↓ Advertise on Defender2 ↓

Home > Technical > Puma "Airbrakes"....
Post Reply  Down to end
Page 1 of 3 123>
Print this entire topic · 
Shax



Member Since: 05 Oct 2010
Location: London
Posts: 391

England 2010 Defender 90 Puma 2.4 XS CSW Stornoway Grey
Puma "Airbrakes"....
I removed the "airbrakes" (rear mud flaps) on my Puma about 6 weeks ago, and now have slightly better fuel economy.. It's gone from just over 28MPG to almost 31MPG.. Not a huge amount, but over a year it will add up to be a decent saving.. ... ,-------,
.. I [__][_]|__
.. I __ |"_|"__|
.. "(o)====(o)"
^^_-^-_^-^_^^^^^--^^^^
PAUL
G7ALW 14.200 USB
26FB458 / 27.275 SSB
Post #158860 31st Jul 2012 12:03am
View user's profile Send private message View poster's gallery Reply with quote
ajps72



Member Since: 08 Jan 2012
Location: Lima Peru
Posts: 105

2001 Defender 110 Td5 SW Chawton White
mmmm Doesn´t sound too bad, good Idea I will try removing mine or installing softer ones. Augusto

Defender 110 TD5 2001
Discovery 4 TDV6
Post #158862 31st Jul 2012 4:55am
View user's profile Send private message View poster's gallery Reply with quote
K9F



Member Since: 12 Nov 2009
Location: Bournemouth
Posts: 9610

United Kingdom 2008 Defender 90 Puma 2.4 XS CSW Stornoway Grey
ajps72 wrote:
Doesn´t sound too bad, good Idea


Think that's good? Try this.....

I fitted a Tornado GR Mk4 Aircraft nose cone to the front of my Defender and now I'm getting 82.3MPG.. Rolling with laughter Rolling with laughter

 If you go through life with your head in the sand....all people will see is an ar5e!!

Treat every day as if it is your last....one day you will be right!!
Post #158864 31st Jul 2012 5:53am
View user's profile Send private message View poster's gallery Reply with quote
bpman



Member Since: 21 May 2008
Location: Oslo
Posts: 8069

2008 Defender 110 Puma 2.4 SVX Station Wagon Santorini Black
come on Mal - let's have a photo
Post #158867 31st Jul 2012 7:11am
View user's profile Send private message View poster's gallery Reply with quote
K9F



Member Since: 12 Nov 2009
Location: Bournemouth
Posts: 9610

United Kingdom 2008 Defender 90 Puma 2.4 XS CSW Stornoway Grey
bpman wrote:
come on Mal - let's have a photo


Steve, it makes me laugh! Laughing If people are prepared to go to such lengths to eek out an extra couple of MPG maybe they're driving the wrong vehicle in the first place. I'd rather keep the mudflaps and give other road users an element of consideration and protection of the extra crud I'm likely to be throwing at them (as well as my own vehicle) without them.

Get a proper remap to gain noticeable increases in performance and fuel economy if you can keep your right foot from using the extra torque. If you go through life with your head in the sand....all people will see is an ar5e!!

Treat every day as if it is your last....one day you will be right!!
Post #158869 31st Jul 2012 7:27am
View user's profile Send private message View poster's gallery Reply with quote
XS Pete



Member Since: 13 Jan 2011
Location: Suffolk
Posts: 632

England 2011 Defender 90 Puma 2.4 XS CSW Stornoway Grey
Is that OK from a C&U perspective to drive around with them removed? I can't think of any other vehicle, execpt maybe tractors, where most of the rear of the wheels is exposed. It must throw load of crap out the back.

Regards

Pete
Post #158871 31st Jul 2012 8:28am
View user's profile Send private message View poster's gallery Reply with quote
blackwolf



Member Since: 03 Nov 2009
Location: South West England
Posts: 16999

United Kingdom 2007 Defender 110 Puma 2.4 DCPU Stornoway Grey
XS Pete wrote:
Is that OK from a C&U perspective to drive around with them removed? I can't think of any other vehicle, execpt maybe tractors, where most of the rear of the wheels is exposed. It must throw load of crap out the back.

Regards

Pete


There is no legal requirement for mudflaps on the back of a Defender as far as I know, nor for that matter on any other non-HGV vehicle. There are more Landrovers on the road without mudflaps than there are with, and many (eg all military ones) leave the factory without any fitted.

If, however, you come back onto a public highway after driving off-road and either make an excessive mess on the highway, or bombard the car behind with crud, you are committing an offence and (especially if the car behind is a Police car) will probably be pulled. It won't be for having no mudflaps though, it will be for other offences.

I suppose that there might be issues if as a result of removing the mudflaps you cause an accident and your insurers find out that you have modified the vehicle by removing the mudflaps and this action has consequently caused the accident. In this case you would probably be uninsured as a result of a non-declared modification, although it is difficult to see how it could be proven that the removal of the mudflaps directly resulted in the accident.
Post #158873 31st Jul 2012 8:52am
View user's profile Send private message View poster's gallery Reply with quote
T1G UP



Member Since: 08 Dec 2009
Location: Bath
Posts: 3101

England 2011 Defender 110 Puma 2.4 XS CSW Orkney Grey
why worry about anyone elses motor! do they give a Censored about you and yours.......

mud flaps are a pain.....an afterthought.

i have a plan to rectify the rear flaps issue.
Post #158874 31st Jul 2012 8:52am
View user's profile Send private message View poster's gallery Reply with quote
blackwolf



Member Since: 03 Nov 2009
Location: South West England
Posts: 16999

United Kingdom 2007 Defender 110 Puma 2.4 DCPU Stornoway Grey
I find it hard to believe that anyone would remove the mudflaps simply to improve the fuel consumption of a Defender, and I suspect that the OP (Shax) has removed the mudflaps for other reasons and has incidentally found an improvement in fuel performance. If you are that desperate for fuel mileage, don't drive a Defender!

I presently have no rear mudflaps on mine (one fell off and was lost in Dorset's great floods a few weeks ago, and it looks stupid with just one, so I took the other off to match) and to be honest I don't notice much difference in ejected crud. It seems to throw up no more without them than it did with them. The benefits are that they now can't rip holes in the bodywork when you reverse over them, or when prolonged flapping work-hardens the panel the outer end is attached to.
Post #158875 31st Jul 2012 8:59am
View user's profile Send private message View poster's gallery Reply with quote
LandRoverAnorak



Member Since: 17 Jul 2011
Location: Surrey
Posts: 11240

United Kingdom 2013 Defender 110 Puma 2.2 USW Orkney Grey
Re: Puma "Airbrakes"....
Shax wrote:
I removed the "airbrakes" (rear mud flaps) on my Puma about 6 weeks ago, and now have slightly better fuel economy.. It's gone from just over 28MPG to almost 31MPG.. Not a huge amount, but over a year it will add up to be a decent saving..

That sounds like about 10%, which seems like an unfeasibly large increase just for removing the mud flaps Confused I suspect other factors at play. Darren

110 USW BUILD THREAD - EXPEDITION TRAILER - 200tdi 90 BUILD THREAD - SANKEY TRAILER - IG@landroveranorak

"You came in that thing? You're braver than I thought!" - Princess Leia
Post #158876 31st Jul 2012 9:04am
View user's profile Send private message View poster's gallery Reply with quote
Shax



Member Since: 05 Oct 2010
Location: London
Posts: 391

England 2010 Defender 90 Puma 2.4 XS CSW Stornoway Grey
blackwolf wrote:
I find it hard to believe that anyone would remove the mudflaps simply to improve the fuel consumption of a Defender, and I suspect that the OP (Shax) has removed the mudflaps for other reasons and has incidentally found an improvement in fuel performance.



I removed them to derust and respray the brackets, and never got round to refitting the airbrakes as I think it looks better without them.

Re people whinging about chucking up excessive amounts of spray, if people were to leave a bigger gap in the rain, then it wouldn't be an issue.. And with regard to dropping mud on the highway, how will mudflaps that are already caked in several inches of mud reduce what the tyres chuck out?

Just for info, I used to get a regular 28.5MPG, filled up this morning, and it works out at 30.4... ... ,-------,
.. I [__][_]|__
.. I __ |"_|"__|
.. "(o)====(o)"
^^_-^-_^-^_^^^^^--^^^^
PAUL
G7ALW 14.200 USB
26FB458 / 27.275 SSB
Post #158882 31st Jul 2012 9:52am
View user's profile Send private message View poster's gallery Reply with quote
blackwolf



Member Since: 03 Nov 2009
Location: South West England
Posts: 16999

United Kingdom 2007 Defender 110 Puma 2.4 DCPU Stornoway Grey
Shax wrote:
Just for info, I used to get a regular 28.5MPG, filled up this morning, and it works out at 30.4...


It will be interesting to see if this improvement is sustained, a single fill is not a long enough test to be conclusive since other factors may well be at play. It is however food for throught.

Although I do record fuel purchased and the mileage at each fill I haven't yet calculated MPG for the period after the flaps came off, but it will be interesting to do so in the light of your observation.

Shax, is yours a 90 or 110?
Post #158884 31st Jul 2012 10:05am
View user's profile Send private message View poster's gallery Reply with quote
GREENI



Member Since: 22 Aug 2010
Location: staffs
Posts: 10367

United Kingdom 
I'm considering an LS1 lump and auto in mine, Censored economy, I cycle work 99% of the time Mr. Green
Post #158885 31st Jul 2012 10:08am
View user's profile Send private message View poster's gallery Reply with quote
dgardel



Member Since: 30 Nov 2008
Location: Veneto (Heart & Head)
Posts: 3586

Italy 
106 MPG changing the external shape of my Defender.....

Now I have a little more room also..................








Click image to enlarge
 Discovery 5 td6 HSE Stornoway Gray Outback Engineering Limited Edition

IID Pro MV License
Post #158887 31st Jul 2012 10:47am
View user's profile Send private message View poster's gallery Send e-mail Reply with quote
Shax



Member Since: 05 Oct 2010
Location: London
Posts: 391

England 2010 Defender 90 Puma 2.4 XS CSW Stornoway Grey
blackwolf wrote:
Shax wrote:
Just for info, I used to get a regular 28.5MPG, filled up this morning, and it works out at 30.4...


Shax, is yours a 90 or 110?


It's a 90XS. ... ,-------,
.. I [__][_]|__
.. I __ |"_|"__|
.. "(o)====(o)"
^^_-^-_^-^_^^^^^--^^^^
PAUL
G7ALW 14.200 USB
26FB458 / 27.275 SSB
Post #158890 31st Jul 2012 11:07am
View user's profile Send private message View poster's gallery Reply with quote
Post Reply  Back to top
Page 1 of 3 123>
All times are GMT + 1 Hour

Jump to  
Previous Topic | Next Topic >
Posting Rules
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum



Site Copyright © 2006-2024 Futuranet Ltd & Martin Lewis
DEFENDER2.NET RSS Feed - All Forums