reviews/3479/Fuel_efficiency_test

The Toyota Landcruiser test vehicle went from a non-towing, highway cruising fuel consumption of 9 to a staggering 28 (11.62L/100km/tonne) when towing a 2.4 tonne Kokoda Veteran XLi Platinum!

The real benefit of the article is its explanation of how a vans aerodynamics, drawbar length and overall length are significant factors in fuel consumption; weight is only one factor.

Slightly higher rpm on lighter throttle will give you better fuel consumption. Actually easier on engine being single rail turbo !

Want to reduce fuel consumption?
Reduce speed.

Wind resistance is speed squared.
Cheers,
Peter

Thanks everyone for your contributions. A bit to think about. Still have a few k to go before we get home, so I will be able to play around with some of these suggestions.

cheers

Peter

In my 3.2L Ford Ranger towing a tall van and total weight nudging the 6,000kg GCM limit, my average consumption in 20k+ of towing has been 15.2. Headwinds knock it badly, making more difference than the terrain. I got 19.3 in dead flat central Australia when driving into a strongish headwind.

I typically drive at an indicated 95, bumping up to 100 on good highway - so a true 90 - 95. Most of the time it's in Sports mode, with me manually selecting the gear I want. A technique I use is to allow it drop back a bit on the slopes if I am not going to be holding up vehicles behind. This is where cruise control falls short, as it will just apply more power to maintain the set speed.

Unlike other comments on here I also choose lower revs unless power is needed, but never labour it. I know the instant fuel usage readout is not accurate, but I can see usage going up if I choose a lower gear. Maybe next trip I will experiment with using lower gears to check that.

 

yobarr wrote:

---

 

Clarky 1 wrote:

---

Simple formula,
Unless you are operating the vehicle dont believe owners fuel economy claims, and if you must then you can compare their figures with a piece of string theory as every day is different out there in the big road.
Very few people drive the same.
Very few trips are the same with wind direction.
Very few vehicles and loads are the same.

---

 You may like to familiarise yourself with the all-encompassing word "average"? This possibly would have stopped you suggesting that owners are using misleading fuel economy figures,with your words "don't believe owners fuel economy claims". What on earth do you think owners stand to gain by presenting incorrect figures to a public forum? Cheers 

-- Edited by yobarr on Tuesday 27th of July 2021 05:08:08 PM

---

 Yobarr, yobarr, yobarr,

You of all contributors on these forums should recognise that most posts are about *one upmanship*

How big is yours, how high can you piss??

You drove trucks for a while, you know how it is.

Unless we all have the same vehicle travelling over the same road on the same time of day or night,  then there is no way that these figures can be compared and even if we do compare them, then we may be subject to differing driving styles with each individual driver in the vehicle.

I am not saying that all contributors arent quoting accurate figures in as much is that anyone asking this question needs to take the replies with a reserved view on how accurate the quoted figures may be.

Read the Original Post again yobarr.

One trip, one way does not make an accurate figure. If he drove into a south westerly for his entire ONE TRIP then it is only an average for that ONE TRIP.

Just drive a truck or any vehicle across the Nullabor on a regular basis to note the variation.

Then there is *angel gear* so settle yobarr.

 

 

-- Edited by Clarky 1 on Tuesday 27th of July 2021 07:44:52 PM

Petemox wrote:

---

 Hi 

I am concerned about the amount of diesel I am using towing a 2.5tonne caravan. I have the MY21 Isuzu cab chassis automatic. We recently drove down from Qld to Vic and recorded our fuel usage all the way. We are averaging 18ltrs to the 100k. I have heard some people say that they get as good as 14.5, but I dont see how that could be possible. I dont drive fast and let the car sort out what gear it should be in most of the time. However, there are times it is reluctant to shift up from 4 so I stick shift it into 5. 

 

Wondering what others are getting with similar rigs and what they might be doing to get better if they are.

 

cheers.

 

Peter

---

 Peter, 18 is in the ball park. Pretty normal from what I've been told asking around. More ore less what I'm getting. Yep, occassionally some do better, but it's more likely their best figure, not average. And there are a lot of variables.

dabbler wrote:

---

Clarky, I'll say it simpler. I happily acknowledge that it's not very useful doing *direct* comparisons as we all drive different roads in different ways using different vehicles towing different trailed vehicles and carrying different weights. But that doesn't mean comparisons are impossible. I posted my figures to offer information to the OP not to be called a liar and not to one-up anyone at all. You're the only person who thinks this is a pissing contest and you have actually insulted the OP as much as anyone.

---

 Howdy dabbler,

I would hardly compare a Hi Lux towing a teardrop to an Izuzu towing a 2.5 tonne van.

Old Bloke is saying it as it is in both his posts above..

The OP may take offence if he wants but maybe let him tell me that what I said was not true.

From my observation he is concerned about 18 l per 100 k when, if the truth be known, it is probably quite normal for the conditions of his ONE trip.

Most other contributors to this topic do point out several variations to their driving styles and units being towed.

I am sorry you feel that way dabbler.

-- Edited by Clarky 1 on Wednesday 28th of July 2021 06:53:55 AM

We have been travelling with a 4WD Canter motorhome for some thousands of km.
Same roads, same speeds, same wind, same day.
They are 4.5T we are 6.5T (full of fuel and water).
They are 250mm higher, we are the same width. The Canter is about 1m longer than the OKA.
They have a gap between the cab and the camper, we don't.
Canter 3.9L turbo charged 4 cylinder, early 2000s, OKA 4L turbo charged Perkins, 1994.
We both use the same size and style of tyres. OKA Michelin, Canter Bridgestone. Tyre choice can make a very large difference in fuel consumption.

When we filled with fuel, the Canter typically used 15% more fuel than the OKA.
That is a very big difference. We are not sure why.

 

Cheers,

Peter

-- Edited by Peter_n_Margaret on Wednesday 28th of July 2021 10:43:47 AM

Any modification or fitting of any exterior accessory will have an effect on fuel economy / consumption.

Larger wheels and tyres, bull bars, larger mud flaps, roof racks, tarps as opposed to having an open tray or stylside body, the fitting of boxes, the fitting of a canopy, etc,etc, will all have differing effects and results with fuel use.

Then we could go to engine tuning, servicing wheel alignment and even the viscosity of engine and other oils being used.

In my past life I ran 3 trucks on varying transport runs.
I could identify with one driver consistently recording better fuel consumption than even myself and the other driver. This was regardless of what truck I put him in.
Driver habits certainly are a large factor in the use of fuel in any vehicle.

The figure of 18litres per 100k seems fair to me considering the combination being driven.

Clarky, I never suggested the OP and I had similar setups. My post includes comparison of my setup under varying conditions and circumstances. If others find it useful that's the intention, if not it's easily ignored. Your initial post told the OP not to believe the figures posted by others. How do you expect people to feel when you call them liars ?

Clarky 1 wrote:

---

Simple formula,
Unless you are operating the vehicle dont believe owners fuel economy claims, and if you must then you can compare their figures with a piece of string theory as every day is different out there in the big road.
Very few people drive the same.
Very few trips are the same with wind direction.
Very few vehicles and loads are the same.

---

 

 

Absolutely agree Clarky,

Personally I drive according to revs. Always stay under 2000 rpm. That appears to work for me to gain the best fuel economy. Sometimes it is 90 klms per hour and sometimes it is significantly below 90 kph.  

For me it has the added benefit of reduced driver fatigue.