Go Back   EcoModder Forum > EcoModding > EcoModding Central
Register Now
 Register Now
 

Reply  Post New Thread
 
Submit Tools LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 12-04-2013, 06:05 PM   #1 (permalink)
EcoModding Lurker
 
topcat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: England
Posts: 37

Celica VVTI - '05 Toyota Celica GT VVTI
Team Toyota
90 day: 41.89 mpg (US)
Thanks: 4
Thanked 7 Times in 5 Posts
Hill climb: 80% Load or "slow speed bleed"

Here's something I find contradictory and hard to fathom... Climbing a hill, I find the most fuel efficient method is a gradual speed bleed. Yet we are also told that the most efficient way to accelerate is at ~80% load. These two seem contradictory- my own findings are that if I accelerate up a hill it is less fuel efficient. Can anyone explain?

  Reply With Quote
Alt Today
Popular topics

Other popular topics in this forum...

   
Old 12-04-2013, 06:20 PM   #2 (permalink)
Basjoos Wannabe
 
ShadeTreeMech's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 870

The Van - '97 Mercury Villager gs
90 day: 19.8 mpg (US)

Lyle the Kindly Viking - '99 Volvo V70
90 day: 25.82 mpg (US)
Thanks: 174
Thanked 49 Times in 32 Posts
This is indeed a conundrum I face daily.

What I have found is if you can stay in overdrive, do so. This will of course entail a speed bleed, otherwise you will downshift and it's all lost.

Accelerating I would think take somewhat less power than going uphill because you are not fighting to go uphill. I can push my car up to probably 3 mph with leg power on a flat surface, but I can't budge it on even the slightest incline.
__________________
RIP Maxima 1997-2012


Quote:
Originally Posted by jamesqf View Post
I think you missed the point I was trying to make, which is that it's not rational to do either speed or fuel economy mods for economic reasons. You do it as a form of recreation, for the fun and for the challenge.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-04-2013, 06:48 PM   #3 (permalink)
Hypermiler
 
PaleMelanesian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Texas
Posts: 2,321

PaleCivic (retired) - '96 Honda Civic DX Sedan
90 day: 69.2 mpg (US)

PaleFit - '09 Honda Fit Sport
Team Honda
Wagons
90 day: 44.06 mpg (US)
Thanks: 611
Thanked 434 Times in 284 Posts
You have to look at the whole trip, not just the momentary mileage while climbing the hill. Watch a trip average mpg gauge, if you have one. Try the methods and see which one costs you the least.

I can say that in the cars I've tested, 80% load and low rpm works best. It means slight acceleration, so I do a puuuuuuuuulse and mini-glide.
__________________



11-mile commute: 100 mpg - - - Tank: 90.2 mpg / 1191 miles
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-04-2013, 07:00 PM   #4 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 5,927
Thanks: 877
Thanked 2,024 Times in 1,304 Posts
If the hill is the perfect grade then you can maintain 80% load in top gear.

If the grade is less, maintain 80% and increase your speed.

If the grade is more bleed your speed and maintain 80% load.

You have to consider the load and the amount of time it takes to reach the peak of the hill. Least time in top gear while maintaining 80% load is your objective.

If you can't maintain 80% load in top gear, then try the next highest gear with 80%. The 80% is your best efficiency but the longer it takes you to climb the grade the greater time spent at lower mileage.

regards
Mech
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2015, 01:24 AM   #5 (permalink)
EcoModding Lurker
 
ShinyMew's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Vic, AU
Posts: 27

Suzuki Swift '06 - '06 Suzuki Swift (Base)
Thanks: 4
Thanked 3 Times in 1 Post
There is a hill I commute up and over in my automatic car about one hundred times per year. It takes about 30 seconds to travel up, so it is quite long. My current tactic is to accelerate before the bottom very hard (about 80-90% throttle) to reach the highest gear (which kicks in at about 70km/h). By the time I've hit the slope of the hill I'm at about 90km/h and thereafter gradually lessen the pressure I place on the throttle to avoid it shifting down. If maintain that 80-90% throttle, the car still loses speed up the hill and it drops a gear to try compensate. Half the time, I am able to avoid it shifting down, and the other half the time, once it has fallen below about 65km/h and 20% throttle, it shifts).

Surely easing off the throttle (load) whilst travelling up the hill and losing speed, rather than maintaining 80%, in order to prevent it shifting down, is better?
__________________
Proponent for Prevention of Cruelty to Automobiles.

  Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2015, 01:49 AM   #6 (permalink)
Just cruisin’ along
 
jcp123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Rochester, NY
Posts: 1,183

Beater Echo - '00 Toyota Echo
90 day: 42.67 mpg (US)

Hondizzle - '97 Honda Civic DX
Team Honda
90 day: 46.55 mpg (US)

Shaggin Waggin - '14 Chrysler Town + Country
90 day: 22.56 mpg (US)
Thanks: 66
Thanked 200 Times in 170 Posts
The slow speed bleed it what works best for me. Then again, I have an automatic, so I have little choice - kick the load up that high and the auto grabs a gear or two.

Accelerating up a hill from a dead stop is the biggest conundrum I face.
__________________



'97 Honda Civic DX Coupe 5MT - dead 2/23
'00 Echo - dead 2/17
'14 Chrysler Town + Country - My DD, for now
'67 Mustang Convertible - gone 1/17
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2015, 05:17 AM   #7 (permalink)
Human Environmentalist
 
redpoint5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Oregon
Posts: 12,752

Acura TSX - '06 Acura TSX
90 day: 24.19 mpg (US)

Lafawnda - CBR600 - '01 Honda CBR600 F4i
90 day: 47.32 mpg (US)

Big Yeller - Dodge/Cummins - '98 Dodge Ram 2500 base
90 day: 21.82 mpg (US)

Chevy ZR-2 - '03 Chevrolet S10 ZR2
90 day: 17.14 mpg (US)

Model Y - '24 Tesla Y LR AWD

Pacifica Hybrid - '21 Chrysler Pacifica Hybrid
90 day: 57.45 mpg (US)
Thanks: 4,316
Thanked 4,471 Times in 3,436 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by jcp123 View Post
The slow speed bleed it what works best for me. Then again, I have an automatic, so I have little choice - kick the load up that high and the auto grabs a gear or two.
Do you have a device to monitor the load?

I have carefully studied how my 1998 Toyota Camry behaves when ascending a hill, and it won't downshift until 90%+ load is reached or RPM drops too low. It may drop out of closed loop mode on a very long and sustained 85+% load. I keep the load right at 80% on sustained hill climbs both to keep it in top gear, and keep it in closed loop mode. If the hill is very steep, then the car may downshift once RPM drops too low. It doesn't take much of a hill for the relatively tall-geared, heavy, and modestly powered Camry to loose enough speed that it drops down a gear.

The answer to the question is not either 80% load or slow speed bleed, but both. Sustain 80% load, and if the hill is too steep, you will slowly bleed speed.

Notice that as RPM drops, and without moving the throttle position, the engine load will increase. As RPM drops, smaller throttle openings are required to maintain the same engine load. That means you will need to constantly adjust the throttle in response to the engine RPM increasing or decreasing. Less throttle for lower RPM, more throttle for higher RPM; same 80-85% target load.
__________________
Gas and Electric Vehicle Cost of Ownership Calculator







Give me absolute safety, or give me death!
  Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to redpoint5 For This Useful Post:
Daox (03-10-2015)
Old 03-09-2015, 06:15 AM   #8 (permalink)
EcoModding Lurker
 
ShinyMew's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Vic, AU
Posts: 27

Suzuki Swift '06 - '06 Suzuki Swift (Base)
Thanks: 4
Thanked 3 Times in 1 Post
Thumbs up

Quote:
Originally Posted by redpoint5 View Post
Notice that as RPM drops, and without moving the throttle position, the engine load will increase. As RPM drops, smaller throttle openings are required to maintain the same engine load. That means you will need to constantly adjust the throttle in response to the engine RPM increasing or decreasing. Less throttle for lower RPM, more throttle for higher RPM; same 80-85% target load.
Ah, this is where I went wrong. I always erroneously assumed load correlated with throttle position. This is what I attempt to do anyway; I maintain the maximum load the automatic transmission will allow before it shifts down, which is just another way of stating this thread's newfound consensus, at least for automatics.
__________________
Proponent for Prevention of Cruelty to Automobiles.

  Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2015, 09:13 AM   #9 (permalink)
Just cruisin’ along
 
jcp123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Rochester, NY
Posts: 1,183

Beater Echo - '00 Toyota Echo
90 day: 42.67 mpg (US)

Hondizzle - '97 Honda Civic DX
Team Honda
90 day: 46.55 mpg (US)

Shaggin Waggin - '14 Chrysler Town + Country
90 day: 22.56 mpg (US)
Thanks: 66
Thanked 200 Times in 170 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by redpoint5 View Post
Do you have a device to monitor the load?

I have carefully studied how my 1998 Toyota Camry behaves when ascending a hill, and it won't downshift until 90%+ load is reached or RPM drops too low. It may drop out of closed loop mode on a very long and sustained 85+% load. I keep the load right at 80% on sustained hill climbs both to keep it in top gear, and keep it in closed loop mode. If the hill is very steep, then the car may downshift once RPM drops too low. It doesn't take much of a hill for the relatively tall-geared, heavy, and modestly powered Camry to loose enough speed that it drops down a gear.

The answer to the question is not either 80% load or slow speed bleed, but both. Sustain 80% load, and if the hill is too steep, you will slowly bleed speed.

Notice that as RPM drops, and without moving the throttle position, the engine load will increase. As RPM drops, smaller throttle openings are required to maintain the same engine load. That means you will need to constantly adjust the throttle in response to the engine RPM increasing or decreasing. Less throttle for lower RPM, more throttle for higher RPM; same 80-85% target load.
To be honest, I had taken it for granted that an auto and DWL were so mutually exclusive, that I never tried. Yes, I believe that my UG will calculate load. I'll have to experiment with this a little bit.
__________________



'97 Honda Civic DX Coupe 5MT - dead 2/23
'00 Echo - dead 2/17
'14 Chrysler Town + Country - My DD, for now
'67 Mustang Convertible - gone 1/17
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-2015, 01:41 PM   #10 (permalink)
Experienced UAW Mechanic
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Bear Lake
Posts: 363
Thanks: 7
Thanked 73 Times in 63 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by topcat View Post
Here's something I find contradictory and hard to fathom... Climbing a hill, I find the most fuel efficient method is a gradual speed bleed. Yet we are also told that the most efficient way to accelerate is at ~80% load. These two seem contradictory- my own findings are that if I accelerate up a hill it is less fuel efficient. Can anyone explain?
Around 85% throttle, most engine control computers transition from closed loop, stoichiometric, to open-loop, much richer.

  Reply With Quote
Reply  Post New Thread






Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.5.2
All content copyright EcoModder.com