Hypermiling Lesson

[Chris D.]

Originally Posted by MetroMPG

"Engine Off Coasting"

this site needs a serious abbreviations table for n00bs

I bet there are lots of "quote" ????
responces floating around on here


to the site suggestions area Batman!

[Lazarus]

Originally Posted by MetroMPG

Great post, Rick! Nice tutoring, Laz!

I'm with the others who want to know the details of what you changed to instantly boost your results by 15%.

I'll give it the usually YMMV and these were just my opinions.
It's not a matter of one single techniques it was just fine tuning the arrows in his quiver. Keep in mind this was not his daily driver which responds alot different then this slug. Rick can add or subtract anything he thinks he needs to.

More efficient acceleration rates.
Working the terrain
When the best time for "N" (since i don't EOC)
Pluse and bleed
best speed to time the lights for a giving speed limit.
decleration rates 40-30, 20-0

How to ignore the jerk behind you when you're at the speed limit. (JK)

[Lazarus]

Originally Posted by hondaworkshop

Put that on video and you'll get some serious Web traffic...I'd watch it, then Digg it.

Man that would be one boring video. Grandma on her Sunday drive.

[RH77]

Originally Posted by Lazarus

I'll give it the usually YMMV and these were just my opinions.
It's not a matter of one single techniques it was just fine tuning the arrows in his quiver. Keep in mind this was not his daily driver which responds alot different then this slug. Rick can add or subtract anything he thinks he needs to.

More efficient acceleration rates.
Working the terrain
When the best time for "N" (since i don't EOC)
Pluse and bleed
best speed to time the lights for a giving speed limit.
decleration rates 40-30, 20-0

How to ignore the jerk behind you when you're at the speed limit. (JK)

That's pretty much spot-on. The biggest thing for me is estimating coasting distances and light timing.

And yes, the vehicle is a boat anchor. I drove it 440 miles up to the Siouxland area today in a 20+ MPH headwind (felt like 90). To get it at 30+ MPG total, I fell back to 55 MPH in a 70 zone for a 150 miles or so (and up to 60 in the 75 zone). The Cd is supposed to be 0.33, but it seems much higher than that.

Originally Posted by Lazarus

Man that would be one boring video. Grandma on her Sunday drive.

You gotta put some cool transition graphics and techno music to keep the kids entertained Otherwise yeah -- we're coasting...

...coasting some more. How about this Weather???

RH77

[s2man]

and "now we're not using the brakes".

[Harry6]

Lazurus,

You certainly pointed to a good list of things we can target to improve FE. But can you be more specific?

How do you know or find the more efficient acceleration rates?

What tips can you give for working the terrain, pulse and bleed, and deceleration rates and ranges?


Thanks,
Harry

[Lazarus]

Originally Posted by Harry6

Lazurus,

You certainly pointed to a good list of things we can target to improve FE. But can you be more specific?

How do you know or find the more efficient acceleration rates?

What tips can you give for working the terrain, pulse and bleed, and deceleration rates and ranges?


Thanks,
Harry

Harry welcome to the site. I'm afraid that there is not a one fit's all model. You're on the right track with the SG it is well worth the money and will pay for itself very quickly. Each one of your questions could probably have it's own thread because there ia alot of different responses to them.

I'll touch on the acceleration. The short answer it depends. Don't you love it. Every car is different and it varys with whether it's an auto or manual. This is where the SG come in handy.

I've done acceleration test with 2 different cars both automatics and the difference between rapid and slow accleration was really pretty minimal. This was accelerating to a certain speed and holding it over a 1 mile course.

I prefer a slow acceleration because that is usually what traffic will allow. If you try to acclerate rapidly it usually ends up with you having to get off it and then trying again to get up to speed or over accelerating for the traffic and having to brake. This again depends on how long before you have to slow down and terrain. For a rough estimate take a look at what kind of rpms you run at 60 mph. Then use that as a base line to tweak what works. Bottom line the FE game is dynamic and one size does not fit all and you have to make adjustment on route, traffic, terrain, posted speeds, light ect.

The easiest way to think of it is that for each segment of your route, acceleration to stop, repeate until done, you want to expend the least amount of energy for that segment. So whatever you use to get up to speed you want to deplete it all at the far end. So if you have a 1 mile long segment and you accelerate very slowly and use 3/4 mile to get there then you will waste energy because you will have to use brakes to slow down at the other end.

[RH77]

So, I applied the techniques to Teggy today and it worked great!

Since it's Saturday, I didn't have the over-caffienated office-types and minivan Moms riding my bumper, so coast times were decent.

Another technique I used today was to monitor the Ignition timing. I recall that 28+ was the target for efficient operation. That helped a lot.

The SGII reported 37.5 in mixed driving today on a cold start (with 3-hour EBH). It will take some additional tanks to work out the noise (this tank will be a bad example -- carbon cleansing, transmission fluid change, resetting the ECU/TCU, etc.)

The acceleration portion definitely improved. Thanks again!

RH77

[DifferentPointofView]

Yup the 2.4. It's no replacement for the Neon's 2.0, but you can still pull-down some decent numbers at lower speeds.

Experimenting around town today, I found the ideal speed to be just above 45 MPH (42-ish is where the TC engages)...

RH77

Does the Avenger have CVT? the caliber does, so I have no idea when anything engages cause there's no difference in rpms while accelerating, nor the butt-gauge can't tell me anything cause there's no shifting. CVT seems nice, but I like the shifts.

[RH77]

Originally Posted by DifferentPointofView

Does the Avenger have CVT? the caliber does, so I have no idea when anything engages cause there's no difference in rpms while accelerating, nor the butt-gauge can't tell me anything cause there's no shifting. CVT seems nice, but I like the shifts.

No it has the good 'ol 4-speed auto with Torque Converter.

How to tell if a vehicle has a CVT (not very efficient) find an open space to do a full throttle run for at least a few seconds and see if it holds near the redline/max power point, or if it does the traditional shift-n-drop.

The CVT is supposed to make the vehicle more efficient by having an infinitely variable gear ratio within its range -- that way it can keep the revs in the most efficient range.

I drove a Nissan Rogue (Sentra based mini-SUV) in the bitter cold of Norther Iowa this Winter (-10F). Once it warmed up to Zero-Degrees, it drove normally -- the best feature was the way it would drop the RPMs to around 1500 just driving around town. Same for the highway operation.

The argument, is a CVT less efficient itself with all of it's extra mechanical processes and the question remains: will it be a reliable, long-term investment? In my case, the CVT made a terrible metal-on-metal screeching noise, on acceleration, until the temp rose to near Zero -- of course an extreme example. The vehicle just couldn't warm up otherwise -- it was freezing in there! (that was with no heat, trying to send what it was making to the engine/transmission).

I've driven CVTs in the Ford Taurus ("500" version) and Nissan Murano with no problems. A little bump in FE can usually be expected.

RH77