View Single Post
Old 11-20-2013, 11:16 AM   #22 (permalink)
bikenfool
EcoModding Lurker
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: lakewood, co, usa
Posts: 53

subey - '99 Subaru Impreza Outback Sport

rav4 - '07 Toyota Rav4
Thanks: 3
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by niky View Post
In practice, reading off of instant meters on various cars, it's more efficient to pursue load or to use a pulse-and-glide with hills than to maintain a constant speed over them... even a slower speed.

Aero drag going downhill hurts. Gravity drag going uphill hurts more.

Tried it several ways when researching for a Shell eco-seminar. It's more effective to allow speeds to vary on the hills on my regular highway route than to go over them at a constant slow or fast speed.

It works. Never mind whether you think it does or doesn't, it works. Gravity > Aero.
I'm not questioning pulse & glide.
Gravity is not drag, the energy you have to put into the system to climb the hill is regained on the other side. Aero drag is a loss, never regained.
What research did you do for the seminar? Care to share?
It doesn't matter whether I think it works or doesn't, the facts matter.
  Reply With Quote