Well coming from a 45mpg average car that gave me that regardless of me doing city driving or bombing it down a motorway the Yeti's 35mpg average was a bit sobering to start with. And with age one mellows some what so I've had no issues sticking to 70 wherever I go and getting a Maxidot average of around 40mpg. (It is the London driving that is bringing my average down as you see in my signature). It gives roughly this consumption 2 up, 4 up, with a roof box, without the box, with a trailer or without trailer give or take 10% or so...... The Yeti being a brick I thought it can only get worse the faster you go over 70... since well it does get MUCH better if you do an average speed of 55 to 60. Then I get 50 to 55 mpg (Maxidot). But who sticks to that speed on a motorway?! Not moi.

So the other day we went camping. Three up and I did not want to take the roof box nor the trailer so two seats were left at home and the car got loaded from behind the driver and around to the boot up to the ceiling. So pretty full. We were running late having left on a Friday after work and had to get to the campsite before they shut the gates. So we drove at a fair clip to the New Forest from London. Got there and low and behold what was the average consumption? 41mpg like ever......... hmmm.

Driving home there was no rush but I decided to push it a bit again to see what the consumption will be. This time 2 up since our passenger felt squashed in the back and preferred the purr of a 3,0 V6 petrol automatic in a Renault Avantime (average for that going home at 70mph was 22mpg!!! ).

Consumption going home for the Yeti: 41,3mpg.........

So I guess the Yeti's bricklike shape only has an influence up to 70mph?! I won't think that to be true but the average consumption seems to indicate otherwise. I'm perplexed by this.

I've never been convinced by this 'Yeti is a brick' theme. Compared to what? The nose and windscreen are quite steeply raked and there's little 'front on' windnoise (indicative of resistance). Wipers dive below bonnet height to allow smooth airflow, wing mirrors are well rounded ... Compared to (eg) a Freelander it's remarkably aerodynamic.

I've never been convinced by this 'Yeti is a brick' theme. Compared to what? The nose and windscreen are quite steeply raked and there's little 'front on' windnoise (indicative of resistance). Wipers dive below bonnet height to allow smooth airflow, wing mirrors are well rounded ... Compared to (eg) a Freelander it's remarkably aerodynamic.

It is not the nose Bobdog!!! It is the tail! The front is fine but a truly aerodynamic car with a good Cd figure has a tapering tail (called a Kammback). The Yeti has a vertical cliff face of a tail and THAT is the brick shape that is giving it a terrible Cd figure of 0.37.

It is not the nose Bobdog!!! It is the tail! The front is fine but a truly aerodynamic car with a good Cd figure has a tapering tail (called a Kammback). The Yeti has a vertical cliff face of a tail and THAT is the brick shape that is giving it a terrible Cd figure of 0.37.

Mmmm, as I said, compared to what? Mazda MX5; 0.38? Ferrari F50 0.372?

Mmmm, as I said, compared to what? Mazda MX5; 0.38? Ferrari F50 0.372?

True I guess....... I've just been comparing it to my old 0.27 Cd Audi perhaps. And 0.37 sounds HUGE compared to that but is in fact not that much I guess. Though in fairness most modern cars hover around the 0.30 mark. The MX-5 and F50 are both not the best of the breed examples in terms of average Cd.

True I guess....... I've just been comparing it to my old 0.27 Cd Audi perhaps. And 0.37 sounds HUGE compared to that but is in fact not that much I guess. Though in fairness most modern cars hover around the 0.30 mark. The MX-5 and F50 are both not the best of the breed examples in terms of average Cd.

Most direct Yeti competitors are in the 0.35 - 0.45 range; but what matters surely, allowing for my limited understanding of the physics, is not the drag coefficient, but the coefficient multiplied by the frontal area of the car.

It is not the nose Bobdog!!! It is the tail! The front is fine but a truly aerodynamic car with a good Cd figure has a tapering tail (called a Kammback). The Yeti has a vertical cliff face of a tail and THAT is the brick shape that is giving it a terrible Cd figure of 0.37.

I parked mine next to a Honda HRV the other day which has a flat back but also a funny looking airfoil on the roof.

Made me wonder if some kind of foil would improve the drag factor of the Yeti.

It would probably look stupid though like on the HRV

As you say mpg drops right off once you go over 65mph. :(

Now THIS is a brick!!

http://www.the-blueprints.com/blueprints/cars/landrover/19307/view/land_rover_defender_110_%281997%29/

As you say mpg drops right off once you go over 65mph. :(

I'm in fact saying the opposite. My mpg on this trip at 70 was exactly the same as at 90...

Now THIS is a brick!!

http://www.the-blueprints.com/blueprints/cars/landrover/19307/view/land_rover_defender_110_%281997%29/

No wonder the houses in Wales all look a bit odd this is a brick Graham!

http://www.google.co.uk/imgres?imgurl=http://www.orbana.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/Brick-Session.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.orbana.com/all-articles/the-perfect-brick/&h=400&w=400&sz=55&tbnid=09Pn6Kjl60p2lM:&tbnh=91&tbnw=91&prev=/search%3Fq%3Dbrick%2Bpictures%26tbm%3Disch%26tbo%3Du&zoom=1&q=brick+pictures&docid=CNFh9v5Hx8tRqM&sa=X&ei=TD-gTojnFMyo8QPi0p3UBQ&ved=0CDQQ9QEwAQ&dur=1734

The Yeti is not a brick, this is:

BMW K100 RS Flying Brick

cd is terrible, but 100 hp to 325 kg all up and small cross section makes for a little excitement if desired.

The cd of the Yeti is not the whole story. You also have to consider the cross sectional area, which is quite large considering your comparisons. No doubt the squarish back of the Yeti contributes to drag, but the high ground clearance and the poor aerodynamics between the floorpan and the road is likely a major contributor. As Bobdog mentioned, the relative abscense of noise is a good indicator of good aerodynamics.

BTW the mileage of the BIMMER is only marginally better than the Yeti. On the other hand 0-100 km/hr of less than 4 seconds is in the supercar territory - and it is 20 years old!

Edited 20 October, 201114 yr by Agerbundsen

I'm in fact saying the opposite. My mpg on this trip at 70 was exactly the same as at 90...

naughty boy.....you shouldn't know what the average fuel consumption is at 90mph............Though I did read a while back that you were in Germany Ferrari hunting, so I guess that is where that figure comes from.

A lot of it depends on how the car is driven, how long you are at the high speeds etc..... If I drive Elsie on flatish roads at 60mph on a dual carriageway she will do 50+mpg. throw in some roundabouts and it will drop to the mid 40's.

I drove down to Newquay recently at motorway speeds or the speed of the road and it averaged about 38mpg. Coming back I drove more slowly, staying at 60mph and she averaged about 47mpg. I can't comment on fuel consumption over 70mph as I have't been abroad in her yet.

I think what matters the most from my experience is the change of speed. I have averaged 60mpg on a flat route from south of Coulsdon to home, over about 5-6 miles at a maximum of 30mph where I managed to time the traffic lights to perfection (rare)

But:

Elsie the Helipad averaged 15mpg recently

(around Castle Coombe where I drove her flat out for 10 minutes or so.)

All my figures for mpg are maxidot less 10%, which is pretty close to the actual figure.

Maybe its the factor that the OP had Yeti 'fully loaded' and thus the suspension was fully compressed thus lowering the ride height; likely dropping the tail more than the front, actually made the car more aerodynamic and therefore gave better fuel consumption?

Rather like the Greenline with its 20mm lower suspension except more so, because a full load will compress the rear by a good 150mm (think about the current vogue of aero artic truck trailers that have an almost wing shaped profile to the roof).

Discuss?

Rather like the Greenline with its 20mm lower suspension except more so, because a full load will compress the rear by a good 150mm (think about the current vogue of aero artic truck trailers that have an almost wing shaped profile to the roof).

Discuss?

Significantly intellingent analysis would require access to a windtunnel.

Idea is OK, but how to prove it????

Significantly intellingent analysis would require access to a windtunnel.

Idea is OK, but how to prove it????

Two identical Yeti, one driver only the other fully laden doing the same journey?

Of course this theory only really works on a long, cruising run with fairly constant speed; when the weight effect of being fully laden is less significant i.e. little acceleration.

Here's a pic of my 'fully laden' Yeti that illustrates how much the suspension compresses;-

It will also depend upon the wind direction, the stop-start contribution , acceleration, topography and so on and on.

I have been interested on my frequent journeys Wales to Perth how much ambient conditions will affect the MPG.

Things like tyre pressures and tyre condition will all contribute.

No doubt, though, that canny driving (= old fartishness) will see better results - at the expense of a few yawns.

G

Maybe its the factor that the OP had Yeti 'fully loaded' and thus the suspension was fully compressed thus lowering the ride height; likely dropping the tail more than the front, actually made the car more aerodynamic and therefore gave better fuel consumption?

Alas I had it "fully loaded" by volume and not by weight. So no it looked normal from outside and might have had 20mm or so compression. Can't say but it was not noticable.

Well coming from a 45mpg average car that gave me that regardless of me doing city driving or bombing it down a motorway the Yeti's 35mpg average was a bit sobering to start with. And with age one mellows some what so I've had no issues sticking to 70 wherever I go and getting a Maxidot average of around 40mpg. (It is the London driving that is bringing my average down as you see in my signature). It gives roughly this consumption 2 up, 4 up, with a roof box, without the box, with a trailer or without trailer give or take 10% or so...... The Yeti being a brick I thought it can only get worse the faster you go over 70... since well it does get MUCH better if you do an average speed of 55 to 60. Then I get 50 to 55 mpg (Maxidot). But who sticks to that speed on a motorway?! Not moi.

So the other day we went camping. Three up and I did not want to take the roof box nor the trailer so two seats were left at home and the car got loaded from behind the driver and around to the boot up to the ceiling. So pretty full. We were running late having left on a Friday after work and had to get to the campsite before they shut the gates. So we drove at a fair clip to the New Forest from London. Got there and low and behold what was the average consumption? 41mpg like ever......... hmmm.

Driving home there was no rush but I decided to push it a bit again to see what the consumption will be. This time 2 up since our passenger felt squashed in the back and preferred the purr of a 3,0 V6 petrol automatic in a Renault Avantime (average for that going home at 70mph was 22mpg!!! ).

Consumption going home for the Yeti: 41,3mpg.........

So I guess the Yeti's bricklike shape only has an influence up to 70mph?! I won't think that to be true but the average consumption seems to indicate otherwise. I'm perplexed by this.

The Avantime still looks fantastic though, so different from anything else around. Still regret not having bought one when they came out! Shame Renault had so many problems with the sub-contracted firm that built them (Matra).

From my own experience the greenlines mpg really drops off at around 75mph.

Optimum appears to be around 60mph.

A lot of that is really to do with the way 5th gear is geared on the vehicle (it could really do with a 6th IMHO).

I'm not 100% convinced about the stop/start at the moment with regards to fuel economy.

While trying to get out of a carpark recently, crawling along with a lot of stop/start for 45 mins., the readout on maxidot was 4.9 mpg

Andy

From my own experience the greenlines mpg really drops off at around 75mph.

Optimum appears to be around 60mph.

A lot of that is really to do with the way 5th gear is geared on the vehicle (it could really do with a 6th IMHO).

I'm not 100% convinced about the stop/start at the moment with regards to fuel economy.

You just need to drive in heavy urban area where traffic is hardly moving. Then you will notice.

The fuel consumption will tail of quite considerably above about 70mph. Whilst the Cd is obviously a major factor, the relationship between power required (to enable more speed) and air resistance is not linear. A steady 90mph as opposed to a steady 65mph may typically double fuel consumption. 38% more speed but 100% more fuel. Whilst other factors are at play the major player will be air resistance (drag)

My 140 manual has just done a 26 mile round trip through St Albans and Hemel Hempstead and out on the A41 consumption just over 45mpg.

The Trip 2 average over the last 2500 ish miles is showing 39mpg. A large part of the latter was the haul from St Albans via France and Spain to Portugal and back via Santander. Abroad I was generally cruising at or close to 130kph. Mileage since has been UK primarily light urban and at legal speeds. That is a full 10mpg better than any previous vehicle.

For a full 5 seater with a good level of equipment and climate control always on I think that is wholly admirable.

These are maxidot figures but seem reasonably representative.

Well now I know the Yeti is NOT a brick! Looks at this monstrosity from the Tokyo Motor show!

Now THIS is a brick on wheels!

From: http://www.autoblog.com/2011/12/01/daihatsu-fc-case-concept-tokyo-2011/