I always assume that others will follow these posts today, next year, etc. But I also had to make leaps and leave out examples galore in the above post to keep it a reasonable length. (And no more long ones after this).
Yeah, we scrutinize the details to make the best choices. Or we miss opportunities.
in the shortest amount of time possible
I should have been more explicit: a
racer is someone unconcerned by the "cost" (however determined) to reach a particular goal. Travel speed is irrelevant. The FLOSCAN is a
racer tool by this definition as it won't ever pay itself off in a private vehicle.
when I’m in my RV I’m not interested in scrutinizing every last nuance of performance to squeeze every last mile out of a gallon.
Neither am I (see below).
at some point it can become more work than fun.
I'll say that we should define
work and
fun:
Work is divided visual attention: what takes my eyes away from the road (steering & traffic management observation/scans); and Fun is skill application or grace; fun is lowering the number of driver inputs and attenuating gross actions. (the lesser attention needed for audio/verbal processing also benefitting: the wife).
Thereby, them that have not planned two-hour rest breaks and four-hour food/fuel breaks have increased their workload and stress level by now having to direct visual attention away from driving to find the next place to pull over to meet those necessities. Capice? A trip-plan reduces stress, relieves the workload and, one is only driving when driving.
Known stops, right down to Exit Number and physical address, in advance. Leg lengths of time, not just distance. Being fresh at the end of the drive is the goal. We work backwards to construct the days drive.
To wit:
I used to run my 16,000-lb combination rig at 62-63 mph. I gained mpg by dropping to 58-mph in the same gear, but not enough to matter (.5 - 1.0; from 15 to 16+) What changed is that instead of running at the top of my range (barely past peak BSFC) I found that by running towards the lower end of the optimal 58-62 mph towing range was that the EGT and MAP rise was nearly insignificant while on cruise control (closer to the Cummins 666 rule of 6-psi, 600F and 60 mph for best FE).
I have an "aggressive" CC. Where before I might "cancel" the cruise temporarily for rises and gentler hills to manually control speed, I now over-rode it slightly, instead, to speed up in advance of the grade, allowing the CC to "catch" and take over throttle work at a
different point. In all events this made driving easier on me, and if I decided to drop to Direct out of OD the rpm rise was
more favorable for
economy-under-power. I was rocking along now . . . at the other side of the engine sweet spot (about a 75-100 rpm difference). A
two-for-one win.
58-mph made for lower engine work: the rig could take the small Interstate rises on it's own versus 63-mph, and my having to monitor gauges and make calculations for virtually no mpg penalty.
Having the CC on 100% is a proven heavy vehicle strategy. Mine is on before the entrance ramp ends.
This is what I was trying to get to in delineating the difference between an O/O and a company driver. Or, a racer and a commercial driver: The OODA Loop.
Just that much less air resistance made a difference for the driver since the motor was now underneath the curve . . which translated into fewer vehicle inputs and
unbroken attention to traffic and terrain maintained. Fewer diversions = more
fun.
You reasonably feel that your belly-pan may have been a lot of effort for naught. I'm arguing that as skills increase and finer sensitivities come to the fore that your average mpg will benefit as you make the kind of discoveries as above. I strongly feel, as also above, that crosswind buffeting will be "reduced" in re steering inputs. With no reduction in fun, however defined, will your numbers increase over time and some miles. Your work is inspiring, Orbywan, so keep at it.
.