Go Back   EcoModder Forum > EcoModding > Hypermiling / EcoDriver's Ed
Register Now
 Register Now
 

Reply  Post New Thread
 
Submit Tools LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 05-23-2010, 10:13 PM   #1 (permalink)
EcoModding Lurker
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Randallstown, MD
Posts: 29

95 SL1 5spd - '95 Saturn SL1
90 day: 41.18 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Throttle % while accelerating?

Hi I have just recently started on my quest for fuel economy in my 1995 saturn SL1 5spd. My best tank mpg to date is 38.4. Anyway to my question I was wondering what would be best for fuel economy - more throttle in a higher gear but less rpm or less throttle in a lower gear but higher rpm? Is it best to accelerate quickly say 75% throttle and shift at a higher rpm up to 40-50mph and then cruise or use about 25% throttle and shift at a lower rpm up 40-50mph then cruise? i know its based on the car and the engine. I know that the SOHC in my saturn makes peak torque at 2450rpm. Should i take the rpms higher than that while accelerating or shift around 2500rpm? Im just in search of the best way to get up to a certain speed for cruising. Thanks in advance

  Reply With Quote
Alt Today
Popular topics

Other popular topics in this forum...

   
Old 05-23-2010, 10:49 PM   #2 (permalink)
Ecomodder
 
Fr3AkAzOiD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Raleigh, NC
Posts: 259

Cobalt XFE - '08 Chevrolet Cobalt XFE
Team Chevy
90 day: 41.1 mpg (US)

'05 Malibu V6 Tow Vehicle/Track Car - '05 Chevrolet Malibu LS V6
90 day: 23.12 mpg (US)

'08 XFE average for 2013 - '08 Chevrolet Cobalt XFE
90 day: 41.1 mpg (US)
Thanks: 41
Thanked 25 Times in 20 Posts
Between 70% to 100% throttle and shift between 1,800 - 2,500 rpm.

There is an article on www.autospeed.com that tests this I just can't place my finger on it right now. I'll edit it in if I can find it.


Edit: Found it!

Brake Specific Fuel Consumption
http://www.autospeed.com/cms/A_110216/article.html
__________________
Lifetime mpg


2012 mpg

Last edited by Fr3AkAzOiD; 05-23-2010 at 11:11 PM..
  Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Fr3AkAzOiD For This Useful Post:
ChazInMT (07-23-2010), ShadeTreeMech (05-23-2010)
Old 05-23-2010, 11:24 PM   #3 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
comptiger5000's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: CT, USA
Posts: 544

RaceJeep - '98 Jeep Grand Cherokee (ZJ) 5.9 Limited
90 day: 13.62 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1
Thanked 26 Times in 23 Posts
About 2/3 to 3/4 throttle (not quite enough to throw it into WOT enrichment), and shift early (low RPM) is most efficient.
__________________
Call me crazy, but I actually try for mpg with this Jeep:



Typical driving: Back in Rochester for school, driving is 60 - 70% city
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-24-2010, 12:18 AM   #4 (permalink)
Basjoos Wannabe
 
ShadeTreeMech's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 870

The Van - '97 Mercury Villager gs
90 day: 19.8 mpg (US)

Lyle the Kindly Viking - '99 Volvo V70
90 day: 25.82 mpg (US)
Thanks: 174
Thanked 49 Times in 32 Posts
this has actually been a burning question of mine for a while now. make me wish I had a 5 speed again
__________________
RIP Maxima 1997-2012


Quote:
Originally Posted by jamesqf View Post
I think you missed the point I was trying to make, which is that it's not rational to do either speed or fuel economy mods for economic reasons. You do it as a form of recreation, for the fun and for the challenge.
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-24-2010, 12:19 AM   #5 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
AeroModder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Oregon
Posts: 471

Tank - '96 Ford Aspire 4 door
Team Ford
90 day: 46.75 mpg (US)
Thanks: 15
Thanked 65 Times in 48 Posts
Now, what about an auto trans?
__________________
In Reason we Trust
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-24-2010, 06:56 AM   #6 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
comptiger5000's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: CT, USA
Posts: 544

RaceJeep - '98 Jeep Grand Cherokee (ZJ) 5.9 Limited
90 day: 13.62 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1
Thanked 26 Times in 23 Posts
For an auto, accelerate with as much throttle as you can while not driving the RPMs too high. After a while, you find the sweet spot, which is different on every car.
__________________
Call me crazy, but I actually try for mpg with this Jeep:



Typical driving: Back in Rochester for school, driving is 60 - 70% city
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-24-2010, 08:35 AM   #7 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 5,927
Thanks: 877
Thanked 2,024 Times in 1,304 Posts
Best rate of acceleration is lowest manifold vacuum in highest gear that will produce the desired rate of acceleration. If acceleration is too slow use next lower gear, while maintaining low manifold vacuum.

Any throttle position below the point of full load enrichment is fine and it can range quite a bit from 20%to 80%. This is because throttle position does not determine load. Load is a function of manifold vacuum. Once manifold vacuum reaches 100%, additional throttle will not increase power unless you go to full load enrichment, or in the case of my VX you loose lean burn, which is another stage of enrichment.

In an auto transmission you want the lowest manifold vacuum you can maintain without causing the transmission to hold the lower gears any longer than its earliest shift point.

Every engine is more efficient when it has the maximum amount of air inducted into the cylinders at the bottom of the intake stroke. RPM too low you loose the harmonics of induction resonance and that benefit. RPM too high and you are loosing energy to friction and reciprocation losses, which are due to the accelerating and decelerating masses in all reciprocating engines. Good intake harmonics can actually increase the volume of air slightly on the intake stroke with the inertia of the incoming air contributing a sight "supercharging" effect.

I think it is not well understood generally, that very low throttle positions can virtually eliminate manifold vacuum in almost any throttled engine as long as the load is sufficient, which is accomplished by choosing higher gears than most drivers use for acceleration.

Think of it this way. I call it pulse accounting. Every combustion pulse is much more energy efficient when it uses all of the engines available compression, which requires the manifold restriction to be the lowest possible amount. When manifold vacuum is 0 the maximum amount of air is in the cylinder to be compressed and that will produce the maximum amount of power per unit of fuel consumed.

Without wide open throttle enrichment.

If you produce that amount of manifold vacuum at the RPM where your engines BSFC is highest, you have duplicated that BSFC, and that is as good as it can get.

regards
Mech
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-24-2010, 11:58 AM   #8 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
AeroModder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Oregon
Posts: 471

Tank - '96 Ford Aspire 4 door
Team Ford
90 day: 46.75 mpg (US)
Thanks: 15
Thanked 65 Times in 48 Posts
I'll try that. I figured out how to short-shift this auto under 3K RPM, but I can't push the pedal far for a little after the shift.

Though if I barely touch the throttle (1-2%), it'll shift even sooner, but accelerate like a turtle. It will act like it's in high idle at that throttle level.
__________________
In Reason we Trust
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-25-2010, 12:14 AM   #9 (permalink)
Smeghead
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: South Central AK
Posts: 933

escort - '99 ford escort sport
90 day: 42.38 mpg (US)

scoobaru - '02 Subaru Forester s
90 day: 28.65 mpg (US)
Thanks: 32
Thanked 146 Times in 97 Posts
Some times you can "force" a shift on an auto. Accelerate heavily 70-80% throttle when the rpm (the plural is on the r of revolutions) is about right for the next gear let up on the accelerator then push back down till just before it shifts down again.
__________________

Learn from the mistakes of others, that way when you mess up you can do so in new and interesting ways.

One mile of road will take you one mile, one mile of runway can take you around the world.
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2010, 10:50 PM   #10 (permalink)
Basjoos Wannabe
 
ShadeTreeMech's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 870

The Van - '97 Mercury Villager gs
90 day: 19.8 mpg (US)

Lyle the Kindly Viking - '99 Volvo V70
90 day: 25.82 mpg (US)
Thanks: 174
Thanked 49 Times in 32 Posts
On my Maxima it turns out there is an adjustment to the throttle positioning sensor. Basically I make the compuet think the throttle is closed more than it is making the tranny want to stay in a higher gear. It may be the same on other vehicles. On my Max it took loosening 2 phillips screws and twisting the senor in the same direction as the throttle plate twists, which made the tranny shift early.

I found this out my accident when I installesd a new TPS. I adjusted it reverse of how I described, and it downshifted sooner and refused to upshift without higer RPMs.

Hmmmm, wonder what happens if i go the other way....

__________________
RIP Maxima 1997-2012


Quote:
Originally Posted by jamesqf View Post
I think you missed the point I was trying to make, which is that it's not rational to do either speed or fuel economy mods for economic reasons. You do it as a form of recreation, for the fun and for the challenge.
  Reply With Quote
Reply  Post New Thread




Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Honda IACV explained TomO Off-Topic Tech 16 12-21-2015 02:49 AM
Aftermarket Cruise Control, AKA Hand Throttle. Hugh Jim Bissel DIY / How-to 19 08-04-2009 01:49 AM
Does a given throttle position always mean consistant, predictable fuel usage? KJSatz EcoModding Central 8 08-17-2008 07:50 PM
Throttle sensitivity Formula413 EcoModding Central 13 05-29-2008 05:55 PM
Accelerating and shift points bhazard Hypermiling / EcoDriver's Ed 26 04-25-2008 05:52 PM



Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.5.2
All content copyright EcoModder.com