View Single Post
Old 01-24-2012, 01:18 PM   #64 (permalink)
NeilBlanchard
Master EcoModder
 
NeilBlanchard's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Maynard, MA Eaarth
Posts: 7,908

Mica Blue - '05 Scion xA RS 2.0
Team Toyota
90 day: 42.48 mpg (US)

Forest - '15 Nissan Leaf S
Team Nissan
90 day: 156.46 mpg (US)

Number 7 - '15 VW e-Golf SEL
TEAM VW AUDI Group
90 day: 155.81 mpg (US)
Thanks: 3,475
Thanked 2,952 Times in 1,845 Posts
If weight is always worse, then how does the Jacobs Honda (on the EM home page) more than double it's FE with ~33% more weight? How does the Edison2 VLCe more than double the efficiency of the VLC with ~25% more weight?

At lower speeds rolling resistance is the majority of the load. Above a threshold that depends on the CdA of the car, the aerodynamic drag becomes the majority of the drag.

Speed X weight = kinetic energy. So, once you accelerate the weight, you can coast. With lower aero drag, you can coast farther with a given weight.

Aerodynamic drag trumps weight, because aero drag is a total loss, and because at most speeds aero drag swamps all other losses combined.

Edit: I do think that with the significantly lower efficiency of IC engines, that weight is closer to aerodynamic drag; but aero still is more important. The Spira4u (X-Prize vehicle) weighed about 485 pounds, while the Edison2 was about 830 pounds, the Edison2 was more efficient.

The Illuminati 7 at 3,100 pounds is about 2X more efficient than either one. When you are wasting 80% of the energy under acceleration, it matters a lot more than if you are wasting only 20%.
__________________
Sincerely, Neil

http://neilblanchard.blogspot.com/

Last edited by NeilBlanchard; 01-24-2012 at 02:10 PM..
  Reply With Quote