Is it just me or is the "number of tanks" in the mileage database a useless number. Ideally, you should be able to multiply the number of tanks by the tank capacity and get the number of gallons used. Then dividing the miles driven by the number of gallons gives you average mpg. But, working backwards from the average mpd and miles driven, the tank capacity comes out different for every vehicle within the same type and the number is also therefore different from the stated tank capacity.

Clearly, the "number of tanks" figure is just the number of times the car was filled up without regard to how much fuel was actually put in.

Wouldn't it be more useful to actually replace # of tanks by actual gallons used, although you can back calculate this from the average mpg and miles driven.

Sorry for raising this issue if it has been discussed before.

# if tanks is simply a representation of the number of data sets (maybe "# of fuel-ups" is a better label) that person has contributed to the database for that vehicle. It's useful in that it adds information to interpret each user's average MPG -- is that 50mpg over 1 or 2 tanks, total, or over 50 tanks? etc.

I've never run a tank dry in my FEH, so I'll never be able to fill up at the pump the full 15 gallons my vehicle's gas tank can hold.

- Shannon (Geeky, Wild Texan)