Discussion in 'The Daily Grind' started by Gord, Apr 30, 2023.
Welcome to the grind
I’m a bit behind - I’ll catch up at some point
You’re ahead of me…..since my behind is not a bit, but larger than your behind. May Day, May Day.
Gord, thank you for starting the month.
Thursday morning I left for Bloomfield MI.
Returned Sunday afternoon.
About 630 miles round trip (slightly different
route on the way home.
Going there I had some favorable winds ( typical SW )
fcd = 53.9
Coming home , same wind.
fcd = 49.8
Averages out to 51.9 MPG.
Still have not calculated my error.
Bought 87 E10 at a Shell in Marshall MI for $3.499.
MUCH cheaper than IL.
When I bought the car on Jan 14 the odometer showed 13,500.
Now it's a little under 18,000.
Maintenance Minder says 60% oil life remains.
I'm very pleased with the car.
Today , 42 deg F in Naperville and Elk Grove.
Wind WNW 12
33.1=3 miles, fcd = 52.5 MPG
Today , 37 deg F in Naperville, 38 in Elk Grove.
Wind NNW 9
33.3 miles, fcd = 51.7 MPG.
The big-tired, auto Elantra took me, the Nikon 7-15x35mm Nikon zooms & Galileo 8x40mm binoculars to the Wildlife area. The area was very quiet. The Galileo does qualify as a wide field of view (FOV) & beats the narrow FOV Nikon. Since the Galileo is quite good & sharp optically, it is better than the Nikon for GENERAL 8 power viewing. When compared to the Nikon’s 15 power resolution, obviously the Nikon wins. My various binocular tests have most often been which binoculars can I use by itself. The Nikon wins again as a stand alone optic. Yes, the Galileo can be used alone one time, two times? But, don’t tie my eyeballs to only 7 or 8 power. I have higher power binoculars & MUST use them too.
I did tour thru the wildlife area, on “new” paths that have have been developed while the brush-clearing machines did their thing. I’ll enjoy the new paths, till the growing brush re-claim their rights. Got over near the God-made Park Bench. It still exists, altho a brush-clearing machine passed about 2 feet to one side of it. So God’s handiwork is still handy. However, in a 2nd way, God’s handiwork had a say in things……again. One of the Maple trees had fallen. & what a fall! If I had been sitting on the God-made Park Bench during the fall, I would have been about 15 feet away from the nearest parts of the tree, hitting me. Maybe small pieces of the tree may have hit me. Yeap, one falling tree created the God-made Park Bench. Another falling tree almost destroyed the God-made Park Bench. Yowza!
Long live the God-made Park Bench.
PS……I looked closely at the remaining stump of the fallen Maple tree. Huge amounts of pressure had ripped at the tree’s trunk. As it was falling, a weakness in the lowest part of the trunk may have caused the tree to veer away from the God-made Park Bench, saving it…..so I continue to have a rest spot in the middle of the Wood…..even with the included God-made foot rest! Wow & yowza.
You would be MORE pleased with the car if you put on….
Today , 52 deg F in Naperville , 55 in Elk Grove
Wind SSE 9
33.3 miles , fcd = 58.1 MPG.
Wow, Edwin. Impressive.
Therre is still an unresolved fcd error. But thanks, Bill.
The stars and planets were aligned today.
I don't P&G too often in this car. Meaning , I don't
glide in neutral. Instead , I accelerate at around 2000 RPM
( which is actually brisk ) and then back off until instant MPG
is 85-90 MPG. I do try to make sure it doesn't go into DFCO
until I want it to.
Yeah…..what Bill said……..yeah……Wow! On some routes, been able to average very close to 50MPG with the 2013 auto Elantra. Never completely took the 2016 manual Elantra on those routes, & the manual would beat the automatic Elantra. However, I ran my tests years ago & traffic is worse now. At times, I glide in neutral, but only approaching stop signs or lights. The Elantra loves to glide & I never really could efficiently work that guide. Your 58.1 MPG is beyond anything I could get from the Elantra. Now Wayne would be able to take our Elantras & really jump the MPG….but that is Wayne.
Is that possible with the CVT Fit without abusing it?
I have done it , but not so often. One needs to wait a second and a half before giving it throttle again.
I find it's easier to cruise at 85-90 MPG instead and then have DFCO when I need it.
I’ve never understood the premise that manually using a CVT (or regular automatic transmission) hurts the transmission. I used to shift to neutral often in my CVT Dodge Caliber. I especially enjoy shifting to neutral in our 6 speed automatic Elantra, while approaching stop signs, avoiding the automatic shifting down through all the gears to the stop sign.
I'll hazard a guess that at 90 mpg, torque transmitted to or from the drive wheels is approximately zero (i.e., free-wheeling), and that above a certain speed, the ratio of engine speed to forward speed is the same as in DFCO---if that's a fixed ratio like with a manual.
I've never driven a vehicle with mechanical belt-(or chain)-and-pulleys type of CVT, except one short, slow, congested trip in a 2007 Ford 500. Rode in a circa 2018 Forester, though.
Ah….Across the street from my house, short of 2 decades ago, I took a CVT Ford 500 for a test drive. I adored it! THAT is what motoring around is supposed to be! Eventually I bought a smaller, cheaper Dodge Caliber CVT. Your trip in the Ford 500 appeared NOT to be good. If you had been paying attention, it was that congested traffic you encountered that would have taught you the outstanding features of its no-shift, vibrationless & smooth drive. In particular, in stop&go&stop traffic, the drive from 0MPH to 10MPH & back to 0MPH, the bane of drivers, is elegant & peaceful with no jittery gear changing, hesitation or surging.
Today , 56 deg F in Naperville, 52 in Elk Grove.
Wind NNE 7
33.3 miles, fcd = 54.2 MPG
I also drove a Ford 500 CVT. I was thinking "Wow, I could drive this car forever and
never go aove 2000 RPM."
Today , 49 deg F in Naperville , 47 in Elk Grove.
Wind NW 6
33.3 miles, fcd = 53.2
My smaller Dodge Caliber CVT at 60MPH would have 2000rpms on lowland flats. Above 60MPH, the rpms began climbing, such as 70MPH(rarely), 2333rpms. On our steep mountain slopes, higher rpms were encountered. Many CVT drivers, not paying attention to coming steep slopes, complained about the NEED for excessive thrash-about rpm increases. But, carefully watching for those steep slopes coming up, Caliber throttle, torque & rpm increases, just yards BEFORE those increasing slopes, kept throttle, torque & rpm settings lower than those thrash-about rpm levels. Two additional improvements while paying attention to increasing slopes ahead: 1) the CVT mountain drives became avenues of smoothness & flow, with elegant maintenance of speeds due to perfect CVT gear ratio matching, & 2) MPG in the mountains was maintained & equivalent to my flat-land drives. Of course, mountain drives were longer(meaning better MPG) with less traffic than my normal everyday flatland driving, (more MPG). Still…..avoiding engine thrash-abouts & large rpm increases in the mountains, had to add even more mountain MPG.
It was the Caliber, for which I started my purchases of used, over-sized tires, which gave 63MPH at 2000rpms. Doesn’t sound like much, but that extra 3 MPH at 2000rpms was very noticeable, giving the over-size tired Caliber, a sweet, almost limousine ride (the purchased used Firestone Affinity tires added to that sweetness, for sure) . Of course, at 70MPH(again rarely), rpms would be 2222, instead of the OE 2333, as mentioned early in this post. On the 70MPH Freeways here in Washington state, I would travel at 65MPH, & rpms would be 2063. Indeed, small cars, I believe, respond best to over-sized tire usage than larger vehicles…..at least MY small cars did, all which had higher OE highway rpms, so torque was a bit higher.
Separate names with a comma.