2016 A.R.E CX Canopy- design, mpg issue

Hold on I can't get a pic off my iPhone right now so I will have to get the Taco out of the garage for some poser shots. Stand by..

 

Glad your overland is working out. However that is not the cap that is at fault. It is the Cx that has terrible sight lines that looks and acts like a parachute. That was sent from the factory to my dealer and not given a good inspection from the factory. It's nice to see such a thrilling response about are when my perspective is just getting ripped off and kicked in the teeth buying a lemon of a product. You drop 2k on a product and expect it to perform and be a working tool for your truck. Not something that changes the aerodynamics to hinder fuel economy. Ive never bought anything in my life with such vague expectations. Usually you buy something for what it's intended purpose is. This caps purpose is to improve fuel economy. However it doesn't. It has dropped it significantly. Andy has even pointed out in this thread it may or may not. Hey here's 2000 dollars Im buying this product for what you state in your brochure its supposed to do. Oh well it may or may not do what you thought it is supposed to do. Are Cx cap is a joke don't waste your money

 

While I sympathize with your struggles with the CX cap, the purpose of a cap is not to improve fuel economy. It is to cover the bed of your truck.
The report that ARE uses in the brochure is misleading though, as the coefficient of drag increased with a square cap, reducing MPG. It was only for a new cap design did drag decrease. This new cap design is not manufactured by ARE. Based on this study, you should see a decrease in fuel efficiency with a square cap like the CX. Obviously this is a controlled study with a specific truck and designs and environmental factors will change results.

I am surprised that ARE quotes this report as it could lead to problems, like the ones in this thread.

study results (I am assuming these are the correct numbers, found online)


new cap design used in study (I am assuming this is the cap, found online)


Even though ARE is not directly stating that a cap they sell actually increases MPG, you could make a strong argument they are. *Sorry they actually are with the TW model, none of the others though.

This only states they affect fuel economy. Which is true.


But this implies it is for the better. Which it is, but (based on the quoted report) not for anything they manufacture.

 

There's my gap. It's lower than the absolute top of the roof line bit a smidge taller than the end of the cab roof.

 

Is the X series based on the CX mold?

 

Yes it is!

 

that sucks.

 

But is the X available for the '16 Tacoma? I was told it was not and with no ETA on development.

 

it isn't but if it's based on the CX mold, and nothing changes, it will suffer the same problem

 

Thank you for posting these images of your V. My now former '16 CX for whatever reason (A.R.E hopefully will determine), sat and angled differently. I think we can all now agree CX and V come from different molds. Going forward on this thread, thinking maybe V customers are golden. Any CX '16 owners feedback whether you have issues or not are welcome to chime in.

 

Hi everyone, here is some more info regarding the CX series cab height debate. These aren't excuses or anything, just information from our R&D teams:

- We use the crown of the cab to base our height decision, not where the cab roof slopes down and ends. If we made it the same height as the end of the cab roof, we feel very strongly the cap would look really short and odd. It's not just a feeling either, we've tested this in prior years.

- Working with my engineers, we measured and determined the V Series mold is actually 1/16" taller than the CX mold at the cab.

 

The X Series is not available as of right now and I do not have an expected release date as of right now.

 

Fyi, there's my former '16 CX's gap:

 

This thread has been interesting—and helpful. I’m looking forward to getting my V Series installed as soon as it comes in.
Thanks for the extra effort @areaccessories and @.劉煒. Good luck @pocketsmcaaron... Keep us posted!

 

Can you explain to me after you get the returned '16 CX, why my old CX on my '2nd gen didn't have these issues discussed on this thread?

 

maybe the cab on the 16 slopes more at the back making the issue more apparent? just a guess.

 

I will do my best, but even though both trucks are Tacomas, comparing the two is not an apples to apples comparison. We had to completely redesign all of our products for the 2016, and as far as we are concerned, comparing the 2nd gen Tacoma to a F150 is just the same as comparing it to the 2016 Tacoma.

 

Hope A.R.E. gets their cx mold figured quick before anymore leave their plant. Im stoked with the overland though.

 

Your second photo makes me glad I ordered the windoors (w/ vents). Looking forward to getting it installed. (I purchased my Tacoma from Kendall too.)

 

It's kind of what it visually looked like to me and my mpg odometer.