| Forum Home | ||||
| PC World Chat | ||||
| Thread ID: 65084 | 2006-01-07 02:17:00 | Car-fuel consumption at accelerating | taly (5956) | PC World Chat |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 418871 | 2006-01-07 02:17:00 | Hi Guys! Has anyone ever heard about how much fuel it takes to get from 0km/h to, say, 50km/h. Manufacturers give data for time to get to 100km/h, say 10sec. But how much fuel? All I seen is liters per 100km, which don't say much to me when assesing driving around town. They say in this case about 30% more, but it would make sense to give liters per accellaration for different times: 10sec, 15sec, and so on. Any thoughts? |
taly (5956) | ||
| 418872 | 2006-01-07 02:39:00 | They don't ever give this ... it would depend too much on the "style" of driving. When the car travels at a steady speed, the fuel is providing enough energy to overcome the rolling resistance, wind resistance, any "up-hill-ness", the losses in the engine, and the fairly inefficient generation of electricty for accessories. During acceleration it provides the same, plus the energy required to accelerate the total mass. It might be possible to calculate a figure ... to within 10 or 20% or so ... but in general, pumping the brakes, or the accelerator, costs fuel. Steady driving with gentle acceleration and minimal braking saves fuel. Riding a bicycle saves much more. |
Graham L (2) | ||
| 418873 | 2006-01-07 02:40:00 | I have a 2.3 L Mazda 6 that has a feature that will tell you in 2 second increments, how many litres you are using per 100km. When I accelerate hard it goes up to around 35 - 40 l/100km. When I ease back at 100 km/h it hovers around 7 - 9 but drops to 0 - 1 when I coast. I could find a flat piece of road and do some 'tests' ..... |
Jester (13) | ||
| 418874 | 2006-01-07 05:04:00 | Hi Guys! Has anyone ever heard about how much fuel it takes to get from 0km/h to, say, 50km/h . Manufacturers give data for time to get to 100km/h, say 10sec . But how much fuel? All I seen is liters per 100km, which don't say much to me when assesing driving around town . They say in this case about 30% more, but it would make sense to give liters per accellaration for different times: 10sec, 15sec, and so on . Any thoughts? Well . , if you are accelerating off the top of a building or trying to accelerate up a large hill, mountain, or steep driveway, and adding in air density, (parasitic drag or oxygen percentage), changes in altitude, temperature, dew point, road surface, tire inflation, wheel bearing grease qualities and viscosity, lubrication oil viscosity, tension on the accessory (fan) belts, porosity and finish to the vehicle's exterior surfaces, windows open or shut, number of passengers, payload including amount of battery electrolyte, load of fuel in tank and temperature of same, windshield washer bottle fullness, quality of oil in engine and transmission and differential, cleanliness/contaminents in oil in engine and transmission and differential, gear ratios, stiction and rolling resistance of tires and tread depth, bearing(s) pre-load factors, brake rotor and drum trueness, wheel/rim runout or eccentricity, overall wheel alignment, toolboxes and repair equipment in the trunk, paint density/thickness and color on fenders and hood, how much bondo is in the dent repairs, radial or bias-ply tires, missing air dams and body parts and fenders, undigested food and wastes in the driver's alimentary canal, clothing worn by driver . . . . or lack thereof, pedestrian(s) stuck in grill or undercarriage, small animals stuck in grill/undercarriage, local flora and vegetation stuck in grill or undercarriage' lenght of driver's hair . . . or lack thereof, (getting esoteric now) photon strike angle from sunshine or moon, temperature of the roadway, caloric content of fuel, condition of injectors/carburation system, atomization and wetting factors in plenum, columnar velocities of air/fuel charge, laminar flow in cylinders and intake areas, fuel stratification factors, angle of sparkplugs in relation to quench area in combustion chambers, flamefront propagation values, moon phase and rise/set times, siderial time, attitude of driver, attitude of passenger(s), shifts in the time/space continuim, occluding stars in our galaxy, bilabial fricatives by driver/passenger(s) and quality thereof, see? lots of variables . . . . . tell me what yours are and I will plug them into my vehicle acceleration/mass caloric consumption calculator and get right back to you . |
SurferJoe46 (51) | ||
| 418875 | 2006-01-07 05:26:00 | Usually fuel consumption is listed as two results. 1. Highway conditions 2. City conditions City consumption will be around 80% of that of highway. |
gibler (49) | ||
| 418876 | 2006-01-07 06:11:00 | City consumption will be around 80% of that of highway. Curious. Lower consumption in the urban jungle eh. ;) |
Winston001 (3612) | ||
| 418877 | 2006-01-07 06:20:00 | Curious. Lower consumption in the urban jungle eh. ;) Er, yeah, wrong way around :waughh: In Auckland, you probably drive so slow you can just use foot power like the Flintstones :) |
gibler (49) | ||
| 418878 | 2006-01-07 19:43:00 | Usually fuel consumption is listed as two results. 1. Highway conditions 2. City conditions City consumption will be around 80% of that of highway.What??????? I beg to differ, particually if one drives a bigger car. Many years ago, i owned a V8. A days shopping round flat city CHCH would cost me $20 in petrol, but a trip to the other side of the island, usually towing a ton or 2 of chicken**** at speed would cost just over double that for a 3-4 hour drive. My truck however is geared wih low speed in mind, so sustaining 90Km/hour is a bit guzzly. It really needs a 6th gear so the engine can cruise when the tuck does. |
personthingy (1670) | ||
| 1 | |||||