Archives

I tried P&G, and I tried calibration, and in the end I gave up on the SG. I decided to keep it so I have something to clear codes with, but the rest of the time it will sit in a box on a shelf. On its very best day it gained me maybe 2MPG, and on its worst days -- and there were simply too many of them -- it filled me with false hopes only to let me down when the real numbers came in.

Maybe it's me -- in fact, it probably is. I have been driving for a long, long, long time, I like to drive. No, I love to drive. I come from (at least!) two generations of forebears who love to drive. I have driven minibikes and 18 wheelers and pretty much everything in between. And I can be a cheap SoB. I already do most of the nifty stuff recommended on this forum, and I do it without even thinking about it.

I learned to coast more. Coasting is fun. I've already added it to the 'do it without thinking' repetoire.

I learned that, if you own a 2007-8 Honda Fit like I do, slowing down on the freeway will make a big difference in MPG. It's a city car, with city car gearing. And I learned what DFCO means -- on several levels.

I learned that P&G, while it sounds fabulous and really appeals to the cheapskate and the engineer in me, at the end of the day yields an incremental improvement that, for me, is not worth the effort.

And I learned what I already knew; I won't trade a few pennies of MPG for time, and I won't trade a few pennies of MPG for a practical level of comfort. The speed limit is my speed limit, and the AC runs when I want to run it. I mean, come on -- I'm already driving a Fit with pumped up tires. :p

The bottom line is that the slower you go, and the more you coast, the better your mpg will be. P&G helps incrementally, but adds effort -- and, significantly in some cases, risk. Same with FAS, unless you're driving a real hybrid.

Mabye y'all should start a Hypermiling Lite subforum or somesuch.

I get 55 to 60 on a car not as efficient as a fit. It is you, bro.

Sorry to hear you didn't see improvement. Perhaps you were already driving efficiently?

I definitely see the MPG increase substantially when I P&G, and even more when I FAS (which I do only in the Subaru only for longer glides in safe locations). Perhaps a firmer Pulse might help? On the highway I've been using 50-60 in the Subaru, narrowing it to 55-60 in traffic, 50-55 to help trucks by, and 45-60 when there's no traffic around.

Yes, it can be annoying when the SG does not agree with the tank numbers. Mine reads a bit high and I'm in the process of calibrating it.

HM is whatever you make of it. There are times when I try very very hard and there others (especially with someone else in the car) when that just is not possible, and I try not to stress too much over it. Patience helps: I've been at this 2 years and am still learning and improving. And like you I've been driving for a looong time: ca 46 years.

I get 55 to 60 on a car not as efficient as a fit. It is you, bro.Do you see those numbers on the SG, or do you get those numbers at fillup?

And yes it is me, to no small extent. I'm unwilling to get run over by semis and whackos on the PA Tpk, and I'm unwilling to trade 20 more minutes at home at both ends of my commute for 80 cents an hour during it.
Perhaps a firmer Pulse might help? On the highway I've been using 50-60 in the Subaru, narrowing it to 55-60 in traffic, 50-55 to help trucks by, and 45-60 when there's no traffic around.I tried several different P&G methods, speeds, ranges, and pulses. Two consistencies came to the fore: 1) going slower raised MPG; 2) average speed being constant, the most consistent thing was my fillup MPG no matter what else I did.
Yes, it can be annoying when the SG does not agree with the tank numbers. Mine reads a bit high and I'm in the process of calibrating it.I got the SG to match up pretty well with tank numbers and miles. But I don't need a realtime gauge for that; heck, I do that calculation in my head, after the fillup. What I was expecting from the SG was a realtime tool to tell me whether the method I'm employing right now is doing me any good or not. The SG failed to do that within a reasonable degree of accuracy.
Patience helps: I've been at this 2 years and am still learning and improving. And like you I've been driving for a looong time: ca 46 years.Yep, and I'll keep toying around with methods and speeds and tire pressures -- and aerodynamics, and unsprung weight, and probably some other stuff I haven't thought of yet.

I think the SG is a great tool for folks just starting out, but those of us who remember 36HP VW Beetles will already know how to squeeze efficiency out of a vehicle and will probably do it with or without a realtime digital readout.

I'm sorry to hear that your Scanguage didn't meet your expectations.:( I almost feel guilty(not too much though:p) for having two SG's in my car. Having the second one has helped me to another ~5% over what I was getting with just the one. I too have been driving at varying levels of dedication to FE for just shy of 30 years now and have found the SG to be nearly like a little bird that sets on my shoulder and say, "Hey, your getting a bit heavy on the right foot" even when I can't tell I'm applying extra pressure. Then I back off and see the iMPG make a significant leap back up where it should be.

I see where your coming from on the time issue. I don't see that 20 minutes is very much compared to the rest of the day but everyone is a little different and I respect that. Another way to look at it though may be to compare the difference/improvement in your mood when you arrive home later vs. getting home earlier. Again, don't take this as a judgment but maybe more like a possible rethink. Keep up the good work and remember that the important thing is, you care enough to at least try something to improve unlike the other 95+% out there.

I know what you mean. I hypermile "lite" with the Suburban in city driving ,and on long trips I hypermile very, very lite.
City I pulse and glide with the motor on in D- I use syn oil , high tire pressure ,asys diff lube, and I've pulled 122 lbs of seats. I use the AC constantly-New Orleans is hot and humid. These mild changes get me about 25% or so better than I would get otherwise.

On Long trips I set the cc to 68 mph and don't pulse and glide. We get 21mpg over long distances. 68 mph isn't slow, but it is slower than the average vehicle speed-.I passed 2 folks,22 passed me in 30 minutes of counting on I-40.I don't take or use the Scan gauge on long trips- too dangerous to be distracted on unfamiliar roads ,and I'm not going to change anything anyway.

I suspect big truck like vehicles actually respond better absolutely and maybe in respect to % -than smaller more inherently FE vehicles. Big vehicles have poorer CDs,so they will respond "better" to slight decreases in speed ; they have taller sidewalls ,so they probably respond better to increases in tire pressure.

Most folks just use the Hypermiling tricks that "Fit" (ha,ha) them best.Your Fit is an excellent city vehicle -you start out waaay ahead. Any modifications you do will pale in comparison to one pickup using just door jam proper tire pressure.

Charlie

Hi Wdb:

___Sorry to hear of your experience. I don’t know about your extra minutes but following the legal limits is the max I will ever suggest. Whatever whacko’s you experience, you have 5 methods to reduce them to nothing more than a slight annoyance…

___Either way, sell your ScanGauge in the For/Sale Trade forums as there are hundreds of individuals that would love to own it for the improvement it will bring to them.

___As for the Fit equipped w/ a ScanGauge, there are two Fit drivers here that are pushing 60 to 70 mpg tanks and that cannot be achieved without a ScanGauge.

___Good Luck

___Wayne

Just a few examples here. RichXKU has pulled over 70mpg for significant distances at highway speeds in a manual Fit like yours. Andrew has done likewise in a similarly (short!) geared and powered older Civic. Personally, I've managed over 50mpg (51.3mpg to be exact) in my Elantra at an average speed of 67mph on the highway (my first tank over 50mpg, actually) -- and that car is only rated for 33mpg on the highway using the old ratings. I think you'll agree that 67mph isn't going too slow? All three of us have done this using P&G.

High speed P&G is extremely difficult to control properly. I did it over 700+mi and without the SG attached I'd never have managed it. I had to keep a close eye on the average FE to be sure that it continued to trend upward with every cycle of P&G. Low speed P&G is way the heck easier. And yes, my recorded (tank) results are all from odometer miles divided by number of gallons entered at the pump. After several tanks I got the SG dialed in very well and it typically only deviates from reality (as measured at the end of a tank) by 1% or so.

With that said, it is certainly your job to determine just how much effort and time you are willing to put into this. In the grand scheme of things most of us really don't spend that much more time to get places, and we are all comfortable with different levels of effort. That's your part. Our part is to let you know what is possible and how to achieve it.

Don't be sorry people! I tried it, it's not for me, end of story. I'm moving on to 9 pound rims (vs. 16 pound stockers), aerodynamic undertrays, maybe lowering the whole car. My target is 40MPG, in decent time, relative comfort and as much safety as I can muster. I'm almost there.
I see where your coming from on the time issue. I don't see that 20 minutes is very much compared to the rest of the day but everyone is a little different and I respect that. Another way to look at it though may be to compare the difference/improvement in your mood when you arrive home later vs. getting home earlier. Again, don't take this as a judgment but maybe more like a possible rethink.It's 40 minutes -- 20 each way. I equip my cars with Sirius radios, so my my mood when I get home is usually pretty good. :)
On Long trips I set the cc to 68 mph and don't pulse and glide. We get 21mpg over long distances. 68 mph isn't slow, but it is slower than the average vehicle speed-.I passed 2 folks,22 passed me in 30 minutes of counting on I-40.I do 65 on the PA Tpk, including some parts that are posted 55. I get passed by everything, and only pass the occasional motorhome or 18-wheeler. If I go 60 I get swooped at like a small bird by hawks, and to me that is asking for an accident.
___Sorry to hear of your experience. I don’t know about your extra minutes but following the legal limits is the max I will ever suggest. Understood. My measure is whatever I can manage safely, with a strong tendency towards the speed limit itself. As I said earlier there are parts of my commute where the speed limit gets me nearly run over.
___As for the Fit equipped w/ a ScanGauge, there are two Fit drivers here that are pushing 60 to 70 mpg tanks and that cannot be achieved without a ScanGauge.I suggest you check with RickXKU on his 70MPG reports. They all came from SG trip readouts. His actual fillup worked out to 50-ish MPG. In other words he fell victim to the same thing that caused me to decide to remove the SG from my car.

Rich is a friend of mine and a true hypermiler, willing to sweat a gallon to save a gallon. If anybody can squeeze 60MPG from a tankful I suspect it will be him.
Personally, I've managed over 50mpg (51.3mpg to be exact) in my Elantra at an average speed of 67mph on the highway (my first tank over 50mpg, actually) -- and that car is only rated for 33mpg on the highway using the old ratings. What do you get if you use all of the same techniques minus P&G?
With that said, it is certainly your job to determine just how much effort and time you are willing to put into this. In the grand scheme of things most of us really don't spend that much more time to get places, and we are all comfortable with different levels of effort. That's your part. Our part is to let you know what is possible and how to achieve it.And you do a darned fine job of it. Thanks!

Personally, I've managed over 50mpg (51.3mpg to be exact) in my Elantra at an average speed of 67mph on the highway (my first tank over 50mpg, actually) -- and that car is only rated for 33mpg on the highway using the old ratings.
What do you get if you use all of the same techniques minus P&G?

Reposted because I would really like to know.

I got 36mpg the last time I drove that route without P&G and used only DWL and DWL.

I get my numbers off SG and odo and are very close with the scanguage tending to be a bit higher but I continue to try and match them. You have to calibrate the thing, but even those who never calibrate them will get huge improvements based on the feedback. You can only improve by using it. The numbers climb and climb with each new technique and each new tank.

You have many here who will probably only use scanguage numbers and may never calibrate. No problem, they are still saving huge amounts of fuel and contributing not 80cents an hour to their wallets, they are contributing to solving much larger problems.

You already did what is intened. You saved fuel. You beat the EPA, and decided how you like things. No problem, sometimes people don't like this whole idea at all. At least you are driving in a safe, more fuel efficient way. You are so much better than all those people out there who are impatient and angry.
But a lot of people would love that Scanguage and save tons of money and fuel with it. Set it free.

I have noticed I blow maybe 10-15 extra minutes going to work, but I arrive in a safer, more heart friendly manner not to mention I cut my fuel bill by about 75% compared to my old driving habits. (I was a serious speeder) Gas isn't an issue anymore since I use so darn little of it now. But then again, I only have to drive to work maybe 5 times a month. If I was in the 9-5 world, I would probably see it a bit different, so I understand about saving time if you have to go right back to work the next day again. Family time becomes more important. Anywho , we all love to yack don't we? Peace.

All the other techniques are nowhere near as effective as P&G. I have recently been using this with (to me) astounding results. It does require practice, as you must rev match for each engagement. I only use FAS where I know that I will not need the engine power for a set amount of time, such as coast to a red light or on very long hills on the highway. You cannot use this where the need for power is unpredictable, such as waiting for a break to turn left, or at a stop sign, etc. Interestingly, a highway trip I took yesterday on a toll road with light, fast moving traffic gave me the best ever trip result of 4.5 l/100km (53 mpg). I do not drive slower than the flow of traffic, and was using 115 and 105 km/hr (75 and 70 mph) as my bracket speeds. I have found that short hard bursts of acceleration are better than long slow ones. The point is that you dont need to travel slower than the flow of traffic to get very good results. Yes, it is a lot of work, but my experience is that it will improve your MPG by 20-30%. Any of the other methods alone can only do 5% or so.

If you are concerned about FE the biggest improvement you can get is to get your tires hard and work on your driving. This requires the feedback that the SG gives.

Anywho , we all love to yack don't we? Peace.Ain't it the truth. And the best part is: I put it back in. Crazy right?

Well, as I said earlier I have moved on to other efficiency improvement methods. First on the list was to install a front undertray on the car, which I finally got to do this week. I wanted to see if the undertray affected engine coolant and engine compartment temperatures and I thought, hey, the SG can show me that. So back it went. New location, not up in the line of sight anymore, but nevertheless.

I'm even using one of the gauges to show tank MPG. Will wonders never cease. :p