Mini Test: Driving With Load VS. Cruise Control - DWL (more or less) busted! - Fuelly Forums

Android Users - Coming Soon! - Migrating from aCar 4.8 to 5.0

Go Back   Fuelly Forums > Tech, Troubleshooting and Repair > Experiments, Modifications and DIY
Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Click Here to Login
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
Old 04-14-2007, 08:04 PM   #1
Registered Member
 
Peakster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 467
Country: United States
Exclamation Mini Test: Driving With Load VS. Cruise Control - DWL (more or less) busted!

I did a little A-B test tonight comparing 'driving with load' versus cruise control and here are my results:

Temperature: 11*C
Winds: coming from the south @ 15km/h.
Route:
Attachment 374

Here's the YouTube Video of the test.

Driving with Load:
FE average: 60.5 mpg
Speed Average: 48 mph

Using Cruise Control:
FE average: 60.2 mpg (a 0.5% mileage decrease if you're picky)
Speed Average: 48mph

Looks like using cruise control is virtually just as good as keeping a steady throttle and letting the car speed up and slow down as it likes.

I tried to make a video of the test & everything went well except the last clip where I announce the mpg with the cruise: It didn't record on camera !!! Now I know how people feel when they get all geared up for a UFO sighting and miss the final alien shot !

I'll probably still post it later because there's some funny parts where a guy driving an SUV gets all angry after I point the camcorder at him, and me full-throttle accelerating like mad so I can simply merge onto the highway.
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	CA2NS1I71.GIF
Views:	217
Size:	73.0 KB
ID:	327  
__________________

Peakster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-14-2007, 08:10 PM   #2
Registered Member
 
zpiloto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,225
Country: United States
What kind of route, weather and terrain were you dealing with. I would be really supprised if that held up to more testing. I done hill climbing (1/2 mile 6% grade) with load and without and there is a significant difference between the two. Then again I don't have that data to show since my computer crash.

Just saw the map. Was it the same directions both time.
__________________

zpiloto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-14-2007, 08:13 PM   #3
Registered Member
 
Peakster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 467
Country: United States
Quote:
Originally Posted by zpiloto View Post
What kind of route, weather and terrain were you dealing with. I would be really supprised if that held up to more testing. I done hill climbing (1/2 mile 6% grade) with load and without and there is a significant difference between the two. Then again I don't have that data to show since my computer crash.
The route is fairly flat, but enough difference in altitude where my speed drops/climbs considerably. I'll definitely post the video so you can see the road conditions. It's definitely worth considering a A-B-A-B test.

Computer crash eh? Looks like the UFO thing is effecting you too!

Quote:
Originally Posted by zpiloto View Post
Just saw the map. Was it the same directions both time.
You bet. North to south DWL, drove back to the top, and did the same exact route with cruise @ 48mph. The video is loading on YouTube as I type.
Peakster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-15-2007, 07:33 AM   #4
Registered Member
 
Snax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 758
Country: United States
I think more data is imperative when comparing to cruise controlled speed. As I found with my brief testing of my grille blockoff, there seems to be too much variance to conclude anything even on a 20 mile round trip.
Quote:
With Blockoff,
leg 1, 22.5 MPG
leg 2, 21.7 MPG
Sans-Blockoff
leg 1, 21.8 MPG
leg 2, 22.0 MPG
I also believe that the difference between load adjusting and cruise are more pronounced when you throw some significant hills in there, particularly when you get into being able to anticipate the crest of a hill and initiate a coast sooner. Plus, those with automatic transmissions stand to prevent kickdowns and fuel sucking over revving on the ascent with load adjusting.
__________________
LiberalImage.com

I think, therefore I doubt.
Snax is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2007, 11:58 AM   #5
Registered Member
 
zpiloto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,225
Country: United States
Peak in my search on acetone I found that this(second one down) experiment made google. Now you can say that your work has been published.
zpiloto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2007, 02:51 PM   #6
Registered Member
 
Peakster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 467
Country: United States
Quote:
Originally Posted by zpiloto View Post
Peak in my search on acetone I found that this(second one down) experiment made google. Now you can say that your work has been published.
That is awesome!

Now let's see if my Acetone Test will make google too (just did the test today and about to make a thread on it ).
Peakster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2007, 06:58 PM   #7
Registered Member
 
MetroMPG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 4,223
Country: United States
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snax View Post
I also believe that the difference between load adjusting and cruise are more pronounced when you throw some significant hills in there
I think you're right there, Snax. Hills will make the DWL technique's advantages more obvious.

Also, I was too simplistic when I described DWL as maintaining a constant pedal position, Peakster. Thats more like "DWL lite".

"True" DWL would have you monitoring your SG for engine load (or an engine load-related parameter like instant MPG). If you're DWL, your MPG should stay constant as you climb & descend grades. This will likely mean that you have to let off the accelerator progressively as your speed falls in a climb (maybe even downshift too), and slowly re-apply pressure after the crest.

So "True" DWL (as opposed to DWL Lite) by its very nature will also probably result in a slower average speed over a given route than driving that route with the cruise control (assuming the same starting speed). So you also face less aerodynamic losses.
MetroMPG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2007, 07:20 PM   #8
Registered Member
 
Peakster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 467
Country: United States
Quote:
Originally Posted by MetroMPG View Post
Also, I was too simplistic when I described DWL as maintaining a constant pedal position, Peakster. Thats more like "DWL lite".

"True" DWL would have you monitoring your SG for engine load (or an engine load-related parameter like instant MPG). If you're DWL, your MPG should stay constant as you climb & descend grades. This will likely mean that you have to let off the accelerator progressively as your speed falls in a climb (maybe even downshift too), and slowly re-apply pressure after the crest.
Whoa! Crazy concept. I thought it was as simple as keeping a steady GPH (my cruise control tends to lessen the GPH while going downhill and increase it while going up grades). "DWL lite" - that's funny !

Quote:
So "True" DWL (as opposed to DWL Lite) by its very nature will also probably result in a slower average speed over a given route than driving that route with the cruise control (assuming the same starting speed). So you also face less aerodynamic losses.
That was actually one of the things that interested me. Is it that DWL increases FE because the average speed is slower than if we were to drive in cruise? Since I drove the 7 miles doing 48mph average using DWL-lite, for a good cross-check, I thought it would be obvious to simply set the cruise to that same 48mph to keep it a constant variable (since the time travelled needs to be the same in order to compare apples with apples, no?).
Peakster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2007, 07:48 PM   #9
Registered Member
 
MetroMPG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 4,223
Country: United States
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peakster View Post
Is it that DWL increases FE because the average speed is slower than if we were to drive in cruise?
Good question
__________________

MetroMPG 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
Why Is there No App?! muffetmd Fuelly Web Support and Community News 8 03-11-2012 10:06 AM
Incorrect Milage Calcuatlion PatM Fuelly Web Support and Community News 4 07-17-2009 08:21 PM
Average fuel mileage line in the history graph? BDC Fuelly Web Support and Community News 1 05-06-2009 01:07 AM
Any offtopic.com forum members? MetroMPG General Discussion (Off-Topic) 0 09-13-2006 12:16 PM

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 06:58 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.