Fellow HCH hypermilers....
#51
06-04-2006, 07:34 PM
Re: Fellow HCH hypermilers....
Originally Posted by ElanC
I wouldn't do it. With the engine off and your foot on the brake, I think there is some risk of running out of hydraulic pressure for your brakes. You could have accomplished the same fuel efficiency by letting go of the brake for a second. The engine would have started up but then, since you're rolling down hill with your foot off the gas pedal, you'd have seen the instantaneous MPG go to 100 because the valves would be shut. Your fuel consumption would be zero. In other words, you don't need to shut off the engine (auto stop) in your 2006 to shut off fuel consumption while moving.
Another thing that happened in your Auto_stop scenario is that when you needed to slow down to turn you used your friction brakes because the engine was not turning and you couldn't get regenerative braking. If your engine had been turning you'd have recovered some of the braking energy. So I suspect that what you did was actually less fuel efficient than normal driving.
Another thing that happened in your Auto_stop scenario is that when you needed to slow down to turn you used your friction brakes because the engine was not turning and you couldn't get regenerative braking. If your engine had been turning you'd have recovered some of the braking energy. So I suspect that what you did was actually less fuel efficient than normal driving.
#52
06-15-2006, 02:22 PM
Re: Fellow HCH hypermilers....
Well so far my current tank is even better than the last, 86.6 displayed so far. This might be the one to break 80 with both displayed and calculated results. As far as I know no one has hit 80 with both displayed and calculated results so far. Warmer weather with no AC and no short trips seems to be the ticket.
#53
06-15-2006, 04:03 PM
Re: Fellow HCH hypermilers....
Originally Posted by lakedude
Well so far my current tank is even better than the last, 86.6 displayed so far. This might be the one to break 80 with both displayed and calculated results. As far as I know no one has hit 80 with both displayed and calculated results so far. Warmer weather with no AC and no short trips seems to be the ticket.
Lakedude you are an inspiration.
Out of curiousity what causes the MT to go into AS mode. I test drove one a while back and it never did the AS when stopping though the car might not have warmed up enough. Then what do you do to FAS a manual while driving.
#54
06-15-2006, 10:12 PM
Re: Fellow HCH hypermilers....
Any use drafting as a technique? I used to have a 60 mile commute to a client each way in my MDX - I used to find trailers or trucks going about 55-60mph and follow them about 20 ft behind. My trip computer would show 33-35mpg vs normally only getting about 26-27 instantaneous mpg. EPA rating was 22 or 23 hwy for the MDX.
#55
06-15-2006, 11:09 PM
Re: Fellow HCH hypermilers....
86.2 at the RTP.
s2ktaxi
I don't draft. I think it is unsafe, plus their is very little traffic on my trip home at midnight from my second shift job.
birchman2
Thanks,
Auto stop works the about same was as a CVT except it kicks in at 20 mph. Autostop will not work if the brake vacuum is not sufficient, or if the AC is not in econ mode, or if the outside temp is not over freezing.
A FAS is easy, but dangerous if you don't understand what will happen to the brakes and steering. To FAS all you do is turn the key off for a second and back to the run position and let the car coast ICE off. I normally only use it on downhills or when coming to a known stop or left turn.
#57
06-24-2006, 06:57 AM
Re: Fellow HCH hypermilers....
CNCL:
Last edited by tigerhonaker; 06-24-2006 at 07:06 AM. Reason: Answer is on another Post Here: Terry
#58
06-24-2006, 07:05 AM
Re: Fellow HCH hypermilers....
Originally Posted by lakedude
I've done it! 81.6 calculated, 87.4 displayed. Sorry about the crappy pic, phone cam.
Just went back and refreshed my memory on this Thread from the beginning.
Your number 1-Post said the following:
RJ your record tank has the same problem HCH03's does. While you calculated 80.1 at the pump your display was only showing 76.
Because my display is 3.3% high I will consider the 80 mpg barrier to be broken when the calculated figure is 80 or higher and at the same time the displayed figure is 82.64 (80 + 3.3%) or higher.
I'll leave it to each of you to calculate the error margin of your own display. We have all come very close but I'm not handing out any cigars till one of us does it right!
So, with the following information it really makes sense to me about the original (GOAL-SET).
A-Major-CONGRATS lakedude
Very Nice Indeed:
Terry
BTW, I really think (IMHO) this calls for a 2-Thumbs-Up !!!!
#59
06-24-2006, 12:38 PM
Re: Fellow HCH hypermilers....
Nice numbers!!!
Why do you stop after only 3.7 gallons? I know you guys look for every advantage you can get and it seems to me that this would only hurt your FE. For example, with this tank you were carrying around an average of 12 gallons of gasoline (75 pounds) for the life of that tank. If you used up all but one gallon, you would have carried around an average of about 7 gallons of gas. This would mean that the average weight of the car would be 30 pounds less over the lifetime of the tank. I know the effect is not much, but all effects are cumulative.
Also, the calculated FE is more accurate over a larger tank. The error comes from variations in fill-ups and is minimized with increasing the volume of the fill-up. Don't take this the wrong way. I am not trying to discredit your numbers. If anything, your display number suggests that your calculated number is low. Anyway, I'm just curious.
Why do you stop after only 3.7 gallons? I know you guys look for every advantage you can get and it seems to me that this would only hurt your FE. For example, with this tank you were carrying around an average of 12 gallons of gasoline (75 pounds) for the life of that tank. If you used up all but one gallon, you would have carried around an average of about 7 gallons of gas. This would mean that the average weight of the car would be 30 pounds less over the lifetime of the tank. I know the effect is not much, but all effects are cumulative.
Also, the calculated FE is more accurate over a larger tank. The error comes from variations in fill-ups and is minimized with increasing the volume of the fill-up. Don't take this the wrong way. I am not trying to discredit your numbers. If anything, your display number suggests that your calculated number is low. Anyway, I'm just curious.
#60
06-24-2006, 03:10 PM
Re: Fellow HCH hypermilers....
Thanks Tiger!
Kite, I normally stop after 300 miles as has been my habit ever since my 1992 Ford Ranger's fuel gauge gave up the ghost. Since the fuel gauge on the Ranger was broken the trip meter functioned as the fuel gauge. 300 miles was about the max safe range in the Ranger per tank. I know the hybrid will go 3 times that far but it makes me nervous whenever the mileage is over 300. If you check the database most tanks for IMLC are right around 300, this is nothing new.
Kite, I normally stop after 300 miles as has been my habit ever since my 1992 Ford Ranger's fuel gauge gave up the ghost. Since the fuel gauge on the Ranger was broken the trip meter functioned as the fuel gauge. 300 miles was about the max safe range in the Ranger per tank. I know the hybrid will go 3 times that far but it makes me nervous whenever the mileage is over 300. If you check the database most tanks for IMLC are right around 300, this is nothing new.
