View Single Post
Old 02-15-2015, 06:12 AM   #27 (permalink)
oldtamiyaphile
Master EcoModder
 
oldtamiyaphile's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,510

UFI - '12 Fiat 500 Twinair
Team Turbocharged!
90 day: 40.3 mpg (US)

Jeep - '05 Jeep Wrangler Renegade
90 day: 18.09 mpg (US)

R32 - '89 Nissan Skyline

STiG - '16 Renault Trafic 140dCi Energy
90 day: 30.12 mpg (US)

Prius - '05 Toyota Prius
Team Toyota
90 day: 50.25 mpg (US)

Premodded - '49 Ford Freighter
90 day: 13.48 mpg (US)

F-117 - '10 Proton Arena GLSi
Pickups
Mitsubishi
90 day: 37.82 mpg (US)

Ralica - '85 Toyota Celica ST
90 day: 25.23 mpg (US)

Sx4 - '07 Suzuki Sx4
90 day: 32.21 mpg (US)

F-117 (2) - '03 Citroen Xsara VTS
90 day: 30.06 mpg (US)
Thanks: 325
Thanked 453 Times in 320 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by sword_guy8 View Post
What I discovered was NOT peak FE based on engine RPM. In fact, engine RPM has nothing to do with it. The only thing I've found which has a direct correlation to FE is manifold pressure.
This is really simple if you think about what you're actually measuring.

At a constant load/MAP, as speed rises, so does RPM, and this means your fuel usage also goes up (if you watch your Gallon/Hr you'll see this).

However when measuring MPG, as your speed/rpm increases, you're also increasing miles traveled. So although you're using more fuel, you're traveling more miles and if load is constant, the two cancel each other out.
__________________






  Reply With Quote