A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

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.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Home Built
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Aerodynamics acording to Myth Busters!



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #32  
Old July 30th 07, 10:45 PM posted to rec.aviation.homebuilt
Peter Dohm
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,754
Default Aerodynamics acording to Myth Busters!


"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

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
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


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:24 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.