A few months back, Darin and Ben (EM’s founders) asked me to review the new ScanGauge-E. I gladly accepted and tried it out for a few weeks. You can see the full review here. For the blog we’ll keep it short and to the point.

First up, we’ll look at some of the limitations of the ScanGauge-E. The first thing I noticed was that it only has one cable connector on it. The ScanGauge-II has two, one on the back and one on the front. This isn’t a big deal unless it interferes with how you want to mount the ScanGauge, or on the off chance you want to daisy chain two or more ScanGauge-Es together.

I was able to daisy chain my ScanGauge-II from my car with the ScanGauge-E on the end of the chain though.

Probably the biggest thing most users will note is that the ScanGauge-E only shows two gauges instead of the ScanGauge-II’s four gauge display. While this isn’t quite as nice, Linear Logic has done a few things to negate this limitation.

First off, they have added a bar graph to the left of the display. The graph always tracks MPG over time. However, the scale of the graph, or how it displays information is configurable. By default, the graph’s zero (halfway) shows as your trip average. Therefore you know if you’re doing better or worse than your current average. This is a pretty nice setup.

You can also set the graph’s zero point to a set MPG. They call this “GOAL”, and you can manually set whatever MPG you want as your zero point (0-255). With GOAL you can see if you are hitting the MPG you want or not. You could even set GOAL to the EPA rating of the car to see how well you’re doing compared to it. In addition, you can change the time scale of the graph to show a history of 20 seconds to 16.5 minutes.

Second, they have added gauge sets. You can scroll through the gauge sets with the left buttons. There are three default (not customizable) gauge sets, and two customizable sets. The default gauge sets show instant and trip MPG, the next shows trip CO2 emissions and today’s CO2, and the third shows trip fuel cost and today’s fuel cost. In addition to those three default gauge sets, you can make your own two custom gauge sets like you do with the ScanGauge-II. The buttons on the right cycle through the available gauges just as normal. While using the ScanGauge-E I found these gauge sets to be extremely useful. I really wish the ScanGauge-II had this same feature now.

The last things that the ScanGauge-E doesn’t have is the X-gauges, and performance features. The X-gauges are really nice if you own a hybrid since you can get info on your battery pack and a few other nifty things. I use them all the time with my PHEV Prius. I definitely don’t like to see them go. The performance features you loose out on are 0-60 timing, 1/4 mile timing, and 60-0 timing. But being fuel economy nerds, those are of little use to us anyway!

Let’s move on to what Linear Logic has added to the ScanGauge-E. It does have several features that the ScanGauge-II does not have. I already talked about the MPG graph and the gauge sets. In addition, the ScanGauge-E also calculates CO2 emissions. They have added two new gauges that calculate the CO2 emissions of your vehicle. The first one is “CO2″ on the display, it shows how many pounds/kilograms of CO2 your car has put out on the current trip. The next one is “TCO”, and it shows how many pounds/kilograms CO2 your car has put out for the entire day. In the trip meter section you can also see how many pounds/kilograms you’ve put out for the entire tank too.

In conclusion, I don’t think the SGe it is for everyone. But, it’ll be a very good fit for some people, including those looking to save money. You get almost all the features of the ScanGauge-II, but at 2/3rds the price (about $50 savings). That makes the payback much quicker. I think my ScanGauge-II paid for itself quite fast. That makes the ScanGauge-E a no brainer if you’re looking to save money. The other group of people I’d suggest this to would be the more casual ecodrivers out there. Its a nice gauge, gives lots of info and will help increase your mileage. There isn’t too much to look at on the screen; it’s smaller and fits in nooks a bit easier.

All that being said, I wouldn’t recommend the SGe to one specific group of people: the hardcore hypermilers. These folks  love info and will use every bit they can get their hands on to increase their mileage. That means needing the 4 gauges up all the time to optimize driving. I also wouldn’t necessarily recommend the ScanGauge-E to hybrid owners. The loss of the X-gauges is a big price to pay for hybrid owners who can gain a lot of functionality through them.

Of course, EcoModder sells both the ScanGauge-E and the ScanGauge-II. They can both be found in the EcoModder Store.

This post is a continuation/generalization/more organized version of my earlier blog post.

There are a lot of improvements possible for internal combustion engines (aka ICE’s).  It helps to list the areas that are causing losses, to start:

– The geometry of the physical layout of the piston, connecting rod and the crankshaft is less than ideal.  The connecting rod needs to be ~60 degrees past top dead center to get the best leverage on the crankpin; but the pressure from the fuel ignition occurs much earlier than this; when the connecting rod is essentially trying to bend the crankshaft sideways.  The motion of the piston is necessarily sinusoidal.

- The power stroke is only 25% of the full cycle, and there is a lot of mass that has to be accelerated, stopped and accelerated again.

- The valvetrain has to physically resist being moved, and it has to work against the air flows.

- The piston tends to scrape the sides of the cylinder, because it would “rather” twist that stay straight.  The rings must exert friction on the cylinder.

- The oil must be pumped through little tiny passageways.

- Electricity must be generated.

- An ICE is a self-powered air pump, in essence.  Air flow and the pressures generated, and the cyclical nature of them cause resonances, and backpressures, and the gasses become spring-like.

- Small volumes, like the space above the top ring and the top edge of the piston, trap unburned fuel because the flame cannot reach it.

- Everything flexes and springs — the crankshaft and the camshaft flex torsionally and longitudinally, the piston vibrates and distorts, as do the cylinders.  Valves bounce and stretch and distort into potato chip shapes.

The list goes on…  The net result is a typical internal combustion engine that uses ~20% of the energy in the fuel for output motion at best, and requires a transmission to keep the torque of the engine relatively close to the speed of the vehicle.

So, knowing all this, how can we make incremental or wholesale improvements?

+ Offsetting the crankshaft center away from the power downstroke gives the connecting rod some better mechanical leverage — but is the compression stroke adversely affected?

+ Variable valve timing allows the torque to be available over a broader range of RPM’s.

+ Valves can be electrically/hydraulically moved in both directions (opened and closed) to avoid fighting the springs.  This also makes it easier to use subtle or more abrupt adjustments to the valve timing.

+ Use cams rather than the crankshaft, to gain a lot more mechanical leverage, and to allow the piston motion to be controlled by the designer; like the Revetec:

Revetec trilobate cam drive animation

This particular design also reduces piston scrape (but it introduces some tendency to rotate the piston within the cylinder).  It also avoid big changes in crankcase pressures (in configurations with even numbers of pistons).  This design effectively doubles the efficiency.

+ Use the Atkinson valve timing, like the Prius does, which has a lot of overlap of the exhaust valve with the beginning of the intake downstroke (I think?) so that there is built in exhaust gas recirculation (aka EGR).  This also effectively doubles the efficiency.

Hmmm, how well would a 2-cylinder Revetec with Atkinson cycle and electrically activated valves work?

+ Use a rotary design that reduces the reciprocal motion.

+ Use a 2-stroke design to cut the parasitic losses in half.

++ Use a continuous burn design to further reduce the cyclical nature of the engine; or at least reduce the time between power cycles.

+ Figure out how to reduce waste heat from being produced, and then try to use the remaining excess heat to produce output.

What are other ideas to improve ICE’s?

<<<<   >>>>

While power plant efficiency is a very important factor to the overall vehicle’s efficiency, there are lots of ways to improve the rolling chassis, as well.

Rolling efficiency is the most basic function of any vehicle; however it may be powered.  This involves:

* Tires, wheels, wheel bearings, suspension, wheel alignment (loaded and in motion).

* Ride height and attitude — both of these are critical to good aerodynamic drag, and we should not leave them to chance.

* All aspects of aerodynamics: overall shape and size, specific details, ventilation of the passenger compartment, motor/drivetrain cooling/temperature control.  By using good passive air management, we can both improve the air flow around and through the vehicle; and avoid needing a power input to actively solve these requirements.

* Weight and friction of all moving parts (if you can avoid power steering and power brakes, this reduces the losses of operating the vehicle).

+ Temperature stability affects a lot of things: the people, and the drivetrain in particular.  Learning from buildings, we should use insulation and low-e glazing to help stabilize the temperatures.

+ Braking should be regenerative: either electrical whenever possible, or, we should use hydraulic motors and a small accumulator; instead of friction brakes which produce waste heat.

+ Especially if the brakes are regenerative hydraulic, then the suspension should also be regenerative; and use the shock pistons to also pressurize the accumulator.  If possible, the entire suspension springing should be hydraulic, I think.  Because flexing springs also produce waste heat.  Alternatively, the suspension could be electromagnetic.

Can you add to this list of improvements, please?

I think that the X-Prize competition is fulfilling the objective of focusing on vehicle efficiency.  Starting with the results so far, I am hoping to contribute to the discussion and to the process.

Here’s the link to the PDF that shows the results of the X-Prize Knockout Round.

The measured MPGe of the teams in this round — remember this is the Combined number from the City, Urban, and Highway tests:

American HyPower    54.5    Hybrid
Spira        84.8    ICE (E10)
FVT eVaro        152.5    Hybrid (serial)
Zap        111.0    EV
Tata        134.3    EV
Electric Raceabout    128.1    EV
AMP         86.7    EV
West Philly (MS)    63.5    Hybrid
West Philly (Alt)    53.7    Hybrid
Global-E        50.4    Hybrid
Li-ion         182.3    EV
Aptera        140.1    EV
TW4XP        107.0    EV
WWU        92.5    Hybrid
Tango        86.8    EV
BITW        51.1    ICE (diesel)
X-Tracer (#72)    180.0    EV
X-Tracer (#79)    188.8    EV
Illuminati        119.8    EV
Enginer        53.0    Hybrid (electric/ICE w/ steam heat recovery)
Edison2 (#95 Alt)    97.0    ICE (E85)
Edison2 (#97 MS)    101.4    ICE (E85)
Edison2 (#98 MS)     80.3    ICE (E85)

I think these results speak for themselves!  The electric cars are in general, giving much better efficiency, and several of those (the X-Tracer, FVT, Tata, and the Aptera) also have excellent acceleration.  The Li-ion,  Illuminati, TW4XP, and Edison2 (among others) were not as quick — the Li-ion and Edison2 cars are through to the finals, though.  I am sad that neither the FVT eVaro nor the Illuminati Seven made it through, due to (relatively) minor technical reasons.  They failed at the moment (which is how racing/competitions work, to be sure), but I think their problems are solvable, and the strong merits of their vehicles are obvious.

The Aptera is through, but still a bit disappointing — it’s aero is equal or better to anybody (save the X-Tracer), but their efficiency seems to have suffered.  It barely betters the Tata, which is “just” a well executed EV conversion of a decent but ordinary hatchback.  The Global-E had an ignition mapping error that made their number lower.

So the lowest MPGe of an electric drive; the AMP’d Sky was 86.7MPGe (Tango was 86.8), while the best of a car with an internal combustion is the Edison2 #97 at 101.4.  (Actually, the FVT has a ICE powered generator onboard, but did not need it *at all* in the X-Prize. It would be great to see how the eVaro does for MPGe in charging mode!)  The hybrids all were all below the 67MPGe — except the WWU at 92.5 (and the FVT).

The average of the 12 vehicles using electric drive MPGe (I’m including the FVT in this) was 134.7MPGe
The average of the 6 hybrids (not including the FVT) was 61.26MPGe (please note, these are all parallel hybrids?)
The average of the 5 internal combustion drive cars was 82.92MPGe

The X-Prize results table does not include weights, but I daresay that the average weight of the internal combustion cars was lowest (the Edison2 and Spira are all much lighter!).

The best aero drag is on the X-Tracer, followed by a very close group including the Aptera, Edison2, Li-ion.

As many have said, the X-Prize is setting a very high standard (which is both good and bad).  They are essentially looking for the complete package, and virtually no glitches.  Even the well financed/professional teams had several glitches.  I would have set up the X-Prize a bit differently; to measure (and therefore emphasize and encourage) the four main things that need to be improved to get the maximum efficiency.

Those four critical things are; from most important to least important (as I am interpreting the Knockout results):

* Drivetrain Efficiency
* Aerodynamic Drag
* Weight
* Rolling Efficiency

I would have scored these in relative terms, which pits each vehicle against the others (rather than setting standards that are somewhat arbitrary).  On drivetrain efficiency, I would either use a dynamometer or the best result of the three economy tests: the City, Urban, or Highway.  (This will indicate what vehicle is good for a particular role, and measures the drivetrain at it’s best.)

For Drivetrain Efficiency, the points awarded would be the best MPGe x Number of Seats.  So, using the Overall MPGe for 23 vehicles that competed in the Knockout Round listed above (we do not have the separate measured results from the City, Urban, and Highway test): the X-Tracer #79 would be 188.8 x 2 = 377.6 points, and so on.  The best mainstream MPGe was the Illuminati Seven: 119.8 x 4 = 479.2 points.

Aerodynamic Drag would use the Weight and the Rolling Efficiency, and the results of a Coastdown test to determine the Cd of each car.  I would take the inverse of the number of entrants divided by the Cd, then multiplied by the Number of Seats: So the Aptera and the Li-ion and the Edison2 alternate cars may be at the top: 23 (22, 21) / 0.15 x 2 = ~306.6 and ~293.3 and ~280 points respectively.  The Edison2 mainstream cars would get 20 and 19 (or higher depending on their Cd) resulting in 20 (19) / 0.15 x 4 = 533.3 and 506.6 points respectively.

For Weight, I would take the lightest one and score it by inverting the number of Entrants x the Number of Seats – the Spira would get 23 x 2 (seats) giving it 46 points.  The Edison2 alternate car would be next with 22 x 2 = 44 points.  The two Edison2 mainstream cars would be 21 x 4 = 84 points and 20 x 4 = 80 points respectively; and so on.  This give priority to the cars that seat more people, and it is realistic in terms of what is achievable in the real world.

Rolling Efficiency includes tires and alignment and would be prorated for weight – a slower coastdown test using a ramp would be needed.  I think an inverted number of the entrants would be a fair way to award points.

Obviously, all four of the critical factors are interrelated, and they all would be reflected in the Overall MPGe number – but testing for them and awarding points (in some manner) for them separately, helps focus the designs on the most important aspects – and more importantly helps demonstrate their performance; whether or not the designs get ALL of them right and in the right balance, and if there is something that lags (or breaks) and the vehicle is DQ’d, people will still be able to judge the merits of the design.

We could quibble about how each of these was scored – I am just throwing this out there.  At this moment in time, I feel that the emphasis on the safety, and meeting the letter of the rules, etc. are  distracting the designers from the main point; of maximizing the efficiency.  Obviously, for a finished, production, reasonably priced, appealing vehicle – ALL of these things are also critically important.  These would be determined by finished vehicle, and the buying public.  But, I feel that an emphasis on the overall efficiency, and the four most important factors that directly contribute to maximum efficiency, would have better served the purposes of the X-Prize.

One of the most important things I learned while I was at the X-Prize Knockout competition was: do not dismiss or ignore anybody!  There is a LOT more than meets the eye with all of the entrants, and no matter the results, all the designs have strengths – and weaknesses that are all very informative.

I also was floored by the height of passion by so many people.  The sight of Oliver Kuttner with tears streaming down his face; returning from the starting line of the City Test with the first of his cars about to actually get to the heart of the matter; moves me to tears, as well.  And I’m quite sure that every person involved in the X-Prize, who has put in a similar Herculean effort, feels the same.

I want to try to list steps that car makers could/should take to improve the fuel efficiency, in approximate order of cost:

• The most obvious improvement to cars, would be to mold the plastic on the front of the vehicle to be smooth and round, with grill openings that are sized (and placed) only as required to cool the engine. Some new plastic bumper covers and grill pieces could be snapped onto cars. Flush covers should be used on all lights. Fairing pieces could be added to side mirrors. Hood gap gaskets, and streamlined wheel covers are easy, too.

• Sealing all the seams and joints (with gaskets/backing flanges) in the high pressure areas of the vehicle, & flush side glass.

• Smooth floor pans with no sharp protrusions — this is part of the drag just as much as the parts of the car that can be easily seen. Smoothing the underside with covers (like the GM EV-1, the 3^rd gen Prius, the 1939 Maybach, as well as the VW 1 Liter car, the 1937 Schlör “Pillbug” and the Aptera).

• Transmission ratios should be optimized for efficiency at normal driving speeds. Higher gearing with 6-7 speeds would be optimal (smaller engines need more gears to work efficiently); or CVT transmissions.

• Narrower and lighter, LRR (low rolling resistance) tires should be used. Use very high quality wheel bearings (ceramic or precision steel) and make alignment robust and easy to service.

• Average & “instant” MPG displays, that are on all the time; so the driver can compare them. The new Honda Insight, the 3rd gen Prius, and some Ford models, have excellent displays that help the driver be more efficient; with different color backgrounds indicating how efficiently you are driving.

• Throttle control (rather than cruise/speed control!) that maintains even throttle in a user-set speed range, with minimal throttle increases to maintain the speed in that range. This should also decrease throttle and coast when the speed is higher than the user set range.

• Tire pressure monitor, that warns the driver when the tires get below the recommended pressure (which could be adjusted upwards if the driver wants to run a pressure up to the tire sidewall maximum).  Or better yet: fill tires with foam, so they would never deflate, and minimize rolling resistance.
  

• Efficient & effective fresh air flow through the vehicle, with intakes on a high pressure area, and exhaust vent(s) out the back of the vehicle into the low pressure wake zone, providing passive ventilation; and also reducing aerodynamic drag.

• Coat all the window glass to exclude as much heat as possible. With effective fresh air flow (see above) this may completely avoid the need for A/C (see below).

• On defrost mode, the A/C should only come on automatically at maximum defrost (if at all), and it should be on a timer of ~1 minute, and it should always be toggled on/off by the driver. I would prefer to make A/C on the defrost setting optional.

• Efficient lights such as LED’s and HID, that use a little power as possible while functioning as well (or better) than incandescent lights.

• Lower consumption electronics, such as A/C, fans and audio systems. Some/all of these could be powered by solar PV panels with a robust battery system; even in conventional internal combustion engine (aka ICE) powered cars.

• Active grill, that opens when more cooling air is needed, but remains closed – and is more aerodynamic most of the time. This can also be done passively with the right airfoil shapes that effectively closes off air flow when the velocity goes up.

• Wheel alignment and brake drag needs to be minimized, easy to adjust, and robust – to maximize rolling efficiency.

• Fully ducted engine cooling system, with the intake down low on the front, and the exhaust flows into a low pressure zone; minimizing the size of the radiator and the reducing the “internal” drag as much as possible. The Britten V1100 (racing) motorcycle is an good example of how this could work.  NASCAR has shown that for a fully ducted cooling system, you only need 16 sq in for every 100HP.
  

• Video cameras and screens in place of side mirrors. This would help a lot with aerodynamics.  An example of this starts in post #167: http://ecomodder.com/forum/showthread.php/scion-xa-aero-mods-2969-17.html

• Automatic engine shut off and start up; at least with CVT (or automatic) transmissions — and possibly with standard shifts, based on having both the clutch and the brake applied? The Toyota/Scion iQ will have this feature.

• Lean burn in low vacuum conditions. Use variable valve timing to gain efficiencies.

• Store hot coolant in a vacuum insulated tank, to speed up warm-up time; a-la what the 2^nd generation Prius does. Or, do what the 3^rd generation Prius does: heat the coolant quickly using the exhaust heat. Preheating intake air would also help fully vaporize the fuel; making it higher efficiency.

• Tighten up wheel openings, and always use aerodynamically designed wheels/covers, with rear wheel skirts (at least optionally).

• Make roof racks removable. Years ago, I saw a “papoose” add-on storage system that locked onto the back of the car, with a single caster wheel to support the weight — it tucked completely into the air flow behind the car, forming a boattail; and it would be a great way to add storage space when needed; that did not affect how you drove very much. It could actually greatly improve the overall aerodynamic drag of the vehicle.

• Regenerative shock absorbers: MIT has a method of using hydraulics to drive a generator, eliminating the need for a mechanically driven alternator; or, to charge the electric drive (aka traction) batteries. These can also be used to lift and level the vehicle, to improve aerodynamics under different loads.

• Use a composite wheel/tire that has low weight, very low rolling resistance (by being strong enough to stay round), and low aerodynamic drag, no worries about inflation — and tune the suspension to work with said wheel/tire. (see item above) This could gain even more energy, since very little would be damped by the tires.

• For new 4-cylinder internal combustion engine designs, the crankshaft could be split with a hydraulic coupling that can automatically disengage two cylinders completely; saving all the pumping and friction losses, for situations when 2 cylinders are enough to provide the required torque to move the vehicle. There are also cam-driven designs that about double the efficiency of the ICE.

• Nissan is (supposedly) going to reduce their cars weight by ~15%. I think all cars could be reduced by 20-30% with smarter steel fabrications, smarter use of materials. Here’s a site that shows a steel chassis that is 25% lighter and nearly twice as stiff/strong as a conventional steel chassis:

  http://www.bluescopesteel.com.au/go/news/ultra-light-steel-auto-body-ulsab-project/

• Multiple car door latches could be used to increase strength & safety of the chassis — helps to further reduce weight, increase strength & rigidity, without requiring an unusual entry method (such as the VW 1 Liter car or the Loremo).

• Make every vehicle with a plug-in electric w/ serial hybrid ICE drive train, with regenerative braking. Use a cam driven engine that spins the armature and the stator in both (counter-rotating) directions, to charge the traction batteries. The engine could have rotary valves to reduce parasitic losses. It would run at it’s ideal RPM to drive the torque load of the alternator.

• Rework the overall shape of the vehicle to reduce drag. Cd of 0.13 – 0.25 are achievable! The 1937 Schlör“Pillbug” seats 5-7 people and has a Cd of 0.13 – this car should used a model!

In an effort to increase the blog’s focus on ecomodding and some of the great content that comes out of our users, I’ve decided to begin a series of posts on an ongoing project coming out of my own garage. The idea of swapping a Honda Insight hybrid drivetrain into my CRX began at this year’s Green Drive Expo, where despite my good mileage I realized I just couldn’t compete with the first generation Insight.

With that in mind I had two options: buy an Insight or ecomod the CRX. Buying an Insight would’ve been easier, but more expensive, less fun, and frankly my CRX is still in great shape. So, I decided to shop around for a totaled I could strip down for parts to recycle into my CRX.

Having found one, the swap became just a matter of doing it, which is where I currently am, and that’s where this update comes into play. The swap is half-finished, with all the old having been stripped out with the new ready to go in.

However, removing everything is clearly the easy part, with the second half of the project being the troublesome attempts to put things back together and make them play nice with each other. At this point there isn’t much to say, but in the upcoming posts I will take you through how I tackle several problems in making this whole thing come together.

Look out for upcoming posts on:

• Custom engine mounts
• Integrating the obd2 wiring system into the obd0 harness
• Adding the IMA hybrid system
• Tweaking the IRX for superb gas mileage

To stay up to date on the nitty-gritty, follow along with my project thread on the forums.

In the pantheon of very efficient production cars, there are perhaps three Hondas that truly stand out: the first generation Insight hybrid, the lean burn Civic VX, and the CRX HF.

Recently, a CRX HF owner further cemented that car’s status on the list by achieving a stunning 118 mpg (US) in a fuel economy rally in New York state.

The rally, organized by the Adirondack Motor Enthusiasts Club (AMEC), took place August 23 over 104 miles of scenic, lightly travelled, winding roads through the southern Adirondack mountains (with admittedly very MPG-friendly speed limits of 45 to 55 mph).

It’s fair to say the 118 mpg performance that Chang Ho Kim coaxed from his modified 1989 CRX surprised event officials.  The marshalls – who observed each of the 25 competitors’ vehicles being filled to the brim both at the start and finish for the most accurate MPG calculations – brought Chang’s CRX back to the pump several times at the end to ensure they’d squeezed as much fuel as possible into its tank.

(For comparison, the next highest scores were 106 mpg (US) from an ecomodded 1998 Geo Metro/Pontiac Firefly and 90 mpg (US) from a 2000 VW Jetta TDI – more details here.)

In stock form, the 2nd generation Honda CRX HF is a good platform for fuel economy. It’s light (1830 lbs), has a small 1.5L 62 horsepower engine, and relatively tall gearing.  It’s rated at 41 city / 50 highway / 45 combined mpg (US) by the EPA’s  revised 2008 ratings.

Modifications, mechanical & racing experience helped secure win

How did Chang Ho Kim pull a 118 mpg rabbit out of his hat?  EcoModder recently spoke to Chang to shed some light on his background, his CRX and his driving techniques.

EM: Let’s start with a bit about yourself.  What you do for work & fun?

CHK: I am a mechanic in my own shop, FunHondas, in Maynard, Massachusetts.  I mostly do general repair and maintenance of Honda/Acura cars.  I do a lot of tire work as I am a preferred installer for www.tirerack.com.  You can type in zipcode 01754 to see what is said about me and my shop on their website.

For fun I like to travel and go camping with my family. I also enjoy photography.

EM: Is it true this was your first fuel economy competition?

CHK: This was my first fuel economy run.  I had never even heard of it before I saw the post from the AMEC organizers on the New England Region SCCA (Sports Car Club of America) web site.

EM: So you’ve got racing experience then?  That would explain your skill behind the wheel.

CHK: My passion has been for autocross.  I started autocrossing in 1991.  I have placed as high as 3rd place at the SCCA Solo Nationals in a HS 89 Civic Si.  Last year I campaigned a DS 00 Integra Type R.  This year I am running my ST 89 Civic Si.  I also have a STX 89 Civic Si that I have trophied with at the Solo Nationals.

Recently I started to rallycross a M2 90 Civic GSR and have been having lots of fun playing in the dirt and snow and ice.  I am currently the season points leader in M2 for NER/SCCA.  That is mostly due to the winter events where my studded Nokian Hakka5 tires do really well.  I still have a lot to learn about driving in gravel.

I have ice raced my 01 Integra Type R, autocross style, using Nokian tires and have done very well, beating the AWD cars in the studded tire class with my FWD car on studded Hakka5 tires.

EM: OK, so you’ve obviously got experience with car control & precision.  Where did you pick up your fuel saving techniques?

I spent a lot of time on the internet before the competition starting at the AMEC site and linking to many others: Aerocivic.com gave me a lot of ideas for aerodynamic modifications.  EcoModder.com gave me many tips on driving technique.

EM: Before we talk about your driving techniques, tell us a bit about your car preparation and mods.

CHK: It’s a 89 Honda CRX HF with about 150,000 miles on the odometer that I got from a client.

General maintenance before the fuel economy rally included:

• I had the AC fixed, I hate hot and muggy.
• Redline MTL in the tranny and Mobil1 0w20 in the engine.
• new Honda airfilter, cap, rotor, wires.  They all needed replacing anyway.

Modifications before the rally included:

• Tires: low rolling resistance 155/65/14 Nokian HakkaR snow tires, brand new for the event, pumped up to 50psi mounted on Honda 14×5 alloy wheels
• Shocks: Konisport, revalved with SPSS1 valving, double adjustable, shortened body, set to soft
• Springs: Ground Control coilovers with 350 front 250 rear springs.
• Lowered car 2 inches, front camber at -3.5, toe set to zero front and rear, zero thrust angle
• Front wind deflector and rear wheel skirts made from thin polycarbonate, aluminum duct tape, self tapping screws and 3/4″ aluminum band
• masking tape to cover all panel gaps / seams, passenger door handle (forgot to do the driver side door handle)
• removed passenger side mirror
• I added lightness by removing the passenger seat, spare tire and tools, floor mats
• 6 pound race battery.

EM: tell us about the driving techniques you used.

CHK: I had a small cooler with a little ice and a small towel to cool myself off as I drove with the windows closed and the AC off.

The race type suspension meant I had better momentum coming out of the turns so less need to gas after a turn.

Where safe, I took a classic race line to maximize momentum.  If I had to gas in a turn, I took the shortest line to minimize distance.

Pulse & glide where appropriate.

EM: Did you use fuel economy instrumentation?  Navigation?

CHK: The HF has an upshift light that I find annoying.  I used a Garmin Nuvi 760 to keep track of my average speed.

EM: Any plans for future economy competitions?

CHK: I suppose I have to come back in 2010 to defend my title with AMEC, but we will see what next year brings and if I still have the CRX.  If I do come back, it will probably have a boattail and I will be more careful with the fillup at the start and not spill any at the finish fillup.

EM: Chang, thanks for the interview and congratulations again on your win!

—

For more coverage of the AMEC event see the complete forum thread.

This weekend marked the third annual Adirondack Motor Enthusiast Club’s fuel economy competition, which takes place on the beautiful back roads just to the west of Albany, NY.

This was the first year that EcoModder came out to the event, and it was definitely a great time. Event organizer Mike Kamm included, 7 EcoModders came to the event and competed in two of the three categories.

The course was a 104 mile loop through the Adirondacks on winding roads that challenged not just the average ecodriver, but would challenge any driver. Unlike many fuel economy courses, this one had huge hills that challenged drivers to work hard and pick up mileage wherever they could.

All told, EcoModder took home 4 of the 6 awards its members were eligible for. In the diesel/hybrid category member tasdrouille took home first place in his 2000 Jetta TDI with an astounding 90 mpg. Second place went to Matt Herring in his new Toyota Prius, with an impressive 76 mpg over the course.

In the gasoline non-hybrid category, EcoModder had four competitors. Though Robert Smalls and Wonderboy did not take home prizes, they both got well over 200% of their EPA ratings. Robert drove his Subaru Legacy to a very impressive 47 mpg while Wonderboy made a record run of 65 mpg in his Civic EX.

I took home the 3rd place prize, with 83 mpg in my 91 Honda CRX, with my EcoModder co-founder Darin taking second place with a very impressive 106 mpg in his Pontiac Firefly (Geo Metro). The 1st prize went to Chang Ho Kim in his aeromodded 89 CRX, which shocked everyone with 118 mpg in his first fuel economy competition.

Also notable was event organizer Mike Kamm‘s 77 mpg Datsun B210. He would’ve easily taken the top prize in the historic class but instead decided to compete in the gasoline class and came in 4th place by less than  one-tenth of a gallon of gasoline.

Definitely an event we will be attending again next year!

Got Pruis solar roof envy? Evidently quite a lot of people do these days. But that doesn’t mean that you, too, cannot have your very own solar roof. However, the ecomodders taking the initiative to add solar to their cars are not doing it for comfort in the summer, but for fuel economy.

How does a solar roof increase fuel economy?

Well, for the average ecomodder, removing gasoline-hungry alternator is a big dream. However, the usual method of doing this is to add a deep discharge battery and plug it in at home, a big hassle that still leaves your car with a somewhat limited range.

Solar alleviates this problem by allowing you to trickle charge your battery for extended alternator-less trips and less need to plug in to recharge.

So, how are they doing it?

The DIY solar roof solution is simpler than you might think. Just build your own custom solar array…on your roof! If that sounds too complicated, check out ecomodder member gascort’s step by step process, and you’ll see that with a little elbow grease and a lot of courage, you too can have a solar roof.

Definitely one of the cooler ways to turn your vehicle into a gasoline-sun hybrid!

httpvhd://www.youtube.com/watch?v=voYLttw-N0E

Let’s face it, many of us have older cars. And cars, as they get older, develop all sorts of little, painful annoyances. One of those annoyances, which has gotten to me even since I first bought my 1991 CRX, was how the windshield wipers never really seemed to move the water off of the glass. It was like it stuck there, just to annoy me.

I finally discovered Rain-X, and while I don’t often sing the praises of commercial products, this is definitely one of the rare times when I will. Rain-X has done more than any other modification to make my car feel like new, and even allowed me to remove my rear wiper.

So, if you’re interested in just how easy it is to give your car a makeover, check out the video I made on the subject. Just wash, apply, rub in, repeat, and you’re done in no time flat!

With nearly 3000 vehicles in the EcoModder garage, most of them logging data for over a year, we decided it was time to crunch some numbers to see how EcoModders stacked up in terms of real fuel savings.

Well, the numbers are in. The average EcoModder gets 33.12 MPG, which is just a hair over 25% above the vehicle EPA ratings (at time of writing). This means that since joining the site, our members have saved over 65,000 gallons of gasoline when compared to the EPA ratings.

It’s not surprising that certain drivers can easily beat the EPA, but it is encouraging to know that thousands of drivers working together can consistently get fuel economy well above the EPA rating.

EcoModder member bondo is well known for his aerodynamic pickup bed cap, which he designed, builds, and sells himself. Recently he hit us over the head with another great aero design, this time a scale vehicle model he donated to the Ford Motor Company to help them pull through their current rough patch.

As you can see in the original thread, bondo built the model himself in his garage and chose Ford as the recipient because of their insistence to go it alone without federal bailout money and because he believes the company is under good stewardship. Personally, I think this this is a great design and Ford is lucky to have it. Congrats to bondo for putting it together.

(Photo: Egan Snow)

For a while now I’ve been mulling over a blog post featuring top online resources about EV conversions: sites that educate, facilitate and inspire.

I already had a short list of what I wanted to point to, but instead of wracking my brain to flesh it out, through chance I found myself mulling over nearly the same list I had in mind over at Nikki Bloomfield’s blog, aminorjourney.com.  (Nikki has plenty of EV experience: she owned and upgraded a City El, and has modified her Toyota Prius to plug-in operation.)

You will of course arrive at link #7 of Nikki’s list and may think, perhaps cynically, “well of course EcoModder would like this list.  It’s ON it!” (We’re recommended specifically for info about efficient driving techniques and aeromods.)

While it is generally true that flattery will get you everywhere, you’ll just have to believe me when I say finding EcoModder there was nothing more than an unexpected bonus (though entirely deserved, it can be argued).

Head on over to aminorjourney’s Ten Top DIY EV conversion links and read Nikki’s reasoning behind each of her selections:

1. www.evalbum.com
2. The EVDL
3. www.KiwiEV.com
4. DIYElectriccar.com
5. EVconvert.com
6. EVCapri.com
7. Ecomodder.com
8. EVparts.com
9. Project Forkenswift
10. WhiteZombie, Blue meanie and Plasmaboy

What do you think?  Are there any must-see or must-read conversion resources that are missing?  Let us know in the comments.

UPDATE: Just found this great link on electric car conversion issues.

What does a Ford Motor Company fuel economy technical expert do for fun at the end of the day?

He heads home to his own shop and custom builds an aerodynamically efficient, two-passenger, 3-wheel motorcycle capable of 125 mpg (US) at 65 mph (1.9 L/100 km @ 105 km/h) and a top speed of over 100 mph (161 km/h).  And then after using it for 3,200 miles (5,150 km), he puts it on eBay to make room in his garage for the next version which will be a plug-in hybrid.

“After working [on] improving conventional production car/truck fuel economy I wanted to try something with fewer constraints,” says EcoModder member John (HyperRocket).  Now there’s an understatement.

(It kind of makes you wonder how many house painters go home at the end of the day, budding Picassos, to toil on masterwork canvases…)

His street legal, 2-seat, tandem vehicle is registered as a motorcycle and was engineered for both high efficiency and fun:

• the drivetrain is from a Kawasaki Ninja: a 250cc liquid cooled, four stroke, DOHC 2 cylinder tuned with an exhaust gas analyzer for best efficiency & driveability

• six speed manual transmission

• weight: 505 lbs

• excellent 0.16 coefficient of drag, calculated through GPS-based coast down tests

• HID projector headlight up front, and LED’s elsewhere (front turn signals are integrated into the side mirrors for aerodynamics)

• safety features include 4 point seat belts, roll bar and front mounted IMPAXX crash foam as now used in NASCAR sides

John claims fuel efficiency of 105 mpg (US) (2.2 L/100 km) cruising on the highway at 65mph when equipped with the bling wheels and sporty gearing, and even better numbers with a couple of additional mods: “When equipped with the pictured motorcycle tires (not included) and a smaller rear sprocket it achieved 125 mpg @ 65mph.”  (1.9 L/100 km @ 105 km/h)

If you think a vehicle like this might draw attention, John confirms that with a good anecdote:  After being stopped by police and explaining the project to the curious officer, ‘back up’ was called in.  “Four squad cars showed up, several houses of neighbors came out and the whole thing turned into a spectacle. No ticket, everyone was genuinely interested in ecomodding!”

The trike’s eBay auction has a starting bid of $15,600 USD. While not questioning the design or workmanship that went into the machine, we wonder if that price will draw efficiency-minded bidders in these days of $2 per gallon gasoline.   Undoubtedly his work would have grabbed a lot of attention last summer, when fuel prices were driving people into a frenzy, paying utterly ridiculous prices for used Geo Metros to save money at the pumps.

Best of luck, John.   We’re looking forward to seeing what rolls out of your shop next!

—

Follow the discussion about the HyperRocket in the EcoModder forum

[imagebrowser=7]

This Saturday in Watkins Glen, NY was the annual Green Grand Prix, an event which celebrates fuel-efficient and alternative fuel vehicles. For the first time this year the event was split into two separate categories: the fuel economy competition and the time-speed-distance rally.

EcoModder had four vehicles come to represent the site in the fuel economy rally. Of those 4 vehicles (in three different categories), we took home three victories and posted the 1st and 3rd overall fuel economy numbers for the event.

The EcoModders

• 1998 Pontiac Firefly (aka Geo Metro): Darin Cosgrove (MetroMPG) took home 1st place in category 10, which housed all the out of production and weirdo vehicles. Although there was not a prize for it, he and his heavily ecomodded Firefly were recorded at 99.7 mpg and got the best fuel economy of any vehicle at the Green Grand Prix.
• 1991 Honda CRX: Benjamin Jones (SVOboy, author) pulled down 88.5 mpg, making it the third highest vehicle overall and winner of the 27-32 mpg (by EPA rating) class. The vehicle was sporting some hastily added ecomods as well as a lean burn engine swap and MPGuino.
• 1998 Honda Civic EX: Will Meredith (Wonderboy) has a lightly ecomodded Civic EX equipped with a Scangauge II to help tune the nut behind the wheel. The EX model was the least efficient Civic in Honda’s lineup that year, but Will still managed a very impressive 57 mpg with the car.
• 1993 Toyota Tercel: Tim Sullivan (McTimson) drove an unmodified 1993 Toyota Tercel. With only an MPGuino to guide him, Tim was able to ecodrive his way to victory in the 33-38 mpg class, rounding out the three victories for EcoModder.

The Green Grand Prix

The Green Grand Prix started at the Glen Motor Inn Motel outside of Watkins Glen, NY, a town well known for its racing heritage. The 77 mile course takes the drivers up Route 14 to Geneva and then down Route 96 back to Watkins Glen.

The course is mainly over roads with a 55 mile speed limit, and the drivers had 2 hours and 5 minutes to complete the fuel economy competition before incurring a penalty. Also included in that time was a mandatory 10 minute stop at a halfway point in Geneva, NY.

The course’s rolling hills were great for fuel economy and offered drivers and navigators a great view of Seneca Lake, one of New York’s famous Finger Lakes.

At the end of the competition drivers were monitored as they filled up in town and had their mileage recorded. These numbers were then used to calculate the fuel economy for the overall competition. Due to a number of factors, the most salient of which was fuel expansion, the numbers were a little high, but consistently so (except for the Priuses with their bladder gas tanks).

After the show all the competitors headed out to the local high school for the awards and vehicle show, which also included representations from local high schools that had competed in the Shell EcoMarathon competition.

Overall, the Green Grand Prix was a well-organized and great event. EcoModder will definitely be in attendance next year, hopefully with even more drivers. For more, check out the thread on the forums.

Every year in Watkins Glen, NY there is a great event called the Green Grand Prix. The GGP has two main competitions, one a time-speed-distance road rally for hybrids and alternative fuel vehicles, the other a fuel economy competition on major public roads around Seneca Lake.

This year we decided we’d show up for the fuel economy competition. Right now, the night beforehand, four of us are here at the Glen Motor Inn Motel waiting to race (as efficiently as possible) around Seneca Lake, competing in two different classes for modified vehicles.

Representing EcoModder are three cars and three drivers, all with ecomodded, fuel-sipping rides:

• Geo Metro: This Metro has been heavily modded with both aero and drivetrain mods, and will be competing in the 40-44 mpg (EPA) category.
• Honda Civic EX: The Civic has some aeromods but a stock drivetrain and a keen driver who will be watching the Scangauge trying to eke out every last drop.
• Honda CRX: I will be driving my CRX, which will sport some last minute ecomods as well as a redone Civic VX drivetrain in the 27-30 mpg category.

More updates to come tomorrow, but we’re hoping to take home a few victories for EcoModder. After the race there will be a car show with some pretty sweet rides, so we’ll be sure to post up the highlights.

Stay tuned!

httpvhd://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XNSon0kKsmY

There used to be a time when economy cars didn’t always have a passenger side mirror. For example, depending on the market, the CRX HF, which had a remarkable drag coefficient of 0.29, didn’t always come with one. Twenty-one years past the first production of the 2nd-generation CRX, we can’t speculate on Honda’s motivations, but judging by the fact that the low coefficient of drag is prominent in sales pamphlets, we can assume that aerodynamics had something to do with it.

Yesterday, I decided it would be a good time to take a high-tech approach to an old problem. It cost about $90 and took a few hours of my time, but now have a rear view camera in place of the mirror that once graced the side of my car. I hope you enjoy the video.

Seems like the European automakers are going all out on fuel economy these days. Opel has created an ecoFLEX version of their popular Insignia sedan, which due to some clever ecomodding has a low drag coefficient of 0.26 and scores a solid 45.2 MPG (US) in the European driving cycle.

ecoFLEX modifications include:

• additional panelling under the fuel tank;
• lowering the body 10 mm;
• adding a flexible front spoiler lip;
• reducing upper cooling openings;
• optimized gearing and final drive ratio on this six-gear manual transmission;
• specially-designed Michelin Primacy HP tires;
• shift recommendation dashboard display.

Definitely a solid sedan, but when will we see it on this side of the pond?

Source: TheAutoChannel from our forums

When was the last time you heard of a full-size work van getting better fuel economy than your average sedan? If you don’t remember, that’s okay, neither do I. Like their other ecoNetic cars, Ford has ecomodded their standard Transit work van with a high-efficiency diesel engine, aerodynamic wheels, and low-rolling resistance tires.

However, because the 32.6 MPG rating is adjusted from the EU test cycle, you should take it with a grain of salt. This is because the EU cycle tends to give better ratings than EPA testing, so 32.6 MPG in Europe might actually be a bit less on this side of the pond. But again, as ABG notes, the EPA cycle has notoriously underwhelming diesel ratings, and it might be that the European ratings are a bit closer to reality.

Perhaps this is a prelude to a Ford Transit Connect ecoNetic model, which would combine the same ecomods with the smaller model of the van. This opens up the possibility of getting such a vehicle in the United States, where the Transit Connect will soon be on sale.

Every year, the Automotive Hall of Fame in Dearborn, Michigan adds a few influential people to their archives. The Automotive Hall of Fame has the task of preserving the most important ideas and moments in automotive history, so it’s quite an honor to be inducted.

That’s why I was happy to hear at the New York International Auto Show that Wunibald Kamm, designer of the Kammback, will be inducted in 2009. In 1938, he helped BMW design the first Kamm-Coupe, a 328 with a .25 drag coefficient, matching the first generation Honda Insight.

Clearly, his ideas were ahead of his time and never widely adopted, but with fuel economy coming back to the forefront of automotive design, Kamm is finally getting some attention.

This is of special import to us ecomodders, since the Kammback is one of the most effective and possibly coolest looking aeromods around. For some more reading on actual Kammbacks (including the one in the picture above), check out these threads:

• Geo Metro Kammback Design and Construction: Step by step.
• Better Minivan Gas Mileage with a Kammback: 3.7% better, to be exact.
• Civic VX Kammback: Clean looking install on a Civic VX.
• Building a Del Sol Kammback: The Del Sol is a perfect Kammback candidate.
• Another Civic Hatch Kammback: Another clean-looking Kammback

httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W1dwPQ37FlA

Thanks to holypaulie on our fuel economy forums for posting this video of his own aeromods!