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

Reply  Post New Thread
 
Submit Tools LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 01-20-2016, 10:23 PM   #81 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
oldtamiyaphile's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,483

UFI - '12 Fiat 500 Twinair
Team Turbocharged!
90 day: 40.3 mpg (US)

Jeep - '05 Jeep Wrangler Renegade
90 day: 18.09 mpg (US)

R32 - '89 Nissan Skyline

STiG - '16 Renault Trafic 140dCi Energy
90 day: 31.12 mpg (US)

Prius - '05 Toyota Prius
Team Toyota
90 day: 50.25 mpg (US)

Premodded - '49 Ford Freighter
90 day: 13.48 mpg (US)

F-117 - '10 Proton Arena GLSi
Pickups
Mitsubishi
90 day: 37.82 mpg (US)

Ralica - '85 Toyota Celica ST
90 day: 25.23 mpg (US)

Sx4 - '07 Suzuki Sx4
90 day: 31.72 mpg (US)
Thanks: 320
Thanked 438 Times in 311 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by ConnClark View Post
The biggest argument against fast acceleration is that excess pressure is left in the cylinder when you lay into the gas and it just ends up as noise when the exhaust valve opens.
Noise doesn't take a lot of energy to produce though, consider how much noise you can get from a typical 100w car stereo.

__________________






  Reply With Quote
Alt Today
Popular topics

Other popular topics in this forum...

   
Old 01-20-2016, 10:42 PM   #82 (permalink)
DieselMiser
 
ConnClark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Richland,WA
Posts: 966

Das Schlepper Frog - '85 Mercedes Benz 300SD
90 day: 23.23 mpg (US)

Gentoo320 - '04 Mercedes C320 4Matic
90 day: 22.44 mpg (US)
Thanks: 46
Thanked 227 Times in 156 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by oldtamiyaphile View Post
Noise doesn't take a lot of energy to produce though, consider how much noise you can get from a typical 100w car stereo.
You will here the riceboy's fart can muffler long before you will here their stereo. Also a stereo is designed to make noise efficiently. A car engine does it as a by product.
__________________
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-21-2016, 09:29 AM   #83 (permalink)
Rat Racer
 
Fat Charlie's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Route 16
Posts: 4,066

Al the Third, year four - '13 Honda Fit Base
Team Honda
90 day: 42.9 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1,724
Thanked 1,861 Times in 1,208 Posts
Wasted noise, be it a fart can or Justin Bieber, is 100% waste. Turning the noise into something useful like forward movement or or just about anything Carlos Santana did will still involve waste, but you get a whole lot more out of it.
__________________

Quote:
Originally Posted by sheepdog44 View Post
Transmission type Efficiency
Manual neutral engine off.100% @MPG <----- Fun Fact.
Manual 1:1 gear ratio .......98%
CVT belt ............................88%
Automatic .........................86%

  Reply With Quote
Old 01-21-2016, 02:24 PM   #84 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Earth
Posts: 5,209
Thanks: 225
Thanked 808 Times in 592 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by ConnClark View Post
You will here the riceboy's fart can muffler long before you will here their stereo.
Not true, in my experience. Though of course you mostly hear the thump, thump of the bass notes from the subwoofers.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-21-2016, 11:51 PM   #85 (permalink)
EcoModding Lurker
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: USA
Posts: 9
Thanks: 2
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zach View Post
Sorry to bump a thread kinda old but isn't that the opposite of what the 100+ hypermiling tips states for DWL (56)? Accelerating on downhills right before an uphill climb since you burn less on the downhill? I am still trying to learn so some clarification woold be great.
I found UFO's advice posted on 11-16-2015 to be useful and true. Rather than accelerating on the downhill, I seem to get better mileage when I apply only the minimum acceleration needed to maintain speed on the downhill, using DFCO coasting whenever the gradient alone is sufficient to maintain speed. I then start applying increased acceleration in the level transition area between the downhill and uphill, using DWL on the uphill while monitoring instant MPG gauge as feedback, gradually easing off the accelerator as I crest the hill.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-22-2016, 01:10 AM   #86 (permalink)
EcoModding Apprentice
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Florida
Posts: 221
Thanks: 0
Thanked 22 Times in 18 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by UFO View Post
Yes, don't do a running start before you get to the hill; accelerating downhill is not efficient. Save your engine power for going up hills and don't back off until you crest the hill, unless you know you will need to scrub speed on the downhill.
I don't know what most people say about the fuel cutoff; most cars continue to supply fuel even when coasting in gear, with foot off the accelerator.
The car also will slow down faster.
It's much better to stay in neutral when coasting downhill, for as long as the car maintains speed, or accelerates.

Also, going 100% open throttle is really bad for the engine, and fuel economy.
Acceleration should be spirited, but not too aggressive, 50-80% of engine power. Higher with smaller engines and/or heavier vehicles, lower with larger engines and/or lighter weight vehicles.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-22-2016, 04:49 AM   #87 (permalink)
EcoModding Apprentice
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Florida
Posts: 221
Thanks: 0
Thanked 22 Times in 18 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by ConnClark View Post
The biggest argument against fast acceleration is that excess pressure is left in the cylinder when you lay into the gas and it just ends up as noise when the exhaust valve opens. Its called blow down and with the otto cycle it is un avoidable. The more gas you give the engine the more that goes to waste.
I think the biggest argument against fast acceleration, is mainly high RPM.
When having a CVT, best results come from running the engine at the lowest RPM needed for the load; eg: low acceleration, keep RPM at 1500RPM.
Fast acceleration, at 1500RPM it might be lugging; so RPMs go up to where the engine has enough torque to pull it off.

Ever heard of advancing the timing of an engine?

In a way, it's doing exactly the same thing as increasing the load (or increasing the gearing).
It's running the engine in a much more efficient state.
Too much, and the engine will lug, ping, or shut down.
Too little load, and the engine will run inefficiently.
Most cars are tuned to run fine when towing it's own weight up a 25 degrees hill in 5th or 6th gear. That makes for good acceleration, but also lower MPG.
Reducing that buffer, may make the engine much more fuel efficient, but also less able to tow heavy loads uphill.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-22-2016, 09:37 AM   #88 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Ecky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Vermont
Posts: 4,036

Gaptooth (retired) - '00 Honda Insight
Team Honda
Gen-1 Insights
90 day: 54.26 mpg (US)

Such Fit - '07 Honda Fit Sport
90 day: 41.27 mpg (US)

Connect - '15 Ford Transit Connect XL
90 day: 23.4 mpg (US)

K-sight - '00 Honda K-sight
Team Honda
90 day: 45.37 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1,831
Thanked 1,702 Times in 1,090 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by ProDigit View Post
I think the biggest argument against fast acceleration, is mainly high RPM.
When having a CVT, best results come from running the engine at the lowest RPM needed for the load; eg: low acceleration, keep RPM at 1500RPM.
Fast acceleration, at 1500RPM it might be lugging; so RPMs go up to where the engine has enough torque to pull it off.

Ever heard of advancing the timing of an engine?

In a way, it's doing exactly the same thing as increasing the load (or increasing the gearing).
It's running the engine in a much more efficient state.
Too much, and the engine will lug, ping, or shut down.
Too little load, and the engine will run inefficiently.
Most cars are tuned to run fine when towing it's own weight up a 25 degrees hill in 5th or 6th gear. That makes for good acceleration, but also lower MPG.
Reducing that buffer, may make the engine much more fuel efficient, but also less able to tow heavy loads uphill.
Some interesting analogies here!

I think you'll find some contention about the existence of lugging in modern engines, but regardless, peak BSFC is not always at the lowest possible RPM, and maximum economy will be found by producing as much forward energy as possible at peak BSFC, and as little as possible away from peak BSFC. Peak BSFC is often quite low in the rev range for large engines, but for many small 4 cylinders, it's somewhere around 2,500-3,500RPM at high (but less than 100%) load.

Still, it's probably a safe rule to follow, to shift as soon as possible. Slightly better is pulse and glide (with EoC) at peak BSFC.

In the case of my particular car, 3rd gear is slightly less than 1:1, and I have two overdrive gears. With the tiny 3 cylinder, all but the shallowest of hills require a downshift, and when towing close to its own weight, it's not uncommon that I find myself in 3rd or even 2nd. Increasing the amount of engine would probably increase its efficiency when towing, because I could keep RPMs down and BSFC up, but it would decrease efficiency when not towing. For best economy, you really want just enough engine that, while cruising up a shallow grade at highway speeds, you're at high load near peak BSFC in the rev range. It makes me wonder why more cars don't include a gear for that. Yes, you're reducing your buffer in top gear, but downshifting is always an option.

  Reply With Quote
Reply  Post New Thread


Thread Tools




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