Quote:
Originally Posted by RedDevil
We more or less agree on a lot of stuff, finaly  |
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedDevil
With 'pretty much' I meant 'almost'.
|
fair enough ... as long as you recognize the penalty... your ahead of many P&G advocates who refuse to do so.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedDevil
the increase in resistance is 3 times the square of 10%, which is just 3% for a 10 mph difference between high and low speed.
|
yup a 3% penalty.
If one is able to improve the average ICE efficiency by more than the P&G varying seed penalty is there a net benefit... if not it is just a penalty.
I have seen many P&G die hard advocates do much much more than 10% from high speed to low speed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedDevil
Give me lots of time and an empty road and I can easily get my Insight over 80 mpg by P&Ging like this  . Make it a windless 30C day, then maybe 100 mpg is attainable. |
Driving at slower average speeds consumes less energy P&G or not.
The better comparison is the same average speed.
And as it so happens ... another forum member did some constant speed tests with a Gen-1 Insight on flat level ground ... so you can compare your P&G MPG at the same average speed to his ... and see where the P&G is giving you a benefit , or not.
So @ and average trip speed of 30 MPH you have to do ... much better than 80 mpg ... you have to get better than 131 MPG... or keep the ~80mpg but do it at an average speed of over 60 MPH ... if you get less than that at the same average speed ... then that's the breaks .
