FUEL CONSUMPTION Si4 / SD4 REAL LIFE NUMBERS

Stil averaging 33 mpg. Wether I'm doing town driving or motorway mix

Are you talking about US or UK MPG?

I've heard (Gaydon is only 7 miles away) that LR are working on an 1800cc version of the Si4 engine, more power, lower emissions and much improved fuel economy. Apparently the driver is because of the disparity between diesel and petrol costs.

Certainly if you look at the other major brands such as Audi/VW or GM then small capacity ultra-high performance engines with stunning fuela economy are appearing.

(24-11-2011 10:13am)Straydox Wrote:  I've heard (Gaydon is only 7 miles away) that LR are working on an 1800cc version of the Si4 engine, more power, lower emissions and much improved fuel economy.

that's going to be a harder working engine if they downsized it to 1.8. Would it not be better to have a hybrid? Electric/battery power for city and slow traffic, petrol/diesel for highways, combine both for added boost/power when required.

Are there any know stats on the fuel savings with the stop/start technology on the RRE?

(24-11-2011 02:42pm)Big G Wrote:  Are there any know stats on the fuel savings with the stop/start technology on the RRE?

I've never seen any - my current Audi has a claimed 3% (as if you could ever check such a claim in the real world).

just git a 41 mpg from my manual on an M1 run from York back to work at a constant (cruise control on) 73

Copied from the EVOQUE Wiki:
"The Land Rover LRX concept vehicle was the most compact Land Rover to date. Its size complemented a wide array of efficiency improving technologies in the form of Land Rover’s e_Terrain technologies. These included biofuel compatibility, lightweight construction materials and technologies such as the removable carbon composite roof panels, regenerative brakes, a stop-start system, and the ERAD (electric rear axle drive) parallel hybrid powertrain system.[4] ERAD encompasses the incorporation of an electric motor into the rear axle of the vehicle. It would propel the LRX to speeds of up to 20 mph (32 km/h) before the engine was started by an integrated starter generator as part of the stop-start system. ERAD was designed to reduce CO2 emissions by an average of 20 percent under the NEDC test cycle and was expected to offer another 10 percent reduction in extra-urban driving situations. The system was designed to also optimise the off-road ability of the vehicle. Land Rover aimed to achieve 120 g/km CO2 emissions and fuel economy of 60 mpg-imp (4.7 L/100 km; 50 mpg-US) on the European combined cycle with an efficient 2.2-litre turbodiesel engine.[5] The engine would become the only four-cylinder vehicle in the Range Rover lineup."

60mpg during the concept stage? ERAD to further reduce CO2 emissions & fuel consumption?
Ummm....did JLR forgot to put this system in during production?? Or was it simply too much of a fuss? Or will it come out in the next iteration? Hmmm.

More reading for those interested on the 'toys which didn't make it to our Evoques' : http://www.automobilesreview.com/car-mak...gies/3220/

i have just completed 3400 miles at an average 33.5mpg.
managed about 40mpg in a controlled experiment but still way off the claimed 55mpg in their sexy advertising!
have complained to both dealer and escallated to landrover - they just dont want to know!
fortunately have richard hammond as a neighbour so maybe the terrible threesome might like to challenge lr to justify their published figures.

(09-01-2012 10:43pm)purewhite Wrote:  i have just completed 3400 miles at an average 33.5mpg.
managed about 40mpg in a controlled experiment but still way off the claimed 55mpg in their sexy advertising!
have complained to both dealer and escallated to landrover - they just dont want to know!
fortunately have richard hammond as a neighbour so maybe the terrible threesome might like to challenge lr to justify their published figures.

Excellent. Same issue. And dealer does not give me the time of day. Hope to hear more people taking on the dealers