2006 Honda Civic Hybrid

Page 2 of 2  
On Wed, 22 Feb 2006 00:48:26 GMT, "Art"


actually measure the car moving?

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

No. That is not a practical solution anyway. If you can only test cars on 70 degree/50%RH calm wind days, you are going to have a severe backlog of testing after the first year.
I think the new test drives the car a little more aggressively. What it should include is a full throttle acceleration from 10 to 75 mph. The current test assumes that you bought a 200hp engine because you want to drive like a little old lady.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Wed, 22 Feb 2006 05:18:14 GMT, Gordon McGrew

Why is why you, strangely enough, test it indoors.

The current testing makes no difference if you've got a car that is shaped like a dart, or one thats shaped like a routemaster double-decker buss.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Makes sense. Still not clear that this would produce more realistic results than a dyno test. And you would need a very big indoor track to accommodate my 10 - 75 mph test.
The truth is that no matter how you test it, the results will be wrong for most drivers. Most drivers will be either more or less fuel efficient than any number you put on the sticker. It clearly could be more accurate than it is now.

I assume that the frontal area is factored in. Surprised there would be no consideration of aerodynamic efficiency. I remember when there used to be a lot of bragging rights for lowest Cd. Haven't heard much about that in years.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Thu, 23 Feb 2006 01:18:24 GMT, Gordon McGrew

not that big, and by indoor, i guess you could replace that will walled/sheltered. OR, you cuold just use a circular test-track, and as long as the windspeed is within a range (say 0-10mph) it would be acceptable, since you're going circularly, so what you lose from the headwind you gain from the tailwind.

Right now its very inaccurate. Almost useless i'd say, espcially as modern cars will often have their software 'tuned' for the EPA tests.

Its not just frontal aea though, its shape, flow etc. We did start talking about it a few days ago on #honda on the Efnet network though. most cars were in the 0.3 range.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Well, then you still have the issue of temperature. Humidity is a minor factor also. You can probably minimize the variation by locating in Hawaii.

Probably no way to completely dodge that. The best you can do is require a wide range of operating conditions in the test.

Wonder what the SUVs average.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Why not test the vehicles in a wind tunnel-like situation so their co-efficient of drag comes into play?
wrote:

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Thu, 23 Feb 2006 12:37:38 -0500, "Bob Palmer"

(top posting is generally frowned upon, but i'll let it pass this time)
wind tunnels are expensive, just in rental fees. second, they're just no that big. third, all wind tunnels are static, the vehicle is held in place with force bars, which record the forces acting ont he vehicle when the tunnel is active (info courtesy a riend of the wifes, who runs the windtunnel at Cranfield university) There is no way to measure the effect the wind would have on the load of the carthe car is not progressing, and as such having to work against the wind force. if its not moving, the winds not affecting the milage, and its basically the same deal as with any other static test.
nice idea though, good thinking.. a half mile wind tunnel might be more the answer.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

It sounds like drag (not just coefficient, but entire magnitude) of drag is already factored in. http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/how_tested.shtml says: "The energy required to move the rollers can be adjusted to account for aerodynamic forces and the vehicle's weight."
The coefficient of drag is just that, a coefficient relative to a "bluff body" (flat surface) of the same frontal area. Drag is the actual retardive force.
Mike
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Thu, 23 Feb 2006 18:35:15 -0700, "Michael Pardee"

Another unnecessary limitation of current tests is that cars are placed in weight categories instead of factoring in their actual weight. Apparently this is why the Accord Hybrid previously had no spare tire in 2005 and when they added one in 2006 the milage estimates dropped noticeably. The extra weight put it into the next category and it was severely punished.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
I've heard this argument before, but when I went to the EPA site that describes the testing protocol (http://www.fueleconomy.gov /), it made no mention of weight classes (other than being exempted altogether if your vehicle weighs more than 8500 lbs). It does mention different classes based on interior volume, but the testing protocol appears to be the same for all classes.
Do you have any reference material/website link that can give me info on the different weight classes?
On Sun, 26 Feb 2006 01:59:08 GMT, Gordon McGrew

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
This is from a Road & Track article on the 2005 Accord Hybrid:
http://tinyurl.com/lvcyv
Less sun and storage. No sunroofs allowed, because when it came down to crunch time, the Accord Hybrid was on the verge of being bumped up another EPA weight class and something had to go. [Goes on to note absence of spare tire also.]
EPA documents refer to weight classes in this description of the milage tests.
http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-GENERAL/2006/February/Day-01/g451.htm
Inertia weight class means the class, which is a group of test weights, into which a vehicle is grouped based on its loaded vehicle weight in accordance with the provisions of part 86 of this chapter.
Here is the table itself. Note that at around 3500 pounds the classes are in increments of 125 pounds. So, at some point, one more pound counts as 125.
http://www.setonresourcecenter.com/40CFR/Docs/wcd00080/wcd080f1.asp
On Sun, 26 Feb 2006 15:34:44 -0500, Spazpop2000

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Tue, 21 Feb 2006 08:52:54 -0500, "Flyifyoucan"

It all depends on how far, how fast, and most importantly of all, just plain HOW you're driving.
Smooth fluid driving at or around the optimal speed will result in best MPG. lots of short drives, or ones which big speed variations will result in poor MPG.
Driving agressively wll give poor mpg, and thinking and driving ahead will do better. Its all about you. Geting a hybrid is no magic bullet *BANG* yuo're getting high mpg figures. I can ease 50 out of my van on a long highway run, I can get low double figures out of my 88 civic if i really tried.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Also in the civic and accord hybrid, they only go in auto stop if you stop. If you creep forward continuously you are wasting gas. Move up in steps in creeping traffic.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.