Go Back   EcoModder Forum > EcoModding > Hypermiling / EcoDriver's Ed
Register Now
 Register Now

Reply  Post New Thread
Submit Tools LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 08-21-2012, 08:51 PM   #1 (permalink)
40-60-40 MPH P&G
echo-francis's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: laval, QC
Posts: 276

Echo-P&G - '05 Toyota Echo base
Team Toyota
90 day: 82.76 mpg (US)
Thanks: 45
Thanked 111 Times in 57 Posts
problem with p&g

recently on a long highway trip i did some p&g test and i found that it was worse than maintain a constant speed

while maintain a constant speed of 80 kph i was having between 3.7 and
4 l/100km

my p&g cycle was from 70 to 95 kph at 80%LOD and while accelerating i was geting an average of 11l/km

i calculate the times of all my pulse ang glide and my glides were 2.5 times longer than my pulse so i divide 11 by 2.5 i get 4.4 and its worse then 3.7 and 4

p&g cycles were on the 5th speed between about 1800 and 2500 rpm

maybe i do someting wrong but i cant find out my self

Best Tank (1557.2 Km): 2.57 LHK (91.63 MPG (US) )
Best Highway Trip (~36.8 Km): 2.16 LHK (109 MPG (US) )
Best Commute Trip avg (73.8 Km ): 2.33 LHK (101 MPG (US) )
Echo-Troll Modding Thread

I know i dont have a very good write-up
no lean-burn? no good gear ratio? p&g is the answer
  Reply With Quote
Alt Today
Popular topics

Other popular topics in this forum...

Old 08-21-2012, 09:21 PM   #2 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
nemo's Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: US
Posts: 975

Chief - '06 Pontiac Grand Prix
90 day: 25.8 mpg (US)

SF1 - '12 Ford Fiesta S
90 day: 22.87 mpg (US)
Thanks: 189
Thanked 226 Times in 176 Posts
I don't know how accurate you numbers will be doing it that way. But it seems to me you forgot the distance you cover while accelerating. Shouldn't it be 11 divide by 1 + 2.5 result 3.14.

  Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2012, 09:35 PM   #3 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: na
Posts: 1,025
Thanks: 277
Thanked 217 Times in 184 Posts

Read that thread, if your not going engine off 80% load might not be enought to beat steady speed. Via his numbers higher load the better.
  Reply With Quote
Old 08-22-2012, 11:41 AM   #4 (permalink)
Batman Junior
MetroMPG's Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: 1000 Islands, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 21,835

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

MPGiata - '90 Mazda Miata
90 day: 53.56 mpg (US)

Winter beater Metro - '00 Chevrolet Metro
90 day: 61.98 mpg (US)

Fancy Metro - '14 Mitsubishi Mirage top spec
90 day: 58.72 mpg (US)

Even Fancier Metro - '14 Mitsubishi Mirage top spec
90 day: 61.46 mpg (US)
Thanks: 3,537
Thanked 6,327 Times in 3,272 Posts
Why aren't you letting the ScanGauge calculate fuel consumption? Do you have the "fuel type" setting on "hybrid"? That will keep the ScanGauge alive while coasting.

If the ScanGauge is shutting off because of using the key to stop the engine, a kill switch will fix that.
Latest mods: 3-cylinder Mitsubishi Mirage. EcoMods now in progress...
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 08-22-2012, 02:44 PM   #5 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
3-Wheeler's Avatar
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Southern WI
Posts: 824

AlienMobile - '00 Honda Insight
Team Honda
90 day: 80.05 mpg (US)
Thanks: 94
Thanked 550 Times in 189 Posts
Originally Posted by echo-francis View Post
....p&g cycles were on the 5th speed between about 1800 and 2500 rpm ....
It's important when accelerating back up to speed, to keep rpm's "low", but the throttle plate relatively "open".

Might be helpful to determine where on the rpm band, that the engine is more responsive, without getting the rev's too high.

Taking off slow like a "grandpa" is too slow, and your results will be about the same as constant speed driving.

Take off briskly and then shutoff the engine and coast, is the best way to get high mileage.

  Reply With Quote
Old 08-22-2012, 03:59 PM   #6 (permalink)
EcoModding Lurker
Join Date: May 2012
Location: France
Posts: 17

Finalkev1 - '03 VW Lupo 3L
90 day: 80.69 mpg (US)
Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Hum... you are trying to do an average by using time of acceleration with "average instant" fuel consumption giving by the ODB without any distance informations and faulse speed average... it's (just a bit) an average result ;-)

Does the scangauge as a "total fuel burn" fonction? Cause it could be one way to do right calculation.

  Reply With Quote
Reply  Post New Thread

Thread Tools

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.5.2
All content copyright EcoModder.com