100+ hypermiling / ecodriving tips & tactics

[Frank Lee]

Fuel Economy, Hypermiling, EcoModding News and Forum - EcoModder.com - Search Results

[euromodder]

Originally Posted by givemeslack

I'm surprised I didn't see in all the hypermiling tips, this obvious way to reduce a significant amount of weight.

It's in the modification list as part of the weight reduction options:

65+ Vehicle modifications for better fuel economy - EcoModder.com

Fill up with gas more frequently, and only when the tank is near empty. Then fill up 1/4 to 1/2 of the tank capacity. That's much less weight than a full tank.

Sure.
The bigger the tank, the bigger the weight gain.

That said, you'll be hard pressed to see the difference of say 8 gal / 50 lbs or 30L / 25kg in mixed driving.
If you're almost entirely driving in town with frequent stops and starts, you might notice it though.


If - like me - you pass your favourite / cheapest gas station along your regular commute, you could do it.
If you have to go out of your regular way to get gas, forget it ...


You'll see most benefits if you do this as part of a more involved weight reduction effort.

All combined, I've beached some 150 lbs / 70kg - both car and body weight - it still gets lost in the tank-to-tank variations.

[euromodder]

Originally Posted by givemeslack

Even without a mpg gauge, you can still use my method of only filling up halfway AND get an accurate reading.

From then on, whenever the tank is empty, only fill it up half way, keeping a log of the gallons of gas put in, (or just save all the receipts).

You could fill up with a fixed volume of gas, and drive it until the reserve light comes / stays on, then reset the odometer / trip meter reading and fill up with you fixed volume of X gal / L gas ASAP after.

That way, you'll even have a decent idea about the actual fuel consumption judging by the distance driven, rather than by volume.

Pulling in to a gas station that is on your route, shutting off the engine, and filling up with however many gallons you want does not waste gas.

For some members, it'd double the number of stops on that trip

Every time you stop - voluntarily or forced by traffic - you're using more gas than you would ideally have needed.

[YeahPete]

I have something to suggest. Not quite sure how to phrase it or if anyone agrees with me.

Hill Acceleration:
When accelerating up curved hills inside of the curve to reduce the hill cimbing distance.

Maybe this can be added under 51 . Use the 'racing line'

[RedDevil]

One note about the tip to park so that you do not have to reverse out:

This depends on the space available and the parking skill of the driver.
At my office the parking lot has really narrow slots. We wriggle past each others mirrors and doors just to get in and out.
Reversing into those spots is quite difficult, while driving straight in is dead easy.
Reversing out of a tight spot is not difficult at all.

So while the engine wastes triple the fuel per second while cold, it is still better to park straight in and reverse it out if the time to do so is less than a third of the time needed to reverse in.

So this rule had better be refrased to 'Reverse in IF you can do so easily'.

[rajadaja]

I would like to revisit #38 because it seems like 18 wheelers can create drafts that one can benefit from even when following at a safe distance. I don't have any proof , but when a truck passes at highway speeds, you can often see leaves and other light debris fluttering for several seconds after the truck has passed. Couldnt I get the equivalent of a 5-10 mph wind boost and still remain 2-3 seconds behind the truck? If I find one travelling at a reasonable speed then I get the double benefit of not worrying about driving a little slower than the rest of the traffic. Also, 18 wheelers follow a lot of these rules because they are carrying heavy loads and are very sensitive to braking situations and they also tend to slow down when going uphill and speed up on the downgrades, which I just recently figured out is much better than using cruise control. BTW, I get much better mileage when my wife is not in the car. She can't stand the slow acceleration from stoplights or how I like to put the car in neutral on downhills!

[2000neon]

Yes you can still see an improvement in mileage from following larger vehicles, even back at a safe distance.

Also, it may be worth doing some reading on acceleration technique, depending on how slow you are accelerating. By doing a granny start and taking fooooorevvver to get up to speed, you are burning more fuel, for an unnecessarily long time. It may be better to put your foot into it a bit and get up to speed relatively quickly, so you can cruise at speed and get better MPG quicker. You don't want to accelerate hard enough to the point where the computer will go all out and richen the fuel mixture, or to the point where the car delays shifts to run higher rpm (in an automatic transmission vehicle). So if you find that point, back off just a little bit until it shifts normally again.

If you search for it here, it is the idea behind accelerating with (about) 80% load, I've also seen it referred to as "accelerating briskly".

Edit: By the way, I see that it is your first post, welcome to the forum.

[rajadaja]

Thank you for the welcome and the information! Yes, I was surprised to find that the pulse and glide technique actually works because I thought steady speed was preferable unless the road was not flat. I try to accelerate briskly on the downhills only, just like as if I was riding a bike, so I can build up the momentum to get over the next hill without reducing speed too much. What is your take on accelerating from a stop on an incline? My assumption has been that this is the biggest gas guzzler, so I should wait until the road levels out before hitting top speed. Do you think it's actually better to accelerate briskly for a shorter period? I have another unusual question. Is there any appreciable change in drag if you drive next to the concrete barriers that sometimes come very close to the edge of the lane, like in construction areas? I could see arguments for both worse economy and better, but I confess I dont know much about fluid dynamics. I usually avoid those lanes just because it feels a little unsafe so I probably wouldnt do it unless traffic was light

[RedDevil]

Side barriers are generally bad for MPG as they squeeze the air between your vehicle and themselves. The air you displace has to move somewhere, anything that gets in the way of that is bad.
The exception is with strong side wind; as the barriers block that too that helps.
Most cars have had aerodynamic tweeks of some kind from windtunnel testing. They work well head on, but might not when hit by side wind. My '11 Insight is one example.

I ride in the wake of trucks if I can.
A good truck with low rear shielding on a windless day at 90 km/h (56 mph) can reduce my FC to less than 3 l/100km (better than 75 mpg) on the level.
But don't follow too close, as I found that the turbulence is quite strong close by. That lowers aerodynamic efficiency so it may even increase drag in spite of the relative airspeed being lower.

[2000neon]

In my opinion, accelerating on an incline follows the same idea, it uses a lot of fuel no matter what you do. So what I do is still accelerate with a good bit of throttle (not wide open flooring it) but relatively high engine load. I shift a little bit higher (1600 on flat ground/ 2000 going up hills), I use the torque of the motor (BSFC - worth a search on here), and just get it done and out of the way. Trying to pull really slowly up the hill, you will have poor MPG, for a longer period of time compared to just getting on the throttle for a shorter time.

There have been a number of discussions on techniques for hills. If you have some time it is worth a read, a lot of people have given input with all different types of vehicles.