My Signature Nav handling an impressive 6ft load
2 2

18 posts in this topic

These are not the best pictures because it was dark inside my work, and when I arrived at destination I was so eager to unload I forgot to take a few more pictures. The main long load is a 6ft long and 2ft wide cylinder for a coffee roaster.

 

IMG_0291.thumb.jpg.ac6f16bec8c4cff200b3780aea059b3e.jpg

 

The choice was use the Kadjar for the 300 mile round trip, or use the works hateful dogged van which would have driven me insane. So it had to fit. First problem, I was expecting the front passenger seat to do the tabletop mode - but it either doesn't or I am too stupid to make it do it. Looking at my Signature nav front seats they have lifted edges on both the base and back so I could not see how it could even tabletop if I could find the way to do it. BUT, if you remove the passenger seat headrest and move the seat fully forward and then tilt it backwards into full on chillax recline - it actually is not very much higher then the folded down back seats - result. Plenty of cardboard to protect the car then just slid the tube up and over the front seat reclined lip. Slight issue the tube has a sticking out bit where it connects - which when upwards was catching the glass roof so I had to rotate it into the potentially attacking me while driving side position. Stopped it wandering using strapping hooked to front and rear passenger hand holds. At the back stopped it moving backwards with a couple of beefy motors in boxes. Also tied it to the two rear luggage hooks left an right.

IMG_0290.thumb.jpg.0be08334f315b1ae013996d40a774695.jpg

It didn't even slide a mm during the 150 mile trip to deliver it - although nearly all that was motorway. 

6ft long load fitted in the Kadjar done, it can be an impressive and luxurious van if needed. Added bonus, clocked an average 65mpg on the trip up (set off at 6am so clear motorways and slip streamed a Mercedes Sprinter doing 69mph for a good 90 miles)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, c0ff33 said:

These are not the best pictures because it was dark inside my work, and when I arrived at destination I was so eager to unload I forgot to take a few more pictures. The main long load is a 6ft long and 2ft wide cylinder for a coffee roaster.

 

IMG_0291.thumb.jpg.ac6f16bec8c4cff200b3780aea059b3e.jpg

 

The choice was use the Kadjar for the 300 mile round trip, or use the works hateful dogged van which would have driven me insane. So it had to fit. First problem, I was expecting the front passenger seat to do the tabletop mode - but it either doesn't or I am too stupid to make it do it. Looking at my Signature nav front seats they have lifted edges on both the base and back so I could not see how it could even tabletop if I could find the way to do it. BUT, if you remove the passenger seat headrest and move the seat fully forward and then tilt it backwards into full on chillax recline - it actually is not very much higher then the folded down back seats - result. Plenty of cardboard to protect the car then just slid the tube up and over the front seat reclined lip. Slight issue the tube has a sticking out bit where it connects - which when upwards was catching the glass roof so I had to rotate it into the potentially attacking me while driving side position. Stopped it wandering using strapping hooked to front and rear passenger hand holds. At the back stopped it moving backwards with a couple of beefy motors in boxes. Also tied it to the two rear luggage hooks left an right.

IMG_0290.thumb.jpg.0be08334f315b1ae013996d40a774695.jpg

It didn't even slide a mm during the 150 mile trip to deliver it - although nearly all that was motorway. 

6ft long load fitted in the Kadjar done, it can be an impressive and luxurious van if needed. Added bonus, clocked an average 65mpg on the trip up (set off at 6am so clear motorways and slip streamed a Mercedes Sprinter doing 69mph for a good 90 miles)

Regarding the fuel consumption, I think the slipstream aided you immensely, I spend way too much time working on fuel consumption and you hit a brick wall at over about 63mph, difference to me is about a 20% drop by increasing to 70 from 63. But the frontal height of the cagey is never going to render it streamlined;).

Yes, it's a practical car no doubt, mine is used as a builders van almost at times and even the floor leveller doesn't complain.

Biggest thing I had in was a massive domestic chest freezer, but I have to admit to having the rear tailgate about 4" open due to me not being able to drive without the seat all the way back.

My fishing gear is toted around more than anything else, the rod holdall is a full 6ft 6" long and fits diagonally and flat across the rear with the seats folded still leaving room for all the gear and stuff needed for a weekend fishing for 2. It should fit, I took it with me on the test drive.

 

Edited as just noticed you have a 1.6, I had that in the qashqai and now have the 1.5cagey, very little if any improvement in mpg.

Hopefully you can help me out here, I couldn't get a test drive in a 1.6 when I changed to the 1.5 so didn't get a direct comparison. However the 1.6 in the qashqai was rough sounding, ie clattey and actually sounded like a diesel, the 1.5 doesn't, well not in the cagey.

But the qashqai was a very noisy car in all respects, transmission whine through the bulkhead and pebbles etc rattling up of the road, not of that in this car. So the question is did you test both in the Kadjar??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/08/2017 at 9:30 AM, turboted10 said:

Edited as just noticed you have a 1.6, I had that in the qashqai and now have the 1.5cagey, very little if any improvement in mpg.

Hopefully you can help me out here, I couldn't get a test drive in a 1.6 when I changed to the 1.5 so didn't get a direct comparison. However the 1.6 in the qashqai was rough sounding, ie clattey and actually sounded like a diesel, the 1.5 doesn't, well not in the cagey.

But the qashqai was a very noisy car in all respects, transmission whine through the bulkhead and pebbles etc rattling up of the road, not of that in this car. So the question is did you test both in the Kadjar??

I got the 1.6 Diesel because it was the biggest engine the Kadjar came with and I hated the 1.6 petrol in my 11 plate Grande Scenic. I didn't drive a Kadjar before getting it, mainly got it because I liked the DRL headlights lol. 

As for the 1.6 Diesel sound - it's far quieter then my old 1.6 petrol. Whisper quiet - in fact it's often hard to tell if the engine is running or off. I've done plenty of varied driving now and it handles speed bumps well, little road noise to speak of - I imagine the experience is pretty much going to be the same as the 1.5 in that respect. I use the Eco feature all the time and still feel the acceleration is sprightly enough for needs with it on, and just knock it off for extra power if I want to overtake or just feel a bit racey. I did not get the 4wd option though - it adds 800kg to the car weight which I imagine cripples the fuel economy and performance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, c0ff33 said:

I got the 1.6 Diesel because it was the biggest engine the Kadjar came with and I hated the 1.6 petrol in my 11 plate Grande Scenic. I didn't drive a Kadjar before getting it, mainly got it because I liked the DRL headlights lol. 

As for the 1.6 Diesel sound - it's far quieter then my old 1.6 petrol. Whisper quiet - in fact it's often hard to tell if the engine is running or off. I've done plenty of varied driving now and it handles speed bumps well, little road noise to speak of - I imagine the experience is pretty much going to be the same as the 1.5 in that respect. I use the Eco feature all the time and still feel the acceleration is sprightly enough for needs with it on, and just knock it off for extra power if I want to overtake or just feel a bit racey. I did not get the 4wd option though - it adds 800kg to the car weight which I imagine cripples the fuel economy and performance.

Cheers for that, I asked the question of several 1'6 owners but yours is the 1st reply. 

I really have to test drive the 1.6 in cagey form, as said earlier in the qashqai it sounded rough and crude, but I think they had forgot to install sufficient soundproofing for EU standards, had the 1.6 kadjar been quiet when tried (no chance) would have gone with that. Very economical and just a tad more oooomph than the smaller engine.

ECO is interesting,  no one seems able to fully explain what the button does, but I drove 500 miles with it acting then switched it off, the turbo has much greater impact than without. I thought it just reduced fuelling but I'm thinking it may vary turbo boost. 

It will be a 1.6 for me next time, not enough mpg increase to have the power reduction in my view.

Thanks for your comments

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The ECO cuts the peaks of the throttle to a smooth curve. Lowers the air-con, and basically skips 20 hp. If it was not the cut off of the air conditioner, it would be awesome, cause in 40 degrees Celsius it's a killer...

Sent from my SM-N910C using Tapatalk



Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, AOne said:

The ECO smoothens the peaks of the throttle to a smooth curve. Lowers the air-con, and basically skips 20 hp. If it was not the cut off of the air conditioner, it would be awesome, cause in 40 degrees Celsius it's a killer...

Sent from my SM-N910C using Tapatalk
 

 

Fortunately in the UK it's mostly cloudy enough to not even need Air Con, I occasionally pop it in if I get into the car after it has been sat in direct sunlight but the majority of the time it is not even needed for me. I get the point though, it's shame the ECO mode doesn't have a setting in the R-Link where you can turn on an off what it controls.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, AOne said:

The ECO cuts the peaks of the throttle to a smooth curve. Lowers the air-con, and basically skips 20 hp. If it was not the cut off of the air conditioner, it would be awesome, cause in 40 degrees Celsius it's a killer...

Sent from my SM-N910C using Tapatalk
 

 

 

 

The air con is average on full tilt. I think you are wrong, yes it knocks the top off the performance curve but I would really like to know how it does it, shutting down ancillaries? No

as coff said,  it's shame the ECO mode doesn't have a setting in the R-Link where you can turn on an off what it controls.

But what does it control?  Not getting the full performance of the engine when in ECO mode to me is a no no, If I want to accelerate out of danger, I want it to be instantaneous, ECO button only provides full output on full throttle.

Another example to me of wanting to be in charge of the vehicle rather than vice versa

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/08/2017 at 6:58 PM, AOne said:

The ECO cuts the peaks of the throttle to a smooth curve. Lowers the air-con, and basically skips 20 hp. If it was not the cut off of the air conditioner, it would be awesome, cause in 40 degrees Celsius it's a killer...

Sent from my SM-N910C using Tapatalk
 

 

 

 

I owe you an apology, I said earlier that I didn't think it reduced the air con performance. I took out a remote digital thermometer when I drove today. Lodged the sender in the central vent, set temp to low and air con on. Gave it time to stabilise. With eco on it showed 6.9C, turning it off gave an immediate reduction of exactly 1 deg, ie 5.9C.

Doesn't sound a lot and in practise hardly seems noticeable but it must have a dramatic effect considering the laws of diminishing returns, ie that 1 last degree probably cost as much energy say from 10 to 7 degrees.

Interestingly I switched the eco off whilst holding a steady speed in 4th going up a gentle hill, ok not a kick in the back but there was a distinct push from the car in response, so something changes rather than it just ignoring spikes when accelerating as this was at cruising speed.

But the thing that still puzzles me is that given the detail and effort they have gone too in integrating this feature into the car, why does it have such little effect in most drivers experience?.

I think I know the answer to my own question to be honest, more political than practical??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/12/2017 at 2:10 PM, c0ff33 said:

I got the 1.6 Diesel because it was the biggest engine the Kadjar came with and I hated the 1.6 petrol in my 11 plate Grande Scenic. I didn't drive a Kadjar before getting it, mainly got it because I liked the DRL headlights lol. 

As for the 1.6 Diesel sound - it's far quieter then my old 1.6 petrol. Whisper quiet - in fact it's often hard to tell if the engine is running or off. I've done plenty of varied driving now and it handles speed bumps well, little road noise to speak of - I imagine the experience is pretty much going to be the same as the 1.5 in that respect. I use the Eco feature all the time and still feel the acceleration is sprightly enough for needs with it on, and just knock it off for extra power if I want to overtake or just feel a bit racey. I did not get the 4wd option though - it adds 800kg to the car weight which I imagine cripples the fuel economy and performance.

The 4x4 weighs 107kg more than the fwd 1.6dci, not 800kg, (1536kg against 1429kg) and I can get 54mpg commuting to work on the dreaded A14 car park every day, so I'm happy enough with that. I only bought my red Sig Nav because it was pre-reg with £8k off the list price, and I didn't want to wait 3 months to order a 1.2 Sig S Nav as my Jeep trade-in was starting to whine and vibrate and may not have lasted that long.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Stevieboy said:

The 4x4 weighs 107kg more than the fwd 1.6dci, not 800kg, (1536kg against 1429kg) and I can get 54mpg commuting to work on the dreaded A14 car park every day, so I'm happy enough with that. I only bought my red Sig Nav because it was pre-reg with £8k off the list price, and I didn't want to wait 3 months to order a 1.2 Sig S Nav as my Jeep trade-in was starting to whine and vibrate and may not have lasted that long.

The 800kg came up more then once when I was looking at specs and comparisons from various sites online, so I stand corrected on the weight difference although I have no need for 4wd except on the few days we might have snow and ice which are getting fewer. And I am still more then impressed the 1.6Dci can manage 65mpg average on a long motorway run with a good 50kg load plus driver - especially because my research suggested the 1.5Dci would give the best fuel economy by far but so far my experience is the 1.6dci offers both good performance and also fuel economy. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

23 hours ago, turboted10 said:

 

 

I owe you an apology, I said earlier that I didn't think it reduced the air con performance. I took out a remote digital thermometer when I drove today. Lodged the sender in the central vent, set temp to low and air con on. Gave it time to stabilise. With eco on it showed 6.9C, turning it off gave an immediate reduction of exactly 1 deg, ie 5.9C.

 

 

 

Doesn't sound a lot and in practise hardly seems noticeable but it must have a dramatic effect considering the laws of diminishing returns, ie that 1 last degree probably cost as much energy say from 10 to 7 degrees.

 

 

 

Interestingly I switched the eco off whilst holding a steady speed in 4th going up a gentle hill, ok not a kick in the back but there was a distinct push from the car in response, so something changes rather than it just ignoring spikes when accelerating as this was at cruising speed.

 

 

 

But the thing that still puzzles me is that given the detail and effort they have gone too in integrating this feature into the car, why does it have such little effect in most drivers experience?.

 

 

 

I think I know the answer to my own question to be honest, more political than practical??

 

 

 

Fair play Ted, you really got your lab coat on proving that one.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, 1964 said:

 

 

 

 

 

Fair play Ted, you really got your lab coat on proving that one.

 

emoji106.png

How do you do the "nerd" voice on the internet, :D.

Actually i was also still trying to get to the bottom as to why the stop/start has given up the ghost. I saw in a video from Renault, (this was when the auto start kaptur thing caught my eye), that Renault said that S/S wouldn't kick in if there was a big difference between set and actual temps on the car. This time of year mine is usually just set to Lo and ambient is about 18, but given I'd tested with the heating system switched off I just wondered if it was 1 of Renaults quirks. Matching the temps with system back on made no difference.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/08/2017 at 2:10 PM, c0ff33 said:

I got the 1.6 Diesel because it was the biggest engine the Kadjar came with and I hated the 1.6 petrol in my 11 plate Grande Scenic. I didn't drive a Kadjar before getting it, mainly got it because I liked the DRL headlights lol. 

As for the 1.6 Diesel sound - it's far quieter then my old 1.6 petrol. Whisper quiet - in fact it's often hard to tell if the engine is running or off. I've done plenty of varied driving now and it handles speed bumps well, little road noise to speak of - I imagine the experience is pretty much going to be the same as the 1.5 in that respect. I use the Eco feature all the time and still feel the acceleration is sprightly enough for needs with it on, and just knock it off for extra power if I want to overtake or just feel a bit racey. I did not get the 4wd option though - it adds 800kg to the car weight which I imagine cripples the fuel economy and performance.

I have the 1.6 4wheel drive. With ECO on I am getting 56mpg on a run of 500 miles including some motorway driving at 70 miles an hour. I expect that if I limited speed to 60 this figure could be improved.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Melville said:

I have the 1.6 4wheel drive. With ECO on I am getting 56mpg on a run of 500 miles including some motorway driving at 70 miles an hour. I expect that if I limited speed to 60 this figure could be improved.

I gave up on Eco. I tried it for a while and it made no difference to fuel consumption. All it did was make the throttle feel like it had an elastic band between the pedal and the engine. I also turned the air con to Lo to cool the car down during that heatwave we had a few weeks ago. The system said no, and kept the fan just ticking over. As soon as I turned Eco off the fan went to max and cooled everything down. As far as I could tell, Eco stopped the air con working completely.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Melville said:

I have the 1.6 4wheel drive. With ECO on I am getting 56mpg on a run of 500 miles including some motorway driving at 70 miles an hour. I expect that if I limited speed to 60 this figure could be improved.

I can assure you it would improve a lot, try 63 mph, probably 60 when speedo gain is take away, at least 10% by my reckoning. The brick shaped high front is the culprit.;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

2 2