![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Harry K" wrote in message ups.com... On Jul 29, 6:33 pm, (Scott) wrote: On Sun, 29 Jul 2007 10:04:39 -0400, in rec.aviation.homebuilt, "Peter Dohm" wrote: Have you 1) verified you odometer against at least 10 miles of highway mile markers, 2) verified your speedometer reading at 60MPH as a result of the same test, and 3) checked the cumulative fuel mileage, as shown on the computer, against your fuel mileage calculated in the usual way? Seconded. I've never seen an automotive trip computer that was worth more than the recyclable metals in it. My Grand Prix has a trip computer, and what it tells me is scarcely better than a wild guess. It reports better fuel mileage than I really get, and underreports the amount of fuel I've used. When the tank's full it tells me I have a range of 430 miles (best I've ever gotten was ~350), and it raises a fuel alarm when I've still got 80 miles in the tank. Now and then, it will raise a low fuel alarm when the tank is completely full. It probably kicks puppies and steals candy from babies, too. -Scott Probably quite true but... It is a useable instrument to detect what mode of driving is most efficient even it it is not accurate. That is if it reports, for example, 19 mpg over a stretch of road with tailgate down and then you repeat the run in the same direction, same speed, same conditions, etc. the reported mpg is then a useable bit of data. Yes, it will be inaccurate but the comparison is useable and meaningful. Harry K Probably true. However, the coastdown test mentioned elsewhere in this tread is probably the most consistently reliable method--when properly controlled. The most obvious requirements a state the coast down from the same place and speed each time, record the remaining speed at the seconde marker, continue testing in the same direction, warm up the tires before the first test, and choose a day (or days) with constant temperature and wind conditions. There are certainly more, but those are enough to give a far more reliable result than any test in traffic that I can think of--and even then, since we are discussing the drag of detached flow, the test may only be valid for the speed(s) at which the test was run. Peter |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Myth: 1 G barrel rolls are impossible. | Jim Logajan | Piloting | 244 | June 22nd 07 04:33 AM |
Dispelling the Myth: Hillary Clinton and the Purple Heart | Otis Willie | Naval Aviation | 0 | February 21st 06 05:41 AM |
dam busters | Hamisha3 | Military Aviation | 48 | February 26th 04 11:17 PM |
cheap, durable, homebuilt aircrafts- myth or truth? | -=:|SAJAN|:=- | Home Built | 27 | January 8th 04 09:05 AM |
The myth that won't die. | Roger Long | Piloting | 7 | December 19th 03 06:15 PM |