Nice to add more data to the pile.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimepting
I think that one potential problem the OP had was that his method did not adequately warm up the engine
|
You're quite right there! The car used doesn't
have an internal combustion engine.
I used the electric ForkenSwift.
Quote:
|
and transmission, so that viscous drag changed somewhat during the tests.
|
I would say that's possible, though more likely the transmission was at ambient temperature throughout. The parking lot used is only a few hundred meters from where the car was parked (cold soak). I bet it wasn't driven fast/far enough to significantly change the temperature of the drivetrain components.
Quote:
|
When I get a nice day, I intend to drive my long test course at 70&80 psi and see if the fuel economy differs. After all, that is the real test.
|
It may be "real", but it's less of a "test" (less validity). I'm not sure why you would want to do this, given your understanding that "controlled as possible" testing resulted in nearly insignificant changes in rolling performance at the highest pressures. Actively driving a test route will be vastly less controlled than a coast down test, wouldn't you say?