got a reading of 2.4 kpl at the end of my shift that consisited of a nice drive from trafford park to coventry and back, Spent my time doing a staedy 50mph all the way, accelerated gradually and slowed down with using little effort on the brakes.
Done the same run at 56 mph and have got 3.6 Kpl. Is it me or is it because when i fuel up at the end of the day i am infact putting more fuel in than the last person as fueling can never be accurate some fill to the neck some dont but the guage allways says full in the cab, Surley the low kpl will reflect on me or do they know otherwise
Your not wrong. I’m about to confront the boss with a similar thing. It’s not the speed, It’s the revs. Too low and you use more fuel, Too high and you use more fuel. He thinks slow speed = better fuel consumption.
A friend of mine on tanks did a week at about 50mph on motorways. He’s at 44ton when loaded then runs empty back to the depot full shifts not local work. He returned a combined average of 8.5mpg. He did the same at 56mpg. He returned 9.5mpg.
I’m no mechanical expert so I don’t know if this is true but I was informed by ‘a man in the know’ that doing 30 mph in a standard petrol 5 speed manual car in 4th is uneconomical because a certain amount of fuel is not burnt off 
I’m usually in 3rd because it gives more accelerator control especially for immediate engine braking.
■■■■■■00:
got a reading of 2.4 kpl at the end of my shift that consisited of a nice drive from trafford park to coventry and back, Spent my time doing a staedy 50mph all the way, accelerated gradually and slowed down with using little effort on the brakes.
Done the same run at 56 mph and have got 3.6 Kpl. Is it me or is it because when i fuel up at the end of the day i am infact putting more fuel in than the last person as fueling can never be accurate some fill to the neck some dont but the guage allways says full in the cab, Surley the low kpl will reflect on me or do they know otherwise
Are we talking two different motors here ? I know Volvo fuel meters can vary wildly. Some seem accurate and some are very optimistic. Whether they can be calibrated or not ? You will probably find if you or you Co. work out the actual mpg by kms per litre used that you will get a better picture of what’s going on. And, yes you have the age old problem of who filled up before you and whether you are all filling to same level etc. Maybe you are worrying too much, either that or look at the level before moving and then fill to same level at end.
ROG:
I’m no mechanical expert so I don’t know if this is true but I was informed by ‘a man in the know’ that doing 30 mph in a standard petrol 5 speed manual car in 4th is uneconomical because a certain amount of fuel is not burnt offI’m usually in 3rd because it gives more accelerator control especially for immediate engine braking.
That’s right.
■■■■■■00:
got a reading of 2.4 kpl at the end of my shift that consisited of a nice drive from trafford park to coventry and back, Spent my time doing a staedy 50mph all the way, accelerated gradually and slowed down with using little effort on the brakes.
Done the same run at 56 mph and have got 3.6 Kpl. Is it me or is it because when i fuel up at the end of the day i am infact putting more fuel in than the last person as fueling can never be accurate some fill to the neck some dont but the guage allways says full in the cab, Surley the low kpl will reflect on me or do they know otherwise
why dont you look in the tank before you start driving and then fill it up to the same point when you finish
Any company that is taking notice of fuel consumption over a shift, or a day is going to get wild figures.
It needs to be done over a month by working out the mileage against the fuel used.
Even when the magazines do these road tests they are concious of different routes and try to replicate the test route exactly, they also use some kind of calibration device to ensure an equal amount goes into the fuel tanks.
My FH had a single Volvo D shaped tank which held 780 litres iirc.
I could vary the amount of fuel I put in by as much as 75 litres just by the direction I drove up to the fuel pump.
In other words your 2.4 kpl means absolutely nothing unless the other driver is filling to exactly the same level, in the same position, at the same temperature.
so tell me what is the point of employers going to the extra expense of providing drivers with courses on how to drive more econimically, i thought slower speed staying in the green meant a higher kpl.
Therfore it must be nonsense even for a driver to be given a word in their ear from their employer like limeyphil for figures that can be so manipulated so at to distaught the judment of the employer and employee, and i take your point of looking in the tank first but that is another inacuracy
limeyphil:
Your not wrong. I’m about to confront the boss with a similar thing. It’s not the speed, It’s the revs. Too low and you use more fuel, Too high and you use more fuel. He thinks slow speed = better fuel consumption.
A friend of mine on tanks did a week at about 50mph on motorways. He’s at 44ton when loaded then runs empty back to the depot full shifts not local work. He returned a combined average of 8.5mpg. He did the same at 56mpg. He returned 9.5mpg.
I found the same…
When I ran at 57 the mpg was 7+
I now run at 53 and return 6+ 
I would almost guarantee if anyone runs a truck at 53 on cruise control rather than 56 there will be an improvement, difficult in the UK I know
Wheel Nut:
I would almost guarantee if anyone runs a truck at 53 on cruise control rather than 56 there will be an improvement, difficult in the UK I know
I couldn’t believe it either…
I run an old 400 twingo, no cc. It’s now been 6 months at 53 on same work
I put it down to the truck having to work harder. The turbo kicking in most all the time where as at 57 it didn’t need it so much ?
Trouble is vosa didn’t approve 