# Forklift fuel efficiency



## jim lyon (Feb 19, 2006)

I know it isn't a real big item in the big picture but does anyone here pay much attention to forklift fuel usage in gallons per hour? I'm constantly amazed by the effiency of the Hummerbee Kubota turbo diesel. Just got done putting 31 hrs on one and used about 17 gallons. Seems to always run somewhere between 1/2 to 2/3rds of a gallon per hour. Given the fact that you are moving a 5,000 lb. plus machine with tractor tires in mostly rough terrain and constantly lifting heavy loads and running all the power through a hydrostatic transmission it seems pretty nearly impossible. If one equates it to 60 mph highway driving in a far lighter vehicle with little rolling resistance, it would be in the 100 mpg range. Love that little diesel and sad to see it's no longer going to bee available from Hummerbee.


----------



## crofter (May 5, 2011)

There can be noticeable difference in fuel consumption between different diesel designs of the same nominal output. Different hyraulics can make a big difference too (open center vs closed center) I have an older Kubota with few hours on it, non turbo and indirect injection and it is not teriffic for economy compared to the new one with direct injection and turbo. They still kick the pants off a similar sized gas machine though!


----------



## HarryVanderpool (Apr 11, 2005)

jim lyon said:


> Just got done putting 31 hrs on one and used about 17 gallons.


Jim, you know how much I love to brag about my hot-rod forklift.
However, the 351 Windsor sucks down about 4 - 5 gallons per hour.
Thank heavens for 42 gallon fuel capacity!!

I like to think (however true or false) that what is lost in fuel is gained in time saved!


----------



## odfrank (May 13, 2002)

The Bobcats I have used over the decades for landscaping work all used about a gallon an hour, running at high RPMs. I think my T190 has a Kubota engine.


----------



## jim lyon (Feb 19, 2006)

HarryVanderpool said:


> Jim, you know how much I love to brag about my hot-rod forklift.
> However, the 351 Windsor sucks down about 4 - 5 gallons per hour.
> Thank heavens for 42 gallon fuel capacity!!
> 
> I like to think (however true or false) that what is lost in fuel is gained in time saved!


Agreed, time is money in this business, particularly with the current low cost of fuel, though the simple act of having to take the time to refuel a lot can be frustrating as well. Mostly just wondering what others experiences are from a fuel economy standpoint.


----------



## BernhardHeuvel (Mar 13, 2013)

I own a very small forklift, but this thing is thirsty. 

I just wonder which alternatives we have if we really run out of oil one day. Back to horse and cart? Lifting hives by hand? I sometimes play with those thoughts but can't see how it would work without oil.


----------



## Maybee Apiaries (Jun 23, 2016)

BernhardHeuvel said:


> I own a very small forklift, but this thing is thirsty.
> 
> I just wonder which alternatives we have if we really run out of oil one day. Back to horse and cart? Lifting hives by hand? I sometimes play with those thoughts but can't see how it would work without oil.


I think that day is far enough away that there will be alternatives by then. The pace of new technology is faster than we can get the dinosaurs out of the ground.


----------



## babybee (Mar 23, 2012)

Has anyone tried the hummerbee turbo 2?


----------



## BernhardHeuvel (Mar 13, 2013)

Maybee Apiaries said:


> I think that day is far enough away...


How far is this away?


----------



## BernhardHeuvel (Mar 13, 2013)

From what I have read so far on oil depletion, I like that model the most. Read carefully all parts: http://www.thehillsgroup.org/depletion2_018.htm

By 2027 we need as much energy to produce a barrel of oil as that barrel could give energy to the general economy. 

So there will be still oil out there in the year 2027, but we can't use it. 

Seems we urgently need a good boost in technology to replace all that oil in 10 years...as far as I observe technology development, we don't have major breakthrough in the technology sector for a long time. 

How much total energy needs to be replaced? And by what energy source? More corn fields? And bio-fuel? Hmmm...

I know it isn't a real big item in the big picture...today...but sure it will be one in the near future.


----------



## Sadler91 (Nov 6, 2011)

BernhardHeuvel said:


> From what I have read so far on oil depletion, I like that model the most. Read carefully all parts: http://www.thehillsgroup.org/depletion2_018.htm
> 
> By 2027 we need as much energy to produce a barrel of oil as that barrel could give energy to the general economy.
> 
> ...



Well this thread went a very strange direction that I didn't anticipate lol


----------



## Roland (Dec 14, 2008)

Bernard: - we have new fracking methods that have opened up reserves that where previously untappable. It may not be allowed on your continent. 

Besides, if that fails, the Germans over here still dabble in holzbrenner Volkswagens.

Crazy Roland


----------



## jvalentour (Sep 4, 2014)

I just recently added a forklift attachment to my Kubota 5100. It has really changed my approach to so many things.


----------



## Fusion_power (Jan 14, 2005)

Re Holzbrenner Volkswagen, wood burning could indeed power a major chunk of our economy. How long do you think the wood will last? At present rate of consumption, we might get 10 years out of it. Somehow, I think solar power is our only realistic long term option. Then we will rate forklifts in terms of battery capacity and electric motor efficiency. Did you know that electric motors are mostly under 80% efficient?


----------



## Roland (Dec 14, 2008)

Don't tell Al Gore, but I suspect the Holzbrenners would work on coal also, and we have a whole lot of that. 

I once work at a place that made dynamometers, and it does not surprise me that the turbo diesels get the best BSFC(brake specific fuel consumption, lbs fuel per hp hour). During one of our tests, a Detroit 8v92 made 400 hp with the same fuel flow rate as a SBC chevy motor made 200 hp.(A 351 Windsor would have been about the same)

Actually, an 80 percent efficient electric motor is good compared to the best turbo diesel. Offhand they are around 40 percent??

Crazy Roland


----------



## Vance G (Jan 6, 2011)

There is so much more oil in the ground than anyone wants to admit! The Bakken shale put this nation into near the leading producer status in spite of all the governments efforts to stop it by not permitting guvmint controlled land and forbidding pipelines. My oil rights are fifty miles from where drilling stopped when the glut took control. The same shale is under my land. I won't live to see it developed----so don't talk to me about oil depletion!


----------



## BernhardHeuvel (Mar 13, 2013)

Ha ha. You missed the problem. There will be oil out there even in hundred or two hundred years. Problem is, we can't dig it out without using more energy as it holds. In terms of money: would you invest 5$ if you get only 1$ back? 

If it would be only money, that could be override somehow. But it is energy-related. You can't put five energy units into the oil drilling, to gain only one energy unit back. That's energy suicide.

I hope, mankind comes up with more ideas other than holzgas burning (to replace 1 gallon of gas you need 100 pound of wood...), fracking or other intensivations of old school techniques. Where's innovation when you need it? 

What's the problem with having a good backup ready? If it is not for you, it maybe useful for your kids or grandchildren. Keep them in the beekeeping business.


----------



## Roland (Dec 14, 2008)

Bernhard - do not believe everything you read. Recheck your numbers on hotzbrenner efficiency. There is a good article on a long term run done somewhere near Uruguay or Paraguay. 

Listen to VanceG. He is sitting on so much cheap oil that it will take his lifetime for them to get to the oil where he is. The doomsayers do not want you to know about it.

Crazy Roland


----------



## HarryVanderpool (Apr 11, 2005)

Drill, baby drill!
4 - 5 gallons per hour at up to 60 MPH!
Times-a-wasting!


----------



## lissa123 (Feb 22, 2018)

babybee said:


> Has anyone tried the hummerbee turbo 2?


 Hummerbee Turbo is now more powerful, smoother, and faster than ever.


----------



## johno (Dec 4, 2011)

Yup solar power is the thing, why we are planning a pipeline to the sun to get all the energy we need. Wait you say the heat from the sun will prevent you from building that pipeline. Do you think we are stupid we have already thought about that and we will build the pipeline at night. LOL
Johno


----------



## sakhoney (Apr 3, 2016)

Dang Harry - a 60 MPH fork lift with 351 motor? - need to mount a tow bar on the front of the truck. truck ever break down instead of pulling the fork lift - have fork lift pull truck. How good is it at lower speeds? (or is that yet to be seen)


----------



## HarryVanderpool (Apr 11, 2005)

Sakhoney, it does really well at all speeds.
For one thing, there is no worry or sensation of tipsiness.
Heavy loads lifted up high are no worry,
One of the best things is NO TRAILER!
When you are done loading, you back up to the truck, throw a toggle switch and quickly drop the tongue onto the hitch from the driver's seat.
I wouldn't trade it for anything.


----------



## MTN-Bees (Jan 27, 2014)

I thought Hummerbee was going back to the Kubota Diesel engine ?


----------

