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

Reply  Post New Thread
 
Submit Tools LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 02-22-2011, 09:49 PM   #21 (permalink)
Polymorphic Modder
 
SoobieOut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Utah
Posts: 307

2006 DaCivic Hybrid - '06 Honda Civic Hybrid
90 day: 45.16 mpg (US)
Thanks: 188
Thanked 40 Times in 25 Posts
Millions of dollars were spent developing the double nickle (55 MPH) signs in the seventies.

From what I have read it is the magic number for FE. I am sure there are different gear ratios to place the number a bit higher or lower.

  Reply With Quote
Alt Today
Popular topics

Other popular topics in this forum...

   
Old 02-23-2011, 07:29 PM   #22 (permalink)
500 Mile Metro Traveler
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Sun City, CA
Posts: 183

'89 Dakota LB - blue - '89 Dodge Dakota V6 LE
90 day: 19.8 mpg (US)

'17 Fiat 124 - SunFiat - '17 Fiat 124 Spider Classica
90 day: 30.51 mpg (US)

'89 Metro - The Egg - '89 Geo Metro Base
90 day: 50.71 mpg (US)

'94 Alto - The Box - '94 Suzuki Alto Ce-L
90 day: 39.5 mpg (US)
Thanks: 14
Thanked 13 Times in 10 Posts
nothing the government ever does is purely scientific. throw a few special interest lobbyists in the mix and then you have the real reason on the 55mph selection.

i'm sure the best vehicle speed has to do when the aerodynamic drag starts to contribute substantially to the speed equation.

as for engine speed, i'm going to guess it's on the idle speed side of the peak torque curve, so in my engine's case, it produces peak tq numbers at 2500 rpm, so somewhere between 1000 rpm and 2500 rpm would be ideal.

Last edited by zonker; 02-23-2011 at 07:35 PM..
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-23-2011, 07:32 PM   #23 (permalink)
(:
 
Frank Lee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: up north
Posts: 12,762

Blue - '93 Ford Tempo
Last 3: 27.29 mpg (US)

F150 - '94 Ford F150 XLT 4x4
90 day: 18.5 mpg (US)

Sport Coupe - '92 Ford Tempo GL
Last 3: 69.62 mpg (US)

ShWing! - '82 honda gold wing Interstate
90 day: 33.65 mpg (US)

Moon Unit - '98 Mercury Sable LX Wagon
90 day: 21.24 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1,585
Thanked 3,555 Times in 2,218 Posts
55 is generally the point at which aero loads overtake other resistances. Due to the nature of aero loads- that they increase exponentially rather than linearly- 55 seems a sensible place to assign max velocity in order to get maximum benefit.
__________________


  Reply With Quote
Old 02-23-2011, 07:52 PM   #24 (permalink)
Pokémoderator
 
cfg83's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Southern California
Posts: 5,864

1999 Saturn SW2 - '99 Saturn SW2 Wagon
Team Saturn
90 day: 40.49 mpg (US)
Thanks: 439
Thanked 532 Times in 358 Posts
zonker -

Quote:
Originally Posted by zonker View Post
nothing the government ever does is purely scientific. throw a few special interest lobbyists in the mix and then you have the real reason on the 55mph selection.

i'm sure the best vehicle speed has to do when the aerodynamic drag starts to contribute substantially to the speed equation.

as for engine speed, i'm going to guess it's on the idle speed side of the peak torque curve, so in my engine's case, it produces peak tq numbers at 2500 rpm, so somewhere between 1000 rpm and 2500 rpm would be ideal.
I think basjoos likes to maintain a higher average MPH than most of us because of his aeromods. For the majority of cars, however, this is the way things play out :



In all cases the trend is downward, and it was going down *before* 55 MPH. The only special car in all of this is the Mercedes C 180 K. It "bucks the trend", but it is still going down.

CarloSW2
__________________

What's your EPA MPG? Go Here and find out!
American Solar Energy Society
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-23-2011, 08:14 PM   #25 (permalink)
500 Mile Metro Traveler
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Sun City, CA
Posts: 183

'89 Dakota LB - blue - '89 Dodge Dakota V6 LE
90 day: 19.8 mpg (US)

'17 Fiat 124 - SunFiat - '17 Fiat 124 Spider Classica
90 day: 30.51 mpg (US)

'89 Metro - The Egg - '89 Geo Metro Base
90 day: 50.71 mpg (US)

'94 Alto - The Box - '94 Suzuki Alto Ce-L
90 day: 39.5 mpg (US)
Thanks: 14
Thanked 13 Times in 10 Posts
thank you for the chart!

from what info i have been picking up your chart and from other websites, it seems 37-62 mph is "the zone" you don't want to leave, and where it falls after that depends more on the car's own engine/trans/aero specs.

so... i know the car will shift into it's tallest gear (0.75:1 with TQ lockup) at about 46mph (1700 rpm approx).

so i'm going to guess for me it's somewhere between 46 and 57mph. I'd say 62mph but my car is NOT aerodynamic

i think i need to take my lil 90 mile loop and slow my speed from 65-70mph to 50-55mph and see what happens.

p.s. i did donate for a mpguino so hopefully i'll have that in my measuring arsenal real soon.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-23-2011, 08:23 PM   #26 (permalink)
MPGuino Supporter
 
t vago's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Hungary
Posts: 1,807

iNXS - '10 Opel Zafira 111 Anniversary

Suzi - '02 Suzuki Swift GL
Thanks: 830
Thanked 708 Times in 456 Posts
Engine tune has a great deal to do with optimal engine speed on the highway. This includes volumetric efficiency of the engine, as considered to be an air pump. If low end on a given engine is questionable to begin with because that engine can't really breathe at low RPMs, then odds are it will get worse FE on the highway with taller gearing, than with lower gearing.

On the other board I sometimes visit, there was at least one example of somebody swapping in a transmission computer to get an extra overdrive gear for their electronically controlled transmission, and they actually ended up hurting their FE as a result. When I looked at the other engine mods this guy had, I could see why.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-23-2011, 08:26 PM   #27 (permalink)
500 Mile Metro Traveler
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Sun City, CA
Posts: 183

'89 Dakota LB - blue - '89 Dodge Dakota V6 LE
90 day: 19.8 mpg (US)

'17 Fiat 124 - SunFiat - '17 Fiat 124 Spider Classica
90 day: 30.51 mpg (US)

'89 Metro - The Egg - '89 Geo Metro Base
90 day: 50.71 mpg (US)

'94 Alto - The Box - '94 Suzuki Alto Ce-L
90 day: 39.5 mpg (US)
Thanks: 14
Thanked 13 Times in 10 Posts
a couple other good graphs...



  Reply With Quote
Old 02-23-2011, 08:34 PM   #28 (permalink)
500 Mile Metro Traveler
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Sun City, CA
Posts: 183

'89 Dakota LB - blue - '89 Dodge Dakota V6 LE
90 day: 19.8 mpg (US)

'17 Fiat 124 - SunFiat - '17 Fiat 124 Spider Classica
90 day: 30.51 mpg (US)

'89 Metro - The Egg - '89 Geo Metro Base
90 day: 50.71 mpg (US)

'94 Alto - The Box - '94 Suzuki Alto Ce-L
90 day: 39.5 mpg (US)
Thanks: 14
Thanked 13 Times in 10 Posts
well besides the 90 mile trip at 50-55mph, i have another thought... there is a substantial uphill grade for approx 1 mile on the I-15 near my home. I will see how slow i can lug the car before it wants to shift out of TC lockup, so basically i'll try it at 50mph (1850 rpm) and then try at subsequently higher speeds until the trans will not unlock the TC. That should give me an idea about the motor's torque efficiency at lower rpms.

UPDATE: did the I-15 hill climb. Set the cruise control for 50mph. The white rag would lose speed and downshift from TC lockup. At 55mph, she climbed without a speed drop and kept in TC lockup. So... I think my magical hwy speed rpm is greater than 1850 and less than 2050 rpm.

Last edited by zonker; 02-23-2011 at 09:31 PM..
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-23-2011, 08:42 PM   #29 (permalink)
500 Mile Metro Traveler
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Sun City, CA
Posts: 183

'89 Dakota LB - blue - '89 Dodge Dakota V6 LE
90 day: 19.8 mpg (US)

'17 Fiat 124 - SunFiat - '17 Fiat 124 Spider Classica
90 day: 30.51 mpg (US)

'89 Metro - The Egg - '89 Geo Metro Base
90 day: 50.71 mpg (US)

'94 Alto - The Box - '94 Suzuki Alto Ce-L
90 day: 39.5 mpg (US)
Thanks: 14
Thanked 13 Times in 10 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by t vago View Post
Engine tune has a great deal to do with optimal engine speed on the highway. This includes volumetric efficiency of the engine, as considered to be an air pump. If low end on a given engine is questionable to begin with because that engine can't really breathe at low RPMs, then odds are it will get worse FE on the highway with taller gearing, than with lower gearing.

On the other board I sometimes visit, there was at least one example of somebody swapping in a transmission computer to get an extra overdrive gear for their electronically controlled transmission, and they actually ended up hurting their FE as a result. When I looked at the other engine mods this guy had, I could see why.
+1!

I understand that it's the sum of the whole. I've already made air/fuel/ignition modifications to the motor and thru testing have found more mpg thru smaller injectors, a smaller diameter intake tube (creates higher air velocity thru the maf for increased ignition timing/fuel to offset smaller injectors), and a full time warm air intake by removing the flap valve that directed only cold air into the tube at operating temps.

That and some under-driving of the accessory speeds have gotten me a personal best of 31 mpg so far (it was 26 when all was stock, same as the epa hwy specs). That was at speeds between 65-70 mph constant. Now with the new info, I'm going to attempt the same trip, but 50-55mph speeds and see if I pick up any fuel economy.

Last edited by zonker; 02-23-2011 at 09:37 PM..
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-23-2011, 09:48 PM   #30 (permalink)
(:
 
Frank Lee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: up north
Posts: 12,762

Blue - '93 Ford Tempo
Last 3: 27.29 mpg (US)

F150 - '94 Ford F150 XLT 4x4
90 day: 18.5 mpg (US)

Sport Coupe - '92 Ford Tempo GL
Last 3: 69.62 mpg (US)

ShWing! - '82 honda gold wing Interstate
90 day: 33.65 mpg (US)

Moon Unit - '98 Mercury Sable LX Wagon
90 day: 21.24 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1,585
Thanked 3,555 Times in 2,218 Posts
http://ecomodder.com/forum/showthrea...peed-1477.html

There seems to be a point of lower rpms at which engines don't get more efficient.

__________________


  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