quote:
Originally posted by Doug Hillary:
Hi,
Yes Ted - but where is the actual data or is it hypothetical, circumstantial,........... and etc?
Even with clinical like fuel consumption monitoring replicating vehicle, driver (attitude, skill, knowledge ) and use parameters including temperature/weather is difficult if not totally impossible
Ted I have excellent database of fuel use records for my vehicles as I have spent millions of $ on fuel over the last decade and spend thousands daily. It is the greatest cost in a trucking fleet especially in Australia diesl fuel costs about $A0.90 per litre
I have run hundreds of Courses on the fuel economy subject since 1974 - 30 years - in a number of different Countries. We do in-cabin Driver training too and I have worked very closely with both Cummins and Detroit for many years. I have published many documents as well
I drove the pre-release prototype "Fuel Squeezer" 8v92TTA Detroit in the USA in 1975 - at Milton near New York as I recall
Without a doubt the Driver has the greatest influnce on a vehicle's fuel economy - all else being equal
In a Laboratory using a dyno and feeding in similar parameters, of course gains can be made from engine oil viscosity changes. As much if not more can be gained from lower viscosity/synthetic transmission lubricants too
We covered this in another tread on here Ted but there is simply too many variables involved
I'll wait to see your data before commenting further
Regards
Doug
Doug:
Precisely. That's why all the hypothetical fuel economy "gains" are more than offset by a driver who keeps the pedal on the mat.
The best thing for us fleet owners was modern electronics. For example, the Cummins PowerSpec software on my laptop allows me to go into the cab, plug in the adaptor cable for the J1939 interface bus, and heavily modify the following:
Torque applied, max speed, cruise control range, idle cutoff based on temp, total idle time, max HP (Or "detune" the motor), low RPM grade lugging, etc etc etc.
I have averaged 10% gains fleet-wide by playing Big Brother and substantially derating my fleet. No magic elixirs in the crank, just common sense.
Of course, some drivers resent being monitored so closely. How about airline pilots, where every single control input is subject to review?
The good drivers quickly learn "easy does it" and drive the tractor/trailer the most economical means possible.
Lab testing with motors hooked up to precision instruments and mounted to a test stand may uncover fractional improvements in fuel economy.
As you mentioned Doug, how does that translate to the "real world?" In many cases, not very well.
To me, it still seems a** backwards that here in North America we promote this EPA CAFE nonsense so folks feel good about driving giant pickups and SUV's as "daily drivers."
I find it simply ironic that an individual exercises their "free will" to purchase a 10 MPG SUV, then complains about the high operating costs. They still drive alone to work. I used to do carpooling and it works well.
It's not the first time we hit a brick wall though. Remember the first OPEC oil embargo? All those fire breathing hotrod cars getting 6-10 MPG became obsolete overnight.
Just got back from the Toyota dealer and have test driven the Toyota Echo Hatchback. Overall, not bad for a tiny car. I truly think I could live with it. I wish it had a SMALLER motor though.
Since I have rented tiny 3 cylinder 1 litre cars in Europe while on vacation, I find nothing wrong with them. Their lack of subjective "power" is more than made up for by stellar fuel economy.
As an example, the VW Lupo 3L is rated 3 litre per 100 kilometre fuel consumption: that works out to around 94 miles per Imperial gallon, if my math is correct. The tiny turbodiesel won't melt the tires off, but who cares?
True, I probably would not want to drive from my house to Nevada and back in such a tiny car. Something like a Buick LeSabre or a Cadillac Deville would be far more comfortable.
Then again, for what it costs to drive +3,000km one way (Fuel, meals, motel, etc), it's usually cheaper and more environmentally friendly for me to fly. I get there in 4 hours instead of 3 days.
Jerry