Choosing EPA Ratings for Highly Modified Automobiles

[SVOboy]

*sigh* I'm just going to leave it at the 88 hf level (not even 89-91, that's lower) just because it's the highest rated so no one is going to whine about underrating my EPA values.

As long as dan is happy.

[krousdb]

Originally Posted by SVOboy

*sigh* I'm just going to leave it at the 88 hf level (not even 89-91, that's lower) just because it's the highest rated so no one is going to whine about underrating my EPA values.

I don't recall anyone whining about anything.

Originally Posted by SVOboy

As long as dan is happy.

As I said a few times before in this thread, it doesn't matter to me what we end up with. Prolly the best thing is to let each person decide individually and not make a big deal about it. Like Matt said, he doesn't want to have to police the gaslog. I don't understand why you would make a decision just to make me happy. I'm already happy seeing the improvement you have made. Do what you feel is right. I will back you up 100%.

EDIT: After seeing the poll numbers it looks like there is a clear concensus to use original EPA values. I say we just go with that.

[Matt Timion]

Originally Posted by krousdb

I'm already happy seeing the improvement you have made. Do what you feel is right. I will back you up 100%.

Agreed. This site is about helping each other obtain better fuel economy. Each person does it their own way. I personally think that SVOBoy's improvements have been amazing.

It's a real honor to be here with all of you guys.

[SVOboy]

Originally Posted by krousdb

I don't recall anyone whining about anything.

As per this thread, I'm whining.

As I said a few times before in this thread, it doesn't matter to me what we end up with. Prolly the best thing is to let each person decide individually and not make a big deal about it. Like Matt said, he doesn't want to have to police the gaslog. I don't understand why you would make a decision just to make me happy. I'm already happy seeing the improvement you have made. Do what you feel is right. I will back you up 100%.

EDIT: After seeing the poll numbers it looks like there is a clear concensus to use original EPA values. I say we just go with that.

I probably sounded sarcastic, but I wasn't being so. I realize that my caring at all is just vanity, I don't do these things to show off or look cool, so what does it matter what my % over EPA reflects.

[krousdb]

The biggest influence that none of us have control over is our daily commute. I happen to have a FE friendly commute but I didn't pick my job based on that. People who have short commutes, like you Ben, will always have a handicap when comparing yourselves to me or Basjoos. I wish I could figure out a way to level the playing field, but I can't.

I believe that it has been mentioned here before, but maybe we should add another top ten list for lowest fuel useage. That way, those that choose to walk or ride thier bike would be able to have something to show for it.

[MetroMPG]

I think that's a good idea, Dan. For example, I've noticed and admire Brick's deliberations on route, etc., because he seems want to do just that: burn less fuel overall.

On commutes... agreed. I have an unfair advantage there. My commute is from my bed to wherever the computer is. All my driving is "free range", and I can pick the best routes whenever I head out.

And I personally don't care what yardstick people use to measure their "% over". More important is that everyone keep their garage info up to date so we can see in detail what's been done to the car (if anything), and what type of driving techniques they use... Hey Matt - that's not in there, but might make a good category, above the car info: "Driving techniques commonly used."

[SVOboy]

I don't keep my garage current at all, *sigh* Before I go and when Matt gets pictures up.

[MetroMPG]

Originally Posted by krousdb

My average speed is 35 MPH. How much do you think that stuff would get me? Certainly not 80-100 like you.

True. But I just figured if you see the utility of doing a belly pan, then it just seems logical to do other aero things as well.

The point of a partial boat tail is lost on me, at least on the hatchback. There is already a tail / spoiler on the back which I assume is there to promote separation of the flow.

The roof extension is good for getting clean separation, true. But a boat-tail would taper the car's shape even further than stock, so where it ends, the trailing wake would be that much smaller. Kamm figured: assuming laminar flow and the proper tapered shape, the optimum area at the very rear of the vehicle should be 50% of the vehicle's maximum projected area.

I'd be surprised if you didn't net at least a couple of percent FE improvement just with skirts, smooth wheel covers & carefully applied wheel/tire deflectors.

[Matt Timion]

Originally Posted by SVOboy

I don't keep my garage current at all, *sigh* Before I go and when Matt gets pictures up.

Did more work on it last night. Should have something basic up tomorrow.

[rh77]

Late to the party as usual... OK -- simple answer from a data consistency standpoint: use the EPA figures. Time and money is spent on making these modifications to stock vehicles, and when compared to the base figure with city/highway/combined, these vehicles typically achieve Hypermiler status. It would be very cumbersome, and honestly next to impossible, to devise an equation for each mod compared with the stock vehicle or to just replace the figures with what is closest to the end-resulting car. If you get 60mpg out of the deal instead of where you started out at 35, then you've accomplished something profound. Perhaps instead we could get a baseline of economy for the vehicles before the mods and report it that way. IMHO, Hypermiling deserves some attention.