InterceptRadio.com Forums

The radio website that respects the Civil Air Patrol and their copyrights.
It is currently Sat May 24, 2025 11:51 am

All times are UTC - 8 hours


Forums       Map Search       Database Search       Live Audio       Alerts       Wiki




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 15 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Sun Jan 06, 2013 10:57 pm 
Offline
Mr. Bad Example
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2004 10:11 am
Posts: 8079
Location: Nancy's Bedroom... ooh aah
So, odd situation at hand. Over the past 2 weeks, I've put on and taken off my new rooftop cargo box. Since I'm an MPG dork, I've kept careful track of my results with and without the box.

City (without)- 21.4 mpg
City (with)- 21.2 mpg

Highway (without)- 28.1
Highway (with)- 28.9

So, with a 16-cubic foot cargo box, at highway speeds, I've increased my gas mileage. WTF?
Image

Note- my mileage would probably be higher if the car didn't have two speeds- "fast" and "off".

_________________
President-in-Exile, Seattle Area Radio Communications And Scanner Traffic Intercept Crew (SARCASTIC)
Don't feel bad if you can't use your STD100/200; there are still people using Digital Frequency Search!
Bunnery definition for the under-fives


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jan 07, 2013 12:36 am 
Offline
Angus Cheeseburger
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2004 5:09 pm
Posts: 4759
Location: CN88st
A little free advertising :D

_________________
" SILENCE IS CONSENT "

Jim N7UAP - Bellingham, WA / InterceptRadio.com


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jan 07, 2013 12:40 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2005 1:17 am
Posts: 2643
Location: Not Gulfport
Certainly no expert but from all the reading I've done on Formula 1 body design... I'll give it a shot.

My guess would be that the airflow is continuing over the roof of the car; however, the container is compressing the airflow slightly. So instead of the airflow aimlessly scooping over the windshield and bleeding off, it's being directed and thus reducing drag. I would guess you're seeing the efficiency boost only at higher speeds.

A F1 engineer described how their carbon-fibre body parts were constructed with .0001" accuracy and implied that it doesn't take much to throw performance off. These engineers are going for either A. speed or B. balance -- of down-force and/or drag reduction -- usually depending on the track design.

I have to agree though, that I wouldn't have expected this either.

Without being too picky, you also have to take in a lot of other variables when measuring MPG. Temperature, altitude, weather conditions can all affect your measurements.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jan 07, 2013 3:07 am 
Offline
Corporal Cowboy
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2004 4:45 pm
Posts: 3556
Location: Stensgar, SE of
"Dream Girls" is truly the WTF here.

And the 'No Parking' sign you ripped from the fence.

_________________
</>


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jan 07, 2013 7:11 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Mar 02, 2004 12:26 pm
Posts: 830
a) Make damn sure you're comparing apples to apples, the noise in the data due to outside air temperature and wind will hide any effect of the configuration. This is why we spend big bucks on wind tunnels.

b) I see two immediate side effects of the box. It alters the fore/aft balance, which could raise or lower the nose and directly affect drag of the basic vehicle. It also masks the rack hardware (you didn't remove that, did you?). To a first-order approximation, the rack bars themselves have as much drag as the box alone.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jan 07, 2013 9:03 am 
Offline
Mr. Bad Example
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2004 10:11 am
Posts: 8079
Location: Nancy's Bedroom... ooh aah
I didn't remove the crossbars for box-less testing. I figured a16-foot box would be more of a drag factor than the 2 oval shaped "Whispbars".

_________________
President-in-Exile, Seattle Area Radio Communications And Scanner Traffic Intercept Crew (SARCASTIC)
Don't feel bad if you can't use your STD100/200; there are still people using Digital Frequency Search!
Bunnery definition for the under-fives


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jan 07, 2013 9:32 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2010 6:02 pm
Posts: 124
I always new that winter temps/fuel blends affected mileage. It is definitely a different animal as there are some other issues going but our 2011 Prius sees a nosedive in mileage during colder spells

City driving summer 48.7mpg
Highway driving summer 51.3mpg

Winter city driving 39.2
Winter highway 43mpg

Hopefully temps are not messing with your numbers.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jan 07, 2013 9:56 am 
Offline
Mr. Bad Example
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2004 10:11 am
Posts: 8079
Location: Nancy's Bedroom... ooh aah
The last 4 days with the box have all yielded an average of .8mpg higher, including an 80mph+ trip to Olympia last night and a 75mph (averaged) trip to and from Cle Elum.

_________________
President-in-Exile, Seattle Area Radio Communications And Scanner Traffic Intercept Crew (SARCASTIC)
Don't feel bad if you can't use your STD100/200; there are still people using Digital Frequency Search!
Bunnery definition for the under-fives


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jan 07, 2013 10:15 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2005 1:17 am
Posts: 2643
Location: Not Gulfport
Wilrobnson wrote:
The last 4 days with the box have all yielded an average of .8mpg higher, including an 80mph+ trip to Olympia last night and a 75mph (averaged) trip to and from Cle Elum.


Well, if you go even faster, you'll get better mileage! :D

"Trooper -- no really, I was just gathering data to better enhance my MPG efficiency..."

I bet if you slap a Google sticker on the front of your cargo container he may let you off with a warning. ;)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jan 07, 2013 11:03 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2007 1:58 pm
Posts: 3429
Location: Not in Alaska
Wilrobnson wrote:
I've put on and taken off my new rooftop cargo box.
Wouldn't it be easier to hoist bodies in to the rear cargo area?

And doesn't that block your NMO mounts?

Badger wrote:
City driving summer 48.7mpg
Highway driving summer 51.3mpg

Winter city driving 39.2
Winter highway 43mpg
Interesting that your highway MPG is higher. Also interesting is that you're looking at an ~18% reduction. If Priuschat is anything to believe, a 10% drop is normal. And supposedly this 10% number is on all cars; so those with trucks that are only getting 18 only see a 1.8 MPG drop which is easy to shrug off.


As to Wil's problem, the sample size is too small to draw any conclusions from. I suggest signing up for Fuelly where you can track MPGs and add tags (like "body bag on") to differentiate between fillups for easy comparison.


Last edited by Atomic Taco on Mon Jan 07, 2013 11:10 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jan 07, 2013 11:06 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Mar 02, 2004 12:26 pm
Posts: 830
Wilrobnson wrote:
I didn't remove the crossbars for box-less testing. I figured a16-foot box would be more of a drag factor than the 2 oval shaped "Whispbars".


The crossbars and supports can create a lot of drag, and the box may reduce the airflow that gets to them. The box itself went through some careful design, it's less draggy than the original car based on area. But I wouldn't bet that the box actually improves net mileage - just that it doesn't do much harm. Best way to prove it would be to get to a really stable cruise at constant throttle, then jettison the box and see whether the car accelerates or decelerates.

Of course, the reason highway mileage beats city is that you're holding constant speed. Going 80 implies you weren't in bad traffic...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jan 07, 2013 11:12 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2007 1:58 pm
Posts: 3429
Location: Not in Alaska
FlashP wrote:
Of course, the reason highway mileage beats city is that you're holding constant speed. Going 80 implies you weren't in bad traffic...
Except on Badger's Prius he's using the electric motor to aid with acceleration and cruising which is why the EPA rates it higher city than highway.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jan 07, 2013 11:15 am 
Offline
Mr. Bad Example
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2004 10:11 am
Posts: 8079
Location: Nancy's Bedroom... ooh aah
1 NMO mount, and that's only blocked with the box all the way back. If I shift it forward to where it slightly overhangs the windshield, the antenna mount is exposed and there's still no appreciable loss in fuel economy.

_________________
President-in-Exile, Seattle Area Radio Communications And Scanner Traffic Intercept Crew (SARCASTIC)
Don't feel bad if you can't use your STD100/200; there are still people using Digital Frequency Search!
Bunnery definition for the under-fives


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jan 07, 2013 3:42 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2010 6:02 pm
Posts: 124
Atomic Taco wrote:
Wilrobnson wrote:
I've put on and taken off my new rooftop cargo box.
Wouldn't it be easier to hoist bodies in to the rear cargo area?

And doesn't that block your NMO mounts?

Badger wrote:
City driving summer 48.7mpg
Highway driving summer 51.3mpg

Winter city driving 39.2
Winter highway 43mpg
Interesting that your highway MPG is higher. Also interesting is that you're looking at an ~18% reduction. If Priuschat is anything to believe, a 10% drop is normal. And supposedly this 10% number is on all cars; so those with trucks that are only getting 18 only see a 1.8 MPG drop which is easy to shrug off.


As to Wil's problem, the sample size is too small to draw any conclusions from. I suggest signing up for Fuelly where you can track MPGs and add tags (like "body bag on") to differentiate between fillups for easy comparison.


I am not too detailed about tracking it anymore. The first few months I was. I think the EPA said 51/50 or something like that. With the city getting better mileage. While I can easily get 48+mpg city driving in the summer without trying and 52-53 trying hard, I have gotten upwards of 57mpg on quick runs down to Ilwaco with just me in the car.

It is a great mileage boost from my 1994 Land Cruiser... I used to get worried about gas prices.. Now not so much. There are plenty of people out there who will get more upset than I will if gas gets close to $4.50 a gallon again.

Plus I don't keep track of when it is with the family (wife and two kids in car seats)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 09, 2013 7:12 pm 
Offline
Bringer of Light
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2005 5:22 pm
Posts: 1573
Location: Depends on the day of the week
I like cheese too.

_________________
Interoperability is an attitude, not a technology.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 15 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 8 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 23 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by electricity. Copyright © 2013 Interceptradio.com