First full tank, only 340 miles,

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
  #21  
Old 11-20-2005, 12:07 PM
xcel's Avatar
Ridiculously Active Enthusiast
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Northern Illinois
Posts: 2,567
Default Re: First full tank, only 340 miles,

Hi Andrew@vr66.com

___As Tbaleno and I both commute into and out of the Chicago area daily, the temps and winds over the past 2 weeks have been absolutely wicked for those attempting to figure out what a brand new hybrid is actually worth in the FE department. Unfortunately, our 10-day forecast does not bode well for you either with the high over the next 10 appearing today. With the Bears kicking the snot out of the Panthers, you are probably better off staying in and watching the game but if you were to do any FE testing whatsoever in our climate this time of year, right now would be the time … I would suggest pressing up your tires to at least 44 #’s all around to start as I can bet your Honda dealership saddled you with 30 - 32 # mush right off the lot Given your location, I have the feeling you are getting hammered from deep inner city driving as this is not an IMA based hybrid’s forte’ without some well placed tricks thrown at a commute like that?

___Another item not relating to your HCH-II directly … Where in the Chicago area do you live again exactly (Wrigleyville possibly?) and would you be interested in meeting Tom and I for a quick get together to do a small shakedown of your HCH-II? I can give you a short clinic on hypermiling in my non-hybrid Accord as well as your HCH-II from what NASAgineer has given me besides the rest of the techniques we use … I am sure you would like to try out Tom’s HCH-I w/ CVT for comparisons sake also? And please consider joining some our Wisconsin hybrid owning neighbors at the Madison Hybrid Group meet in late January. The MHG meets are always good for a tip or two as well as meeting and speaking with other hybrid automobile owners The January meet will include a presentation by a local Honda dealerships presentation on the HCH-II which may add knowledge that you may not have seen or understood before?

___Good Luck

___Wayne R. Gerdes
 

Last edited by xcel; 11-20-2005 at 12:33 PM.
  #22  
Old 11-20-2005, 12:29 PM
kenny's Avatar
Ridiculously Active Enthusiast
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: So. California
Posts: 1,120
Default Re: First full tank, only 340 miles,

BTW if it is any consolation EVERYONE is getting sucky MPG this time of the year where it is cold.

Those EPA=17 MPG SUVs are getting 10 MPG right now.
 
  #23  
Old 11-20-2005, 02:02 PM
Hot_Georgia_2004's Avatar
Ridiculously Active Enthusiast
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Atlanta, Ga
Posts: 1,797
Thumbs up Re: First full tank, only 340 miles,

My hat is off to all of you in the Great White North who are really working their vehicles to their full potential.
 
  #24  
Old 11-20-2005, 02:57 PM
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: San Diego
Posts: 839
Default Re: First full tank, only 340 miles,

Originally Posted by NASAgineer
There are so many variables at play that I think empirical data is the best indicator. I plan to measure my freeway commute at various cruise control settings next week (60, 65, 70, 75, 80). I'll measure the entire commute (~35mi.) at each given speed and always in the same direction to make sure any localized effects are averaged out.
Great. I never used cruise control but driving regularly even at 60 or 70 mph I seem to often get worse FE than at 80 mph, oddly, though 50 mph is highest. So I'd be interested in hearing what your car gets with cruise control. By the way, rather than merely measure in the same direction, a much better test is to measure in both directions on the same road. So you can drive 20 miles one way, record, turn around, reset trip meter, then drive 20 miles the other way.

BTW, I'm just a software engineer at NASA, I'm not a rocket scientist or anything
Haha, maybe, but your posts have been pretty scientific, which is appreciated.
 
  #25  
Old 11-20-2005, 07:47 PM
NASAgineer's Avatar
Pretty Darn Active Enthusiast
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: San Jose, CA
Posts: 330
Default Re: First full tank, only 340 miles,

Originally Posted by CGameProgrammer
By the way, rather than merely measure in the same direction, a much better test is to measure in both directions on the same road. So you can drive 20 miles one way, record, turn around, reset trip meter, then drive 20 miles the other way.
Good idea. I'll do 60 both ways on Monday, 70 on Tuesday, and 80 on Wednesday. Hopefully traffic will cooperate!
 
  #26  
Old 11-20-2005, 08:06 PM
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Leominster, MA
Posts: 2,161
Default Re: First full tank, only 340 miles,

Keep track of temperature and winds too. Those can make a big difference.
 
  #27  
Old 11-20-2005, 08:25 PM
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: San Diego
Posts: 839
Default Re: First full tank, only 340 miles,

Recording round trips minimizes the effects of wind assuming it remains consistent during that time, but temperature matters. However San Jose should be pretty warm.
 
  #28  
Old 11-20-2005, 10:39 PM
ElanC's Avatar
Ridiculously Active Enthusiast
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: El Cerrito, CA
Posts: 700
Default Re: First full tank, only 340 miles,

Originally Posted by CGameProgrammer
Recording round trips minimizes the effects of wind assuming it remains consistent during that time, but temperature matters. However San Jose should be pretty warm.
Recording round trips reduces the effect of wind on your calculated MPG but doesn;t eliminate it.

Let's say you drive 60 MPH with a 20 MPH head wind one way and a 20 MPH tail wind the other way. The increased drag from a 20 MPH head wind is greater than the reduced drag with a 20 MPH tail wind. So the net effect of any wind, even on a round trip, is to make your FE worse.
 
  #29  
Old 11-20-2005, 11:44 PM
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: San Diego
Posts: 839
Default Re: First full tank, only 340 miles,

Originally Posted by ElanC
The increased drag from a 20 MPH head wind is greater than the reduced drag with a 20 MPH tail wind.
Yeah, you're right, since it increases exponentially. My bad.
 
  #30  
Old 11-21-2005, 04:41 AM
ralph_dog's Avatar
World's First Hybrid
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Quincy MA
Posts: 600
Default Re: First full tank, only 340 miles,

Originally Posted by CGameProgrammer
It doesn't work that way since your speed is also increasing by the same amount. The resistance actually increases nonlinearly so after about 55 mph it increases at a greater rate than speed, lowering efficiency, but 20% is a huge overestimate. I've forgotten my basic physics but I'm sure NASA can clarify this.
Here is a formula for drag taken from a NASA web page.

D = Cf x A x r x V^2/2

Where:

D = drag
Cf = coeff of friction
A = area
r = air density
V = velocity

Note that the velocity is squared. Also, your true speed is the speedometer +/- any head winds, tail winds, cross wind vectors, etc. If you have a 20mph head wind and you are going 70mph, then your true air speed is 90mph. (maybe a pitot tube makes more sense for hybrids ). Makes a difference when you square 90 vs 70 in the formula.. I will admit that 20% is a lot but if you do the math, the drag doubles when going 90mph vs 70mph given that all other factors remain the same.
 


Quick Reply: First full tank, only 340 miles,


Contact Us -

  • Manage Preferences
  • Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Your Privacy Choices -

    When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

    © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands


    All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:15 PM.