Driving technique for braking in the city

Tips, advice and tips to lower your consumption, processes or inventions as unconventional engines: the Stirling engine, for example. Patents improving combustion: water injection plasma treatment, ionization of the fuel or oxidizer.
georges100
Éconologue good!
Éconologue good!
posts: 338
Registration: 25/05/08, 16:51
x 1




by georges100 » 08/06/08, 18:53

yes your running cars are extremely rare here : Cheesy: and are considered to be luxury cars : Cheesy: a V8 is for a truck : Cheesy:
0 x
User avatar
Philippe Schutt
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 1611
Registration: 25/12/05, 18:03
Location: Alsace
x 33




by Philippe Schutt » 08/06/08, 20:25

Flytox wrote:Hello Philippe Schutt
Philippe Schutt wrote:
Finally this poses a question (absurd?). on the motorway, if instead of driving at constant speed alternating accelerations and freewheels, would we consume less? Image


This principle is used for vehicles with record consumption at the Shell Marathon. The difference is that the vehicle is very under motorized. A kind of down-sizing which means that the engine is used fully during acceleration, to have an excellent performance, and once the "optimum" speed has been reached, they cut the engine and coast forward until reaching the maximum speed. lower speed limit and then the cycle begins again.

https://www.econologie.com/forums/pantone-et ... 53-10.html

A+


ah. stopping the engine will not be possible, otherwise no brake or power steering. It remains to be seen whether it would still be valid in relation to the constant speed in gear?
0 x
User avatar
Former Oceano
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 1571
Registration: 04/06/05, 23:10
Location: Lorraine - France
x 1




by Former Oceano » 08/06/08, 20:33

Anticipating is not only good for fuel. I drive in anticipation, using inertia, the engine brake ...
My brake pads were changed with my discs over 30000 km ago. I saw them yesterday. They are hardly used by half. In short, I bought a set of new pads that I will use in another 30000 km ... : Mrgreen:
0 x
[MODO Mode = ON]
Zieuter but do not think less ...
Peugeot Ion (VE), KIA Optime PHEV, VAE, no electric motorcycle yet...
aidiv
I understand econologic
I understand econologic
posts: 103
Registration: 20/12/04, 18:57




by aidiv » 08/06/08, 20:37

hello, for the story of declutched for the descents I understand very well the principle, if only in the memory of my mob, I was already raging at the time to be forced to put the gas at bottom in the descents otherwise , that made engine brake and I stopped, while in velà no problem, qd that descent we pedal more ..

in the 50s citroen had made a car whose 4th was freewheel ..... today i would say ok, ABS ebd, telma etcc regulator. but at the time it must have been rather dangerous.

qd I come home from work every evening I noticed a descent of about 4 km and another of 2 km which have a% sufficient for when I disengage, maintain my speed, or 6 km used and it would surprise me very much that the engine just idling as the difference ... of course others will tell me that I just have to let go of the accelerator to save idling, but in this case the speed of the car keeps dropping and I will end up rolling in step ... of course I lived a year and a half in the Pyrenees, did not have the bottom that I will try such practical, but in Brittany it is playable ...
0 x
georges100
Éconologue good!
Éconologue good!
posts: 338
Registration: 25/05/08, 16:51
x 1




by georges100 » 08/06/08, 20:40

in the past our cars had practically no brakes and we did with : Cheesy:
0 x
User avatar
Philippe Schutt
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 1611
Registration: 25/12/05, 18:03
Location: Alsace
x 33




by Philippe Schutt » 08/06/08, 20:55

Did67 wrote:Indeed, I was in situations where "at the end", I have to slow down or stop. Excluding motorways and expressways, this already represents quite a few situations. I think 1 to 1,5 l / 100 km to scratch!

In fact, if I have to stop, I remain taken. No need to use the brakes for nothing.

Did67 wrote:I also have a descent with 4 or 5 turns. There too, I roll on inertia, in 4th, with one foot off the ground and I save braking when entering each bend and "scratch" a little more ...

If you're from 67, I was thinking more of the D217 from Laudenheim to Gresswiller. there is about 3km that I coast, without braking and at about 90km / h.

Did67 wrote:On the other hand, intuitively, I don't think your last idea is good. Life being badly made, somewhere there must be old principles of thermodynamics which must play: I think that it costs you more to start again than you save by slowing down. Otherwise, it would be something like the invention of perpetual motion !!! It would be enough to put a big wheel with inertia, and presto, you accelerate, you slow down 50 times and hop, you roll with the eye ... Alas, I do not think that that works !!!

Not to the eye, but a gasoline engine running at high speed and low load has an efficiency that can drop to almost nothing. that is understandable, it is necessary to activate the pumps of water, oil etc with high mode for not much. so alternating work under load and putting on hold has a chance of being valid.

Did67 wrote:On the subject (motorways), since I have my C5 on-board computer, I am impressed by the impact of speed on consumption. I thought it was a bit of an exaggeration, the stories of reducing speed in the event of pollution. A technocratic joke short of real measure. Not at all !!!
I did not note, because I was driving but on a flat section of highway, I tried, with my cruise control (speed stabilized). Basically, from memory: at 90 km / h stabilized, about 5 l to 5,5 l per 100; at 110 km / h, around 6 to 6,5 l; at 130 km / h, it's 8,5 l !!! (C5 2.0i 16 V petrol therefore, converted to LPG - these are the theoretical petrol consumptions given by the computer; with LPG, the 7,5 l of petrol displayed therefore therefore theoretical becomes 8,5 l of real LPG at the pump - sequential liquid injection of LPG). The small variations are micro-relief, which we don't even realize. The C5 is heavy and it feels immediately for instant consumption.
So unless there is an emergency, I am now stopping around 110 km. I was also surprised to note Sunday evening that on the sections at 130 m / h, we were a majority to drive at 110 km / h!

like I have a Xantia 2.0 CTT and I have smaller deviations, from 8,5 to 90km / h to 9L to 135 km / h. No doubt the effect of the turbo ...
0 x
User avatar
Did67
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 20362
Registration: 20/01/08, 16:34
Location: Alsace
x 8685




by Did67 » 11/06/08, 16:51

Andre wrote:Hello

Jen don't know your cars, I took an example that I know well
with cars around me.
A Camaro or a Buick or a Chevrolet is very ordinary large series cars.
But I suppose that all cars have an economic regime and that when we drive under this economic regime it consumes more

In 5th at 60kmh it risks saving more than at 100kmh
that's just what i meant ..

Andre


My apologies: if I understand correctly between the lines - because nothing indicates on what appears online - you would be on the side of the Americas?

With us, these models are reserved for some fans collectors or who take themselves for James Dean and who release their V8 on Sunday to parade ...

So in a discussion on fuel savings in France, this is as incongruous as imagining the pope promoting the morning after pill in a slum in Sao Paulo!

All cars have an "optimum point". In the info I put, I wanted to share my surprise to find that it was, on the model cited (but I will not advertise), petrol carburation, much lower than I thought (around 70 km / h - I did not indicate it) and that the consumption then increased much faster than I expected. Discovering the joys of the on-board computer, I wanted to share this simple point. Since then, when I'm not in a hurry, I put myself on stabilized 110 km / h even where you can drive at 130 km / h (legally).

I add an experienced point today: declutching and idling represents, still on this model, a consumption of 1 to 1,5 l / 100 km at 50 km / h (in town) and from 0,7 to 0,9, 100 l / 90 km at XNUMX km / h on the road.

When the road descends sufficiently, it is therefore much better to lift your foot but stay engaged and consume "0 l / 100 km" because the ECU cuts off the injection - rather than disengaging and consuming the figures indicated.

Of course, if it goes down less, you will have to consume a little so as not to slow down (by declutching or accelerating very very slightly - a priori, my calculator does not give me a significant difference but this is not easy to measure).

And if it goes down more, you will have to brake so as not to throw yourself into the ravine !!!!
0 x
User avatar
Did67
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 20362
Registration: 20/01/08, 16:34
Location: Alsace
x 8685




by Did67 » 11/06/08, 16:57

Philippe Schutt wrote:If you're from 67, I was thinking more of the D217 from Laudenheim to Gresswiller. there is about 3km that I coast, without braking and at about 90km / h.


On the other side of the slope, my brother! Descent of the Bildhauerhof on Rosheim.
0 x
Christine
Grand Econologue
Grand Econologue
posts: 1144
Registration: 09/08/04, 22:53
Location: In Belgium, once
x 1




by Christine » 11/06/08, 17:55

I haven't had this problem since we moved to the flat country ...


With the North Sea as the last vacant lot
And with waves of dunes to stop the waves
Etc, etc.

.......
.....
...
..
Image
Last edited by Christine the 11 / 06 / 08, 18: 00, 1 edited once.
0 x
georges100
Éconologue good!
Éconologue good!
posts: 338
Registration: 25/05/08, 16:51
x 1




by georges100 » 11/06/08, 17:57

I see you have the fries :D :D :D
0 x

 


  • Similar topics
    Replies
    views
    Last message

Back to "Special motors, patents, fuel consumption reduction"

Who is online ?

Users browsing this forum : Google Adsense [Bot] and 203 guests