08-19-2008, 01:24 AM
|
#11 (permalink)
|
EcoModding Lurker
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: New Cumberland,PA
Posts: 59
Thanks: 2
Thanked 3 Times in 3 Posts
|
i totally hear what you are saying but tires aren't rated for psi, manufactures put numbers on them to get certain parameters filled such as ride quality, noise and grip , which for me i want the least amount of energy wasted in my driveline and my tires to last as long as possible, heck i could have them at 30 psi like when my gf had some horrible perellis on her focus and the pieces of junk balloned the sidewall which were at manufactures reccomended specs.
so if something is proven to be wrong then i will stop but like our driving techniques someone told us all of these rules on how to drive when we were younger and find out now that most are not true , who am i not to try new things that have so far proven themselves completely true! I can see how somethings might be crazy but isn't that how most things are discovered or revolutionized? I am trying to think out of the box from the wasteful notions of my generations and generations past.
|
|
|
Today
|
|
|
Other popular topics in this forum...
|
|
|
08-19-2008, 02:12 AM
|
#12 (permalink)
|
Dartmouth 2010
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Hanover, NH
Posts: 6,447
Thanks: 92
Thanked 122 Times in 90 Posts
|
Well, just hope you don't hit a pothole. Bicycle tires are certainly different, but the same "suggested max inflation" things still come into play, and I've seen too many tires explode in races to take the same chance out on the road. Besides, by darin's coast down test, there's not even much difference in the rolling resistance.
I understand your point about questioning traditional wisdom, but when things like safety are concerned it's best to know first, and act second. Wayne will be in a world of sadness when someone hyperinflates, has a blowout, and then blames him for his completely uneducated recommendations. Unless he's secretly and engineer and knows more than the rest of us.
|
|
|
08-19-2008, 10:13 AM
|
#13 (permalink)
|
Administrator
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Germantown, WI
Posts: 11,203
Thanks: 2,501
Thanked 2,587 Times in 1,554 Posts
|
Back on topic.
I aim to always (regardless of speed) accelerate at around 80% load and keep rpms under 3000. With variations (rpm especially) from engine to engine, it is the most efficient way to accelerate, period. TPS doesn't really have much to do with it other than it effects load. One TPS reading will not work for everyone and will vary quite a large amount depending on many things. Load is the key.
I think there are benefit of accelerating slower. It allows you to not over-accelerate since you have more time to think and see what is going on. It also lowers average speed which will lead to small gains.
|
|
|
08-19-2008, 11:09 AM
|
#14 (permalink)
|
EcoModding Lurker
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Michigan
Posts: 76
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
Moderate to brisk acceleration is most efficient. It operates the engine at its best BSFC (ie, maximum work for the least fuel).
|
|
|
08-19-2008, 12:54 PM
|
#15 (permalink)
|
EcoModding Lurker
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: New Cumberland,PA
Posts: 59
Thanks: 2
Thanked 3 Times in 3 Posts
|
Daox- your thoughts about slower acceleration are the ones i have been thinking that are contrary to accelerating briskly, and keeping the engine of best bsfc is what would make sense as well
|
|
|
08-19-2008, 01:24 PM
|
#16 (permalink)
|
Master EcoModder
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Northwest Lower Michigan
Posts: 1,006
Thanks: 8
Thanked 17 Times in 16 Posts
|
Id have to say a scangauge or mpguino would really be the best way to tell. It really depends on the car, and the driving conditions. On my car, unless I really punch it, I get the same or better mpg with brisk acceration as with just spinning fluid at really slow acceleration (which I used to do before the mpguino). So getting up to speed faster is better since I get the same mpg for less distance.
__________________
Winter daily driver, parked most days right now
Summer daily driver
|
|
|
08-19-2008, 01:39 PM
|
#17 (permalink)
|
Master EcoModder
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: London, Ontario
Posts: 1,096
Thanks: 0
Thanked 17 Times in 14 Posts
|
I'm new to all this driving tech stuff, but brisk accel quite often leads to me using the brakes. I guess it just takes practice to judge correctly.
|
|
|
08-19-2008, 05:22 PM
|
#18 (permalink)
|
EcoModding Lurker
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: New Cumberland,PA
Posts: 59
Thanks: 2
Thanked 3 Times in 3 Posts
|
For me its not too much of an issue worrying about lights unless im in a completely unknown area which sometimes you really can't help but for the most part you can see it coming. Also when getting up to speed fsater will also mean that i can start fas'ing sooner and for longer periods of time which i think will really help along with keeping my target speed lower.
|
|
|
08-19-2008, 05:30 PM
|
#19 (permalink)
|
I REFUSE!
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: 92596
Posts: 262
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
I use 30% TPS as my staple for acceleration, I was going to try 5% increases on following tanks but that never happened panned out because I stopped driving as much, so I just stick with 30% for acceleration and 13-15% for freeway cruising at 50-55mph.
__________________
|
|
|
08-19-2008, 05:36 PM
|
#20 (permalink)
|
Ecoformance Engineer
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Arizona
Posts: 239
EJ7 - '96 honda civic Hx Last 3: 58.02 mpg (US)
Thanks: 0
Thanked 3 Times in 3 Posts
|
A tuner informed me that honda's dont go into open loop unless throttle is over 90% and rpms are high enough.
I accel @ 0-1 in vacuum (about 75%) and always pulse from 1500-2000 rpm. This has given me high 60's in city driving.
__________________
70 mpg or die modding
www.full-race.com
Quote:
Originally Posted by MetroMPG
looking forward to seeing what kind of uber-sipper slinks out of the full race skunkworks.
|
|
|
|
|