Archives

Car|Score|Percentage|Driver
VW TDI|82|181%|Mike Sefton
Tahoe Hybrid|28|133%|Richard Krueger
Ford Escape Hybrid|44|161%|Richard Krueger
Ford Escape Hybrid|51|186%|Debbie (Kats) (<=Disqualified :( )
Camry Hybrid|53|157%|Rob C.
Civic Hybrid|73|174%|Wayne Gerdes
Prius|99|215%|Jared Parish (<= Winner ;) )
Honda Insight|109|209%|Billy


Official release: http://www.hybridfest.com/HF%202008%20MPG%20PR.pdf

Car|Score|Percentage|Driver
VW TDI|82|181%|Mike Sefton
Tahoe Hybrid|28|133%|Richard Kruger
Ford Escape Hybrid|44|161%|Richard Kruger
Ford Escape Hybrid|51|186%|Debbie (Kats) (<=Disqualified :( )
Camry Hybrid|53|157%|Rob C.
Civic Hybrid|73|174%|Wayne Gerdes
Prius|99|215%|Jared Parish (<= Winner ;) )
Honda Insight|109|209%|Billy


Official release: http://www.hybridfest.com/HF%202008%20MPG%20PR.pdf

Some of the scores seem a little low compared to last year. I know Billy did much better last year. Was the course the same or was there bad weather?

GaryG

Some of the scores seem a little low compared to last year. I know Billy did much better last year. Was the course the same or was there bad weather?

GaryG

Gary, I agree with you These scores look way off from last year. I seem to remember Billy getting 168 last year. I also see that Debbie was disqualified:(; were their hands tied by an excessively restrictive time limit?

Gary, I agree with you These scores look way off from last year. I seem to remember Billy getting 168 last year. I also see that Debbie was disqualified:(; were their hands tied by an excessively restrictive time limit?

That would explain why Wayne picked the HCH!

GaryG

yes, what's up with deb????:mad:

Is there some way to fix the annoying typo in the thread title? I tried but it didn't seem to accept the change.

The reason for the "crappy" mpg numbers this year is because we had to average about 32mph through the whole course to not get penalized. I don't have the exact rules on hand but I'm sure someone will post them here shortly.

I was able to get 80.5mpg while trying to floor it at the end to make up some time. In the end I was something like 30 seconds late and got a 2% penalty.

I really want to hear how Jared made the run because I tried my best to do P&G and warp neutral but I just could not make up the time caused by the stops. Plus I had to fill up with E10 crap before entering Wisconsin. :mad:

here is all the scores (not sorted though) The time limit was 51 minutes. Every minute over time resulted in a 2% penalty off your mpg.
I was 6 minutes over and took a 12% hit. :( I had 84.1 ended up with 74.0 MPG. Timing the traffic and red lights was tricky. Of course i'm just an amateur amongst the professionals.

http://i79.photobucket.com/albums/j127/forbessw/DSCN2147.jpg

http://i79.photobucket.com/albums/j127/forbessw/DSCN2147.jpg

yeah, definitely fix the typo :p

Yeah, scores were significantly different from last year, but I think it was way more realistic. They drove the course ahead of time at the posted limits (27 miles in 46 minutes) and tacked on a 5-minute buffer on top of that... so if you came in under 51 minutes you didn't get any penalty. 2% per minute above 51, and at 61 you were DQ'd.

27 miles in 51 minutes meant an average, including all stops, of 32 MPH. Average speeds last year were more in the 20-25 range, so it was a lot more of a challenge obviously. It was all country roads/secondary highways except for the very beginning and end which had some stoplights. Max posted limit was 50.

Even though the numbers weren't as impressive in the "public WOW factor" sense, I actually liked the format a lot this year. Why? Because it wasn't significantly different than what I do day to day... stay within some safe range of the posted limits, not impeding traffic (I got passed by one car on the entire course, and at one point I had 2 behind me within a 2-second following distance... that's IT), and within that just do everything I can. :D

I got trip average speed set up as an XGauge before I left, I will say that this was INVALUABLE. I didn't have to keep track of my time relative to how much of the course was left, I just had to keep that one number above 32. Halfway through the course it was 34 and I kept it there knowing that unexpected light miss-age and heavier traffic at the end could bring that down. I finished in 49 minutes and change.

As far as actual techniques, well let's just say I love warp neutral (most of those 50-limit roads were very hilly ;) ), there was a bit of SHM in there somewhere, and otherwise more or less standard 30-40 P&G. In terms of SoC management, just light DWL out of the gate until I was back to 6 bars... then nothing special until the bottom of the last big hill about 2 miles out when I saw I still had 63% SoC! I EV'd about 90% of the rest of the way.

I understand that the lights messed a lot of people up (more on having to make up total time rather than just having to stop for them), and I will say that in that regard I had some good luck. Out of the 10 on the round trip I missed 3 (I'm defining "missed" as "had to slow down < 10 MPH or stop".)

Oh, and last time I filled up was in MN which I understand is E10 everywhere all year 'round. :(

Again, I didn't mind the restrictions. Elkhart showed what is possible pushing things to the absolute limit, which was also great. This showed what's possible while adapting to traffic, stoplights, and staying close to the posted limits - what can be done day to day. After all, isn't adapting one of the things we should be best at? :cool:

Yeah, scores were significantly different from last year, but I think it was way more realistic. They drove the course ahead of time at the posted limits (27 miles in 46 minutes) and tacked on a 5-minute buffer on top of that... so if you came in under 51 minutes you didn't get any penalty. 2% per minute above 51, and at 61 you were DQ'd.

27 miles in 51 minutes meant an average, including all stops, of 32 MPH. Average speeds last year were more in the 20-25 range, so it was a lot more of a challenge obviously. It was all country roads/secondary highways except for the very beginning and end which had some stoplights. Max posted limit was 50.

Even though the numbers weren't as impressive in the "public WOW factor" sense, I actually liked the format a lot this year. Why? Because it wasn't significantly different than what I do day to day... stay within some safe range of the posted limits, not impeding traffic (I got passed by one car on the entire course, and at one point I had 2 behind me within a 2-second following distance... that's IT), and within that just do everything I can. :D

I got trip average speed set up as an XGauge before I left, I will say that this was INVALUABLE. I didn't have to keep track of my time relative to how much of the course was left, I just had to keep that one number above 32. Halfway through the course it was 34 and I kept it there knowing that unexpected light miss-age and heavier traffic at the end could bring that down. I finished in 49 minutes and change.

As far as actual techniques, well let's just say I love warp neutral (most of those 50-limit roads were very hilly ;) ), there was a bit of SHM in there somewhere, and otherwise more or less standard 30-40 P&G. In terms of SoC management, just light DWL out of the gate until I was back to 6 bars... then nothing special until the bottom of the last big hill about 2 miles out when I saw I still had 63% SoC! I EV'd about 90% of the rest of the way.

I understand that the lights messed a lot of people up (more on having to make up total time rather than just having to stop for them), and I will say that in that regard I had some good luck. Out of the 10 on the round trip I missed 3 (I'm defining "missed" as "had to slow down < 10 MPH or stop".)

Oh, and last time I filled up was in MN which I understand is E10 everywhere all year 'round. :(

Again, I didn't mind the restrictions. Elkhart showed what is possible pushing things to the absolute limit, which was also great. This showed what's possible while adapting to traffic, stoplights, and staying close to the posted limits - what can be done day to day. After all, isn't adapting one of the things we should be best at? :cool:

While I understand the concept of making things more real-world, a time limit like that doesn't fit my definition of real-world. When I go somewhere, I plan far enough ahead so that I don't have to be pressed for time. I also don't feel that I unnecessarily impede traffic either. In fact, many times the traffic behind me impede themselves by not passing when the way is clear/safe to do so. When traffic can't get around, I will speed up though. My $.02.

"real world" termed by epa and causes lower gas mileage results. ..tch tch tch. Time is money, if you never have time, you never have any...

"real world" termed by epa and causes lower gas mileage results. ..tch tch tch. Time is money, if you never have time, you never have...
I suppose that until the people who think of EPA figures as "real world" actually wake up and join the real world instead of living in dream world, then America will still be stuck right where we are now.

I suppose that until the people who think of EPA figures as "real world" actually wake up and join the real world instead of living in dream world, then America will still be stuck right where we are now.


Your are definitely right. I notice that most of America is "asleep" behind the wheels and would rather not have it any other way, complicating the lives of everyone else around them. Does chaos not seem to have its way? Most people only temporary awaken when something out of the ordinary happen and THEN react to an already matured situation. I believe most people have a problem with hypermiling simply because..they have to pay attention. When driving, people want to do everything else to keep their minds off what they're actually doing.

Your are definitely right. I notice that most of America is "asleep" behind the wheels and would rather not have it any other way, complicating the lives of everyone else around them. Does chaos not seem to have its way? Most people only temporary awaken when something out of the ordinary happen and THEN react to an already matured situation. I believe most people have a problem with hypermiling simply because..they have to pay attention. When driving, people want to do everything else to keep their minds off what they're actually doing.
What he said!:flag:

Congratulations to all the winners!

Jerad, you already planning a three-peat?

Oh, and last time I filled up was in MN which I understand is E10 everywhere all year 'round. :(



i am not sure that's actually true, but i could be wrong. anyone else in MN have an answer?

An average of 32 MPH? That's a crock of ****. I averaged 32 MPH last night with 80% highway driving. The only way to average 32 in the city is to go WOT, Brake, WOT, Brake.

44 MPG on the course. And people wonder why we ordered an 09 FEH and are trading in our 04 Hyunda that gets 19.4 MPG year round average. Way to go!

An average of 32 MPH? That's a crock of ****. I averaged 32 MPH last night with 80% highway driving. The only way to average 32 in the city is to go WOT, Brake, WOT, Brake.

Yes I think that's what hurt me. I took it a little easy in the city. Half the course I had an average of about 25mph because of that. The next half I was trying to floor it a lot but just missed my target average speed. Next year I think I will just floor it through the city and take it easy on the rest of the course.

An average of 32 MPH? That's a crock of ****. I averaged 32 MPH last night with 80% highway driving. The only way to average 32 in the city is to go WOT, Brake, WOT, Brake.

Only the first and last two miles were in the city with lights and 30 or less posted limits. The rest was posted limits of 35-50 and less than 10 total stops. These were country roads, not intersection-and-possibly-required-stops every block. In an all-city course I agree 32MPH average would require driving like an idiot.

They did drive the course beforehand multiple times at the posted limits (and not WOT/braking) and the slowest time was 46 minutes, which comes out to an average of 35MPH. We got a buffer of 5 minutes on top of that to account for awful traffic and lights in those first and last few miles.

Edit: here's a map of the course, I think I remember it right. After the turn onto highway MM the country roads begin.

Course map (http://maps.google.com/maps?f=d&hl=en&geocode=11520764536044919952,43.053750,-89.376590%3B9846349553331333704,43.028170,-89.382540%3B2462849481613847682,42.971991,-89.380015%3B15401377885593828659,42.979603,-89.421334%3B1996830131553690421,42.982216,-89.513861%3B3554977485726153518,42.986746,-89.478235%3B13832832389397290810,42.995494,-89.460251%3B3696886841354657144,43.001217,-89.451720%3B197074937098354062,43.001505,-89.389569&saddr=Unknown+road+%4043.053750,+-89.376590&daddr=CR-mm%2FRimrock+Rd+%4043.028170,+-89.382540+to:Byrne+Rd+%4042.971991,+-89.380015+to:Whalen+Rd+%4042.979603,+-89.421334+to:Old+CR-PB+%4042.982216,+-89.513861+to:Grandview+Rd+%4042.986746,+-89.478235+to:S+Seminole+Hwy+%4042.995494,+-89.460251+to:Lacy+Rd+%4043.001217,+-89.451720+to:Lacy+Rd+%4043.001505,+-89.389569+to:43.053064,-89.375582&mra=mi&mrcr=8&mrsp=9&sz=14&doflg=ptm&sll=43.042359,-89.376783&sspn=0.034125,0.081453&ie=UTF8&ll=42.986693,-89.430513&spn=0.034156,0.081453&z=14)

Congradulations to all. It sounds like this year it was more like a road rally then a mileage competition. In a road rally time is the most important thing.

i am not sure that's actually true, but i could be wrong. anyone else in MN have an answer?

As far as I am aware, this is the case. We go through RFG in the winter but I don't believe I've ever filled up with anything other than E10 in this state.

It was more rally-like, albeit without the obscure hints designed
to get people lost. I'm a little more used to this from doing
Green Grand Prix in the spring. The course crew did an astounding
job on signage this year, especially after I helped Bradlee come up
with a way to make the HF arrows visually unique so they wouldn't
look like the big yellow "no really, the road TURNS here" signs
installed by the municipality.
.
Most of the roads were 50 mph speed limit or so [which, frankly,
wouldn't have felt safe in some cases but you know how these
country roads are]. The stop signs were at least fairly predictable,
with "stop ahead" warnings even if the stop was just over a rise.
The lights were all up near the Alliant center and getting across
the major "beltline" highway, but grouped closely enough together
that a yellow generally wouldn't constitute the "sixty-to-zero
surprise" as it can when lights are placed in more open country.
[This is why we need way more roundabouts...]
.
My own crowning irony is that when I went with a press guy in
the morning and coached him, he came back showing 93-something
in the car and 89 on the SG. But I had him going a bit too slow
and we would have just barely disqualified. My own run? All
I had was the SG because I wanted to keep my MFD tank average
intact; I had Ron do a quick calibration dance at the starting
line and off I went, and came back only showing 81 on the SG.
In other words, if the electronics are to be believed, the press
guy I was coaching kicked my butt!
.
_H*

I really don't know about "real world" with a 32 mph average. I checked my tank average this morning - 24 mph average. I drive 1/2 back highways with a 55 limit, and 1/2 in town with about a dozen stops.

133% of my real-world average speed on what sounds and looks (on google) like a similar route is not right. :(

Interesting. Last week one of my runs in the Elantra was an average speed of 22mpg -- that's with all those lights and traffic to deal with.

Sean:

I hope you meant 22mpH, not 22mpg, otherwise...there's some serious right foot issues especially for a man of your caliber ;)

Hahaha! I've done that too. It's an easy typo. ;)

I did not make it this year, and really wished I could have been there. Sounds like everyone had a good time.

I will throw my two cents in on this years challenge. I think the new format IS more like "real world" driving in traffic. While it is great to custom tailor a course and challenge to get the highest numbers for bragging rights. A layout that requires you to maintain a speed closer to the posted speed limits is more "real world" in my opinion.

I, personally, thought the course was great and liked the tighter time limit. That said I missed a turn and was off course so got a DNF. I managed to find my way back on but part of the road I took was 55mph. So, missing the long 35mph segments I still managed 39.1mpg in the Highlander Hybrid.

I think this is a better test of hypermiling skill and less a test of who's got the patience to drive extremely slowly (which I don't have !). Things were tricky b/c you have an urge to avoid exceeding 40mph even in the 50mph zone. In hind sight I think what I would have done were I to do it again is to just set the CC to 45mph for the initial 50mph zone to minimize how far behind I got on time during that initial leg. Then I'd P&G and otherwise try to make up time and mpg during the rest of the course knowing I had some time to play with. I'm curious to hear Jared's chosen strategy though, as clearly it worked well for him.

Sean:

I hope you meant 22mpH, not 22mpg, otherwise...there's some serious right foot issues especially for a man of your caliber ;)

:o

Hi All:

___I will tend to disagree with some and agree with others as far as the Challenge course was concerned. This was a Friday evening Rush and the course was not on the main arterials but country roads (secondary’s) crossing with non-priority lights. I know many of us were stuck at as many as 6 lights and (3) of those were the long types sitting for 2 to 3 minutes for the mains. Secondly, there is no way anyone of the drivers in the challenge race towards stop lights to drive through yellows or race away from them in normal driving unless we were either in a “Timed Rally” or simply did not care about our fuel consumption. The racing from stop light to stop light, quick stops and very high G turns through the corners due to the higher speeds needed to finish on the schedule adds elements that none of us would subject ourselves to ”in our own daily grinds.”

___Many of the drivers and attendees met at a local eatery (Culver’s) and had a quick discussion about this yesterday evening. Eric asked about my thoughts on the course. I replied that Richard already knows and that was about the extent of the reply. Linda told us that she can tell dealers that this was what is achievable driving at real world speeds. Eric also made mention that he wants to move to move to the “Great Race” style timed rally format which as we all know is not a way in which anyone drives on a daily basis no matter the scenario. This takes away from how we drive to save massive amounts of fuel and moves it towards how everybody else drives which is why we are in the situation that we are in today :ccry:

___Although I did not respond with the items going through my head at the time, 51 minutes to achieve the distance in that kind of traffic and signals led to some foolish accelerations and decelerations on my part for a Friday afternoon unfortunately :( Although I was joking about it with everyone else afterwards given I do enjoy a challenge ;), I did not enjoy the fast launches from 0 - 50 mph and the quick stops at signs needed to make time as it is a massive waste of fuel to drive that way. To make the 51 minutes, I both saw and heard from many of the other drivers that had to drive similarly. None of us are dangerous drivers in the “real world” but a timed rally adds a level of driving behavior that none of us would “normally drive like” at any time let alone with that kind of traffic around.

___Finally, Eric and Linda did say they were going to work on some of the above for next years challenge which should make for an even better FE Challenge for all next year.

___Good Luck

___Wayne

.
My own crowning irony is that when I went with a press guy in
the morning and coached him, he came back showing 93-something
in the car and 89 on the SG. But I had him going a bit too slow
and we would have just barely disqualified. My own run? All
I had was the SG because I wanted to keep my MFD tank average
intact; I had Ron do a quick calibration dance at the starting
line and off I went, and came back only showing 81 on the SG.
In other words, if the electronics are to be believed, the press
guy I was coaching kicked my butt!
.
_H*

Hobbit, that just shows what an *awesome* job you did teaching him :) :)

As far as I am aware, this is the case. We go through RFG in the winter but I don't believe I've ever filled up with anything other than E10 in this state.

ok, i might be confuzzled then about what E10 is. is that ethanol in the gas? :confused:

yes, what's up with deb????:mad:

Sigh ... Deb let her nerves & the traffic get to her early on, & her frustration do the same towards the end :o

That said, I tend to agree with the intent to make this closer to a real-world driving challenge. I think there is a place for both this type of competition *&* for events like the WFEC.

As I see it, what we did in the WFEC was "NASCAR" hypermiling, with no time or speed (or lack-of-speed ;)) limits - ideally it would be held on a track, where local traffic wouldn't be a problem, nor would possible conflicts with local residents or law enforcement. It shows what these vehicles are capable of, in the hands of an experienced driver. It also can be a developing & proving ground for new & revised techniques.

The HF MPG Challenge, especially this year was not only more time-constrained, but I thought the roads chosen for the route were a little more challenging in that they were more heavily travelled, & my impression was that there were more stretches with higher speed limits. (That's what got me in the beginning, climbing a hill on one of those 50mph country roads w/a no-passing marking, I looked in my rear-view mirror & saw a line of cars behind me & lost my anti-traffic nerve :( - then to make matters worse, when I closer to the end of the course & realized that I wasn't going to make it, I stomped on the accelerator a couple of times, out of sheer frustration - with myself, not the course :rolleyes:) The curve might have been a little steep, because several *good* drivers were disqualified, & I'm sure there will be tweaking before next year's event (5 more minutes, please??? ;)) But my feeling is that we can use competitions like this to show the guy/gal-next-door that there are better mpg's within his/her reach without a lot of complicated techniques. And maybe that will get more people to actually try & see what they can do.

I was frustrated & upset with myself, because, while I couldn't have pulled 70mpg on this route, if I'd kept my head & watched my time more closely, I *should* have been able to hit high-50's or low-60's :o At least I did better than my 48.5mpg last year. GaryG, your record is safe - at least until *next* year :D And I've already warned Rich (Pravus Prime) that I'll be more competition for him next year, too :) :)

This was my first FE or MPG competition and I have to say I didn't really enjoy it. I think I did ok and if you take away my time penalty I placed in the top 5. The reason I didn't enjoy it is because I never drive like this. To me its not real world because I would never be pressed for time like that. Real world wouldn't be a time limit but only conforming my speed so as not to hamper other people to much and helping them pass me and then go back to my regular methods.

....I thought it was an excellent course, extremely well-marked and easy to navigate. Surely, I would have liked to have more time. I showed only 121.4 mpg at the finish line and was 5 minutes late, and took a 10% penalty, knocking me down to 109 mpg.

I borrowed Eric Powers 2002 Insight. (I flew in on United Airlines) I was considering the mathematics of using ALL the time (61 minutes) and getting much higher mpg before taking the maximum 20% penalty. Maybe that would have been better? Anyway, rather than pulsing to 31 mpg and gliding down to 11 mph as I would have liked, I used higher speeds, aprox 41/22.

When beginning the actual course run, I tried to put on a game face of BATTLE. It is very intense, serious. I mentally told myself I will not let ANY traffic get in my way and spoil my momentum. Out on the country roads, there was a right-hand turn near the bottom of a long downhill. I had too much speed descending the hill, so I got way over in the left lane (the oncoming lane) and "set-up" for the right hand turn. There was no other traffic, so I made the turn at very high speed to avoid using brakes and stunting momentum.

On a course like this, it's a constant mental process of ESTIMATING. You estimate when to shut the engine off to barely glide over the next hill. You estimate how long to remain dwl with a stop sign 1/2 mile ahead, etc. And, I was always thinking of maximizing the time I was spending with the engine off, and minimizing the time spent under power. The whole excersize is quite draining; hence the term MPG "challenge".

Barely into the course, I could quickly see there was no advantage in partially gliding up the hills, as I did last year. It simply takes too much time. So I carefully powered up the inclines, trying to get in lean burn if possible. Not an easy course, due to the time restrictions. But I will tell you, we all need to appreciate and thank the organizers and volunteers. They did a fantastic job, and obviously without them this event would not be possible.....

Billy - Great job. You once again showed your skill in "estimating".

he wants to move to move to the “Great Race” style timed rally format which as we all know is not a way in which anyone drives on a daily basis no matter the scenario. This takes away from how we drive to save massive amounts of fuel and moves it towards how everybody else drives which is why we are in the situation that we are in today :ccry:


___Good Luck

___Wayne

if that is what the format becomes, then i never WILL attend. i don't drive like the "real world" and that was part of my unhappiness with the great race was the format. no thanks.

if that is what the format becomes, then i never WILL attend. i don't drive like the "real world" and that was part of my unhappiness with the great race was the format. no thanks.
I am truly appreciating all the comments from all sides on this discussion of the MPG Challenge.

Was this year's event perfect? No, but it is certainly a great stake in the ground for future events and expanding it's appeal.

There will always be a need for some kind of time limit on officially sanctioned MPG Challenge events. Maybe not as tight as this year's Hybridfest MPG challenge, but something nonetheless.

Competing with a time limit in place will certainly not be a format everyone wants to participate in because it does create and additional level of complexity and constraint. Jerad overcame some of this by having his scangauge set with average trip speed.

As the MPG Challenge events progress there will be a honing of the regulations, as well as more transparency. i.e. releasing the rules in advance, etc

Thanks again and we're looking forward to the next MPG Challenge event.

if that is what the format becomes, then i never WILL attend. i don't drive like the "real world" and that was part of my unhappiness with the great race was the format. no thanks.
I will have to second Laurie's opinion; if the MPG Challenge turns into a Rally instead, I will never attend the "MPG" Challenge which was one of the major reasons I would want to attend HF. To me "real world" driving is too much like driving like everyone else drives; NOT for economy.

Hmmm.... perhaps I'm not being clear enough.

I think having a time limit in which to run a course is reasonable.

Certainly you aren't saying it should be unlimited time correct?

I think a time adds some validity to real world. A few of the uncontrollables could be better controlled though if there is a given time limit. The stop lights added a large amount of luck to the drive. How many stop lights were there? I lost track of red lights, but I did get THREE green lights.:Banane03:

Hmmm.... perhaps I'm not being clear enough.

I think having a time limit in which to run a course is reasonable.

Certainly you aren't saying it should be unlimited time correct?
I wouldn't say there should be an "unlimited" time limit. That would take most of the day to run the event. I would say that the time limit should allow for speeds closer to the 20mph mark though.

ok, i might be confuzzled then about what E10 is. is that ethanol in the gas? :confused:

Laurie, E10 is short for "Ethanol 10%"

Eric, a time limit is fine but it sounds as though this one might have been a bit short. Perhaps some method of determining how well drivers adapt to traffic without hindering it would help?

Eric, a time limit is fine but it sounds as though this one might have been a bit short. Perhaps some method of determining how well drivers adapt to traffic without hindering it would help?
That sounds fair. However, when I'm in unfamiliar territory, I tend to drive slower so I'll have more time to find my destination without getting in a wrong lane, miss a stop sign, etc.

Laurie, E10 is short for "Ethanol 10%"
Eric, a time limit is fine but it sounds as though this one might have been a bit short. Good to hear that we are on the same page about a having a time limit.

I think finding the "right" time limit will be a challenge in itself.

You'd think determining a time limit would be an easy thing, but it's not. For this year's run we went with the best we could determine based on multiple (more than you'd ever want to know!!) runs during the heaviest of traffic.

I agree that we may need to consider opening the time window a bit more, but I would never take anything away from the hours and hours of hard work Linda put into this event. Oh, and as Billy pointed out, she did try to choose a more challenging course this year.

I'm well aware of the effort that goes into such a thing -- determining time frames for any event (competition or not) is pretty challenging if you ask me!!

It is an ongoing process -- I think we each understand that.

... determining time frames for any event (competition or not) is pretty challenging if you ask me!!
That includes things like the upcoming birth of birth of your baby. :)

O.k. back on topic...
You're right, it's an ongoing process. We knew that no matter what we came up with, it would probably need to be tweaked for future MPG Challenge events. If it didn't quite fit what you wanted this year don't be discouraged, and please continue to give feedback. Positive or negative. Constructive criticism is always appreciated.

I will throw this out there for everyone to think about.

To all the good folks that are suggesting increased times for the event or want a competition that you can run 20 MPH to complete. Put together a MPG challenge in a large vacant lot with pylons, go say 30 miles with say a 2 hour time limit. The numbers would be great. And just wait and see what the press and critics do with that, That would set Hybrids and hypermiling back years.

Good to hear that we are on the same page about a having a time limit.

I think finding the "right" time limit will be a challenge in itself.

You'd thinking determining a time limit would be an easy thing, but it's not. For this year's run we went with the best we could determine based on multiple (more than you'd ever want to know!!) runs during the heaviest of traffic.

I agree that we may need to consider opening the time window a bit more, but I would never take anything away from the hours and hours of hard work Linda put into this event. Oh, and as Billy pointed out, she did try to choose a more challenging course this year.

Hi Eric

The big surprise to me last year was the secret course maps that you had a limited time to look at and then had to read the map as you drove the course. Trying to read a map and drive is worst to me than talking on a cell phone. Not knowing I may not see a sign to tell me to turn became a problem also with the maps. This is a safety issue I hope was addressed this year.

As far as the time limits last year, I had a feeling I would have to retrain myself to learn how to drive slow because I don't like holding traffic back in the real world. It turned out I adjusted quite well and got that first place last year. A few complained that they caught the train during their Challenge last year and I felt lucky. Where there train tracks to go over this year? The stoplights are another issue I lucked out on for the most part because I was able to time the lights with a more relaxed time limit.

A month or so ago I had a great TV News report locally here on Fox News and later was contacted by another news channel who wanted to do a story also. They became not interested when they found out I don't like holding up traffic. I wonder if the media caused this reaction to the MPG Challenge time limits this year also.

At any rate, I agree there needs to be time limits, but no surprises. If the rules are not spelled out in the future on your website, count me out also.

GaryG

Hi Eric:

___Adding 15-minutes to a 27 mile challenge course adds a tremendous amount of safety for all involved and only adds 15 minutes to the day no matter how many drivers participate. For safety’s sake, feel free to keep the course for next year.

___Good Luck

___Wayne

Let's apply a little more perspective. The "ultimate* MPG test
is those university-student events where everyone's given a tiny
little Briggs & Stratton engine to install in a purpose-built
glider of their design and a measured quantity of fuel, and they
get to go as far as they can on that on a completely closed track
under ideal conditions. These are the people pulling four digits
of [extrapolated] MPG. At the other end of the spectrum we have
the rednecks buying Priuses and being perfectly happy with 42 MPG
since it's a heckuvalot better than their ol' truck. Continually
striving for ideal conditions is certainly its own kind of fun, but
is not where many of us spend all of our time. Let's face it, most
country roads *are* posted with pretty high [and arguably, downright
unsafe sometimes] speed limits. Our efforts have to land somewhere
in the middle of the spectrum, and like it or not there *are*
certain expectations about anything that looks more like a modern
vehicle instead of, say, an Amish horse cart, so when one behaves
like the other a certain segment of the general public is likely
to simply be confused while observing this.
.
I think some folks are also forgetting the significant gains and
advantages to be had in handling the ramp-up and ramp-down, rather
than complaining about speed by itself. There's little harm in
coming up to a middlin'-high speed as long as it's well-controlled
from a fuel economy standpoint, and we all know about smart braking
and optimized regen capture technique for the decel. In between,
you a> *can* go upwards of 50 MPH and still return good results,
and b> not lose a whole lot of time overall if the well-controlled
stops and starts are relatively few and far between. Remember
the kinematics article (http://techno-fandom.org/~hobbit/cars/kine/) I was trying to work up? Remember how the
time difference between aggressive and mellow accel/decel rapidly
becomes insignificant the longer the distances get? Let's keep
that in mind and place a little more attention into our *transitions*
while handling these back-country roads in a way that maximizes
the advantages of the hybrid systems we're throwing at the problem.
That's really what we're out there to do, right? Those stop signs,
especially with the amount of warning one gets before them and the
clear view of the terrain leading up, should be NO problem. The
remaining problem becomes timing the relatively small set of
traffic lights up near the Beltline, but we do that all the time
and should be used to it [or at least used to getting nailed by
the ill-timed yellows].
.
One thing that counts, and that has not gotten nearly enough exposure
in the view of both Wayne and myself since we've really tried, is
the thought process that goes into our driving in realtime taking
numerous factors into account. For example, the press guy's brain
was already full as I was handling half the job for him by watching
behind in the right-side rearview, lighting the hazards and pointing
left over the roof when needed, and coaching him how to start his
glide just before the top of the rise and by the way watch that RPM
that was creeping up toward 2000. He came out of that run with the
clear understanding, that I mentioned to several people over the
weekend, that hypermilers who are out there keeping track of all
this stuff by themselves are HANDS DOWN the safest and smoothest
drivers on the road, end of story. This is one thing the press
really needs to pick up a much clearer picture on, because if the
general public understood what was going on from an omnidirectionally
PREDICTIVE standpoint they might gain a better idea of WHY anyone would
want to do this stuff -- in all different kinds of traffic. They might
also understand when/why someone CHOOSES to crawl up hills on occasion,
treat it the same way they'd treat a loaded semi, and just move on
when appropriate.
.
_H*

For what it's worth... Texas World Speedway (http://www.texasworldspeedway.com/) is available to rent for $1200. A scant 20 entrants would be enough to flip the bill at $60 a pop. It might not be that impossible to rent a NASCAR track for one of these type events in the future.

11011011

Hi Eric
If the rules are not spelled out in the future on your website, count me out also.
GaryG
Agreed. Even though it's a friendly competition, seeing the rules in advance is important.

I think we are pretty close to what will be used in future MPG Challenge events.

Here are my thoughts:
- a set amount of time for the run that will not result in any penatlies
- a cumulative penalty for each minute over the set amount of time
- an upper threshold time limit that, if not met, results in disqualification.

This is not the same as full rally rules which would have multiple "checks" on average speed throughout the course. Rather it is more along the lines of what Wayne suggested at the Around the World MPG Challenge meetings.

We certainly don't want anyone to have to drive unsafely to compete. (ie driving less than 5 mph, rolling stop signs, or getting the local authorities called on them by neighbors, etc)

I haven't confirmed all this with the rest of the MPG Challenge organizers yet, so I look forward to their final decision.

Perhaps a quick informal MPG Challenge post-event discussion would be good to have after future events while the participants are still present. Doing this via posts is makes the discussion less fluid and more stilted.

Laurie, E10 is short for "Ethanol 10%"

?

ok, got it.i asked about it because someone mentioned filling up in MN and thought there was ethanol in all our gas. i am not sure that's the case, and what i am trying to determine. i know i have seen stations where it's clearly marked on the pumps, but does our regular stuff have it too??? i hope not. the one time i filled with it, my MPG went down.

ok, got it.i asked about it because someone mentioned filling up in MN and thought there was ethanol in all our gas. i am not sure that's the case, and what i am trying to determine. i know i have seen stations where it's clearly marked on the pumps, but does our regular stuff have it too??? i hope not. the one time i filled with it, my MPG went down.

As far as I am aware, there aren't any non-ethanol stations in MN anymore. There are only a few over in WI and none in IL.

Your mileage logs are awesome w/ the E10. Bet you wish you could get Blue Swayed ahold of some real gas.

First of all, I want to thank Eric, Linda and all the other folks for all their hard work in organizing and running the challenge.

I would also like to congratulate Billy for getting that kind of mileage. With all the stop lights, stop signs and the hills, this course was not where an Insight likes to be.

After getting stopped by the beginning few stop lights, I felt that I was behind time for the rest of the route. My priorities were to follow the route (try not to miss a turn since I already had done that), beat the clock and lastly to get good mileage. I remember thinking that I do not have the time for any P&Ging. I do not remember even trying to get into and maintain lean burn at any point. In hindsight, I was my worst enemy during the run.

I felt like I was late to a doctors appointment. If I did not make it in 51 minutes they would charge me and I would have to wait 3 months for another appointment. All the while driving on an unfamiliar detour route following signs and a map. Unfortunately, driving to beat some clock, real or imaginary, is how most people do drive. So I guess that is real world.

How about at least being able to drive the route once before your run? If one was racing at Road America, I do not think it would be done with a road map on your lap.

Marie and I will both keep an open mind as to future challenge participation.

Your mileage logs are awesome w/ the E10. Bet you wish you could get Blue Swayed ahold of some real gas.

:o I'm not the only one around here with high numbers!

I wonder sometimes about how much the numbers would go up with non-ethanol fuel, but I can't complain about what I get now. :)

Hi, everyone --

Keep the feedback coming. It's very good.

Let me respond to a few things I've seen mentioned...

Re: Lights. These are the exact same stoplights every MPG challenge has run through, every year. You've stopped at them before, but without the pressure of time (though last year's Challenge also had a time limit, just not as tight). On the "worst" test run I made, I had to stop at all of them except the right turn onto Rimrock (technically the second light) and the last one of the string on Rimrock (by the convenience station, where the Challenge has turned left both previous years) which is a light timed for the road you're on (which is the main road at that point), so the stoplights were definitely taken into account in the speed restriction.

Re: Traffic. The departure times for the registered participants was compressed this year to an every-four-minute departure, rather than every five as in past years. This meant that the last registered participant would leave and be able to return before the Friday afternoon traffic got too bad. When adjustments to the schedule were made to accommodate some extra runs by folks who were on the waiting list or weren't on the roster for whatever other reasons, those runs began later in the day and began to run into heavier traffic. We could avoid this by being more uptight and not accommodating any extra runs, but what is the fun in that? :-)

Re: Rally. I don't have the patience nor the desire to have half a dozen checkpoints along the way to make sure you're adhering to a specified speed along the entire course, so those of you who won't attend if it's a rally, feel free to book your tickets now. :-) You're safe to come.

Re: Rules. I agree that a sudden change in the rules should be shared ahead of time. I was remiss, and I'm sorry for that. Because we had a time limit last year, this year’s rules didn’t seem all that different to me, but I see from your feedback I was wrong about that. As with previous years, the route was shared with drivers at the meeting, then removed again until their turn to run. I assume, perhaps incorrectly, that y'all find that more fair than if the later drivers have a chance to get out and practice the run while the early drivers don't because their departure time is 20 minutes after the drivers’ meeting. I assumed that the early drivers wouldn't want to have the increased traffic of later drivers running the course for fun at the same time that other drivers were driving it for competition. I'm willing to be wrong, so let's have a discussion about that too. If I decided to pass out the rules in advance -- well, more than an hour in advance :) -- how long in advance should that be? Should practice runs be allowed? How would you suggest the day be structured so that you could have time for two runs? Tell me what you think!

Last of all... the route. Let's just say that we're lucky to have had a route that A) didn't contain road construction, and B) hadn't flooded and washed out the road last month. There aren’t that many roads fitting that description heading out into the country around Madison, other than roads with very high traffic at all times of day. I'm not the only driver who tests the route, and I promise you that we had to stop for lights and turkeys and slow down for little old ladies driving against their red lights and a couple deer and a dog that chased the car (and almost caught it).

Let me also ask this question, which I might be sorry for:

Who do you drive for in the Challenge? Are you only interested in huge numbers to interest the press, at the sacrifice of the interest and implementation of the general public? Or are you driving to show John Public that he can make small changes in his style to get results -- certainly not results akin to Jerad's or Bill's, but results that will help save $$ and use less gas anyway? Do you want to attract “everyman”, or only the elite? Would you rather run a circles in a lot with no traffic rather than the kind of course we've had in the past?

I'd also like to make a small clarification to Wayne's post when he mentioned that I talked about what I can tell dealers as a result of this year’s run. That wasn't the tone nor intent of what I was talking about; I’m not worried about what I can tell dealers, and that played no part in my route-making. I simply shared an anecdote about a conversation I had with a gentleman who is both a huge hybrid supporter and a Prius salesman, who is pained when he tries to enlighten his clients about improving their technique only to be rebuffed by the disparity of speeds between posted and actual in previous MPG Challenges. He was thrilled that he can now talk to his clients and show them that someone like Jerad can drive very near the posted limit and still get that kind of fuel economy -- his buyers can no longer poo-poo the speed driven to achieve those MPGs. I’m sorry if my anecdote left you with the wrong impression about my motivations, Wayne!

Let’s keep this discussion going. I’m all eyes, and learning a lot as I read your thoughts.

~Linda

Dave W. makes a good point. Maybe running on a closed course, no time limit would make sense. But out in traffic on a Friday afternoon, we wouldn't be showing hybrids well by slowing folks down and making them angry. Because believe me, I would be doing a p&g from 26 mph max, and gliding down all the way to about 9 mph. I could certainly achieve 1.3 liters per 100 km (180 mpg) and maybe even 1.2 liters. (193 mpg). And Wayne would be the same or perhaps even a notch better.

So one must ask the question: What is the goal of the event? Is it to show the absolute max capability of the vehicle in ideal conditions? Or is it to demonstrate what a well prepared car and trained hypermiler can achieve in somewhat everyday driving conditions? But for sure, the MPG Challenge must be respected as being credible, believeable, and serve as an encouragement for others to improve their own skills......

I'll also point out that the real-world "65/60" mixed/hwy mpg
I normally get out of my Prius in the summertime is what really
catches interest at the car and energy shows. There's a lot
of merit to that "crossover point" where MPH meets MPG, which I
sort of think of like those old two-needle meters that measure
voltage and current at the same time. The higher you push the
*product* of the two figures, the more wattage you get, and,
well, power impresses people...
.
_H*

I'm thinking next year it would be nice to do a two run mpg challenge. The best run would be the official recorded score. We would have to start earlier to accommodate all the drivers but I think this would give a fair chance to those who don't know the area.

Having a first run will help with getting to know the terrain, the lights, the stop signs, and even traffic flow to some point. With this information I know all of us could modify our driving technique to not only improve MPG but also improve our average speed, and time so there will be less penalties and disqualifications. Plus I think this could also show that making small changes in driving style can show what kind of improvement in MPG you can get when you know the area.

Hi All:

___A little addition…

___At the Plano “Live Green Expo”, Andrew (Palemelaneasn) came up with the idea to mark the Insight, the Prius and his own Civic DX with their best achieved numbers. Normal crowd meandering by until that time and then when they saw 164 mpg over 2,254 miles and 200 mpg over a 40 mile round trip segment painted on the Insight, 110 mpg over 1,397 miles and 127 over a round trip segment on the Prius and his own 68 something over a tank in the DX, the booth became mobbed and four of us were working non-stop from that point until it closed at 05:00 PM. 60 something is excellent, 120 +, wow. Guess which of the two attracts the most attention? Same thing happens with the media. < 100 mpg drives, you are doing really good! > 100 brings out the imagination and it is something to strive for.

___Good Luck

___Wayne

So...two events next year? Limited and Open?

At the Plano “Live Green Expo”, Andrew (Palemelaneasn) came up with the idea to mark the Insight, the Prius and his own Civic DX with their best achieved numbers. Normal crowd meandering by until that time and then when they saw 164 mpg over 2,254 miles and 200 mpg over a 40 mile round trip segment painted on the Insight, 110 mpg over 1,397 miles and 127 over a round trip segment on the Prius and his own 68 something over a tank in the DX, the booth became mobbed and four of us were working non-stop from that point until it closed at 05:00 PM. 60 something is excellent, 120 +, wow. Guess which of the two attracts the most attention? Same thing happens with the media. < 100 mpg drives, you are doing really good! > 100 brings out the imagination and it is something to strive for.

Wayne,

That's very good information, and it's kind of the opposite of what I've experienced myself. At the Going Green Wisconsin Expo, my car was in the booth for three days, labeled with the 145.7 MPG you achieved at the MPG Challenge in 2007. At first, people were excited about that number, but when they asked "how" you did it, they'd give up/turn away/smirk/whatever when I got to the average speed needed to do it. They just weren't interested in going to that extreme, and with no middle ground between what they do now and what you did to get that number, they walked away without any motivation to even try to improve what they are doing. My hope -- and maybe I failed it, that's what I'm trying to get feedback on here in this thread -- was to show the average drivers on the road what's possible for them to achieve without giving up any more sleep to do it. If that doesn't match what you and the other hypermilers want to do in the Challenge, we want to hear that. :)

So please, keep the feedback coming!

~Linda

I guess it comes down to what your trying to accomplish with the MPG Challenge. Educate/Inform the public or No Holds barred style Hypermiling.

While I will go to any extreme to try to achieve higher MPG most people aren't willing to do that in their own commute or lives. My friends even try to downplay my MPG accomplishments w/ the whole speed issue. "You got 80 MPG but how long did it take you to get there?" "What time did you leave 3am to get to work @ 8? HAHA" type comments.

How many people does the MPG challenge reach or effect? Not sure how you could find out but placement of the MPG challenge results might help. Placement this year made it seem nearly hidden. I had to ask where it was at. Placing it near the entrance of Hybridfest with a map of the course driven would get more attention and possibly influence or interest more people.

To me it seemed like the MPG challenge is more for the drivers not the public at this point.

A limited and open style would probably make everyone happy. But i'm not sure if you have enough people to field a format like that.

The staff of the MPG challenge did a great job in my opinion of running it very smoothly and efficiently.

My hope -- and maybe I failed it, that's what I'm trying to get feedback on here in this thread -- was to show the average drivers on the road what's possible for them to achieve without giving up any more sleep to do it.

~Linda

This is what I meant when I wrote that the HF MPG Challenge is closer to real-world driving than the WFEC or the Insight Marathon in OK. Not *our* real world, but that of what we in SF fandom affectionately (or not ;)) referred to as Mundanes. It's not the way I would normally drive either, but my thinking is that if we can show Mundane drivers that better FE is within their grasp, they might be more interested in how we got the numbers we got in the Challenge, & maybe even willing to try some of the simpler techniques.

Hi All:

___At the Plano “Live Green Expo”, Andrew (Palemelaneasn) came up with the idea to mark the Insight, the Prius and his own Civic DX with their best achieved numbers. Normal crowd meandering by until that time and then when they saw 164 mpg over 2,254 miles and 200 mpg over a 40 mile round trip segment painted on the Insight, 110 mpg over 1,397 miles and 127 over a round trip segment on the Prius and his own 68 something over a tank in the DX, the booth became mobbed and four of us were working non-stop from that point until it closed at 05:00 PM. 60 something is excellent, 120 +, wow. Guess which of the two attracts the most attention? Same thing happens with the media. < 100 mpg drives, you are doing really good! > 100 brings out the imagination and it is something to strive for.

___Good Luck

___Wayne

Wayne, you are among my first & dearest friends in this community :), & I love your passion & dedication. I *very* much appreciate what I've learned from you, as well as what I've learned from the others who are brought together in these on-line forums (fori??) There is no way I would be getting the numbers in my FEH that I am without your help & encouragement :), & I feel very fortunate to be able to get that help & encouragement from you in person :) :) When I see you talking to people, whether at HF or the GMAS, I get a sense of the urgency you feel concerning our need as a nation - & a planet - to improve our FE & cut down on emissions.

So please don't be mad at me, but I think maybe part of the value of the HF MPG Challenge as it is evolving will be in getting the Mundane drivers to stretch a bit - sort of like your congratulating me on my 51.6mpg tank & asking me when I'd have a 53mpg tank in the same email :) If you'd asked me back when I was so thrilled to see tanks over 40mpg when I'd post a 50mpg tank, I would have rolled my eyes & said "I *wish*" - now I'm disappointed when at the end of my commute my SGII reads *only* 50mpg & my next goal is to max out my FCD screen on my commute, & eventually on a whole tank :D :D

Hi Debbie:

___You are a great friend as well :) And you made a second and excellent point. You are achieving 50 + mpg on your daily commute back and forth to work over an entire tank vs. what the FE Challenge involved. I drove to Madison the morning of and the HCH-II allowed 71 there and 76 back (or the reverse) and that was higher speed interstate of all things?

___The challenge time limits simply removed the chance for great FE while driving as each and everyone of us does every day vs. the hit it and run to the next light and such. Amazing what Jerad did with the Prius (99 mpg) in that mess but seeing 120 in an Insight, 44 to 51 in an FEH and 76 in an HCH-II are normal everyday drives and certainly nothing special other than the over my head driving to achieve is all :(

___Linda, as far as Live Green Expo, I hope Tarabell, Andrew or Chuck will pass on what I did. There were four of us going non-stop for 5 hours after we marked the windshields on those vehicles with the same crowds but little to no interest prior to it.

___Good Luck

___Wayne

There is something magic about breakpoints. A breakpoint is a number at which people take notice. For instance. $100,000 a year income is a breakpoint. A millionaire ($1,000,000) is a breakpoint. $19.95 is a breakpoint. If it was $20.01 it seems so much more expensive.

Similiarly, 100 MPG is a breakpoint. When people hear anything above 100 MPG they take notice in a special way.

He's right. Before we marked the windows, we had 1 or 2 visitors at times, and at times none at all. After marking them, the four of us had multiple visitors EACH, almost nonstop. I know at least one new member signed up here after that, and who knows how much happened that we will never know about.

Another breakpoint is double the rated mpg. Or to put it more dramatically, 200% of epa.

So...two events next year? Limited and Open?

Would it make any sense to run a limited challenge Friday over the course, with a time restriction based on normal traffic flow (i.e. fitting into normal traffic at the speed limits, with an additional time allowance to cover any bad luck at lights)??

Then a second run early Sat AM (before traffic wakes up) over the same course, no time limit, to see what the absolute max mpg could be??

Among other things, this might be a good way to convince people that the first number is realistic and do-able if they try, since it would be lower (probably) than the second.

Perhaps a different course would be be needed??

One thing I would've liked to have seen was an unadjusted results board. All the numbers that appeared on the board were with the time penalties already applied.

I was just under 48 MPG unadjusted for time with the FEH, and 29 MPG with the TaHy, but neither of those numbers appeared anywhere, just the adjusted MPG Penalty times. (Yeah, I was late both times by a little bit)

Despite being late, I did like the time being so tight. I think there's room for different types of MPG Challenges, from the "slow race" variety with very low speeds on near closed or closed courses, to "real world" or more rally like performances where we have target times and have to stick to speeds we may not want to go for pure MPG purposes. The thing is, if you start giving more time to people, where's the line? You gave us 5 minutes this year, next year 10. The year after that, 15? Then we're back to 87 minutes to go 27 miles. I like the tight time limit, it gives us a greater challenge, and makes it a multifaceted competition.

Now it's a challenge of:
Can you make your time?
Can you adjust to a road you've never seen?
Can you do the above and get a good MPG number?

This makes an event an MPG Challenge.

I also liked how much better "labeled" the course was, with signs at every turn and signs telling you to keep going at nearby turns. I used the map page exclusively, though I know plenty others used just the odometer page, but I'd suggest in the future, speed limit signs and more exacting time references, like a mark that says, "You should be here at 20 minutes to be on track" kind of thing.

Honestly, I don't have that much interest in a pure slow race, closed track, but I really enjoyed this competition, and wish I could do it more then one day a year.

Now, don't get me wrong, I see a valuable part of capturing attention for fuel record races, but I think there's enough room for both types, and this type is definately more my style.

Pravus,

There were time marks on the map -- the blue boxes indicated your approximate time on a 46-minute trip. Perhaps they weren't that easy to see, and perhaps I should have pointed them out a little more clearly at the drivers' meeting.

Maybe I need the projector for that? Or a little more time spent at the drivers' meeting overall? Thoughts?

Richard Steeves and Bradlee Fons are responsible for the signage on the course. A huge shout-out to them; they were out poking stakes into gravel at 5:30 that morning.

I'm working on compiling the unadjusted results. I think that will be interesting to see, too.

Rich,

There were time marks on the map -- the blue boxes indicated your approximate time on a 46-minute trip. Perhaps they weren't that easy to see, and perhaps I should have pointed them out a little more clearly at the drivers' meeting.



I saw that, but again, since all of us were shooting for 51 minutes instead of 46, those were only a generic guide for us. If instead, saying, to make 51 minutes, you should be at this turn by X time, with a dot on that turn or whatever, like rally instructions I at least, would find a lot more helpful.

OT, during the FEH MPG Challenge, I had a police cruiser right behind me during the last mile, so I ended up having to make a few decisions differently to avoid getting pulled over.

Hi everyone!

First of all, it was my first MPG challenge and it was a challenge! For me, trying to navigate, watch traffic, speed, oddometer markings, my MFD (I learned that I really need to get a ScanGauge!) and mpg was very challenging. I really would have been taxed to look at the map to see where I should have been at various points. At halfway thru, I did think that I was OK on time, but ended up about 7 minutes "over time".

I probably drove way too slow on some parts, but I was trying to do a lot of EV, probably too much! I for once did not bend to peer pressure and figured since I drove 500 miles to be there, I'd go the speed I wanted to ;)

I think it was fair because we all drove the same course and had the same time requirements. I kinda wished I could have a "do-over" after I finished, since I knew I messed up in several places, but isn't that what we're all kinda striving for?

Linda, I would LOVE to see the raw mpg and time scores, just for comparison sake.

On the whole, it was fun and I did better than I thought I would. :D

Half the battle is deciding on what strategy to use depending on the road and your SOC--which is what we have to do everyday. I think the emphasis on real world times/speeds is the way to go. You have to balance your speed and try NOT to PO the people behind you.

Kudos to everyone that made HF08 possible. It was FUN! More on that later!

Prius Prime

Hi prius prime: it was very nice meeting you and your husband also. Thanks for coming all the way from the north side of Detroit to participate! You did a great job driving out on the course; many congrats! Bill Kinney....

Hi Billy and everyone,

My husband wants to get an Insight now. He had a chance to drive one and it would be great for his commute. I don't know if we can find one for a low price. May have to wait for some new models to come out.

Sorry this is a little off topic!

BTW I got 60.1 mpg for 500 miles on the way home. And also a new record--lost the first pip at 199.6 miles (should have pumped another ounce of gas in--LOL)


Hope everyone gets/ has gotten home safely.

Donna

Similiarly, 100 MPG is a breakpoint. When people hear anything above 100 MPG they take notice in a special way.

I tried, I really did!! :Banane28:

I think there's a lot of merit to being able to say "here's what these cars can achieve over a certain distance taking about the same amount of time that a driver just following the speed limits would take". If people see that you can double the EPA or better without giving up significant time (unless they are chronic speeders :rolleyes:), I think that can turn as many heads as the ultra-high no-holds-barred numbers.

I'm cosigning the idea put forth to allow a practice run, or even just allow 2 runs and take the better of the two. This does a couple of things - it lets people see the course and learn where the turns are, where the stops are, and how best to target speeds at various points for the posted limits and hitting the stops, and it also averages out a particularly horrible run at the random course factors, i.e. in this case the lights.

I'm also glad there are no plans to turn this into a full-on rally. How often do you have to do anything like that ever? :rolleyes:

A few of my thoughts on the challenge:

The time limit was tight. I managed to get though the course in time but would have liked an extra 10-15 minutes. Running out of time was always in the back of my mind and I did change the way I drove for the challenge. I did much less sub-25 mph gliding in an attempt to keep my average speed up, and I relied on brakes more than usual.

I agree with Pravus Prime about the time marks on the map. About 25 minutes into the course, I looked at the map and figured I was only near the 20 minute marker on the map. So I started to pick up the pace and burn more fuel to try to catch up to the map's suggestions. Not until I was done did I realize that the times on the map were for a 46 minute run, not a 51 minute run which was my target. Much of the blame can probably be put on myself for not examining the map close enough, but I think the map should still have shown the maximum times instead of speed limit times. I imagine most of us were shooting for 51 minutes and not 46.

Afterward, I talked with a few people about the signage on the course. One felt that the signs were not always visible enough. He suggested it would be better to have volunteers set up at the turns to direct cars in the correct direction. That probably needs a large and dedicated volunteer group but maybe something to consider to help prevent people from getting lost. For myself, I found the signs and instructions to be adequate. My main navigation tool was the list with mileage markers, and the signs were used mostly to confirm my interpretation of the list.

The mpg challenge was definitely a challenge and also fun. Thanks to the volunteers and organizers for putting it on. I thought it was done well, but could be tweaked to be better still. This was also my first mpg challenge so I don't really have anything to compare it to.

I feel good I didn't waste my weekend up there. Seriously. Like I've said before, anyone who has to average 32 MPH in mixed driving isn't going to get anything good. Although it would have been great to meet everyone again, the mileage challenge was the real meat of the whole weekend, and someone sucked the life right out of it.

I know time limits were set to try and simulate more real-world driving, but fact of the matter is a lot don't go that fast in the real world.

This is hypermiling, not NASCAR.

lamebuns; your contribution to this thread is lame. How do you know the MPG Challenge event was the "real meat" of the weekend, when you weren't even there? The fact is, there were many activities, forums, displays, etc that contained plenty of beef. And someone "sucked the life out" of what? Who? Perhaps it's easy to criticize from a distance. You say that in this format drivers are not "going to get anything good"? Give me a break. Quite a few achieved excellent mpg numbers, by any measure. Although I would surely enjoy meeting you, maybe it's a good thing you didn't "waste your weekend up there"........

Hey Auston!
I'm with Billy. It was a great week-end and to be included in a new part of a growing segment of today's world is exciting in itself. I met you and others for the 1st time at the WFEC and that alone was gratifying enough without the other events. The same goes for Hybridfest! I have been there 2 years in a row and I plan to go back again. Eric and the others haven't said, "My way or the highway!" They want to know how to improve it and I'm sure they will. Every year I go home with fond memories of Madison and the hospitality everyone has shown. It's amazing what you learn about the ones you interact with on the net. If you had been there, you would have seen and heard such suprises as Billy perform an outstanding arrangement of tunes in pure concert fashion (Tux included) during the dinner and met some pillars of CleanMPG such as Msantos.
Lighten up and view the pics that Mike S and Evan have posted to get a taste of the true atmosphere.
Hybridfest was a worthy event of 4.5 days of my time and over 1000 miles of travel.


I feel good I didn't waste my weekend up there. Seriously. Like I've said before, anyone who has to average 32 MPH in mixed driving isn't going to get anything good. Although it would have been great to meet everyone again, the mileage challenge was the real meat of the whole weekend, and someone sucked the life right out of it.

I know time limits were set to try and simulate more real-world driving, but fact of the matter is a lot don't go that fast in the real world.

This is hypermiling, not NASCAR.

No need to get personal guys, from a distance it's all he (Auston) would have had to look forward to. Granted most if not everyone went there and had fun, this thread was just about the results of the race. From my perspective Auston was just trying to show his disappointment in what was achieved vs what could be achieved. We all have different things that are important to us about the event. As far as him not being there, he really only had the great gas mileage to look forward to. It's different from the outside looking in. Like I said, no need to get personal. Enjoy your hypermiling days and keep those regular daily numbers up, until the next HF, these will be the most important! Have a good day everyone!

As has been mentioned earlier in this thread, there was a lot of things to keep track of during the challenge. I was most concerned with getting lost. It did take my attention away from what I was doing and caused a few hypermiling mistakes. But that being said, as long as the competition rules equally apply to everyone, I have no complaints. The only problem with this year's event for me was that I was required to pass another competitor so that I could make it back in under 51 minutes. Maybe the 4 minute interval is too short?

I plan on participating in 2009, regardless of the rules.:cool:

It's been quite a while since I've posted around here, but I swung by to catch the results and I feel like I'm in an interesting discussion.

An mpg challenge will always be difficult to put together. You don't expect a formula 1 driver to post amazing times on a course that he has never seen or driven. No matter how good he is, he will *never* beat someone who knows the course like the back of his hand.

Which brings me to the *real* astonishing thing about hypermiling in general: what everyday drivers perform on their commute. Their home turf. The route they drive every day, back and forth. The one they know like the back of their hand.

I can pass the 100 mpg mark on my commute almost without trying in my Insight. This is maintaining an average speed well above 40 mph for the duration, and extended segments at 55-60 mph.

I'm sure most of you have a similar route - the one you own. Your route never has idealized conditions, but we post amazing numbers regardless.

The typical hypermiler's commute can't be duplicated in an "mpg challenge" format, so I feel the "true" hypermiler achievement can't be displayed in this way.

Kudos to those who kicked ass in unfamiliar territory!

This has been a very interesting thread. Thanks for all the contributions.
I think what I'm hearing from many people is that people aren't fundamentally opposed to a time limit.
I'm also hearing many people saying that they would have liked to have a bit more time for this years MPG Challenge. I like the idea of multiple runs. Hmmmm....when to fit that in. That could be tricky. Anyone want to come in on Thursday? :)

Time limits are fine with me and I think the average speed of 32mph for a course like what we had was great. It really shows what can really be done at speeds faster than walking speed. :D I would just like to have a first run to get to know the course and a second run just to see if I can improve my MPG and or time.

I would not mind doing a first run Thursday evening or even early Friday.

How about a driver's "parade" through the MPG Challenge route Friday morning?
(Just brainstorming here.)

You could do a parade or have the signs up early and send the route map with the nametag mailing.

So when people get up on Friday morning they can look at the map and go run the course as many times as they like until the challenge starts.

Ryan

How about a driver's "parade" through the MPG Challenge route Friday morning?
(Just brainstorming here.)


I like that idea. I don't think we all need two separate runs measuring MPG, just one (as in a parade tour) to get the lay of the terrain, and the other competition run. Again, I liked the time constraints and the fact that it was more "realistic" in that the run presented us great obstacles to acheiving good mileage. However, I think the rules and limits as well as the minimum average speed need to be disclosed well prior to the actual event. Long enough for competitors to practice similar speed runs at home before leaving for Madison since some of us don't drive that fast in typical driving. I had no problem with the time limit or the penalties incurred for each minute over, but I don't like the idea of disqualifying individuals at a certain cutoff point. I think that the penalties should continue accruing until the person returns (within reason). Also, I would like to see unadjusted MPG numbers displayed alongside adjusted "official" scores even thouogh they woudn't be counted in the competition scoring. Having run the course for the last 3 years, but only having officially competed this last year, I thought that the changes made for this year were a bit too drastic given what people have become accustomed to expecting. I favor the move towards more real life situations, however we need to make sure that everyone's aware of the situation well in advance and has their head in the game for what they're getting into.

Just b/c Linda's now in the thread I want to add that I feel the time limit was fine...I realize that it isn't what some of the more extreme of you guys do, but it's very characteristic of what I do and is somewhat more realistic of what the average driver who wants to learn some hypermiling might be able to achive while not unnecessarily impeding traffic or doing some of the more extreme techniques.

I also think that allowing everyone to keep the maps and allowing time for them to pre-run the course would eliminate the concern about getting lost and might help improve the mpg numbers b/c we'd have the familiarity with the course and be able to do a bit more anticipatory driving.

I keep seeing the term "real world" coming up and it concerns me a bit. I just hope we don't go the route of "if you can't beat 'em, join 'em." I feel that most of the "real world" drives too fast and is why America is where it's at today. Just my $.02 worth.

Hi Efusco:

___Extreme is running a Prius or any other vehicle up to 50 mph and slamming on the brakes, pushing through yellows or taking higher than comfortable high G-turns. Hypermilers are far safer and save far more fuel vs. what you probably consider “normal” and do so by taking the time to do it right. Driving in the fashion you believe is “not extreme” is exactly why the country and the planet is in the situation it is today. I hope nobody else was speeding on the course but I know I was in multiple sections and that alone is a bad omen for at least some of us given 99% of those “extreme drivers” are those that speed. Meaning everybody else, not us.

___The MPG Challenge had time limits last year and it worked out just fine without so much of the racing stuff involved.

___Good Luck

___Wayne

Wayne,
We'll keep your "racing" concenrs in mind. :) Thanks.
On a related note, as a competitor, when would you like to see the maps?

Justin,
You are right on track with the full disclosre. Especially since we know some people do not wish to be in a timed event. The time will be tweaked for future events. You mentioned the idea of no DQ as long as they arrive within reason. For this year's MPG Challenge what do you think would have within reason?

Since I was not there I don't have a feel for the traffic patterns -- did the fact that it was Friday have any bearing on the congestion? Just curious.

Hi

On my experience, I didn't think there was any "congestion"--my "takeoff time" was 2:58. There were other people on the course, I myself did not see any farm implements. We did cross train tracks, but no one got caught by a train, as far as I know--there were supposed to be "marshalls" on the course to watch for that. I'm glad we didn't get any rain, that would have made uneven conditions, plus it was fairly mild temperature-wise.

I did see a police officer and drove cautiously--OK no rolling stops--I know Richard saw one too, they were by the fairgrounds.

I don't know about anyone else, but there was that really big hill toward the end, WOW did I get some momentum from that--exceeded the speed limit there!:eek:

Eric and Linda, I think if we would have had between 55-57 minutes for the challenge, we would have been able to finish OK. (that's why I'd like to see the raw data :D) I can't believe last year's limit was 89 minutes???

As far as not going to HF because you don't like the format of the MPG Challenge, well, there were many people who did not participate (not wanting to or to the wonderful volunteers who were running the event) and had a great time. The social aspect is the best part!

Maybe two runs would be the way to go, but it would take so much time--and when it's your turn to drive you don't want anyone out there "practicing" in front of you. I kinda like the idea of maybe everyone going out ONCE for a "tour" of the course, just to get a feel for the roads, turns, hills and then doing the challenge. Wouldn't that be a hoot--a parade of hybrids going thru the course all together. Kinda like the warm up laps at Indy.

BTW, did anyone go back for that piano (?) for $25 that was on the course?;)

Donna

Hi Efusco:

___Extreme is running a Prius or any other vehicle up to 50 mph and slamming on the brakes, pushing through yellows or taking higher than comfortable high G-turns. Hypermilers are far safer and save far more fuel vs. what you probably consider “normal” and do so by taking the time to do it right. Driving in the fashion you believe is “not extreme” is exactly why the country and the planet is in the situation it is today. I hope nobody else was speeding on the course but I know I was in multiple sections and that alone is a bad omen for at least some of us given 99% of those “extreme drivers” are those that speed. Meaning everybody else, not us.

___The MPG Challenge had time limits last year and it worked out just fine without so much of the racing stuff involved.

___Good Luck

___Wayne
Wayne,
I think you're VERY unfairly interpreting what I'm saying. I'm talking about staying at safe speeds and driving the speed limit while showing respect for others on the road who may not appreciate me going 5 or 10 or 20mph under the posted limit.
I very much consider myself a hypermiler, but we live in a very big world full of people who've never heard the term. I don't speed for other people...but I think it's reasonable to drive in a predictible fashion at a reasonable speed. People, me included, have things of as much value as saving gas in their lives. My time is valuable, my piece of mind is valuable.

If the average speed for the course, at the posted speed limit, is 35mph I believe it is very realistic and very real world to expect to be able to complete the course at 30mph average speed.

I'm not bashing the way you drive, Wayne...but neither should you bash mine. If hypermiling is to be taken seriously on a large scale then it must have appeal to a broad audience...driving down a rural road at 17mph is just not realistic for the vast majority of people outside of the hypermiling enthusiasts world.

Hi Evan:

___Please never repeat the word "Extreme" as following the speed limits in the Chicagoland area is doing anything but being extreme. The "Extreme" drivers are those that are 10 - 15 over the limits and driving like gas was as plentiful as air which happens everywhere.

___I have been working hard for over 7 years now to convince not only hybrid but also non-hybrid drivers that 20 to 100% above the EPA is so easy a fifth grader could do it. It is as we all know but when someone attaches the word “extreme” to it, it makes all the work seem impossible which we all know is not.

___Good Luck

___Wayne

I think that a parade around the course would be great as it would allow every one to see the course.

I think giving out a map of the course in the mailing would also be a great idea as it would allow us non locals to get a feel for the traffic and the terrain and improve our MPG while keeping the slow speed to a minimum like we would at home on our every day commute.

I think of it like going to a race track I have never been on or seen before and being told to get the fastest time around. At best it takes a good race car driver at least one lap to get to know the track and takes it kind of slow so you don't spin out. Then the next lap you can go balls out knowing what to expect.