MAX Update No. 84: Speed Kills (Gas Mileage)

| 11/18/2011 2:49:20 PM

Tags: MAX, 100 mpg, Jack McCornack, Seven Springs 2011, Mother Earth News Fair 2011,

In my 7,500-plus mile adventure in MAX this summer, one lesson really stands out: Haste Makes Waste.

To make a long story short, when George Voll and I drove our high mileage cars (that’s George’s car in the background) from his home in Indiana to the MOTHER EARTH NEWS FAIR in Pennsylvania, we drove various legs of the trip at various speeds. By driving in formation and scrutinizing each other’s fill-ups, we got two-heads-are-better-than-one confirmation of our mileage.

The above photo shows my side of the fuel pump, just east of Columbus Ohio, after our 100.4 mile, 45 mph run from Cleveland. I confirmed speed and distance with my GPS, but for most of the trip George’s diesel Metro was the pace car.

We had driven that leg at 45 mph for three reasons; first, George had never driven a hundred miles that slowly and didn’t know what his mileage was down there; second, 45 mph was the minimum speed when the Auto X Prize did its oval track “race” last year and we wanted to measure ourselves against that benchmark, and third, it was raining hard when we left Cleveland and it’s uncomfortable to drive MAX fast in the rain.

MAX and Diesel Geo Metro at Gas Station 

Mercifully it quit raining as we approached Columbus, so I was able to pack up my motorcycle rain suit (it’s in the black Triumph bag sitting on MAX’s “trunk”) and wring the rainwater out of my earplugs (no, I’m not kidding — the rain suit keeps my body toasty but rain blows in between my helmet and my ears, and if there’s lots of rain, my foam ear plugs soak it up). After this ordeal, my rain suit stayed packed and my ear plugs stayed dry for the rest of my trip — to Pennsylvania and all the way back to Oregon afterward. But I’m drifting off subject; I’ll write about rain some other day.

jack leffler
12/9/2011 3:13:49 PM

Although I believe there is a drop in MPG when your speed increase it is something that is not accurately assessed on th open interstate. The highways traveled on this trip vary to much in terrain. And running across South Dakota (East to West) you have a steady uphill climb from the Missouri to the Rockys. This and the normal summer headwinds from the west greatly affect the fuel mileage (trust me, I've driven the route often). All this being said: avoid being a hazard, drive the speed limit. And I'd like to have either of the vehicles for my long trips.

jack mccornack
12/8/2011 1:40:21 AM

Jeff (this is in reply to the reply below--I couldn't reply to it directly 'cause this blog program only allows 5 links in the reply to a reply to a reply etc etc chain) re excess power @ 55 mph, with the old body I'd say "yes" and with the new body I'd say "yes indeed", thanks to the streamlining. I'm sure I could shift up into 6th gear if I had one but I wouldn't expect huge mileage gains from it. MAX is geared a bit taller than before (by final drive ratio and by tire diameter) and heavier with the full body so I use 1st gear for all my starts now. And when I'm accelerating from 45 mph, I normally leave it in 5th gear...unless I'm passing or something else where haste is in order; then I'll downshift.

jeff dean
12/8/2011 12:15:38 AM

Jack, thanks for your reply. How does Max "feel" when driving? I recall you writing that first gear was hardly necessary, that you could start in second with no problem. Does max have any excess power at 55 mph? Do you think you could shift up (if Max had a sixth gear)? Is there plenty of power going from 45 mph to 55 mph in fifth gear, or do you need to down shift?

jack mccornack
12/7/2011 8:20:43 AM

That is a very interesting question! I've never run MAX at its limits for long enough to get a high-end fuel consumption measurement, but if your target was 35 miles per gallon for some reason (for example, mocking the folks who say the future CAFE standards will force us all to drive slow boring slugmobiles) I'd guess 85 to 90 miles per hour at 3400 to 3600 rpm. Will MAX go 90 mph? Yes, Officer, I do know how fast I was going, that's why I have a GPS.

jack mccornack
12/7/2011 8:01:50 AM

Yes, in my experience fuel consumption is improved by using a higher gear PROVIDED that higher gear doesn't drop engine rpm down where its efficiency losses (caused by extremes of high throttle and low revs) are greater than the gains it gets from its longer stride (distance per rev).

jack mccornack
12/7/2011 7:52:25 AM

I don't think so either, Jeff. 2200 rpm is probably the most efficient rpm for 20 horsepower, but if all you wanted was 1 horsepower I think you'd want rpm to be just above idle; 1000 to 1200 rpm or thereabouts. As extrapolated from the tests done in MAX Update No. 70, it takes about a quarter of a gallon an hour just to keep the engine running at 2200 rpm; that is, with zero power output, just keeping itself going at that speed. The same engine can idle at 1000 rpm on about half as much fuel (1/8 gallon an hour), so if you want a teeny little fraction of a horsepower, the horsepower you'd get if you added just one tablespoon per hour to the fuel consumption, 1000 rpm is about twice as efficient as 2200 rpm. HOWEVER, if you had a car that had so little drag that it could drive at that teeny fraction of a horsepower and you put that car in top gear, 2200 rpm would be slightly more efficient because it would travel 22 miles for every 10 miles the car traveled at 1000 rpm. That's 2.2 times farther for only twice as much fuel. It's complicated, and gets even moreso when you add the option of shifting gears.

jeff dean
12/7/2011 1:04:50 AM

So, if Max is more aerodynamic now with its new slippery body, then it takes less hp to cruise at 55 mph than it did with the original body. Therefore rpm can go down and mpg up. The increase in mpg due to lower rpm, won't be as much as better aerodynamics. But to optimize mpg, I think rpm has to be addressed. Maybe 2200 rpm is the most efficient rpm for any horsepower requirement, but I don't think so because idle rpm is much lower

t brandt
12/5/2011 11:54:31 PM

You're right. MPG is more affected by air resisitance (related to cube of velocity) than to engine parameters at typical driving speeds. Bowling's MPG Estimator: Obviously, fuel consumption is improved by using a higher gear: longer distance traveled per rev of engine.

jeff dean
12/5/2011 5:45:17 AM

So what you are saying is that driving at 45 mph, you should shift into 4th gear to get the best mpg? Would that also work at 50 mph or even 55 mph? What would be the best gear/rpm at 35 mpg?

jack mccornack
12/2/2011 7:22:21 AM

Thanks George, and Jeff, I think it's all air resistance. At 45 mph in 5th gear, the engine is turning 1800 rpm. According to the Kubota 1105-T spec sheet (you can download it at engine efficiency improves slightly as rpm goes up from there and it's at its highest efficiency at 2200, which is 55 mph. So since the engine apparently isn't losing efficiency and air resistance is increasing at the square of the speed, I'm prepared to blame air resistance.

george voll
12/1/2011 6:00:23 PM

thanks for the update Jack.We really enjoyed having you over, hope we will see you again.

jeff dean
11/25/2011 4:35:50 PM

Jack, Looks great. How much mpg loss is due to air resistance and how much to higher rpm? Maybe you could test by driving 45 in high gear, and 45 in next gear down. Results would be interesting.

mother earth news fair


Oct. 21-22, 2017
Topeka, KS.

More than 150 workshops, great deals from more than 200 exhibitors, off-stage demos, inspirational keynotes, and great food!