Hey pb, so before it was a question, here's my official request for a new feature:
The partial fuel-up method of calculation is all over the place. If I take them out, the only correct number is overall average mpg. If I put them back in, I at least get best tank back.
But the running average is incorrect. The monthly graphs are incorrect, both factually and graphically. I see what you're saying about a shorter timespan, but in the end mpg = miles over gallons, and anything else is inaccurate. The numbers are starting to become relatively meaningless since my page, however cool it looks after the redesign, is littered with random, incorrect figures.
Don't even have to answer...just ponder, maybe I'll wake up and be surprised one day :-)
The numbers aren't going to work for everyone, mikewithaprius. No matter what decision we make on how to calculate the various stats, there are plenty of other ways to do it that we won't use and folks will end up unhappy. Just this week I've had conversations with people who don't want partials included in overall average.
We need to make some decisions about how things will be calculated based on the best way we see to do it for the widest possible audience. We're definitely open to discussion, but keep in mind that your version of "correct" or "incorrect" might only apply to some people. For others, excluding partials is "correct" for every stat.
If the numbers are meaningless to you, sorry about that. You might need to find another way to track things. We set up one way to track here and we know it's not the only way.
This just makes me happy that I never do partial tanks. I know from building my own excel sheet that partials can obviously screw up the thing. I do use a slightly different method to calculate correctly the partials, but its still a pain. But since I have no partial tanks on any of my vehicles at the moment, its a moot point.
My sheet, as an example, makes note of partials if they are present, then totals them up with the next full tank, providing a true mileage value, rather than just absorbing them and letting them be part of the larger overall. So if you do a partial, then the next fill up is a full tank, the sheet adds the values of those two fill ups together and gives you your MPG on that full tank fill up, rather than skip it and wait for 2 full tanks in a row. It works for me anyway, but I don't do that here. And since I don't have any partials... It doesn't really matter to me.
As PB says, there is no one correct way to do this. I think their site does a fine job, if one takes into account that each person has to be thorough or more accurate with their own reporting. Not everyone has the same standards.
I'm enjoying the redesign, but miss the speed of the old site. I save up receipts and enter them all in once a month. Used to take me (what seemed like) seconds, now it's minutes... Maybe just the kinks getting worked out? If not, would love a multiple entry page to make data entry easier. Thanks!
Thanks for the suggestion, Roman. We're a small team so we have to use our resources wisely. We also happen to be Web guys. So we can develop Fuelly Mobile once with technologies we already know and it works on iPhones, Androids, Blackberrys, Windows phones, and a bunch of others. It might not be as slick as a native app for each of these platforms, but we don't see what big advantages native apps would give our users for the time it would take to develop them.
I think in a perfect world where we had infinite resources we would create native apps for every major platform. But when you're a small side operation you have to make some tough decisions about where to spend resources.