# mpg questions



## 99060 (May 5, 2006)

hi all
i am looking into mpg on coachbuilts,probably 2.5 and1.9 diesel turbo and non-turbo engines and i could do with any info concerning the performance (cruising speeds and top speeds ,acceleration etc) of any of the above engines.
many thanks Simon


----------



## Rapide561 (Oct 1, 2005)

*MPG*

Hi

My Peugeot 2.2 HDi Diesel/Compass Avantgarde averaged 29mpg in the time I had the van. Van mass 3500 kg.

The previous 2.8 Fiat Diesel averaged 27 - 27 mpg, total van mass 4000 kg.

This one - 3.0 Fiat averages about 24 mpg with a 5000kg total mass.

Factors such as road surface, wind, tyre pressures, drivers "attitude" to the vehicle can all affect MPG.

Russell


----------



## bar (Aug 6, 2005)

Hi Simon,
2.8 TD. 3.5 ton cruising at 50-60 mph on A roads/Motorways average 29 mpg

Empty driving carefully 34mpg. Kept our log over last 5 years

Bar


----------



## rebbyvid (Apr 10, 2006)

Hi Simon
Just back from week in champagne region of france and got 27 mpg with fiat ducato 1.9 turbo lowline fully laden most of the time 3.5 tonnes mainly on A roads at various speeds except for 300 mile to dover which was done on motorways but at no more that 60 mph
heres a site for calculating mpg 
http://www.torquecars.com/tools/uk-mpg-calculator.php
rob


----------



## Velvettones (Jul 31, 2007)

33mpg in a 2.8td fiat


----------



## maddie (Jan 4, 2006)

Hi simon,Iveco 2.8 td low profile type30 mpg plus untill a roofbox fitted then down to 27 and 10 mph off top speed-65 / 75 mph on m/way and foot a little heavy on all other roads.
Old van 2.5 Iveco td with large overhaed bed bump 24 mpg --60mph m/wand a lot slower everywhere else
Transit 2.5 TD 26 / 27 mpg no matter how it was driven? :lol: 
terry


----------



## 100004 (Jul 12, 2006)

Have to say that mpg can't really be a concern when one is spending many£k. Get the van for you and stick to about 60mph. Over that and things go down VERY quick. H


----------



## Jiggles (Apr 17, 2007)

I agree. Buy the van that you really want and drive it sensibly.
You will always rue the day you bought your 2nd or 3rd choice van just because it was a bit more economical.
Fuel is the only real expence of a gorgeous holiday.


----------



## wilse (Aug 10, 2007)

31-32 mpg, 130 bhp, 2.2 Ford Duratorque, up to 65mph, 29 mpg above this, now with 6000 miles on the clock.


----------



## jonnowycombe (Mar 2, 2007)

MPG is completely related to wind resistance in a motorhome - ok ok if you are accelerating up a lot of hills and towing a heavy thing then yes weight will make a difference but 90% and more of your energy used in a motorhome to do more than 55mph is oversiming wind resistance.

So lowlines will be better, roof boxes will make things worse - of course driving like an arse will also make it worse. The later common rail engines are better than the older ones though.

However a 2.0 litre may be less effecient than a 2.8 depending on the load you put on it... So there is no common rules for all shapes of van.

I have a swift Ace on a Ducato 2.8 base and a BIG roofbox as we have no lockers and I get about 24mpg at 60mph - I get the same mpg when I tow a racing car and trailer that weighs a ton on the back at the same speed.

Buy the van that suits your needs - everyone up there is right - sharing a bed with your fat smelly hairy arsed mate will not be worth it when he reminds you that you saved £20 on fuel on a 250 mile journey 

Jon


----------



## ambegayo (Jan 7, 2007)

*MPG*

We had a cruise control fitted (after the engine was chipped to give 145bhp) with this extra torque, with the cuise set at 60 it will stay at that speed up most hills, without cruise on you couldn't get your foot hard enough down to keep this speed up without changing down to 4th and then it wouldn't do 60. Puzzled I asked the chief driver, but still can't grasp the techs behind this cruise thingy - but it is good!!!


----------



## androidGB (May 26, 2005)

*Re: MPG*



ambegayo said:


> We had a cruise control fitted (after the engine was chipped to give 145bhp) with this extra torque, with the cuise set at 60 it will stay at that speed up most hills, without cruise on you couldn't get your foot hard enough down to keep this speed up without changing down to 4th and then it wouldn't do 60. Puzzled I asked the chief driver, but still can't grasp the techs behind this cruise thingy - but it is good!!!


Surely this is down to the extra torque as a result of the chipping, and nothing to do with the cruise control.

All I can think of is that with the cruise set at 60mph you are hitting the hill at this speed and the cruise just feeds in more power to maintain it, driving manually perhaps you allow the speed to fall of slightly before applying more throttle

Andrew


----------



## Spacerunner (Mar 18, 2006)

*Re: MPG*



androidGB said:


> ambegayo said:
> 
> 
> > We had a cruise control fitted (after the engine was chipped to give 145bhp) with this extra torque, with the cuise set at 60 it will stay at that speed up most hills, without cruise on you couldn't get your foot hard enough down to keep this speed up without changing down to 4th and then it wouldn't do 60. Puzzled I asked the chief driver, but still can't grasp the techs behind this cruise thingy - but it is good!!!
> ...


Have to say that cruise control has almost completely changed my driving style. Never used it before May this year, but now its almost a 'must- have'. I'm convinced it is more economical to use and, on m/ways a much faster and relaxed way of covering loadsa miles.


----------



## 89470 (May 24, 2005)

*MPG*

We have a Burstner 850 with a 2.8 Turbo diesel engine. We have had the van from new and I have always done an accurate mpg check. The best I have ever achieved is 20.5 mpg. I usually travel at 56mph, set on the cruise control. Normally it is about 18 mpg.

When we take the car with us - an Open Astra on a trailer the fuel consumption drops to about 16 mpg giving us about 250 miles (400 km) between fuel stops. It does not seem to make much difference when you are towing about two metric tons of car and trailer with you. The car of course being a lot lower than the van (at 3.2 metres) does not cause any extra drag. I have also fitted an american van brush behind the rear wheels and this does keep a lot of the muck off the car when towing.


----------



## androidGB (May 26, 2005)

*Re: MPG*



brianwatson said:


> We have a Burstner 850 with a 2.8 Turbo diesel engine. We have had the van from new and I have always done an accurate mpg check. The best I have ever achieved is 20.5 mpg. I usually travel at 56mph, set on the cruise control. Normally it is about 18 mpg.
> 
> When we take the car with us - an Open Astra on a trailer the fuel consumption drops to about 16 mpg giving us about 250 miles (400 km) between fuel stops. It does not seem to make much difference when you are towing about two metric tons of car and trailer with you. The car of course being a lot lower than the van (at 3.2 metres) does not cause any extra drag. I have also fitted an american van brush behind the rear wheels and this does keep a lot of the muck off the car when towing.


Interesting figures Brian, and very similar to our Hymer S820 also when towing our Matiz on an A frame we seem to loose about 2MPG

Andrew


----------



## MrRob (Jan 15, 2007)

jonnowycombe said:


> Buy the van that suits your needs - everyone up there is right - sharing a bed with your fat smelly hairy arsed mate will not be worth it when he reminds you that you saved £20 on fuel on a 250 mile journey
> 
> Jon


HaHaHa ... resistance to wind is everything ! :wink: .

I loved the XXXMph my 140 Renault Delphin low profile could clime to given enough autobahn (and 28Mpg) but an overcab is so much more useful  ... 175Bhp helps too (18/20Mpg on my first trip out)


----------



## vicdicdoc (May 14, 2005)

1997 Hymer with 2.5 TD on Ducato base = approx 27mpg at 56mph


----------



## NormanB (Sep 8, 2005)

Fiat Low Profile 2.8 JTD rated 3.850 tonnes (no roof box) has averaged 25mpg over 15000 miles in 2 years since new. Mostly at 55mph (ie 60mph indicated on the speedo) or below on motorway/dual carriageways.


----------



## smick (Jun 1, 2005)

*mpg*

1998 Mercedes 2.9 manual chipped to 156bhp - cruising between 58 - 62 on cruise - between 24 - 25.5.

Gets up to 27 if you cruise at 50, Trouble is, it takes you to next week to get anywhere, so it's nearly always 60 ish.

Smick


----------



## Zebedee (Oct 3, 2007)

I hardly dare write this, but the original poster did ask.   

Due largely (I think) to the very recent, and quite dramatic improvements in engine technology, I'm getting 36mpg overall after 5,000 miles in the new truck (May delivery) and 38mpg when forced by road conditions or delightful scenery to "pootle" at 50-ish on minor roads.

I usually stick with the lorries at about 60mph on motorways, since it's much less hassle when in holiday mode, but I do drive at or near the legal limit on other roads so as not to be a pain in the ar*s to fellow motorists.

All this in the infamous Peugeot Sevel base vehicle with a 2.2 litre 130bhp engine, and six gears which must also help a lot.
At a constant 70mph on the motorway the figure plummets to 30mpg, which surprises nobody I guess.

Regards

Dave


----------



## StAubyns (Jun 4, 2006)

Hi

Fiat 2.3 coachbuilt. In the UK I average 27 - 28MPG but just having done 1,500 miles in France its up to 32MPG. Thats rounding the figures up/down. But why the increase in France? We did use the A roads but I have read somewhere that french diesel has additives that we don't use.

But its another reason to get on the ferry

Geoff


----------



## Zebedee (Oct 3, 2007)

This is interesting Geoff.

You said,"_But why the increase in France? We did use the A roads but I have read somewhere that french diesel has additives that we don't use."_

Our present truck is too new to make valid comparisons, but we noticed just the same as you with our previous one. 3 or 4mpg better in France, using the A roads like yourself.

I hadn't heard of French additives (only preservatives    ).

I thought it might be due to less traffic and "holiday mode" driving style, not that I ever belt along unless I'm late for the boat.

Cheers

Dave


----------



## jonnowycombe (Mar 2, 2007)

Nice French warm air is less dense (thinner) than crap wet English cold air and therefore easier to "push through" so the warmer the climate the better your van will do. 

mind you cold air is better for combustion...

Im making this up of course just to see who will flame me for talking out of my bum... Can I say bum ? Oh dear have I broken the rules ?? ****.

Im my experience there is a 5mpg zone of driver difference - could the relaxed scenic nicer enviroment lead us all to sit back, relax, smile and feel happy while trundking along those 5mph less and therefore reduce speed by 10% and reduce wind resistance by 20% ??


----------



## 89194 (May 16, 2005)

I think gearing is much to do with it. My Hymer B754 tag labours in fifth at anything below 60mpg therefore missing the usual economies of cruising at 50-60 mph. I have found that by cruising a little faster at 65-70 mph it is further into the power band and therefore achieves much the same mpg at around 23 mpg. Neither to I need to change down so much. I have recently acquired a motorcycle and trailer (combined weight around 550kg) which will restrict me to 60mph so it will be interesting to see what this does to the mpg!


----------



## jonnowycombe (Mar 2, 2007)

Thats exactly why I rechipped it - I now have more power at 2000 than I used to have at 3000rpm.... Top end is not important....


----------

