Vehicle aerodynamic drag is calculated by multiplying AREA X CD (coefficient of drag....efficiency)

If you want to save on fuel cost I'm not sure if lowering would actually achieve anything......the underbody is quite aero efficient.

Might the CD improve?........I'm not sure.

Staying in the 'truck lane' will save money.

The 'ride' wouldn't improve, that's for sure!

Edited 15 October, 201510 yr by Ryeman

Vehicle aerodynamic drag is calculated by multiplying AREA X CD (coefficient of drag....efficiency)

If you want to save on fuel cost I'm not sure if lowering would actually achieve anything......the underbody is quite aero efficient.

Might the CD improve?........I'm not sure.

Staying in the 'truck lane' will save money.

The 'ride' wouldn't improve, that's for sure!

It works - that's why Citroens lower themselves when they get some speed happening.

My economy improved a fraction when I lowered the Octavia. Sure they are aerodynamic underneath but lowering aids in helping them cut through the air a bit more efficiently.

The rule of thumb is about 1% improvement per 25mm but there's a point where it starts going backwards rather than improving (about 100-150mm off the deck depending on the car).

This is why the greenline is a fraction lower and why a lot of the European trucks are very low in the front bodywork.

It works - that's why Citroens lower themselves when they get some speed happening.My economy improved a fraction when I lowered the Octavia. Sure they are aerodynamic underneath but lowering aids in helping them cut through the air a bit more efficiently.The rule of thumb is about 1% improvement per 25mm but there's a point where it starts going backwards rather than improving (about 100-150mm off the deck depending on the car).This is why the greenline is a fraction lower and why a lot of the European trucks are very low in the front bodywork.

Hi brad

I remember the Cits well......re the trucks, don't they have some sort of aero dam at the front as well?.

It's purely a personal choice but a harsher ride and less ground clearance to give 1mpg improvement at the cost of a full set of springs seems a pointless exercise.

http://www.briskoda.net/forums/topic/224223-more-yeti-goodies/

 

The aerodynamics must be a real problem for the Yeti so lowering one would probably help a fair bit, not just with the undertray but with those windtrap wheelarches. The current van-shaped SEAT Alhambra with same 150tdi engine and DSG box, weighing in at 360kg(!) more than a Yeti is quite a bit more efficient at both town and motorway speeds (SEAT = 47.9-60.1mpg - Yeti = 44.8-56.5mpg) and that can only partially be explained by the (fairly efficient) Haldex 4wd system.

http://www.briskoda.net/forums/topic/224223-more-yeti-goodies/

 

The aerodynamics must be a real problem for the Yeti so lowering one would probably help a fair bit, not just with the undertray but with those windtrap wheelarches. The current van-shaped SEAT Alhambra with same 150tdi engine and DSG box, weighing in at 360kg(!) more than a Yeti is quite a bit more efficient at both town and motorway speeds (SEAT = 47.9-60.1mpg - Yeti = 44.8-56.5mpg) and that can only partially be explained by the (fairly efficient) Haldex 4wd system.[/quote

The Alhambra may have a better efficiency (CD) which is fundamental to motorway fuel economy.

http://www.briskoda.net/forums/topic/224223-more-yeti-goodies/

 

The aerodynamics must be a real problem for the Yeti so lowering one would probably help a fair bit, not just with the undertray but with those windtrap wheelarches. The current van-shaped SEAT Alhambra with same 150tdi engine and DSG box, weighing in at 360kg(!) more than a Yeti is quite a bit more efficient at both town and motorway speeds (SEAT = 47.9-60.1mpg - Yeti = 44.8-56.5mpg) and that can only partially be explained by the (fairly efficient) Haldex 4wd system.[/quote

The Alhambra may have a better efficiency (CD) which is fundamental to motorway fuel economy.

 

I agree, and I expect that must lie in part due to it sitting lower to the road! It's a big old lump that's taller than a Yeti so it still has to cut through a lot of air at speed, I'd imagine the Yeti bonnet/screen shape, shorter length, wheel arches and ride height all contribute to a higher drag coefficient.

The Alhambra may have a better efficiency (CD) which is fundamental to motorway fuel economy.

I agree. The Yeti is pretty poor in that respect.

 

Recently I was looking at drag coefficients of the new Superb 3 in the brochure. I noticed that for the TDI 150 estate, the 4wd version has a higher drag coefficient than the 2wd equivalent. AFAIK the body etc is identical (except for a "4x4" badge), so the increased drag could well be down to having the extra 4wd gubbins (propshaft, rear driveshafts, diff, haldex unit) underneath. This would seem to confirm how the drag coefficient is affected by underbody components - in which case, lowering a car and reducing the amount of air passing under will help (as seen in Greenline Yeti models).

It's the price we pay for character.

Didnt people buy the yeti because of its looks, high stance, 'tonker toy' appearance as somebody said earlier.

All lowering would do is take away from that...

So, by making a very few assumptions, lowering a Yeti by 25mm can save 1% of fuel costs. £12.50 per annum. I'm in!

 

(Mileage 10,000 divided by MPG 40 = 250 gallons @ £5 = £1250 x 1%= £12.50)

So, by making a very few assumptions, lowering a Yeti by 25mm can save 1% of fuel costs. £12.50 per annum. I'm in!

(Mileage 10,000 divided by MPG 40 = 250 gallons @ £5 = £1250 x 1%= £12.50)

Ahaha.

Given itll probably cost £400 odd if they did make the springs..

Yeah. Financially viable .

Didnt people buy the yeti because of its looks, high stance, 'tonker toy' appearance as somebody said earlier.

All lowering would do is take away from that...

Some may have done but the biggest things for me and I'm sure there are others was quality, practicality and looks, I like the slightly lower stance of the Greenline and absence of plastic panels.

It's still plenty high enough to make getting in and out of it a doddle for us pensioners.

 

How about people just answer the OP's question, rather than just question why he wants to do something ?

 

I presume you're all going to pop over to Richard's build thread and question why he's built a race Yeti ?

How about people just answer the OP's question, rather than just question why he wants to do something ?

I presume you're all going to pop over to Richard's build thread and question why he's built a race Yeti ?

Its a forum, people query things.

Maybe change the U and D for a double O .

How about people just answer the OP's question, rather than just question why he wants to do something ?

 

I presume you're all going to pop over to Richard's build thread and question why he's built a race Yeti ?

 

I think I have answered the question several times, but I'll do it again:

 

I do not know of a Skoda Approved Eisbach lowering kit for the Yeti.

Perhaps there's an opening in the market for the "air splitter" devices that were available years ago?

They were a transparent snow plow  V shaped device that you mounted atop the bonnet that was supposed to "split" the airflow around the sides of the car instead of butting up against the windscreen. I don't know if they were successful but they did catch a lot of insects.

 

Fred

Isn't the Greeline Yeti lower than standard?

Therefore a lower set of springs must be available.

See post 7

Perhaps there's an opening in the market for the "air splitter" devices that were available years ago?

They were a transparent snow plow  V shaped device that you mounted atop the bonnet that was supposed to "split" the airflow around the sides of the car instead of butting up against the windscreen. I don't know if they were successful but they did catch a lot of insects.

 

Fred

 

Like this?

Actually quite effective above 40mph when I had it fitted to mk Standard Vanguard Phase 2

 

From an visual point of view to close the huge wheel arch gap have you thought about larger wheels. IMO I think the yeti looks under wheeled

From an visual point of view to close the huge wheel arch gap have you thought about larger wheels. IMO I think the yeti looks under wheeled

Bigger wheels, less MPG though

The wheel arch gap is there for for suspension travel, some Yeti's are used off road, or by people living in remote areas.

 

Do people actually by a vehicle and then spend the rest of the time they have it worrying about how much fuel it uses. There is one simple answer to most of the above, DRIVE SLOWER!!!

Perhaps there's an opening in the market for the "air splitter" devices that were available years ago?

They were a transparent snow plow  V shaped device that you mounted atop the bonnet that was supposed to "split" the airflow around the sides of the car instead of butting up against the windscreen. I don't know if they were successful but they did catch a lot of insects.

 

Fred

A blast from the past

And add a bit more character as well .....love it!

Bigger wheels, less MPG though

And certainly no snow chains ........(if I may mention it ((()

And certainly no snow chains ........(if I may mention it ((()

And itll kill acceleration .

Bigger wheels, less MPG though

 

And probable insurance problems!