Just in case anyone was curious or interested...

It's quite fascinating to see the small adjustments that manufacturers make to make them more efficient on the CO2 tests.

Ah very nice!!!!

I like that Greenline badge on the grille.

What I couldn't get my head round was why the Greenline has such a big gap between the wheel arch and the top of the tyres, when it's supposed to have lowered suspension.

But moving the wheels together from the same picture gave the game away.

There is a clear difference in tyre rolling radius.

It does have 16 inch rims instead of 17, but the tyres are not bigger to make up all the difference.

You can clearly see the overall tyre/rim size is slightly smaller.

That reminds me of the difference between my 16" winter wheel & tyre combo compared to Johanns previous winter tyre set up, there was about a 1" difference in diameter or so.

Interesting indeed. So the Greenlines are only lower due to tyres and not due to suspension changes.

Interesting indeed. So the Greenlines are only lower due to tyres and not due to suspension changes.

That's what I was starting to wonder...

Comparing the tyre sizes gives you this:

205/55R16

Overall Diameter: 631.69 mm

Sidewall Height: 112.52 mm

Radius: 315.72 mm

Circumference: 1984.5 mm

225/50R17

Overall Diameter: 656.59 mm

Sidewall Height: 112.26 mm

Radius: 328.16 mm

Circumference: 2062.7 mm

Diameter Difference: 3.8%

The Yeti brochure states that the ground clearance on the Greenline is 155mm instead of 180mm, so it's 25mm lower.

Which looks right if you look at my pictures in the first post. It's about an inch lower.

The radius difference on the tyres is 12.44mm.

So it looks like half the drop in height comes from the tyres and half from the suspension

Despite the tyres being about an inch shorter, only half of that obviously contibutes to the height of the vehicle. Hence the wheels/tyres look small in the arches.

You're spot on with your calculations. Makes you wonder how such a small difference in ride height can affect fuel consumption enough to make it worth it.

Edited 6 November, 201114 yr by Gary N Wilson

You're spot on with your calculations. Makes you wonder how such a small difference in ride height can affect fuel consumption enough to make it worth it.

I think it was Skoda trying to get the Yeti down to 119g/km on emissions so it could sneak into a lower tax band. Otherwise I doubt the effort of reducing the suspension by about 12mm would have been worth it.

Well, that's the only thing I can think of, because 12mm can't make that much difference to actual economy.

Most people wouldn't care about 0.3mpg over the life of the vehicle... or whatever the change relates too. Particularly if they never had it in the first place.

Interesting, thanks for the photoes. If the suspension is only lowered by 12mm, then that should give you the chance to fit larger tires (mine has 215/60/16 as standard for the S) and I think that would fit nicely - see TP's Yeti for same alloy and larger tires.

Might invalid insurance though?

Edited 6 November, 201114 yr by My_Yeti

Interesting, thanks for the photoes. If the suspension is only lowered by 12mm, then that should give you the chance to fit larger tires (mine has 215/60/16 as standard for the S) and I think that would fit nicely - see TP's Yeti for same alloy and larger tires.

Might invalid insurance though?

Taken on her visit home to the Czech Republic in July

TP

You're spot on with your calculations. Makes you wonder how such a small difference in ride height can affect fuel consumption enough to make it worth it.

The force needed to push it through the air is proportional to the square of the velocity, double the velocity and the force quadruples.

The drag force is calculated from (pv*2)/2 CdA, p = air density, v = velocity, Cd = drag coefficient, A = projected frontal area. Lowering the ride height will reduce the area thus lowering the drag force.

The force needed to push it through the air is proportional to the square of the velocity, double the velocity and the force quadruples.

The drag force is calculated from (pv*2)/2 CdA, p = air density, v = velocity, Cd = drag coefficient, A = projected frontal area. Lowering the ride height will reduce the area thus lowering the drag force.

I was just about to say the same thing!