EcoModder.com

EcoModder.com (https://ecomodder.com/forum/)
-   Hypermiling / EcoDriver's Ed (https://ecomodder.com/forum/hypermiling-ecodrivers-ed.html)
-   -   Some Hypermiling techniques denounced by AAA (https://ecomodder.com/forum/showthread.php/some-hypermiling-techniques-denounced-aaa-3369.html)

Lazarus 06-27-2008 08:10 AM

Some Hypermiling techniques denounced by AAA
 
Well Now we will see what the court of public opinion has to say. I imagine this is just the first in a long line of article to be coming out.

Quote:

AAA opposes all of those methods, noting that cutting off a car's engine may negatively affect power steering and power brakes; overinflating tires leads to uneven tire wear; and rolling through stop signs and tailgating trucks puts drivers at risk.

Blue07CivicEX 06-27-2008 08:32 AM

Well, here goes,

First off, half the people on this site have cars without power steering, my car has power steering but it's light enough and small enough I can steer it quite well without the power assist.

Second, shouldn't they be glad we're overinflating out tires to whihc "leads to uneven tire wear" because that will give them more business out on the highway when your tire blows.

Third, I personally come to a complete stop at all red lights and stop signs, I may not want to but I do, my office window overlooks a 4 way intersection and during the course of an hour I'll see MAYBE 1-2 cars come to a complete stop. So, that makes me question, is ALL of Albany NY hypermiling? if so shouldn't it be safe if we're all doing the same thing?

Fourth, the above goes for red lights, I've been nearly broadsided multiple times by people racing to make lights and just blowing through them AFTER THE DELAY, my light will have already turned green and they are still running it, BUT they must be hypermiling too as only hypermilers do this to keep from ruining their mileage.

Ok, that's my rant,

Ps. I hate idiots, people that stereotype and can't come up with coherent thoughts are idiots in my mind. Also people who have extremely flawed logic, IE, AAA in this case.

Lazarus 06-27-2008 08:41 AM

True but I doubt there are online communities endorsing those practices.:)

NoCO2 06-27-2008 09:13 AM

OMG! But, what about all those cars back before they had power steering or power brakes!? How did they ever function!? :rolleyes:

This is why I always tell people that ride with me and ask about saving gas to practice in a parking lot and make sure they know what to expect before they EVER go on the road and do it. I also tell them to make sure they know how it's going to act with EVERY movement you make. For example, if your steering locks when you turn off the ignition, then you should not EOC or else you might die. Make sure you pump your brakes several times so you know EXACTLY how much force it's going to take to stop your car without power assist brakes. Make sure you know where your hazard lights are without even thinking about it so in case your car doesn't start back up you can get them turned on VERY quickly and get out of the road as fast as possible.

All of these articles I have read assume that everyone does it without knowing what's going to happen before they do. Granted, a lot of the general public probably would, but this is in a country where you can also get your driver's license without any mandatory driver training and education. IMO, there is absolutely nothing wrong with the majority of hypermiling techniques. Rolling through stop signs and drafting, in another of my opinions, yes, is unsafe, however, if the driver chooses to do it then they are taking a risk that could potentially cause them and other drivers harm (more so the stop sign thing then drafting). Not to mention, those two are also the only techniques that are illegal which begs the question why, if so many people are tailgating and rolling stop signs, why haven't more people been getting pulled over for these things?

dcb 06-27-2008 09:43 AM

So what is their position on driving while using a cell phone?

Blue07CivicEX 06-27-2008 10:16 AM

Who wants to start up "How_to_drive_like_an_a**hole.com" so AAA will write and article about them discussing unsafe techniques on the almighty interweb?

MazdaMatt 06-27-2008 11:12 AM

I understand all of your outrage. Personally, i am a LEGAL performance driving enthusiast. I have a track-only car that i haul to race days. Many people I know also use street legal vehicles with performance mods. A lot o media attention in Ontario has created laws that are unjust and affect these people that I know adversely without them actually doing anything illegal. It has created a anti-performance attitude in the police.

Anyway, my point is, all that crap was caused by a number of idiots who absolutely do not act like the "purists". The purists lose out because of the stupid people.

Consider this... one of the purists on this site who has trained himself for years and modified his car in many ways tells a moron that his tires are at 50psi. Moron equates: If i set my tires to 50psi, i will get 80mpg! Moron then pumps up the tires, tailgates a truck on the highway, the truck hits the brakes, so does the moron and his tires lock up hard because he no longer has the grip he's used to. Moron dies, purist gets blamed. That is what is going on.

As a racer I understand the affects of tire pressure VERY much. If my car is acting oddly, i can adjust 2 tires by 1psi and notice a massive differnce. The reason for the massive difference is that I am ALWAYS on the ragged edge of my car's performance. The only time that a street driver is at the edge of his performance is in a major emergency. No training, no safety gear, no grip due to overinflated tires = dead person.

Blue07CivicEX 06-27-2008 11:19 AM

Well stated, so... AAA should be denouncing morons instead of educated purists, I like it :-) (I know that's not what you said but it's the reality of the matter).

MazdaMatt 06-27-2008 11:21 AM

Well, i may have used a lot more words, but yeah... that's exactly what I said.

Lazarus 06-27-2008 12:41 PM

You can't compare racing on a closed course with group of people who know what they are doing to hypermiling USA.

The point of posting this was that in order to get the movement going you need to have people interested. By telling people and indorsing(not that this site does it) to do what most would consider risky at minimum and illegal operations is not going to help in the court of public opinion. It will alway be a bunch of kooks getting in everybodys way. Especially when you can get great result without breaking the law or risky behavior. I think that AAA has it right on the things that they had a problem with in the article. As always YMMV

MazdaMatt 06-27-2008 12:52 PM

In the case of hypermilers vs. morons with high tire pressure, as in the case of responsible performance enthusiasts vs. morons with big exhausts street racing downtown... education is everything. Educate the morons to stop doing what they are doing, and educate the general public that the purists are not morons.

Hypermilers get a lot more good press than performance enthusiasts... feel lucky.

Blue07CivicEX 06-27-2008 12:53 PM

Touche! I think I will record the intersection outside my office and post a clip sometime, it's really quite funny.

12voltsolar 06-27-2008 01:03 PM

My buddy is a professional mechanic and his shop has been sent waring via fax & e-mail from most of the major tire mfg'ers warning that customers my be over inflating their tires and that shops need to be on the look out to warn these folks of the dangers.... So I talked to him and he agrees that max sidewall psi is really too high for MOST passenger cars. BUT my 7 psi (39 up from the A4 suggested 32) extra is not hurting the tires, my 'ride', or my handling safety!
Like the old saying goes look out for the other morons on the road....

MazdaMatt 06-27-2008 01:06 PM

My protege suggusts 32 all around. This is just too squishy for me. I actually get better turn-in response with my fronts at 36 and my rears at 34. "knowledgeable" drivers can benefit from some increase. I prefer to turn around an accident than slow down and hit it softer.

With my recent drive to lower my fuel consumption, i may bump it up to 39/36

ebacherville 06-27-2008 02:22 PM

Now i know why i have never been andnever will be a AAA customer.. 1 my car has no power anything.. Yes my tires are inflated higher then recommended.. but it doesnt effect the drivability of my car. Tire wear.. why cares there MY tires.. My breaks are going to last a hell of a lot longer and wond become over heated from gassing it up to stop light after stop light.. as for tail gating trucks.. a standard 3 seconds is more than close enough to pick up the draft of a big truck..

I have never been in a accident and have been driving motor vehicles since I was 12..

AAA sit on it and spin

trikkonceptz 06-27-2008 04:13 PM

Well I will have my proof on un-evenly worn tires in about 50K miles I guess....

Prior to Hypermiling I had a set of tires on my vibe that didn't even last 12K inflated to 32psi, I replaced them with the exact same tire/brand/size and have had them inflated to 50psi since day one .... 20K miles later, they still look new and the car handles and coast incredibly well.

So already, I have proven AAA wrong, how wrong only time will tell.

Frank Lee 06-27-2008 06:11 PM

Looks to me like AAA was right on everything. See, they have to have a cover-your-a$$ mentality, or else face liability when some moron misuses the data they provide or endorse. They cannot endorse anything that smacks of illegality either, and the drafting and coasting and rolling through stops are all illegal. Additionally, it has been my experience that tires do wear unevenly when way overinflated, and it seems the r.r. benefits of overinflation don't keep increasing along with increased pressure. I believe some overinflation is justified and good- up to and maybe even a little over sidewall max- but beyond that it just can't be something to tell the general public to do.

ttoyoda 06-27-2008 06:16 PM

Quote:

My protege suggusts 32 all around.

That was the maximum cold sidewall pressure limit for the car tires themselves for many, many years. I guess that is why the car makers rarely suggest higher pressure, it is all inertia and history.

RH77 06-27-2008 06:26 PM

Don't forget that a large division of the AAA is their Car Insurance business. Reducing liability looks to be the aim.

Frankly, I don't really care if large organizations or the Press disagrees with the practices. It's odd -- I don't see any hard data of accidents caused by these practices.

I think people will still do what they want -- and if that means investigating into hypermiling, people will do it.

Even if folks used the MINIMAL techniques suggested (that are all perfectly legal), then they would likely boost their FE to a noticeable degree.

More sensationalism, if you ask me.

LostCause 06-28-2008 12:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dcb (Post 38899)
So what is their position on driving while using a cell phone?

I think the argument against cell phones is poorly thought out.

I've heard people argue that our upcoming "hands free" law needs to be expanded to "cellphone free." Keeping your hands on the steering wheel makes sense. Keeping people from having telephone conversations is ridiculous.

- LostCause

cfg83 06-28-2008 01:52 AM

LostCause -

Quote:

Originally Posted by LostCause (Post 39179)
I think the argument against cell phones is poorly thought out.

I've heard people argue that our upcoming "hands free" law needs to be expanded to "cellphone free." Keeping your hands on the steering wheel makes sense. Keeping people from having telephone conversations is ridiculous.

- LostCause

I'll disagree with that one. My brain does lose "attention" when I am talking on the cellphone (with cheesy headset). When I am more self-aware, I deliberately increase my driving attention while talking. If the conversation involves an emergency, my attention can go down the tubes.

It's like when people say "don't get in the car when you're angry". You're state of mind can effect your driving.

CarloSW2

trikkonceptz 06-28-2008 09:39 AM

They will never be able to ban cell phone from use in cars because of how dependent we have become to them. A handsfree law would be as good as it can get, especially now with people text messaging while driving, it is only going to get worse, meaning, more and more distractions in the vehicle. Besides, I cannot imagine police in densly populated areas, monitoring people on cell phones, let alone ticketing them.

Best case scenario, police agencies carry cell jammers in their cars disabling cell phone for x radius around a police car ... that would be funny.

Blue07CivicEX 06-28-2008 09:44 AM

I think they should carry portable spectrum analyzers and directional antenna's then any car with a cell phone transmitting would be pulled over.

PA32R 06-28-2008 10:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blue07CivicEX (Post 39249)
I think they should carry portable spectrum analyzers and directional antenna's then any car with a cell phone transmitting would be pulled over.

Not effective enough. We need cameras and microphones in vehicles to assure complete compliance. There shouldn't be conversations with passengers, radio tuning, cd changing, etc.

Perhaps sensors could be built into the steering wheel such that failure to have two hands on the wheel would signal the authorities who would then pull the offender over and issue a citation for reckless driving.

Or maybe just impound and sell the vehicle to pay for the monitoring system.

jamesqf 06-28-2008 04:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by trikkonceptz (Post 39248)
They will never be able to ban cell phone from use in cars because of how dependent we have become to them.

Who're you calling we? I've never owned one, and have no plans to - unless the price comes down to where it's lower than my land line, and even then I'd probably leave it at home.

As for laws, I'd suggest this: the cell phone provider tracks calls & timing for billing purposes. So if someone is in an accident, the records are checked. If they were making a call at the time, they're 1) presumed to be at fault until evidence proves otherwise; and 2) are liable for extra punitive damages.

Frank Lee 06-28-2008 04:36 PM

Looks like you an me are the only two dinosaurs left that don't have em.

PA32R 06-28-2008 04:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jamesqf (Post 39340)
Who're you calling we? I've never owned one, and have no plans to - unless the price comes down to where it's lower than my land line, and even then I'd probably leave it at home.

As for laws, I'd suggest this: the cell phone provider tracks calls & timing for billing purposes. So if someone is in an accident, the records are checked. If they were making a call at the time, they're 1) presumed to be at fault until evidence proves otherwise; and 2) are liable for extra punitive damages.

This is a very civil board so I counted 10 before replying. "We" means the populace in general, not each and every individual. I applaud your cell phone free life and wish you all success in that regard. "We" don't all have that option.

The idea that someone should be presumed to be at fault if they were making a call is over the top, imho. There are many distractions available to drivers, the cell phone being one. Others are talking to your passengers, disciplining your children, changing the cd player/radio, checking a map or gps system, having a drink of water or soda, eating, etc. That's not to mention the ludicrous ones such as reading a magazine, newspaper, or book (I've seen it), applying makeup, watching television or a dvd, etc. If any one of the above can be shown to have caused an accident, let the ticketing and lawsuits begin but presumption of fault based on an active cell phone call is wrong.

PA32R 06-28-2008 04:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Frank Lee (Post 39343)
Looks like you an me are the only two dinosaurs left that don't have em.

You guys do have computers though, right?

Oh, never mind...

Frank Lee 06-28-2008 04:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PA32R (Post 39345)
This is a very civil board so I counted 10 before replying. "We" means the populace in general, not each and every individual. I applaud your cell phone free life and wish you all success in that regard. "We" don't all have that option.

The idea that someone should be presumed to be at fault if they were making a call is over the top, imho. There are many distractions available to drivers, the cell phone being one. Others are talking to your passengers, disciplining your children, changing the cd player/radio, checking a map or gps system, having a drink of water or soda, eating, etc. That's not to mention the ludicrous ones such as reading a magazine, newspaper, or book (I've seen it), applying makeup, watching television or a dvd, etc. If any one of the above can be shown to have caused an accident, let the ticketing and lawsuits begin but presumption of fault based on an active cell phone call is wrong.

Yeah I had to count to 10 first too. Inevitably, when I nearly get creamed at an intersection or out on the road, it is by a dolt with a phone stuck to their head. It really is.

PA32R 06-28-2008 04:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Frank Lee (Post 39348)
Yeah I had to count to 10 first too. Inevitably, when I nearly get creamed at an intersection or out on the road, it is by a dolt with a phone stuck to their head. It really is.

Does that happen to you a lot?

Frank Lee 06-28-2008 05:06 PM

Define "lot". It happens enough.

It happens more than talking to your passengers, disciplining your children, changing the cd player/radio, checking a map or gps system, having a drink of water or soda, eating, reading a magazine, newspaper, or book, applying makeup, and watching television or a dvd combined.

PA32R 06-28-2008 05:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Frank Lee (Post 39353)
Define "lot". It happens enough.

Probably more than enough (though I was tempted to say "define enough"). I'm not trying to make excuses for cell phone related distracted driving. But it's the distracted driving that is the issue, it happens that the cell phone is currently the most likely distractor.

In California on Tuesday, July 1, the "hands free cell phone" law goes into effect. There are lighted signs on the freeways advertising that. Presumably there are studies (hopefully better than the Mythbusters' version) that justify this law. I've had a hands free version for a couple of years, and I guess it's a little less distracting.

But, speaking of distractions, when the freeway is near its limit, the CalTrans lighted signs are enough of one to cause a jam. And it should should be noted that text messaging while driving is still legal.

gascort 06-28-2008 06:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PA32R (Post 39263)
Not effective enough. We need cameras and microphones in vehicles to assure complete compliance. There shouldn't be conversations with passengers, radio tuning, cd changing, etc.

Perhaps sensors could be built into the steering wheel such that failure to have two hands on the wheel would signal the authorities who would then pull the offender over and issue a citation for reckless driving.

Or maybe just impound and sell the vehicle to pay for the monitoring system.

I love it! hahaha
I agree with you; some of the ideas on this are a little extreme and "big brother".

I think the problem isn't the devices, or talking to passengers, or reading the paper. The problem is the driver.
Frank - the people who nearly hit you while using their cell would not become better or safer drivers if you took their phone away. They would find something to look at, or be distracted by the radio, etc. anyway IMO. Just because this class of morons have chosen their unsafe distraction of choice to be the cell phone does not mean that all using them are like this.

We could bring up plenty of stereotypes like, "teenage driver" or "woman driver".. etc. here. Just because the only bad drivers you see might be people with red hair doesn't mean the other red haired drivers are driving like idiots. I'm sure you know this - not trying to insult you, just bringing it up as an argument.

Frank Lee 06-28-2008 06:55 PM

Yeah I know there are many distractions and many drivers easily led to distraction. My point is the cell phone is the most egregious of the lot.

RH77 06-28-2008 07:17 PM

I think it depends on the driver -- example...

I can't concentrate on driving for FE (or in heavy traffic) and carry on a conversation in the car, let alone on the phone (even hands-free). But if I set the cruise on a long trip in thin traffic, I can talk all day.

I don't know if I'm alone, but for me, the part of the brain that engages decisions in vehicle operation must be closely tied to verbal conversation and aural interpretation. You'll rarely find me on the phone in the car (unless the boss calls or something similar).

The Biggest Problem around here is people TEXTING and driving (especially young drivers -- many who are barely comfortable operating a vehicle). Laws are slowly banning that activity. About a year ago here, several teens were killed in a head-on while someone was texting and crossed the center line at night. Senseless!

RH77

cfg83 06-28-2008 08:57 PM

jamesqf -

Quote:

Originally Posted by jamesqf (Post 39340)
Who're you calling we? I've never owned one, and have no plans to - unless the price comes down to where it's lower than my land line, and even then I'd probably leave it at home.

As for laws, I'd suggest this: the cell phone provider tracks calls & timing for billing purposes. So if someone is in an accident, the records are checked. If they were making a call at the time, they're 1) presumed to be at fault until evidence proves otherwise; and 2) are liable for extra punitive damages.

I wish I *didn't* have a cell phone. My goal was to hold out for $10/month basic cell service, but I caved in for personal/emergency reasons.

I'll have to think about your law suggestion. What would be interesting is if *both* drivers were on the phone at the same time. That would be rare, but who would be at fault? Maybe it would qualify as reckless drivingor cancel out.

CarloSW2

PA32R 06-29-2008 04:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Frank Lee (Post 39353)
Define "lot". It happens enough.

It happens more than talking to your passengers, disciplining your children, changing the cd player/radio, checking a map or gps system, having a drink of water or soda, eating, reading a magazine, newspaper, or book, applying makeup, and watching television or a dvd combined.

I'm not trying to start a word war, but how did you come up with that? If it's "when looking into cars where I'd almost been hit I noticed the driver on a cell phone," that's exceptionally unreliable. To paraphrase someone in this group's signature, "no, I believe you, just show me the evidence."

trikkonceptz 06-29-2008 05:00 PM

I have noticed though, the power the cell phone has to render you useless as you drive. For example, since I drive 55 on all highways people usually just go around me as I drive in the right lane. I have noticed that 100% of the vehicles that sit behind me for some time without incident are the ones on cell phones. Once they hangup, they pass me like everyone else. I guess they don't have the extra brain power, to coordinate a lane change while talking ..

Frank Lee 06-29-2008 05:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PA32R (Post 39551)
I'm not trying to start a word war, but how did you come up with that? If it's "when looking into cars where I'd almost been hit I noticed the driver on a cell phone," that's exceptionally unreliable. To paraphrase someone in this group's signature, "no, I believe you, just show me the evidence."

I've dug up studies on this before. Find it yourself.

Formula413 06-29-2008 05:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RH77 (Post 39375)
I don't know if I'm alone, but for me, the part of the brain that engages decisions in vehicle operation must be closely tied to verbal conversation and aural interpretation.

I believe I read about a study that actually proved this. From personal experience, it is obvious that talking on a cellphone (regardless of whether it is hand-free) reduces one's ability to concentrate on driving.
Quote:

Originally Posted by trikkonceptz (Post 39553)
I have noticed that 100% of the vehicles that sit behind me for some time without incident are the ones on cell phones. Once they hangup, they pass me like everyone else. I guess they don't have the extra brain power, to coordinate a lane change while talking ..

Case in point.
Quote:

Originally Posted by LostCause (Post 39179)
I've heard people argue that our upcoming "hands free" law needs to be expanded to "cellphone free." Keeping your hands on the steering wheel makes sense. Keeping people from having telephone conversations is ridiculous.

I wouldn't say it's ridiculous, but it would be extremely difficult if not impossible to enforce.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:59 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.5.2
All content copyright EcoModder.com