What type of data would you like with the gaslog? - Page 3 - Fuelly Forums
Go Back   Fuelly Forums > The Pub > General Discussion (Off-Topic)
Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
Old 02-08-2006, 06:31 PM   #21
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,978
Country: United States
Re: Well, today I just just

Quote:
Originally Posted by kickflipjr
Well, today I just just knocked off the top10. I would like to be able to look up users who arn't on the 10 ten easily. The bar or line graph
would be cool too.
Yeah, I got knocked off of last place long ago -- it just feeds the competetive fire to get my car at least close to making the list again. I haven't really done much lately -- kind of at a standstill. Mostly it's been driving style -- 55mph max to stay in the high 20s/low 30s. I'm sure we'll all improve once summer comes around...

RH77
__________________

__________________
rh77 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-2006, 06:34 PM   #22
Registered Member
 
MetroMPG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 4,223
Country: United States
that's why i'd like to see

Quote:
Originally Posted by svoboy
but this city driving is a killer
that's why i'd like to see fuel consumption classified by city/hwy/mixed, svoboy. you may already be a "city" hypermiler depending on your car's city rating (are you???). but your driving patterns may prevent you from ever becoming an overall/mixed hypermiler.

---

as for the potential of my firefly, i'm not so sure about that. i know i've mentioned before that it's waaay more difficult to beat its rating than any other car i've driven. and i'm not sure if the issue is me, the car, or the rating.

e.g. in the last 4 years of driving my 89 accord, i averaged 35.8 mpg, which is a comfortable 33% over the EPA combined rating of 27. and i did that without even trying very hard (relative to my driving style in the past year).

yet with the firefly, i'm struggling mightily, and barely squeezing out a 3% victory by the same criteria.

and if i go by the canadian ratings, i'm actually falling short of the car's combined rating by 1 or 2 percent! (my NRCan hwy rating is 12% higher than the EPA's - i haven't compared other vehicles to see if the discrepancy is consistent)
__________________

MetroMPG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-2006, 06:48 PM   #23
*shrug*
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 6,195
Country: United States
My EPA ratings are actually

My EPA ratings are actually 29/32, with 31 for mixed, so I think I'm beating it. It's just a bummer because I got like 3 tanks in summer when I bought the car and now I'm screwed. So much work to be done and not enough money or time to do it. Spring break better be free of **** to do .
SVOboy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2006, 05:31 AM   #24
Registered Member
 
krousdb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,480
Country: United States
Location: Raleigh, NC
Re: that's why i'd like to see

Quote:
Originally Posted by MetroMPG
e.g. in the last 4 years of driving my 89 accord, i averaged 35.8 mpg, which is a comfortable 33% over the EPA combined rating of 27. and i did that without even trying very hard (relative to my driving style in the past year).

yet with the firefly, i'm struggling mightily, and barely squeezing out a 3% victory by the same criteria.

and if i go by the canadian ratings, i'm actually falling short of the car's combined rating by 1 or 2 percent! (my NRCan hwy rating is 12% higher than the EPA's - i haven't compared other vehicles to see if the discrepancy is consistent)
I don't know exactly where you live in Canada, but the more efficient the engine, the bigger hit you take for cold weather. Part if it may be where you live. The Firefly would suffer more than the Accord.

A top ten list, or a ranking by MPG only really makes sense if everyone had the same car. As was mentioned before in this thread, it might be more fair by showing the % over the combined EPA rating. That way, there is no penalty for having "the wrong car". The idea is to do the best we can with what we have.

Another thing to consider is that some cars may have been "tuned" by the manufacturer such that they happen to do very well on the EPA test program, but don't necessarily do well in real life.

IIRC on the EPA highway cycle, the average speed is 48mph. The top speed is only 60mph. I would call that a suburban cycle rather than highway. In 1985, the EPA began discounting highway test results by 22% and city results by 10%. To put that in perspective, if the 98 Firefly had been around in 1984, it's EPA rating would have been 48/60. Ouch!
__________________


krousdb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2006, 07:45 AM   #25
Registered Member
 
MetroMPG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 4,223
Country: United States
Re: that's why i'd like to see

Quote:
Originally Posted by krousdb
the more efficient the engine, the bigger hit you take for cold weather.
hadn't considered that. but i'm not that far north - i'm on the st. lawrence river in southeastern ontario, roughly 500 km northeast of your location. looking at a map, i'm at a lower lattitude than several entire mid/western states.

Quote:
IIRC on the EPA highway cycle, the average speed is 48mph. The top speed is only 60mph.
did some more digging and found an article comparing the EPA and NRCan test cycles. our country's city cycles differ, however the highway tests are essentially identical. (which makes my 12% higher NRCan hwy rating even more bizarre).

Quote:
if the 98 Firefly had been around in 1984, it's EPA rating would have been 48/60. Ouch!
essentially it was around in 94: not counting the ultra stingy XFi model, the previous gen. car used the same TBI 993cc engine (though ODB1) & transmission, however the body style of the pre-95's were slightly smaller and 180 lbs lighter than the car i've got.

the '94 metro's EPA rating is 46/49: same hwy figure & 2 mpg higher on the city cycle (which could be accounted for in the weight difference). the rating for the 1993 model is 46/50. unfortunately canadian data prior to 95 isn't available.
MetroMPG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2006, 10:56 AM   #26
Moderator
 
GasSavers_DaX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,209
Country: United States
Re: Haha, knocked me down to the

Quote:
Originally Posted by krousdb
Quote:
Originally Posted by SVOboy
Haha, knocked me down to the last spot, I need to pull up my crappy winter mileage.
All you need are a few long road trips. You are welcome to come for a visit.:-)
I can't wait to finish my HF transmission and do some full tank I-285 night runs.
GasSavers_DaX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2006, 11:47 AM   #27
*shrug*
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 6,195
Country: United States
Quote:I can't wait to finish

Quote:
I can't wait to finish my HF transmission and do some full tank I-285 night runs. Smiling
Hell yeah, I'm picking up krousdb a free cx tranny so he'll be in the same boat,
SVOboy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2006, 10:52 AM   #28
Registered Member
 
MetroMPG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 4,223
Country: United States
matt - been playing with the

matt - been playing with the GD equivalent for CF. got a basic charting mini app working. This is the actual "complete" f/e data for Firefly #1:



to this i'm planning to add:

- a corresponding rolling plot of "lifetime mpg" (cumulative miles/gal re-calc'd at each fill up), so you can easily see where each fill-up lies in relation to your "lifetime mpg".

- reference lines for: EPA city/hwy/avg estimates

- reference line for: other drivers' actual mpg with the same car

i'll post back when i've added this stuff. we should be able to translate this approach from CF to PHP for the gaslog area once i've ironed out the details.

(can you spot the small fillup affected by filling error??? )
MetroMPG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2006, 11:10 AM   #29
Registered Member
 
MetroMPG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 4,223
Country: United States
i was also thinking of

i was also thinking of generating image map code for each chart, so you could mouse-over each fill-up datapoint and view the details in the browser status bar. (if you wanted, i guess you could also javascript it up to display the data elsewhere on the page)
MetroMPG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2006, 11:59 AM   #30
Moderator
 
GasSavers_DaX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,209
Country: United States
Re: matt - been playing with the

Quote:
Originally Posted by MetroMPG

(can you spot the small fillup affected by filling error??? )
Holy crap! My theory is proved!
__________________

GasSavers_DaX is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Web site errors jeffreydj69 Fuelly Web Support and Community News 3 04-18-2013 02:21 AM
Fuelly Android App - eehokie Fuelly Web Support and Community News 2 07-14-2010 09:59 PM
More graphs? jonsands Fuelly Web Support and Community News 1 07-08-2009 02:54 AM
twitter integration? flapjacker Fuelly Web Support and Community News 4 11-15-2008 07:35 PM
84-88 Toyota Pickup Scorn Wanted to Buy 0 09-14-2005 03:11 PM

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 07:24 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.