Light versus Heavy Throttle Acceleration
 

I'm in a huge rush to get my computer packed up for my 8 am departure to college, so I'm just gonna throw it out without introduction: https://crxmpg.com/accelmpg.html

interesting, i wonder what the test results would be if there was no shutting off of the engine, i imagine most people would rather not shut of the engine, me included.

I imagine that the percent increase would be be same, just lower numbers on the total FE imagine I do.

I wonder about how this works in city driving that has a lot of stop and go. If you stop every 1.5 miles how would that effect the results?

As I said, I think more distance between stops would increase the benefit of this. But I'm not sure. I stopped every 3/4s of a mile or so. Anyway, leaving the engine on would yield the same results except mehbe slightly closer, there's really no reason to leave the engine on though, :p

Damn this hotel lobby computer...

I think you'd get more "accurate" results by using a chain to DEFINE the actual throttle opening you are using...and the tach to define the shift points.

It's very inaccurate to guess as to your actual throttle opening.

Not trying to be overcritical...that's some good info and a good bit of work.

Interesting results....:thumbup:

Valid point Zugy. Perhaps a chain is overkill though - something (e.g. wood) of varying thicknesses placed beneath the gas pedal would be easier if you wanted to do the test using a physical restriction.

SG users could also watch TPS and/or LOD values.

Then again, knowing throttle opening values exactly may not help other cars since they have different fuel / throttle position maps.

Maybe timing the slow vs moderate rates of acceleration would be a better comparison point.

I always thought the floor made a good throttle stop. :)

HA HA HA HA . . . . IT DOES!!!

Here is another arguement for idling an engine when it only uses .1gph - to pay $10,000 extra for a hybrid I could idle my xB engine for about 2,000,000 minutes for that much money in fuel.