I didnt know there was a prize for most miles driven on a "tank" of fuel.

I got over 1200 miles on two tanks, but thats cheating too...

I also got 27mpg+ in a Grand Caravan this weekend with 6 passengers for 700 miles, so 162 passenger-miles/gallon seems pretty good - even better than two HCH2s at 70mpg

Ill stick with FE for a tank (or more) as one of the few measures of driving/vehicle efficiency. Its hard to argue with 70mpg+ for good efficiency. Ill try to break 64mpg on the way home if the storms in Dayton dont get me.

-------------
I try to refill at same Sams club pump to first click - seems to be fairly repeatable as my hand calc FE tends to stay +1 to +2mpg above the displayed. Yep 1/50 is 2% which is fine by me since I keep all the tanks in the log anyhow.

Best regards,
Carl

 

Who said there was a prize? I guess you'd think there was by the way it's getting scrutinized.

There are numerous threads here at GreenHybrid and over at CleanMPG where people are trying to see how many miles they can get out of a tank of gas. Somebody please tell me what the big deal is.

 

"So, anyway, you claim topping off is a sort of cheating that invalidates comparisons with our moral betters, who follow this mysterious new "first-click" rule the church of You has just invented."

Geez, dude, that's sour -- mischaracterizing what I said, then arguing against the mischaracterization. Any time I hear someone twist my words into a claim of morality and religion, I know he's on the losing end of logic.

"So, if you only fill to the Holy First Click, at the same pump, at the same station, the amount of gas you've actually put in from fill to fill varies by up to .2 gal. In a 12.3 gal tank, that's a nearly 2% variance."

And putting 14.2 gallons into a 12.3 gallon tank is a 15% variance. That's my point; Eliminate the variance by comparing only MPG readouts, not odometer numbers.

"The odometer reading is simply a measure of miles driven. The number of miles driven on a tank is simply the number of miles driven between fillups. I last filled up at an odometer reading of 17,508 miles. If I do not have to fill up again until after 18,508 miles, that will be a 1,000 mile tank. I would hope this would clarify it for you."

Thanks, professor, but I learned basic math in grade school, like 14.2 does not equal 12.3. Talking down to me won't convince me otherwise.

And posts that use hyperbole such as "Ugh" and "wait for it" don't make the author sound intelligent. More often, the writer is simply arguing himself onto a specious tangent, like a three-paragraph discourse on the definition of "full," and repeatedly misquoting me as using the word "cheaters."

Kenny started this thread with a truly impressive number: 70.1 mpg reading for several hundred miles. He freely discloses all his variables, such as no a/c, no cruise control, 48 mph top speed, so readers can make an objective judgment.

I posted a less-impressive number of 50.3 mpg, with constant a/c, frequent c.c., and 65 mph top speed. Again, listing variables serves the purpose of objectivity. Readers can judge which settings and techniques affect the number.

So anyone claiming 1,000 miles from "a tank of gas" isn't being honest without disclosing all the variables, starting with the amount of gasoline -- 12.3 or 14.2. One requires 82 mpg to go 1,000 miles. The other requires 72.

That's a huge difference, and it's why I say forget the miles and focus on the MPG.

 

1stpic, for the record, just one tiny corrrection to your post.

I DID use cruise control for 90% of the miles, and I did list this.

 

Seriously, what is your problem?

It seems you continually question my honesty. Multiple times, you have claimed I have a 13 gallon tank. You should just admit it when you do not know what you are talking about. When have I not disclosed what I have done in getting the fuel economy or miles driven on a tank? Also, if I reach 18,508 miles before I fill up with gasoline again, I will claim that I have driven 1,000 miles on a tank of gas. There will be no dishonesty here. I could care less if it pisses you off and makes you start babbling about Orwellian, Reagan, Hinckley, etc. and crying because you think people are talking down to you. It's not the first time you've made ridiculous posts and then cried about the responses.

mmrmnhrm summed it up well in response to one of your other equally worthless posts.

 

Seeing that you didn't actually dispute any of my conclusions, I'm glad we agree and that whatever end of logic I'm on, you found it acceptable. But you still seem confused on one point:

"And putting 14.2 gallons into a 12.3 gallon tank is a 15% variance. That's my point; Eliminate the variance by comparing only MPG readouts, not odometer numbers."

I agree with your point about MPG, always have, but to repeat: The only way to eliminate fill variance and the resulting imprecision in mileage numbers is by filling all the way to the top. Period. MPG readouts vary all over the place with this car (documented by a large number of posters here at various times as between 1 and 3 mpg off). So by the readout, our mpg is only in a ~5% range, leaving us to hand-calculate. And if we don't actually know exactly how much gas we used, our hand calcs are off too.

And I don't even care about "exactly" (you've seen my mileage, you know I'm not going to be doing any bragging) -- I care about not having it implied that "overfilling" is an unfair trick when in fact it's the best way there is to get the most accurate numbers possible.

--doug
(who never said you *said* "cheaters," but that that's what your posts are in effect "claiming" -- and I don't think that's a mischaracterization of them at all.)

 

Crikey, you people sound like a nursing home full of crotchety married couples! Give it a rest... even the 'first click' people will average out over time simply because after a hundred thousand miles and umptymillion trips to the gas station, the variances between individual tanks will wash out.

 

The last page in MY owners manual is EXACTLY like yours, Mr. Kite (12.4 gallon tank).

My HCH2 was delivered to northern Oklahoma in late May 2006. It appears that where delivered (and maybe when) may help determine what size our tanks are *stated* to be.

Doug is exactly right in removing the largest variable in computing MPG - the consistency of the fuel-fill.
Now, filling to the brim may be bad for your car, but that's not the point - here.
The point here is - unless you:
A
(1) run the tank absolutely dry,
(2) record miles on the car, or reset trip-meter,
(3) put in a measured amount of gas,
(4) then run the tank dry again,
(5) record miles driven since (2),
(6) then calculate your MPG on that measured amount of gas

or:
B
(1) fill tank to the brim,
(2) record miles on the car, or reset trip-meter,
(3) then drive until ready for a refill,
(4) fill tank to the brim again with a measured amount of gas,
(5) record miles driven since (2),
(6) then calculate your MPG on that measured amount of gas

-- unless you do that, you are introducing refueling variances into your MPG calculations. Period.
Most (if not all) of us do a variation of B, although many of us do NOT fill to the brim each time (if ever). Therefore, most of our calculations are merely close approximations, and we're all pretty OK with it. An individual tank may over or understate the *real* MPG, but over time, it will pretty much average out, so long as you're pretty consistent about your fuel-fill method. (BTW, I'm a 2nd click guy. I think it's a little more consistent, and probably there are still no potential "fuel-overflow into the evap-system" issues. I also find this method to give more consistent *displayed* vs. *computed* MPG figures. But that's just me).

And no matter how a 902.3-mile tank over 13.727 gallons-used is sliced, the computed MPG is 65.7, quite impressive for a tank. Any tank. I've never had one even close to that.
That's a good tank for even Kenny. Kenny just had his best tank ever, 71.65 MPG.

It IS good for them to point out the conditions on HOW their great MPG was achieved. The parameters help us understand the differences in their techniques.
Mr. Kite is hypermiling, using several hypermiling techniques many consider extreme. That's OK.
Kenny is not, other than driving like a grandpa, keeping great distance, and anticipating situations like a pro. Both of these guys are showing us what CAN be done in our HCH-IIs. We can learn a great deal from their SIMPLE and well-explained methods.
And they are both to be congratulated for great contributions to our forum. Thanks, guys, for showing us the way(s).

 

yep - many consistently hi mpg tanks are impressive.

Im after umptymillion miles and only hundred thousand trips to the gas station though....

 

Hehe... sorry 'bout that. I had just finished reading another message board, filled with racing enthusiasts who run high compression machines needing 110+ octane Needless to say, when they run, their mpg is typically below that of the average H2.