

| Subject: | Re: FS diesel engine |
| From: | Steven Broomhead |
| Date: | Sun, 17 May 1998 22:41:38 -0500 |
Forget it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!11 I'll let the junk man have the engine for free. I think I will retreat back to a lurcker . Joel Walker wrote: > On Sun, 17 May 1998 20:25:35 -0500 Steven Broomhead said: > >If my tanks holds 10 gallons, say I let it idle in my driveway for 3 hours > >and then start the trip. My tank would run dry at 225 miles. My true mpg > >would be 22.5, BUT I used x (unknown qty of fuel) during the 3 hour idle. > >Since the engine does not idle on pure air, the amount of fuel used is > >negligable. > > in theory. but in test on my 86 van, with a trip computer installed (that > measured the amount of fuel used, and was pretty darned accurate ... down > to 0.1 gallon), i found that that particular van used 0.6 gallons per hour > idling in the driveway. yeah, i know ... who'd REALLY be dumb enough to > do this. well ... it SEEMED like a good idea at the time. :) but i was > fooling around with the trip computer and the new bus, my first water-cooled, > so i wanted to see what it would get. what i found was this: > Bentley says: 18 mph per 1000 rpm. > 1986 data: 16.4 mph per 1000 rpm. tires, friction losses, and air drag, > i guess. > > so i had a table like this: > calc range in > rpm mph gph mpg miles* > 3000 49.1 - - - > 3200 52.3 2.3 23.1 346 > 3400 55.6 2.4 23.6 354 > 3600 58.9 2.7 21.2 318 > 3800 62.1 3.2 19.2 288 > 4000 65.4 3.3 19.8 297 > 4200 68.7 3.7 18.8 282 > 4400** 71.9 4.3 16.8 252 > > - = no data. people were trying to run me off the road at that speed. i also > couldn't get up the very small hills on my "test track" of a pretty flat > area on the interstate highway just west of here. > * = assuming you ran 15 of the 16 gallons in your tank at this speed. > ** = only got to run one short test at this speed, so i didn't have enough > data to average (like the other speeds: they were all averages of three > test runs). remember, this was back when 55 mph was the interstate > speed limit. and a bus makes a very good radar target!! :) > > now, in real-world driving, you can't just sit there on cruise control all > the time. people slow down in front of you, you can't pull out when you need > to get around them, you have to stop for red lights and all sorts of things. > dirty bus = higher drag. tires get low on air = higher drag. that sort of > stuff. so what i found was ... > - best speed for best mpg: 3600-3800 rpm. below 3600 got better mpg, but > didn't have enough omph to get up > most hills. and hills REALLY dragged > the mpg down (the trip computer would > also show instantaneous mpg). > - worst speed for mpg: above 4000 rpm. the higher rpm you drove, the > worse the mpg got. > - best ever mpg: 24.3 mpg. > - worst ever mpg: 14.9 mpg. > > >In short, no matter what my driving habits over the course of a year my mpg > >averaged 25 MPG +/- 1 MPG. > > then i would suspect that > - you drive slower than most folks on the road. > - you drive mostly highway miles > - you keep your tires pumped up > - you keep your bus clean and shiney. > > ... or you're not keeping the records right. on mine, i had to make sure that > i filled up the tank to the same spot in the filler neck. otherwise, there > could be as much as a half gallon or more difference in the amount used to > fill up. plus the time of day makes a difference ... fill up at night and > you get a little colder gasoline, which is more dense, so you can cram a > little bit more into your tank. fill up at 2.pm in the afternoon, and the > gas is pretty warm and expands to fill the tank with less gallons. now, > with the small 16-gallon tanks we have, it's not gonna be a whole lot... > maybe not even noticeable, like a few ounces. but all these factors can work > against you ... and if you depend on the pump nozzle kick-off (when it stops > pumping), you can also vary quite a bit ... not all pumps are the same. > > my point being that even if you do it super-critcally, you can STILL come up > with differences. the reason i did three runs at each rpm and averaged them > was because at different times of the day, in different weather, i'd get > different results. oh, they were close, but not exact. > > joel
Have something to add on this topic today? Revive this thread in the forum »