Quote:
Originally Posted by beatr911
I don't want to poo on theycallmeebryan as he has done an excellent job of demonstrating what can be done with some minor optimization and some basic good driving (riding) skills. I would like to put this in perspective though with a different measuring stick.
Say I hypermile my truck to a 29mpg average, that works out to:
3.45 gallons per 100 miles.
I ride a 1400cc sport touring bike like the average Joe and get 45mpg:
2.22 gallons per 100 miles.
I ride a Ninja 250 like the average Joe and get 61mpg:
1.63 gallons per 100 miles.
I ride like theycallmeebryan on the same Ninja and get 92mpg:
1.08 gallons per 100 miles.
The decrease in fuel use from 29mpg to 45mpg, a 16mpg increase is 1.23 gallons per 100 miles, or about 36% improvement.
The same 16 mpg increase from 45mpg to 61mpg is a difference of just .59 gallons per 100 miles, or about 27% improvement.
A whopping 31 mpg increase from 61mpg to 92mpg is a difference of just .55 gallons per 100 miles or about 33%.
See what's going on here? Once you get out of the low numbers like say 60mpg, the decrease in fuel use gets smaller and smaller for a given increase in mpg. With the relatively small but significant difference in fuel use between 61mpg and 92mpg it partially explains why these great numbers can be reached. It's still an outstanding 33% decrease as it would look like at first glance, it's just not as many gallons saved at a similar percent improvement vs. lower mpg starting point because of the lower fuel use baseline.
It also illustrates why getting the lowest mpg cars off the road is the "low hanging fruit" addressed in the cash for clunkers program. And why hypermiling a FSP is a really great idea.
Feel free to correct my math in case I goofed.
Keep up the good work!
|
Very valid points you talked about beatr911.
The fact of the matter is that when hypermiling, the savings (with any vehicle) increases as gas prices increase. Also, the fact of the matter is that, in my case, I'd rather take my girlfriend out to dinner a few times a week with the nearly 50$ per week i am saving if i had to drive our 5.7L Chevy Tahoe (15mpg AT BEST), than give the middle east + government + others that money.
Higher mpg numbers do not weigh as much if the cost of fuel is light. Increasing numbers up past 100mpg really only benefits range capability on a giving fuel tank capacity... that is if the fuel cost is low. Honestly, I love going an extra 2 days without having to refuel. I increased my range on a tank about 100 miles (give or tank) by hypermiling.
Lets say i go 100miles on a tank.
With 15mpg, i'd spend $13.34 @ $2.00/ gal
With 61mpg, i'd spend $3.28 @ $2.00/ gal
With 95mpg, i'd spend $2.10 @ $2.00/ gal.
Now, If gas stayed at that price for a year, say i drove 10,000 miles:
With 15mpg, ill spend $1,334 per year
With 61mpg, ill spend $328 per year
With 95mpg, ill spend $210 per year.
Note: if gas prices increased, the differences would increase.
So going from 61mpg to 95mpg, im saving $118 per year in that case. By driving my bike instead of the 15mpg pig, im saving a whopping $1124 per year.
My insurance for my bike costs 150$/year. Just by hypermiling, im pretty much paying for my insurance in savings.
Lets not forget the most important part of it all. Im using less gas. Plain and simple. The primary goal in everyones eyes should be to reduce their own dependency on foreign oil so we can rid ourselves of that burden as a country. I've said it before on these forums: Arguably, most of the wars we have fought in the last 100 years have been because of the thirst for oil (and the hunger for energy).