2016 DOE Fuel Eco Run Results.

[StockEngine]

Well first thing aside.. this is one unrealistic test lol.

The results are to be published tomorrow. But heres one article about the "test"

http://www.autoindustriya.com/featur...onomy-run.html

[MR_BIG18]

Well first thing aside.. this is one unrealistic test lol.

The results are to be published tomorrow. But heres one article about the "test"

http://www.autoindustriya.com/featur...onomy-run.html

80kph on sctex and tplex? That sacrilege...

[dct]

Tama lang naman sa midnight sila tumakbo. Imaging the added 70+ cars sa rush hour. Puro reklamo mga tao nyan. Comparison lang kung anong mas ok na car

[dr. d]

as i understood it, the test was designed to compare relative fuel efficiencies of the various cars, driven under the the exactsame conditions.

[StockEngine]

as i understood it, the test was designed to compare relative fuel efficiencies of the various cars, driven under the the exactsame conditions.

Did you see the road map? Who drives 300km * 80kph in wee hours?

Thats why i prefer jc08 and adr and epa numbers for vehicles. Their testing methodology includes city fuel consumption. Not as slow as our traffic though. Still a better gauge than this rather unrealistic eco run. Interesting nonetheless.

A Tesla would have completed this eco run without any fuel.

[jut703]

Did you see the road map? Who drives 300km * 80kph in wee hours?

Me?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[niky]

The best way to compare like to like is to have a set course with set acceleration markers, stop markers and speeds. Very difficult to achieve equivalent acceleration in real life... as different cars react differently to the same amount of pedal pressure... and cars also have different transmission algorithms. The best you can actually do is to run the cars on a dyno and then add in corrections for wind and tire resistance, as the EPA does it... but that is very, very expensive and time-consuming.

And then add in the cost of retrofitting fuel cells temporarily to make sure fuel use is accurately measured.

I mean, we have the knowhow and equipment to do it here... but how would you get the manufacturers to pay the costs of testing?

Who drives 300km * 80kph in wee hours?

Me?

Me.

While I do sometimes drive faster, if I'm not late for a meeting and I don't really have a set arrival time, I do drive 80 km/h on the NLEX. Sometimes when we are doing an event at Clark or Subic, I will drive a steady 70-80 all the way home via SCTEX-NLEX-SLEX.

Great way to save money... I've gotten over 30 km/l by doing so... of course, I do spend extra on energy drinks to keep awake... but still...

[dr. d]

Did you see the road map? Who drives 300km * 80kph in wee hours?

Thats why i prefer jc08 and adr and epa numbers for vehicles. Their testing methodology includes city fuel consumption. Not as slow as our traffic though. Still a better gauge than this rather unrealistic eco run. Interesting nonetheless.

A Tesla would have completed this eco run without any fuel.

well, they could have given out the cars for the drivers to use for a week. then, exchange cars for a week, and then so on and so forth...
afterwards, they can report on the figures.
not perfect, but... what method is?

[Lew_Alcindor]

as i understood it, the test was designed to compare relative fuel efficiencies of the various cars, driven under the the exactsame conditions.

I get your point. But I think giving the consumers a realistic figure is better.

I mean in this test run a vehicle will register 20km/L when in real life driving it is probably half of that.

[daxie]

I get your point. But I think giving the consumers a realistic figure is better.

I mean in this test run a vehicle will register 20km/L when in real life driving it is probably half of that.

I agree. I think it would have been better if they have taken actual videos during their test.