Idle mpg
- Thread starter testerdahl
- Start date
It is the same. Every automaker includes idling. This comment was just bizarre.
Thats very bizzar. There is one thing Toyota does do, they tend to run really crappy advance to dump a lot of fuel to warm up the cats quicker, but I think all you guys drive to the gas station and fill up before the test, so the cats are warm before you start.
There are a few I think unexplored MPG tests in the reviewer world.
1) The real accuarcy of the pump click test. If the amount of gas used on the run is perhaps low (under 5 gallons), that could be skewing results if theres like a varance in when the pump is clicking of a few tenths of a gallon. I do think its the best test we have at the moment but I question the accuracy when they only pumping a gallon or 2.
2) Comparing Curb weight accurately (with a scale) to see if the curb weight rather than the drive train is the mpg difference between diffrerent manufactuers. And possibly loading each truck with ballast so they are exactly the same weight.
3) Any variances due to trim level (Testing out that fancy trim trucks are heavier and thus get below their rated mpg)
4) Winter versus Summer gas. I know that winter forumlated fuels are typically 1 to 2 mpg worse for me.
5) E15 (Unleaded 88) tests
Keep in mind these mgp tests take a lot of time and money to do so I think generally what mpg test out there are done pretty good.
There are a few I think unexplored MPG tests in the reviewer world.
1) The real accuarcy of the pump click test. If the amount of gas used on the run is perhaps low (under 5 gallons), that could be skewing results if theres like a varance in when the pump is clicking of a few tenths of a gallon. I do think its the best test we have at the moment but I question the accuracy when they only pumping a gallon or 2.
2) Comparing Curb weight accurately (with a scale) to see if the curb weight rather than the drive train is the mpg difference between diffrerent manufactuers. And possibly loading each truck with ballast so they are exactly the same weight.
3) Any variances due to trim level (Testing out that fancy trim trucks are heavier and thus get below their rated mpg)
4) Winter versus Summer gas. I know that winter forumlated fuels are typically 1 to 2 mpg worse for me.
5) E15 (Unleaded 88) tests
Keep in mind these mgp tests take a lot of time and money to do so I think generally what mpg test out there are done pretty good.
Last edited:
I thought of something, Mabye he didn't mean "idle" but rather DFCO (Decelleration Fuel Cut off) Thats when you coast the engine stops sending fuel, at that point you are getting infinity mpg. Since you can't devide by zero you may 9999 999 99 or some other large number and that could vastly affect the MPG overall avg if theres a lot of coasting.
I know my scanguage 2 back in the day would use 9999 for this and you sometimes got silly stuff like gaining 2 mpg avg on a large downhill where i would coast downhill for a long time on my way to work.
Using 999 or even 99 mpg as the caculation probably isn't optimal. Since the toyotas usually max out the meter at 2x the expected mpg maybe they think toyota is using a lower number like 30mpg or 60mpg. But we don't really know what number is being used when instinateous mpg is being caculated as infinity.
I know my scanguage 2 back in the day would use 9999 for this and you sometimes got silly stuff like gaining 2 mpg avg on a large downhill where i would coast downhill for a long time on my way to work.
Using 999 or even 99 mpg as the caculation probably isn't optimal. Since the toyotas usually max out the meter at 2x the expected mpg maybe they think toyota is using a lower number like 30mpg or 60mpg. But we don't really know what number is being used when instinateous mpg is being caculated as infinity.
TheDo114
Well-known member
Few thoughts:
1) It varies by pump. There's no better way to perform the test for small or big quantity of fuel.
2) It would be nice to get the actual curb weight of it. Sometimes it's off by a lot and could affect your payload.
3) It would take too much time to test it. The results would also be so close that it would not matter. 2wd vs 4wd would show a much bigger difference and could be nice to see.
4) I would like to see it as well. Maybe something Tim can test with his long term RHO.
5) This gas is not offered in Canada and thus irrelevant to me, but if the truck is rated for it, it could be interesting. Not sure if it would generate a lot of views.
I think the biggest factor for any of the mpg tests is route choice. It must be so consistent for distance, slope, and wind. You can't have any meaningful numbers driving 5 miles downhill with a tailwind. And doing that out and back doesn't really work either. Those factors won't affect the mpg the same.
It all must be an average from multiple tests anyway. A city driving test will have many different idle times due to traffic and lights. So, you need to do it multiple times and gather an average.
Tim's flat-ass Nebraska test is one of the most accurate unless he has a bad headwind.
It all must be an average from multiple tests anyway. A city driving test will have many different idle times due to traffic and lights. So, you need to do it multiple times and gather an average.
Tim's flat-ass Nebraska test is one of the most accurate unless he has a bad headwind.
Oh most definitely the best way but few reviewers have that. And you are right, no one believes science anymore anyway, just what was hyped on YT or Tik-tok.The other influencing factor would be that Gering Nebraska is at nearly 4,000’ above sea level which would affect normally aspirated engines more than turbo engines. So someone living at sea level would see somewhat different fuel mileage results.
One of the reasons the EPA uses a dynamometer to determine average fuel economy is to eliminate all the weather and driver influenced variables. Is it perfect, no, but it’s more scientific than the Joe Schmo’s test drive. But who believes in science anymore.