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

Reply  Post New Thread
Submit Tools LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 12-19-2013, 11:26 AM   #101 (permalink)
hypermiller somewhat.....
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: nova scotia
Posts: 70

Sierra - '13 GMC 1500 SLE
90 day: 12.24 mpg (US)

Cruze Eco - '15 chevrolet Cruze Eco
Team Chevy
90 day: 46.52 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1
Thanked 6 Times in 6 Posts
What is your measurement techniques and what sort of accuracy you looking for?

I invested in a high end "consumer" (fully aware the Professional will add a digit to the price) OBD interface that can read the latest CAN data if I am willing to pay for the software.... I hoped the data provided would be 95% accurate. Time will tell.

Well.... That has me thinking... and more questions....

I got 25 years repairing digital feedback control systems that measure stuff in the micro range at a >1000 Hz rate and be able to read that accuracy in a digital word and references. I was expecting to see the same kind data on the OBD but within the milli range at best.

Does the OBD interface provide raw standardized data as detected on the CAN bus?

If not standardized, where is it interpreted?

If not raw, what is filtered out? What is the resolution for the filtered data?

My minimum sample rate that I am hoping for in 1 Hz but I expect 10 Hz, is that achieveable?

I have not logged data from a car ECU yet and I hope to be able to generate references that will us the best driving technique for different circumstances throughout my commute.

  Reply With Quote
Alt Today
Popular topics

Other popular topics in this forum...

Old 02-07-2015, 03:52 PM   #102 (permalink)
Mechanical engineer
Vekke's Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Kitee (Finland)
Posts: 1,244

Siitin - '98 Seat Cordoba Vario
90 day: 58.56 mpg (US)

VW Lupo 3L --> 2L - '00 VolksWagen Lupo 3L
90 day: 104.94 mpg (US)

A8 luxury fuel sipper - '97 Audi A8 1.2 TDI 6 speed manual
90 day: 64.64 mpg (US)

Audi A4B6 Avant Niistäjä - '02 Audi A4b6 1.9tdi 96kW 3L
90 day: 54.57 mpg (US)

Tourekki - '04 VW Touareg 2.5TDI R5 6 speed manual
90 day: 32.98 mpg (US)

A2 1.4TDI - '03 Audi A2 1.4 TDI
90 day: 45.68 mpg (US)

A2 1.4 LPG - '02 Audi A2 1.4 (75hp)
90 day: 24.67 mpg (US)
Thanks: 259
Thanked 803 Times in 391 Posts
I have pondered this testing thing many times and now I think I have a good way to measure aerodynamic or engine performance/efficiency or rolling resistance mods:

First you need to know your cars exact basic data points like.
- Weigth with driver and fuel, more accurate data the better results will come
- Frontal area
- Cd and Crr values when you begin to do modifications.

Then its wise to make a basic fuel consumption chart with Aerodynamic & rolling resistance calculator - EcoModder.com

There will be your basic data which you will use in your tests in the future. I have generally used just my fuel consumpion gauge, but when you go under 2.5 liters range or 100+ mpg the changes you see have huge effect to values and so many things effects those results that just by doing onroad testing its very hard to be able to see the changes effect to your car or fuel consumption, but I think I have a better way.

For example if you are doing tire testing you should do it at fairly low speeds where the rolling resistance has higher effect to fuel consumption. This can be done at many levels depending on your skills and aims and equiptment you have for testing purposes.

Tire testing

1. easy way.
- find "level" straigth road
- build a stopper under the gas pedal so your speed is limited to 40 km/h 24,8 MPH with 2nd or third gear on that straigth. So you driving with constant throttle CT
- Measure the average engine rpm on that road over some distance so put marks on the road. For rpm measurement its wise to have digital rpm data available
- you can also measure average time on that straigth with regular stopwatch but for that use you might need longer road to see effects, but then again the road does not necessary have to be "flat"
- Basicly this is constant throttle CT its max and you have limited the amount of fuel engine will inject. If speed rpm increses you have less resictance on your tires. From that time and also distance you can calculate the actual avg speed. You can now calculate the crr from your online tool data if your speed increases with same amount of fuel injected. What crr value gives the same fuel consumption.

Ofcourse the tires also effect aerodynamics and you can do the test with higher speeds to get also the aero effect visible but its more difficult. Generally you want to find a tire that has least rolling resistance and maybe test few with high speed if you can see the effects also there which is best. You use low gears because then you can see more clearly how much the rpm changes. 1% change is 1500 rpm is 1515 vs 1% @ 3500rpm is 3535 for example.

With this test you arent looking the effect to fuel consumption directly as you can use the calculator.

2. More scientific way

If you are able to measure the fuel injection amount at that is really injected via VAG com etc you can then check does the injection value stay the same if you have the stopper installed.

If it stays then you dont have any problems but sometimes it don`t depending on the cars design criterias etc.

In that case you need to alter your fuel consumption maps from the ecu this aint easy but propably can be done and I will test it next summer with my A8 project. So you limit fuel injected that under no conditions the engine will only inject that amount of fuel you want. So basicly you are limiting the max power to certain level like you do in flat out accelerations but this time for different purpose.

If you have that vag com cable you can measure thing like injecter fuel or the avg rmp or avg speed directly by logging data. This way its not so important to have straight level road and you can make the test lets say at 4 km long test route. So measure again still avg rpm and speed and that time. results are calculated with that same online fuel consumption tool.

aerodynamics testing

That was for tire testing but if you change the aerodynamics then you should use little bit higher speed something like 70 km/h 43,5 MPH to have bigger aero effect.

For this you want to use your 3rd or 4th gear for same purposes high rpm more accuracy on your results. You don`t want to test at higher speeds because aerodynamic drag will increase with so high steps that you wont see mods effect easily on the speed or rpm or the time travelled unless you have done major modifications but you want to see even those smaller mods effect to your car as 10 small good changes can have that 1-2% better FE. So every mod counts to overall results.

When calculating the results now just play with the Cd value to get your desired results. now you are propably wondering where you get those HP data point as the tool only gives them at 5 mph steps between 5-200 mph and 1 mph steps between 40-65 MPH. You need to fill those data points to exel and make some lines Where you pick up the speed and follow that to hp level. Someone with exel skills could make instructions I am not best at that :/.

You can use this method also for oil, tire pressures, injection timing or any other modifications etc to see which setup is best for your purpose. Ofcourse here you should do the ABA testing to rule out weather etc effects to results

Could this work in action?


Vesa Tiainen innovation engineer and automotive enthusiast

Last edited by Vekke; 02-07-2015 at 04:29 PM..
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-12-2015, 06:34 AM   #103 (permalink)
EcoModding Lurker
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: stevenage
Posts: 15

Gazers Car - '09 Nissan Pixo N-TEC
90 day: 44.34 mpg (US)
Thanks: 6
Thanked 3 Times in 3 Posts
PaleMelanesian, Could you please explain how you captured this data? I have a Scangauge but i don’t think i can link it up to my laptop to capture its real time data, which ideally would be in CSV for Excel manipulation. I am practically interested in the local topography Vs fuel economy Vs engine warm up time.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-13-2015, 01:26 PM   #104 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Atlanta area
Posts: 410
Thanks: 966
Thanked 74 Times in 63 Posts
Just a thought on using gps devices to measure speed and distance. I have noticed that when going uphill or downhill, the gps speed decreases a little compared to the speedo in my truck. I am guessing that this is because the gps device only sees horizontal movement and not vertical movement.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2015, 09:27 AM   #105 (permalink)
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
90 day: 44.06 mpg (US)
Thanks: 611
Thanked 433 Times in 283 Posts
Originally Posted by herbivor View Post
PaleMelanesian, Could you please explain how you captured this data? I have a Scangauge but i don’t think i can link it up to my laptop to capture its real time data, which ideally would be in CSV for Excel manipulation. I am practically interested in the local topography Vs fuel economy Vs engine warm up time.
That is my averaged historical commute trip mileage. Write down the trip mpg after each trip, with other details like temperature and wind. After several years of collecting and averaging, patterns start to emerge. There is a lot of daily variation due to conditions and my own inconsistency, but the sheer mass of years of data overwhelm that.

11-mile commute: 100 mpg - - - Tank: 90.2 mpg / 1191 miles
  Reply With Quote
Old 08-11-2016, 03:38 PM   #106 (permalink)
EcoModding Lurker
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Gilroy, CA
Posts: 8
Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
I didn't see anything on this thread regarding where you can do lab testing (admittedly I just scanned it, I didn't read every post). The SEMA Garage in Diamond Bar California has an AVL dyno in an environmentally controlled room and can run the EPA test patterns. It's also not that expensive (compared to actually making a product) to rent it for an hour or two for your testing.

I'm not sure if a SEMA membership is required, but if you're doing something aftermarket, it's a good idea anyways to join.

I don't work for SEMA, I just wanted to share this info since it took me a while to find somewhere to do testing.
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-26-2017, 05:07 PM   #107 (permalink)
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: Abbotsford, BC, Canada
Posts: 1
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Air temperature very much affects fuel economy. I have found this to be especially true in my 1995 Geo Metro and in my 2011 F150 eco-boost. Driving the Hope Princeton highway in British Columbia I would get 50 miles per gallon in my metro during the winter and 60 miles per gallon in the summer. Same speed similar road conditions, big temperature difference. I found this mpg difference to be similar in my day-to-day driving as well as I was a sales rep travelling all around Vancouver. These days I drive the F150 and I'm always amazed at how big a difference the fuel economy is from winter to summer. The last two spring breaks I have driven from Vancouver to Los Angeles. Driving similar speeds both years and with similar temperatures I found a massive mpg gain between Bakersfield and Los Angeles. The truck was well warmed up by then and the temperatures have gone up from 50° to 70°. Not only did I see about a 15% increase in fuel economy, but I did it while going over 4000 foot summit. My body just drove his 2014 Chrysler town and country on the same route and found the exact same fuel economy patterns as I did. His overall numbers were higher but the trend was the same.
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-27-2017, 01:31 PM   #108 (permalink)
Batman Junior
MetroMPG's Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: 1000 Islands, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 22,513

Blackfly - '98 Geo Metro
Team Metro
Last 3: 70.09 mpg (US)

MPGiata - '90 Mazda Miata
90 day: 52.71 mpg (US)

Even Fancier Metro - '14 Mitsubishi Mirage top spec
90 day: 70.75 mpg (US)

Appliance car - '14 Mitsubishi Mirage ES (base)
90 day: 52.48 mpg (US)
Thanks: 4,060
Thanked 6,957 Times in 3,602 Posts
Absolutely it does! Most people who track their fuel economy long term see clear seasonal patterns in consumption, despite driving the same route.

SAE even has a temperature correction factor that is applied to fuel consumption to standardize results of tests done at different points on the thermometer.
Project MPGiata! Mods for getting 50+ MPG from a 1990 Miata
Honda mods: Ecomodding my $800 Honda Fit 5-speed beater
Mitsu mods: 70 MPG in my ecomodded, dirt cheap, 3-cylinder Mirage.
Ecodriving test: Manual vs. automatic transmission MPG showdown

has launched a forum for the efficient new Mitsubishi Mirage
www.MetroMPG.com - fuel efficiency info for Geo Metro owners
www.ForkenSwift.com - electric car conversion on a beer budget
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-2017, 05:54 PM   #109 (permalink)
EcoModding Lurker
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: USA
Posts: 1
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

I don't actually see anything on this thread regarding where you can do lab testing. This is weird!
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-2017, 06:09 PM   #110 (permalink)
...beats walking...
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: .
Posts: 6,190
Thanks: 179
Thanked 1,525 Times in 1,126 Posts
Originally Posted by MitchellRandle View Post
I don't actually see anything on this thread regarding where you can do lab testing. This is weird!
Very FEW people have 'labs' in their garage(s) nor lab equipment!

  Reply With Quote
Reply  Post New Thread

Thread Tools

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Test: Alternator vs. no alternator = 10% MPG gain @ 70 km/h MetroMPG EcoModding Central 450 10-27-2023 09:40 AM
Project: Rebuilding an '01 Honda Insight as a nonhybrid Fabio Hybrids 158 01-12-2013 11:59 AM
Test: 200w electric bicycle efficiency = 1512 MPG equivalent MetroMPG Fossil Fuel Free 30 07-03-2008 12:25 PM

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