View Single Post
Old 04-25-2011, 10:12 AM   #10 (permalink)
Easter McoModder
SwamiSalami's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: West Texas, US
Posts: 363

'99 Subaru OLL 2.5L - '99 Subaru Outback Legacy Limited
90 day: 22.57 mpg (US)

Rabbit - '08 VW Rabbit S
90 day: 32.93 mpg (US)
Thanks: 212
Thanked 28 Times in 26 Posts
Originally Posted by jedi_sol View Post
Sorry, not trying to rain on your parade, but a 33% gain from before is a bit much (considering MetroMPG only achieved a 15% gain from a full boat tail).

Since you dont have a scanguage, i strongly suggest testing tankful-tankful, instead of relying on small fillups. Small fillups are very misleading because they don't average out any "miscellaneous" factors that could affect your mpg readings. Try to get as many tankful readings as possible to strengthen any mpg results you are achieving.

If you can only do short highway runs, at least try to use the cruise control to cancel out your "foot bias."

I highly recommend reading this thread
I agree with you, there are a lot of variables at play here. However, I wholeheartedly achieved 55.4 miles per gallon with my kammback. No ifs, ands, or buts about it.

It, of course, does make sense that a better "testing" would be conducted on longer trips or "tankfuls" at a time.

I did run into a problem concerning the theory of testing:

Without using a scanguage, theoretically, it is a must to drive the EXACT distance, terrain, speed and using the same accesories (a/c, vent, radio, etc.).

WITH a scanguage, I would assume that there would be a problem as well. While the scanguage is incredibly accurate from moment-to-moment, it doesn't account for terrain at any given moment (especially where the terrain is less obvious).

So I guess what I mean is...with a scanguage, how do you know the moment is right to take a readout?

Also, of course I used cruise control.
  Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to SwamiSalami For This Useful Post:
aClockworkLuka (08-24-2011)