Canopy/no canopy fuel comparison

[mark89]

Hey fellas i have been running a canopy for years and recently got a new one made up but removable, anyway i have spent the last week as a ute and just filled up and after 700ks averaged 14l per 100 however for year's with the canopy i can't get below 15.5l per 100, is it a coincidence or can it really be that much of a difference anyone else compared? Having just spent $2250 on a new canopy and frame by no means am i going to run without it to save a few $$$ was just quite suprised. Its a gq ute td42 with extractors exhaust etc various driving city country and beach.

[Hodge]

Looking at your canopy mate. It don't look very aerodynamical. That would drag the car down . It's like consistently driving into head wind.
When I put a canopy of my navara, even though the canopy was very streamlined and had the width and height of the cab, I still lost fuel economy.

[DX grunt]

A lot of my driving is into the wind, with a bit of gear in the ally pod, so I just pay the fuel bill. lol.

[Cuppa]

My canopy extends beyond the sides & top of the cab, plus has solar panels mounted on top. I average just over 16kms per litre.

[Tip12345]

Must be thinner air in Ballarat !!! have a good break .

[GU CAMPER]

I noticed that when I took my old chassis mounted canopy off and put an aluminium tray on I have got another 100-200 kms out of my tanks

I think it also has a lot to do with all the weight I had in my old canopy

Now I have a slide on camper I notice that when the camper is on it does use more fuel

Also when I took my chassis mount canopy off and put the tray on my rego costs went down a couple hundred per year as my tare weight was lower