Overcab and fuel consumption

Take 2 similar vans, one low profile, one with an overcab. Eg, Broadway EK and Broadway EKTBLP. Same engine, both loaded to the same weight.
How much of a difference would you expect to see in the mpg figures?

I wouldn't ~expect~ it to be more than a few percent, but it does of course depend on quite a few factors - for example, some overcab bodywork is (or at least appears to be) more aerodynamic, while other designs are less so.

The other observation is that the difference will also depend on your cruising speed - the faster you go, the more detrimental to MPG a bigger frontal area will be, all other things being equal.

Agree, far greater fuel costs achieved by not driving round with full tanks, driving smartly ( 5mph in the cruise makes a big difference) and keeping weight to a minimum. It wouldn't be a deciding factor for me, the difference must be minimal between the two although handling on a low profile might logically be better.

Thanks both. Pretty much what I thought, that the overcab itself won't make a lot of difference to mpg. We don't need the extra bed, but the space is really useful.

Hi, For sure   the biggest difference is the driver.  

A light right foot will make the most difference.

regards

Mike

The benifits of having the extra room over the cab far out ways any extra fuel consumption.
I have the es version Nuevo and achieve around 28/30 mpg loaded, however if you have the air con running it drops to around 26.
No handling problems with the rear air suspension.
Boaby

It would be an interesting exercise to put them in a wind tunnel. The low profile although having a smaller frontal area to present to the the air I expect the turbulence from the roof hardware such a roof bars etc would generate drag that may be faired off by the high front models.

Now there's an interesting thought, 'wind tunnel',   'motor home',  high-speed house bricks spring to mind.