Driven to Save -- Opinions Needed! (hypermiling book author seeking feedback)

[jamesqf]

Originally Posted by Richard Rowe

Well, man, if you don't think it would work for you, then go with what does. But you might want to try just maintaining a steady, lower speed. I (unfortunately) spent a lot of time on the West coast when I drove for Prime, and I never really had a problem with just maintaining a lower speed in traffic. Even in LA traffic, most of the time I'd just stick the thing in 6th gear and let it idle at about 10 mph. And that was in almost bumper-to-bumper traffic on the freeway.

It's not about speed - certainly not on my part - but about the behavior of other drivers. I think maybe you are implicitly assuming that all those other drivers out there are going to act like rational people (and for all I know, in Florida they may) but around here they don't. They just will not allow you to maintain a proper following distance, any more than they will keep from passing you on the right, even though the left lane is perfectly clear.

Nor am I talking bumper-to-bumper at 10 mph, it's more like b-to-b at 60 mph or so. Honestly, I'm a lot more worried about the idiot behind me, yakking on his cell phone while navigating his SUV 10 feet from my rear bumper - and sheet metal on the rear of my car bears witness that my worries aren't unreasonabe.

[Big Dave]

Richard:

I'm game. Sorry I didn't get signed on earlier, but I was not on the site for a few days.

I can bring to the game some experience in getting good MPG out of a full sized pickup while driving the limit.

On the subject of drafting I have little additional to offer beyond this:
1) The manufacturers are working on radar/data communications/ and control to allow really close draft by tractor-trailers. this would make the rigs into virtual trains. Only the front guy is truly driving. Everybody else sequentially snugs up and locks in and lets the other guy drive the "train." The electronics handle the rest.
2) Drafting may really only be for the big rigs. Because a lot of truckers don't sound like college professors, the rubes think they are dummies. Fact of the matter is that truckers are highly skilled drivers and eminently capable of sorting themselves into an optimized train with just a few CB exchanges. But average four-wheeler and pick drivers are not that disciplined.


As for your "12 mpg car" that is very common in the pickup community. Most pickups are (IMO) wildly overgeared. 3.73s seem to be the default ratio and 4.11s and 4.56s are far more common than the "economy" 3.55s now offered. I believe I have found nearly the optimum for my truck with 3.08 gears and a double overdrive. The thing has gotten touchy about how I drive it. That tells me I have run out all the (fuel-wasting) reserve power and now have my engine output closely aligned with road load.

As for driving, I am not like the occasional pickup "MPG" guy you hear posturing on the Web who claims some outlandish MPG. then he tells you the secret: He drives real slow. This (IMO) is disingenuous. You drive somewhere because walking is too slow. If you are willing to waste your time, the optimum MPG vehicle is a motorized street luge running at 2 MPH. I do assume that a person's time is worth something. Brakes? I got 190,000 miles out of a set of OEM brakes. I must not use them too much. some people call me Sir Coastalot. I am far from being Wayne Gerdes, but I can time lights well and guage a good coast when i see the opportunity.

If all goes well I'll go out to the scorching plains of Texas and see the guru of pickup aerodynamics and we can mutually contemplate economical pickup trucks.

But I'm in on your project.

[Frank Lee]

On adequate following distance: I witnessed (too close for comfort) a 6-vehicle pileup caused by car #2 being off in la-la land (cell phone???) when car #1 signaled then stopped for a left turn. Vehicles 2-5 all "domino'd" into each other when #2 slammed on the brakes at the 11th hour, soley due to inadequate following distances (although more cell phones could have been involved) and the whole column got pushed into #1, who did nothing whatsoever wrong.

[redpoint5]

Originally Posted by Frank Lee

On adequate following distance: I witnessed (too close for comfort) a 6-vehicle pileup caused by car #2 being off in la-la land (cell phone???) when car #1 signaled then stopped for a left turn. Vehicles 2-5 all "domino'd" into each other when #2 slammed on the brakes at the 11th hour, soley due to inadequate following distances (although more cell phones could have been involved) and the whole column got pushed into #1, who did nothing whatsoever wrong.

Following distance is nearly irrelevant to avoiding a collision when the driver is not watching the vehicle directly in front, let alone further down the road.

My biggest complaint about being behind an SUV or truck is the inability to see through their windshield at the traffic several car lengths down. When I'm behind a vision obstructing vehicle, I increase following distance.

[Frank Lee]

You are right. But I personally saw that they were all so close, they would have to have been anticipating this event in order to have a shot at avoiding it!

[Richard Rowe]

Hey guys...well, I just sent out copies to everyone who sent me their email addresses. If you sent me your email in a PM and didn't get an email back from me, then let me know...I got a bunch of requests, and I might have missed one or two.

I'll reply a little more in depth later...been up for longer than I care to think, and my writing muscle has a serious cramp in it right now. But, I hope you all enjoy the book, and don't hesitate to tell me what you think about anything in it. Don't hold back for my sake. If you think it's the best thing since cut cheese, then tell me what you like so I can do it again! If there's anything glaringly wrong (and I don't think there are too many instances of that) then I'll fix it. If there's something else you'd like me to include, I'm open to suggestions, time permitting. Or, if you just think I'm a complete moron...well, it wouldn't be the worst thing I've heard this week.

Only thing I ask: I am kind of pressed for a deadline with my eds, so the sooner you finish, the better. Don't stay up all night on my account...unless it's just that awesome and you HAVE to see how it ends (John dies at the end). In which case, hey...read it twice. Knock yourself out. But, as I said, the sooner the better.

Thanks again for your work and enthusiasm...hope I've done the ecomodder name proud!

[jamesqf]

Originally Posted by Frank Lee

On adequate following distance: I witnessed (too close for comfort) a 6-vehicle pileup caused by car #2 being off in la-la land (cell phone???) when car #1 signaled then stopped for a left turn.

I witnessed a similar collision: car #2 (me) stopped (for a minute or so) behind car #1 in a left-turn lane, car #3 not paying attention runs into #2, pushing it into #1 (fortunately fairly gently). It's part of the reason I worry a lot more about the guy following me than I do about the one I'm following, at whatever distance.

[MetroMPG]

Hi Richard -

I'll assume you're looking for feedback in this discussion thread, so everyone doesn't reply via email with the same suggestion(s).

One big oversight: In the Tools of the Trade – Knowledge is Power section, I was very surprised you didn't mention using a digital fuel consumption gauge (whether factory equipped, aftermarket Scangauge/OBD-II or equivalent). That's consistently one of the very first pieces of advice given to new members here. It's critical, in my opinion.

Yes, an inexpensive vac gauge will let a driver fine tune load while accel/cruising, but a resettable average MPG display is the proof in the pudding that the driving techniques (or mods) are working or not. Once a driver starts to monitor results on regular short trips (eg. commutes), modifying the nut behind the wheel becomes a much more satisfying & challenging game. There's a good reason the devices are called "game gauges" by some people, and you need a MPG display to provide the score.

There's a very good reason hybrids and EV's have sophisticated consumption displays (my 12 year old Insight has FIVE different ways to track fuel use - six, if you count the fuel gauge ).

Logging fuel consumption tank by tank at the gas station is way too slow / low resolution for most people who are serious about saving fuel.

[Diesel_Dave]

I'll be interested in helping. I just sent you a PM. One thing to keep in mind is that not everything applies equally to diesel vs. gasoline. Sometimes that gets forgotten, even on this forum.

[MetroMPG]

Another comment:

The description of the Pulse & Glide technique in Increasing Engine Load – She's in it for the Pulse and Glide is only half right.

Also, calling the technique "dangerous [and] annoying" earlier, in Acceleration and Shifting: Horse Sense and Horsepower, is kind of a weak generalization that many here will disagree with. Obviously there are scenarios where that characterization may be true, but there are also scenarios where it's not true. (Just as there are times where, say, driving fast is both dangerous and annoying, there are times when it isn't.)

You more or less correctly describe the goal of the pulse as accelerating as close to best BSFC as possible. But the other half of the technique - the glide - isn't described well: You say, "Once you hit your target speed of 70 mph, you let off the throttle, and coast..." But that implies in-gear engine braking/deceleration fuel cut-off, which is absolutely the wrong way to glide.

The method for achieving excellent results when gliding is in neutral, with the engine off (maximizing coasting distance by avoiding compression braking & avoiding idling losses). Also, it doesn't include the caveat that this technique may not work well (for various reasons) with a torque converter-equipped automatic transmission.

I suspect some of the hybrid drivers may question your description of the parallel hybrid approach to P&G as well. (Hint: the best results come from avoiding use of the electric motor/generator.)