Archives

i have a 5 speed echo, full upper grill block, next mod is a full under panel, and mirror delete, i am tring to find info on front and rear modifications, i am going to cut and weld my mods onto this car after first proving the mods with lexan and tape,it has 150k on it so its not that valuable, im working with a top 30 in the nation asphalt racer, who seems to know aero quite well, i will only do the mods if they will pay for themselves in savings,. i drive 105 miles a day minimum 6 days a week. It is almost all flat land as i am in north florida. about 70% is 45-55 mph zone light to moderate traffic. about 20% is 65mph and the other 10% is moderate traffic in 30-40 zone with around 10 traffic lights coming to and then from work. so 630-730 miles a week, i get from 42-46 mpg on this commute, and i get better in the winter than the summer because you have to run( ac in fl) and it does,nt stay cold here for that long in the winter, i dont know if we even have winter formula fuel here ,some of the guys say kills their milage. my goal is to get 650 miles from each tank of gas so i fill up once a week. my tank holds 11.7 gallons .thats around 60 mpg.. i drive by the mpg on my scangauge.looking forward to this site

Welcome. I hate to be the bearer of bad tidings, but you'd have to turn your echo into an aeroecho, like Basjoos did with his aerocivic, to get 60 mpg out of it. Lamebums here has done the best of any Echo owner, getting 53.6 mpg over 15,000 miles with his Echo. That's still ~20% below your target mpg.

Another aero car getting 60 mpg is Darin Cosgrove's Pontiac Firefly with boattail. There's a photo of it on Jalopnik.

Welcome to CleanMPG. First off the mirror delete will do very little to gain you gas mileage. The top Echo's are getting 49 to 57 mpg. If you don't know it we are more about adjusting the nut behind the wheel over making expensive mods to the vehicle.

Most aero mods will only get you another 10% improvement in gas mileage.

So if you spend $500-$750 modding your car and only improve the fuel mileage by 3-4 mpg how long will it take to get back to break even?

See my point. BTW I've been there, done that and got the tee shirt. :D

Now your saying your already getting from 42-46 mpg on this commute

I'd say sixty miles per gallon is out of reach in the Echo. I would start with a goal of fifty and when you reach that strive for fifty five.

Some points that may help you jump two or three mpg's off the top.

Raise your tire pressure to a minimum of 85% of max side wall. If the tire has a max pressure of 44 psi you can start at 38 psi and go up to the maximum sidewall pressure of 44 psi.

I run a minimum of 42 psi in both my cars.

Next I would look at staying at 55 mph or less on the trip. That 65 mph zone I would limit my speed to no more than 60 mph or if your able to do it safely drive 55 mph.

The time difference is only 3.5 minutes more to slow down to 55 mph over 65 mph.
The up side is the fuel mileage difference is at least three mpg and maybe as much as five miles per gallon.

Same with driving 50 over 55 mpg the time difference is only a few minutes but the gas mileage jump is between 1.5-2.0 mpg.

Here is a good start for you that should help you understand what it takes to get better fuel mileage from the beginning.

Beating the EPA - The Why’s and How to Hypermile (http://www.cleanmpg.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1510)

We have several Echo owners on the board that will be able to guide you in the right direction of what works and what doesn't when it comes to the Echo.

I'd say sixty miles per gallon is out of reach in the Echo. I would start with a goal of fifty and when you reach that strive for fifty five.

I definitely agree with this (and it's not often that I agree with ALS on anything!). I sometimes see fifty or slightly above just driving at reasonable speeds on the freeway for 30+ miles at a time. Sixty seems completely plausible with serious aeromods (on the freeway) or serious hypermiling at lower speeds. I'd be intensely curious to see what PaleMelanesian or lnmcmahan could wring out of an Echo. Judging by EPA ratings, I'd expect it to have more potential for absolute numbers than either of their cars.

I definitely agree with this.

Er, I don't, because I misread the original post as saying "in reach". How comical.

60mpg is well within reach if the driver is willing, easily. 70mpg is also within reach.

I average just about 150% of new epa in the winter (at around 10F) on my trips into work that are less than 7 miles on snow tires.

That said, I usually am in the 50's (mpg) on highway trips with a car rated 17/25 on the new epa. The echo is rated 29/38 or 30/38 depending on the year, on the new epa.

In the summer time, 80mpg trips are also within reach if he budgets himself an extra 10-15 minutes...if that.

As a former Echo AT owner I also want to weigh in. While I agree with ALS and Darrell that the most important element is the nut behind the wheel, I think the aero approach is a bit better than they make it out to be. After all, an overall improvement of 10%, if achievable, would be significant.

I did a fair amount of aero work on my echo, short of the really radical. Each improvement was small, but together they added up. Since a-b-a testing is difficult with multiple modifications, or even small effects from one mod, it is hard to say what the actual improvement was, but it was noticable. - with lots of work and some expense.

For aeromodding coroplast is your friend. Try to corner as much as you can from old signs - election season is a gold mine. The easiest coroplast mod is rear fender skirts. make a cardboard template so that you don't have to waste your coroplast on an incorrect fit. Just screw the coroplast down to the plastic wheel arches. You can drive a metal rod, from Lowes or Home Depot, into the bottom row to stiffen the bottom edge.

The next thing is to use a grill block on the top grill opening. It is small, but it certainly looks like an aero disadvantage. In colder climates you can block about 2/3 of the bottom grill opening, but not I suspect in Florida. Just a couple of days ago there was a discussion of underbelly streamlining. Do a seach on "Echo" or "echo" and you should turn that up.

High tire pressures are the most rewarding of any mod. I ran some tests at different pressures and the improvement from the placard pressure up to the 44psi max load pressure is significant. Still higher pressures help some, but the returns are small above 50 psi.

I often looked at a boat tail for the Echo, but never tried. I'm sure it would help, but it would be very complex, unless you were willing to give up trunk storage. You also have to find a way to preserve rear visibility, so you would need plexiglas for part of the tail. It has not been done, far as I know, so there are no models to persue.

You will have an advantage over the EPA numbers due to the fact that, as you say, you have few hills to worry about.

Lastly, though this is a wonderful site, and I read it every day, there is another site where "modding" rules supreme. Try looking at:

www.ecomodder.com.

Their forum has a special section devoted to aeromodding. Some very interesting approaches there, though some are expensive and time consuming.

One last point. Buy a SGII. You will need it badly in your pursuit of aero improvements and improved driving technique. You won't ever know what is working without the Scangauge.

I'd say 60 is a worthy goal with a 5-speed. I just did a 300-mile round trip highway drive last week, and averaged 63 mpg, with people on board and thunderstorms for part of the trip. The echo starts out with slightly better mileage than my civic, too.

Since your driving is mainly highway, but reasonable speeds, it's a good chance you can hit that goal. Highway driving makes aero mods more useful than low-speed urban driving.

My Elantra (with a much larger/less efficient engine and heavier body work) is worth low to mid 50's on the highway at around 55mph (it will get pretty close to 60mpg through moderate congestion in summer time temps) so I'm sure the Echo can get up there with enough effort and care.

Even though Andrew's car is geared so it runs higher RPM than my Elantra, you can really tell he's got a lighter more efficient car when he tops 60mpg in the conditions he just listed. :o

The echo has an added bonus of VVTi, while my civic has no variable valve timing at all.

Sean, you Elantra also has a 2.0 engine compared to my 1.6. The echo has a 1.5 = even better.

Absolutely -- my iron block is a bit of a pig, though. That engine has to stay off more than it is on to return anything reasonable. I can stay pretty close to you in the city segments (though I've never topped 80mpg :o) but completely fall behind on the highway.

I'd love to try my hand at the Echo some day -- it has a rather tall profile yet still returns very nice numbers at highway speeds. An excellent vehicle to be sure!

One last point. Buy a SGII. You will need it badly in your pursuit of aero improvements and improved driving technique. You won't ever know what is working without the Scangauge.

Sorry, I missed fact that you already have one. Great! You are now in position to do some real improvement. Good luck.

Right Lane Cruiser, if you ever find yourself in the SF Bay Area, I hope you'll have a chance to borrow my car for experimentation.

The OP might be able to tweak close to 200% of the '08 EPA out of his '02 Echo. The Division A quarterly FE contestants manage to do it consistently on their commute routes.

But few of us are Division A drivers with perfect commute routes. Look at the lifetime average mileage of the best people on this website, and 170% of EPA is a rare accomplishment.

Division B is more realistic for most serious hypermilers, especially those who drive a wide variety of trips and routes. The '02 MT Echo is rated 29 city/37 highway, and 32 mpg combined. Division B competitors typically get 175% of EPA combined. That's 175% of 32 mpg, or 56 mpg - exactly what Lamebums gets, and about what I do with my Sentra (173% of '08 EPA or 152% of original EPA). My Scion will eventually get there. I knocked its mileage down with a 7300 mile cross-country trip on unfamiliar roads.

Aaron, I'm in the north Bay, if you want to get together to get some driving tips sometime.

As mentioned above, last week I did a highway trip, including crazy-nuts city and thunderstorms and cold weather, and got 190% of epa. You can ask Chuck or Phoebeisis about the drivers there. :eek: It's not just the commuting route. ;)

I agree with Darrell, there is definitely something fishey with some of these Class A numbers. It has taken on the aspect of a non-stop competition and as such it seems to have departed somewhat from reality.

I know competition. I've raced cars most of my adult life and I know the mentality it takes to compete. But in racing, there is an organized and enforced set or rules to make car preparation relatively level and there are "rules of the road" that govern how a driver conducts himself on the track. Perhaps most important, all competitors see the same green flag, the same checker flag and must drive the same course. Competitors still find small ways to achieve small advantages through near infinite testing, development tweaks, and money. In the case of the mileage challenge, there are no preparation rules and no rules of the road. A participant is free to engage any far flung extreme that he can envision, impractical as it might be for ordinary or regular driving.

Here are some of the things I THINK I see that make the numbers kinda unrealistic:
1. Most likely the electrical augmentation vehicles at the very top of the list are not counting their total energy input.
2. Pulse-and-glide methods are being used by many, but are illegal in many states.
3. fas 'ing is being employed widely, but is illegal in many states.
4. Extremely high tire pressures are common, limit adhesion and are probably dangerous to some drivers. Those well familiar with the problem get away with by knowing the handling limitations. (I have an Insight with Bridgestone LLRs so I have personal knowledge of this effect.) On race cars, "street" tires do run at elevated pressures, but anything beyond 35-40 pounds hot is counterproductive to grip and racers don't get over those levels. Vast personal experience there!
5. Limiting car use to special situations. By the age of some of the vehicles and the small amount to miles listed in the general mileage logs, it seems likely that some of these cars are only driven when conditions are good or when routes will be good.
6. The commuting bias. A known route driven hundreds of times will yield an unrealistic bias because the driver becomes familiar with each and every little driving trick which saves half an ounce of fuel.
7. Some, if not most, of these cars are driven by only one driver. Pretty unrealistic for a family situation.
8. Other unrecognized problems.

It is kinda unfortunate that there isn't some actual regulation of this competition, but that is impractical of course. A set of ground rules might help, but it is difficult to envision any realistic enforcement. Human nature being what it is, if tire pressure were limited to 44 psi, as an example, several would use higher pressures. More significantly, folks are "trapped" into vastly different driving circumstances and no amount of "regulation" would change that fact.

Please don't mark me off as bitter. I am not. I am interested in what folks do to achieve better FE, and I do much of it myself - my postings here make that clear. (Just to prove that point, you'll see my fas question in another thread.) I just have an "eyes open" view of what is going on and don't take it too seriously - any more. If folks want to compete on an unlevel field, then go to it. There is no real harm, it makes for interesting reading and furthers a worthwhile goal - better FE with less environmental impact and less dependance on foreign oil. And please don't flame me, I speak honestly and with malice toward none. I've learned lots here and expect to learn lots more.

Jim, most of the vehicles in the mileage competition have normal logs as well. Take a look at those for realistic, year round driving performance.

As for known commutes, yes that is definitely a factor but many of us drive routes for the first time with excellent results.

I can't speak to the electric "enhancement" -- I don't use any.

Jim, I've thought about this a lot too.

On "unrealistic" numbers, what is realistic?? STM that there is a whole spectrum of mpg from utter leadfoot to someone who really works at it (perhaps over a defined route at lower speeds in a warm climate). To me, "realistic" doesn't mean much. Before I retired, I had what turned out to be a very mpg-friendly commute. My daily use numbers in no way reflected what someone else might get in different conditions in the same car.

As for extremely high mpg numbers, they are encouraging rather than disheartening because they show me that there is room for me to improve. The 160mpg 2300mile single tank in an Insight-I was done by some highly experienced and talented drivers at low speeds under a defined regimen in summer conditions. I can't hope to duplicate that, but maybe I can get somewhere between where I am and that number, so it's worth trying to adopt modified versions of some of their methods. Therefore their result is useful to me.

I agree with most of your points except (2) and (3). AFAIK there is no law requiring one to maintain a constant speed, and it is quite possible to do P&G without impeding traffic flow. As for coasting in neutral ICE-ON, if this is illegal then MT's would also be illegal, as well as AT's with a freewheel feature like the Suburban I drove last summer. And if FAS is illegal, then many hybrids (including our Insight-I's) would be illegal because they shut down the ICE while the car is in motion. I suppose vehicles with cylinder shutdown would be partially illegal (maybe just the shutdown cylinders would be in violation?).

Which gets to a deeper question: doing P&G and FAS shows what can be accomplished with these methods. So it shows the improvements in FE that could be realized if these features were built into a car, either as an automatic function or something the driver could use easily.

As for (4), tire pressures have been discussed at length here. My feeling is that if one operates under hypermiling conditions at or below the speed limit and without abrupt driver inputs then higher pressure tires are not a problem. By the same token, driving stock tires at or below placard pressures at 80-90mph for extended periods may exceed their performance parameters, depending on the tire and other conditions.

Electric is not currently included in the mileage logs calculations. However, if it were, my battery-charger usage would be equivalent to about 0.1 gallons a tank, by the Progressive X-prize conversion rates. That's about 1/2 mpg drop over my posted results, which DO show the usage. I use a charger overnight, so I have enough battery to run extended FASes with headlights. I'm trading cents of electricity vs dollars of fuel if I had to idle-coast instead.

Most of the cars in the contest ARE running daily commutes. Those commutes are not all the same, but the drivers' knowledge of their own commute levels the field.

That highway trip I mentioned above is an example of how mine is not a special-use vehicle. I could have taken the Ody instead, but that would have used 3 times the fuel. I took a 5 mpg hit for the current tank to save fuel overall.

Whatever the reasons, the competition mileages are perfect commutes, under near-perfect conditions. Ricardo's all-time average is 132% of EPA. Andrew's is 165%, yet he's averaging 225% in the current competition. Sean's is 119% for his Elantra. His last 5 fill-ups in his Elantra look great, but they're the only fill-ups he's recorded in the past two years

The current Division A leader, cpeter38, is getting 269% of EPA during the competition, but 149% of EPA in the same car for his baseline. DiamondLarry is running 202% in the competition, but 164% overall in the same car. The lifetime averages are based on original EPA, while competition averages are based on the lower '08 EPA estimates, which makes most competition values look better. That doesn't account for the majority of the increases, though.

So, can the OP get 200% of EPA day-in and day-out? Its doubtful.

My all time average represents my learning curve when I started and winter driving (which removes any hope of doubling epa). Currently, my all time average is what I get driving in the winter. With daylight saving time, how much I can increase that amount is severely reduced as I can only fas so much at night.

My commute is ONLY 6.8 miles long and not flat by any measure, so it is by no means perfect with 10 stoplights and two stop signs added into the mix. This is Albany NY, so for at least half the commute, I have to deal with other drivers' impatience. On highway drives, I get mid 50's. That said, I drive on the highway MAYBE once every other month. It's all city driving, which in the city, my car is rated for 17mpg on the new epa and 19 on the old epa. Take what you want from this info.

Hi, Darrell. The Elantra hasn't been driven more than what shows in the logs -- I've been mostly driving the Insight since I bought it. I would have sold 'Lantrific but I need a back seat for my growing family. ;) All of my driving is reflected in the tanks of the two vehicles... though the last two tanks in the Elantra had significant driving done by my visiting relatives (ouch).

I keep working at it but my mileage just really suffers under 20F. :(

I find the echo to be a very good hypermiling vehicle. In the summer I can easily hit 60 mpg on my way to and from work. In terms of modding, I havent done anything really. I have my tires at side wall max psi and thats about it. Im thinking about underbody shieldings for better air flow under the car. Im not an expert but I think this car is capable of higher numbers if say Wayne were to drive it.

I am willing to help you out in anyway I can, if need be. Good luck and have fun! :D

My all time average represents my learning curve when I started and winter driving (which removes any hope of doubling epa). Currently, my all time average is what I get driving in the winter. With daylight saving time, how much I can increase that amount is severely reduced as I can only fas so much at night.

Pretty much the same for me, except the fas part. I use a trickle charger to overcome that one.

Pretty much the same for me, except the fas part. I use a trickle charger to overcome that one.

I forgot to add that I have a solar charger that charges my battery during the day :o. I need to get a second one since this one doesn't seem to give me enough of a charge to dark fas.

Sean's is 119% for his Elantra. His last 5 fill-ups in his Elantra look great, but they're the only fill-ups he's recorded in the past two years

The current Division A leader, cpeter38, is getting 269% of EPA during the competition, but 149% of EPA in the same car for his baseline. DiamondLarry is running 202% in the competition, but 164% overall in the same car. The lifetime averages are based on original EPA, while competition averages are based on the lower '08 EPA estimates, which makes most competition values look better. That doesn't account for the majority of the increases, though.

Some of this is easy to explain.

Sean's lifetime values also include several years of non-hypermiling.
Cpeter38 didn't break 200% until a clinic from Wayne.

Much of it has to do with the learning curve. The lower values from early efforts (or lack of efforts) pulls down the lifetime values.

Mine for the last challenge is 164% while my lifetime is 133%. It's easy to see why here:
http://www.cleanmpg.com/index.php?page=garage&displayunits=MPG(US)&viewcar=2597

My all time average represents my learning curve when I started and winter driving (which removes any hope of doubling epa). Currently, my all time average is what I get driving in the winter. With daylight saving time, how much I can increase that amount is severely reduced as I can only fas so much at night.

My commute is ONLY 6.8 miles long and not flat by any measure, so it is by no means perfect with 10 stoplights and two stop signs added into the mix. This is Albany NY, so for at least half the commute, I have to deal with other drivers' impatience. On highway drives, I get mid 50's. That said, I drive on the highway MAYBE once every other month. It's all city driving, which in the city, my car is rated for 17mpg on the new epa and 19 on the old epa. Take what you want from this info.

I think what some previous posters were getting to is some have more favorable conditions than others. For example 10 stoplights in Albany NY is not that bad as you can probably catch most of those lights if you time them properly. This becomes a bit more difficult to do when you factor in a 22 mile commute with lights at every ½ mile and not all the lights are timed the same. I can not remember all the lights even after driving the commute for over 4 years. That being said my commute is still better than bumper to bumper traffic as I only hit about 3 or 4 spots where I have to sit through a couple of red lights before finally getting past the light. There may be a better formula for getting people on an even playing field such as not just dividing City and Hwy EPA by 2, but rather throw a % factor in there – 30% City Driving /70% Hwy Driving, so you would take 30% of City EPA and 70% of Hwy EPA and that would be your baseline. This would be a higher number to adjust for the fact that this person has an easier commute that someone at 50% and 50% respectively.

There may be a better formula for getting people on an even playing field such as not just dividing City and Hwy EPA by 2, but rather throw a % factor in there – 30% City Driving /70% Hwy Driving, so you would take 30% of City EPA and 70% of Hwy EPA and that would be your baseline. This would be a higher number to adjust for the fact that this person has an easier commute that someone at 50% and 50% respectively.

Hmm... I don't like it...

I actually get my best FE when driving "city" and my worst on the "highway" (a lot of us do).

If I could get a commute that was all 35 mph "highway" it would be perfect.

One thing that is costing me a lot right now is that the low speed routes I have are all iced over so I am "forced" to use the highway for safety reasons.

And I wouldn't be able to convert my rural roads to either highway or city. How would you count them?

I think what some previous posters were getting to is some have more favorable conditions than others. For example 10 stoplights in Albany NY is not that bad as you can probably catch most of those lights if you time them properly. This becomes a bit more difficult to do when you factor in a 22 mile commute with lights at every ½ mile and not all the lights are timed the same. I can not remember all the lights even after driving the commute for over 4 years. That being said my commute is still better than bumper to bumper traffic as I only hit about 3 or 4 spots where I have to sit through a couple of red lights before finally getting past the light. There may be a better formula for getting people on an even playing field such as not just dividing City and Hwy EPA by 2, but rather throw a % factor in there – 30% City Driving /70% Hwy Driving, so you would take 30% of City EPA and 70% of Hwy EPA and that would be your baseline. This would be a higher number to adjust for the fact that this person has an easier commute that someone at 50% and 50% respectively.

I do 100% city driving so that would be welcome :). I may drive on the highway once every three months.

add in that my car is rated 17/25, On a good day I'll hit 300%+ of epa on a roundtrip commute.

Add in again, that my daily commutes are under 7 miles and my engine NEVER gets fully warm, that's another thing to consider.

If I had a highway commute 20 miles long, or even a city commute taht long, I'd be easily 250% epa.

The job I had before was actually about 22 miles, ALL city, and if you know state street from schenectady to albany NY, you KNOW it's no less than 50 stoplights. Ask Hobbit.

On these commutes, I was easily over 200% epa DAILY, as in, 42-46mpg roundtrip and I only had this commute for three months. Not trying to toot my own horn here, but imagine if I had that commute for a longer period of time?

A bit difficult to compare upstate NY to Phoenix. That would be like comparing Phoenix to Manhattan. Although valid point on not being able to take a weighted average. All I am saying is some folks have a commute where MPG # may come in higher than others assuming the same techniques being used. Myself included as I can do well at hypermiling for most of the trip, except for the occasional red light that I did not count on which kills the MPG.