[ebonho]

Originally Posted by storme'd

Guys a funny thing happened to my truck on the latest tank full. Last tank full the truck ran 480 kms while this tank it may not even touch 380!! Both times I have filled in from the same pulp and has been close to 42 litres. What could be the reason?

Originally Posted by stormerider

@Stormed, relax nothing happened. It was primarily driven in the city traffic with constant bumper to bumper traffic and some idling.
I also get approximately 400 in city and 450 or so on highway or mix.

@storme'd - I had the exact same experience this weekend to Goa and back. Both times I tanked up til the brim of the cap before starting. And yes, both times it took approximately 42 odd liters from just hit reserve level to brimful.

Going time I hit Goa, passed Panjim, 450+ kms, before the light started blinking on the way to finding our hotel.

Coming back time again topped up to brim of cap and had the light start blinking at 390+ kms, still a good 50+ km short of Pune.

Don't you think this mileage/tank range is quite bad for a touring SUV? My friend accompanying us in his Safari Dicor easily gets over 600 kms for every tankful. Considering the Dicor has a 10 liter larger tank, this difference of 150-200 kms in the tank range indicates a better mileage for the Dicors over the Stormes (the performance differential though was evident on the road .....)

I had 5 people in the truck, A/c (front and rear) at No. 3 all the way, and luggage mounted on my newly installed C-Track roof rack (I still have not mastered the art of covering the luggage with the tarp and tying it down so that it does not open up and start fluttering). Speeds were most times in the region of 120 on the open highway (about 90-100 otherwise in the Amboli section) - with some stretches northward of that when the road and traffic allowed .....

Does a roof rack (with luggage) affect the mileage? The Storme otherwise performed flawlessly, and gives a run for the money to many bigger fancier vehicles on the highway (this time it was a Volvo S60 while going and a Fortuner being driven superbly while coming back - the 175 PS of the Fortuner though makes itself count in the right hands on the highway - hats off).

The A/c and the middle bench comfort are the two stand out points (after the performance and the braking and handling and suspension).

Also test drove my Garmin Nuvi 52LM (which my kids have christened "Mr. Peter" LOL). Quite nice most times except some sending me into one ways and dead ends (and left/right turns where none were there) in Goa while searching for some spots at night. The "recalculating" bit is good, except when Mr. Peter politely orders me every minute to "when possible take a U Turn" how do you snap him out of that mode and get him to suggest an alternate route? One example was that the approach road to our hotel was being surface and a roadroler was kept bang in the middle to close of access from one end. Depending on where we were, if Mr Peter took us to the roadroller, turning back to go all around to the other end invariably caused this recalculating/take a U turn fiasco (which for some reason has everyone inside the truck in splits) ..... Other than that I have been ordered not to change him to some more pleasant female (and Indian) voice.

[tsk1979]

Originally Posted by ebonho

.....

Does a roof rack (with luggage) affect the mileage? .

If you do not use a sealed luggage carrier like Thule etc., the mileage at speeds can be lower by 3-4kmpl or even more. Even a cycle on the roof can bring down your mileage by upto 3kmpl at 100kmph kind of speeds.

[ebonho]

Originally Posted by tsk1979

If you do not use a sealed luggage carrier like Thule etc., the mileage at speeds can be lower by 3-4kmpl or even more. Even a cycle on the roof can bring down your mileage by upto 3kmpl at 100kmph kind of speeds.

So considering I was 120+ most of the time, and considering I got approximately 9.5-10.5 kmpl on both legs, without the roof rack + luggage, I would have gotten about 13-14 kmpl?

I have two questions on this:

1) Is there a eco-speed at which the difference in the mileage is negligible (b/w no rack and with rack)?

2) Is there an accepte way of arranging your luggage (to reduce drag), covering the tarp (so that it does not balloon), that aids aerodynamics?

Do you also get 600 kms to a tankful in your Dicor?

[storme'd]

It is indeed very bad mileage for a tourer. This weekend on a rushed trip to kasauli, it returned me a decent 13.8kmpl with both the AC's on throughout. My speed maxed out at 90 as had my 3 years old daughter in the car seat. I would still have wanted atleast a range of 600 to have complete peace of mind and not have to worry about filling fuel. Needless to say, I loved the drive.

On another note, my work keeps taking me to bangalore and Mumbai very often. Am happy with the popularity the storme has gained in North India but surprised that I don't see too many in south and west. In fact my observed ratio would be 4:1. Don't know if anyone has noticed this till now!

[tsk1979]

Originally Posted by ebonho

So considering I was 120+ most of the time, and considering I got approximately 9.5-10.5 kmpl on both legs, without the roof rack + luggage, I would have gotten about 13-14 kmpl?

I have two questions on this:

1) Is there a eco-speed at which the difference in the mileage is negligible (b/w no rack and with rack)?

50-60kmph Cross 70kmph and aerodynamics start playing a big role

2) Is there an accepte way of arranging your luggage (to reduce drag), covering the tarp (so that it does not balloon), that aids aerodynamics?

Have you seen soft drink trucks with big tall "soft drink" container space which sits higher than cabin. You will see they have a flat plastic thingy streching from top of drivers cab to the container which has soft drinks. You need something like that.

Do you also get 600 kms to a tankful in your Dicor?

I often get 700 if its highway -city mix (12kmpl on a 65 liter tank).
55 liter vs 65 liter tank is like a 16% decrease. With 1kmpl extra mileage its like a 10% decrease effective

[YGarg]

Yesterday I noticed a brand new Fortuner in exact shade as that of my Storme (Pearl Champagne). Looked better than its white siblings, but still couldn't match my Storme.
Has TOYOTA started taking inspiration from TATA ?

[JASMEET MATTOO]

A nice review on Reliabilty of Tata Safari Storme on Car dekho.com

http://www.cardekho.com/road-test/ta...=Expert_Review

[tsk1979]

Originally Posted by JASMEET MATTOO

A nice review on Reliabilty of Tata Safari Storme on Car dekho.com

http://www.cardekho.com/road-test/ta...=Expert_Review

How can you review reliability like this. For reliability you need to take 100 cars and watch them over a couple of years.

[ebonho]

Originally Posted by tsk1979

If you do not use a sealed luggage carrier like Thule etc., the mileage at speeds can be lower by 3-4kmpl or even more. Even a cycle on the roof can bring down your mileage by upto 3kmpl at 100kmph kind of speeds.

Tanveer,

Just had the air pressure in all 4 tyres checked after my Goa drive.

Front L 35 R 32

Rear L 32 R 30

Could this also have affected the mileage figures?

Remember it was a full load - 5 people (approx. 320 kilos) + roof rack and luggage (approx. 50 kilos?)

[tsk1979]

Originally Posted by ebonho

Tanveer,

Just had the air pressure in all 4 tyres checked after my Goa drive.

Front L 35 R 32

Rear L 32 R 30

Could this also have affected the mileage figures?

Remember it was a full load - 5 people (approx. 320 kilos) + roof rack and luggage (approx. 50 kilos?)

About 1 kmpl max. However, a non aerodynamic luggage carrier will have a much more drastic impact
Look at this post
http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/n...eage/index.htm

Aerodynamics start playing a very big role at 100kmph(65mph approx) speeds.
In an aerodynamic car like Accord the impact will be much higher, but still, even in the Storme, it is going to have a big impact

See this also
http://ecomodder.com/forum/showthrea...enalty-96.html

http://metrompg.com/posts/roof-racks.htm

[ebonho]

Originally Posted by tsk1979

Look at this post
http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/n...eage/index.htm

So the wind deflector (the sloping soft drink truck shield you were referring to in an earlier post) actually reduces mileage by 2 mpg over just the rack without the deflector.

[tsk1979]

Originally Posted by ebonho

So the wind deflector (the sloping soft drink truck shield you were referring to in an earlier post) actually reduces mileage by 2 mpg over just the rack without the deflector.

Actually, it will depend upon the wind deflector.
I wonder why they did not do a test with wind deflector + cycle.

Empty rack will offer less resistance.

you also have to take into account the rear shape of the vehicle.
In vehicles where the rear is tapered(eg sedans), an aero or wind deflector will not make much of an impact.
However, in a car like safari or a hatchback which already has a vacuum pulling it backwards, most of the drag improvement can be done on the front end only. So an aero defector may work better.

[ebonho]

Originally Posted by tsk1979

Actually, it will depend upon the wind deflector.
I wonder why they did not do a test with wind deflector + cycle.

Empty rack will offer less resistance.

you also have to take into account the rear shape of the vehicle.
In vehicles where the rear is tapered(eg sedans), an aero or wind deflector will not make much of an impact.
However, in a car like safari or a hatchback which already has a vacuum pulling it backwards, most of the drag improvement can be done on the front end only. So an aero defector may work better.

Most of the roof rack links suggest carrying the cycles/surfboards behind the SUV rather than on topof it. But what to do for luggage? Anyways Safari has issues of tailgate rattling. Don't want to tempt fate by attaching anything to my Storme's tailgate (was briefly thinking of fitting on of those Pajero type ladders LOL).

This is the one I have on my Storme .... its already shaped with a mini front sloping deflector like thing. Wonder if that counts.

http://www.team-bhp.com/forum/attach...guardsx100.jpg

I agree with you. They should have done a rack + cycle without deflector to the comparison so that we could see the difference the deflector made with cycle/luggage (vs on an empty rack).

[tsk1979]

Originally Posted by ebonho

Most of the roof rack links suggest carrying the cycles/surfboards behind the SUV rather than on topof it. But what to do for luggage? Anyways Safari has issues of tailgate rattling. Don't want to tempt fate by attaching anything to my Storme's tailgate (was briefly thinking of fitting on of those Pajero type ladders LOL).

This is the one I have on my Storme .... its already shaped with a mini front sloping deflector like thing. Wonder if that counts.

http://www.team-bhp.com/forum/attach...guardsx100.jpg

I agree with you. They should have done a rack + cycle without deflector to the comparison so that we could see the difference the deflector made with cycle/luggage (vs on an empty rack).

Aerodynamics is a complex subject. Its very difficult to estimate what will have an impact. You can try increasing the deflector size and see if it makes a difference.
Other option is those thule type sealed boxes

[ebonho]

Originally Posted by tsk1979

Other option is those thule type sealed boxes

The issue is mounting. Safari/Storme do not have the rain channels. Therefore they have to be mounted on the roof rails. Even there the curvature of the rails ensures that you cannot use the entire gapto mount the brackets.

So the two cross bars have to be too closely spaced, leaving the rear half of the rack unsupported. The Thule boxes are made of fiber. Not sure how strong they are to support weight on the unsupported back section (racks are stiffer as they are aluminium and supported by struts underneath).

The other issue is that the shape and the fact that they are covered means there is a limited space/configuration to what you can fit it. Lastly of course is the price. The cheapest Thules I saw were about 25K plus, while I got this rack for 7.5K (now its costlier - around 11K).

For something I do not plan to use often, I initially thought of putting on and taking off the rack. But seeing how long it took to fit it, and how carefully you need to center it, plus the chances of scratches and dents while installing, I have decided for now to leave it on.