Using the fan, heater

[1stToyota]

Originally Posted by BailOut

You completely missed out on the first tenet of engineering by failing to focus on the original problem. The original question was whether using these things uses more fuel, which it indeed does. The question was not whether it was worth worrying about or not.

So when you use that turn signal the alternator instructs the fuel pump to give the engine some more fuel, because of the electrical load?

Some people may not care but hypermilers strive to stretch every gallon of gasoline for all it is worth. 0.1% is a totally arbitrary number and may not sound like much but when you add it up over the course of your lifetime it becomes an easily trackable amount. For example, if you average 32 MPG then you use 0.03125 gallons per mile. If you drive 15,000 miles per year it requires 469 gallons of fuel. If you maintain this pattern from age 16 to age 75 it requires 27,656 gallons of fuel. 0.1% of that is 28 gallons, or 3 fill ups.

Really? I don't know how many drops of fuel this will save per tank full, but what if I always remember to go to the bathroom before I get into the car...carrying that extra *payload* around has to give some kind of hit on the MPGs. Let's figure that I always remember to go before I go, for the next 30 years...

[BailOut]

Originally Posted by 1stToyota

So when you use that turn signal the alternator instructs the fuel pump to give the engine some more fuel, because of the electrical load?

How many ways do you intend to ask the same question? No matter how many times you ask it or how many emotes you use or how much you wish it wasn't so the truth does not change. Energy is not free except in your imaginary world of serpentine belts in perpetual motion.

Originally Posted by 1stToyota

Really? I don't know how many drops of fuel this will save per tank full, but what if I always remember to go to the bathroom before I get into the car...carrying that extra *payload* around has to give some kind of hit on the MPGs. Let's figure that I always remember to go before I go, for the next 30 years...

That's not a bad idea at all. In fact it's the only sound idea I've ever seen you come up with. Though I think most people already do this as no one likes to travel while holding it.


It has become quite clear over the last week or so that you are not in this thread to learn or to contribute, but only to taunt others. I encourage you to find more effective ways to spend your time and energy.

[smacky]

Originally Posted by 1stToyota

So when you use that turn signal the alternator instructs the fuel pump to give the engine some more fuel, because of the electrical load?




Really? I don't know how many drops of fuel this will save per tank full, but what if I always remember to go to the bathroom before I get into the car...carrying that extra *payload* around has to give some kind of hit on the MPGs. Let's figure that I always remember to go before I go, for the next 30 years...

I've yet to see any positive contribution you've made to any discussion you've participated in. It just seems like you look for any post by BailOut and you contradict it. How about you just stop posting on the fuel economy forum and any time BailOut says anything, we all just assume you've found some terribly witty way to disagree with him. Just go away.

[colb]

Originally Posted by BailOut

You completely missed out on the first tenet of engineering by failing to focus on the original problem. The original question was whether using these things uses more fuel, which it indeed does. The question was not whether it was worth worrying about or not.

Some people may not care but hypermilers strive to stretch every gallon of gasoline for all it is worth. 0.1% is a totally arbitrary number and may not sound like much but when you add it up over the course of your lifetime it becomes an easily trackable amount. For example, if you average 32 MPG then you use 0.03125 gallons per mile. If you drive 15,000 miles per year it requires 469 gallons of fuel. If you maintain this pattern from age 16 to age 75 it requires 27,656 gallons of fuel. 0.1% of that is 28 gallons, or 3 fill ups.

No, the original question was along the lines of can you save fuel by not using the fan or heater. You say it wastes fuel. I say prove it. The difference is many times less than the margin of variability from tank to tank.
What is commonly referred to as "good engineering judgment" is focusing on reality, not theory. Theory says the fan uses gasoline, but reality will not back up that statement when the fan uses 10 watts and the car takes 10kW to cruise, while other random factors (humidity, temperature, wind, rain, payload, traffic) influencing mileage probably make up ten to a hundred times as much variability as you save by leaving the fan off.

Plus, you really just recommended that by not using the fan you can save 28 gallons of gas over 60 years.

[1stToyota]

Originally Posted by BailOut

How many ways do you intend to ask the same question? No matter how many times you ask it or how many emotes you use or how much you wish it wasn't so the truth does not change. Energy is not free except in your imaginary world of serpentine belts in perpetual motion.

You're the numbers geek, so prove it. Saying that energy isn't free and that using headights or the wipers will somehow cause the engine to burn more fuel doesn't mean a thing unless you've got the numbers to prove it. Show me where running the fan on speed 3 burns more fuel than speed 2.

That's not a bad idea at all. In fact it's the only sound idea I've ever seen you come up with. Though I think most people already do this as no one likes to travel while holding it.

Yeah, 30-40 years from now I might have a whole extra $ or 2 to go crazy with.

It has become quite clear over the last week or so that you are not in this thread to learn or to contribute, but only to taunt others. I encourage you to find more effective ways to spend your time and energy.

NO, I'm here to see the proof behind your honking the horn just stole a little bit of fuel from the gas tank theories.

Maybe it's because you think using the A/C burns fuel because the clutch circuit is hot, but that's not the reason. It's the extra LOAD on the engine because an engaged compressor is harder to spin than a free-wheeling bearing (like when clutch isn't engaged).

[1stToyota]

Originally Posted by smacky

I've yet to see any positive contribution you've made to any discussion you've participated in. It just seems like you look for any post by BailOut and you contradict it. How about you just stop posting on the fuel economy forum and any time BailOut says anything, we all just assume you've found some terribly witty way to disagree with him. Just go away.

I'm sorry if I stepped on toes but I need proof before I'll believe that using the wipers will cause an engine to burn more fuel.

Yes, a belt driven fan burns fuel, a defective fan clutch burns fuel, and belt driven P/S pump burns fuel, but an electric fan and P/S pump burns fuel? I haven't seen proof, just theories that it does.

[otterhere]

Originally Posted by 1stToyota

I'm sorry if I stepped on toes.

You made Smacky mad, girlfriend! Rude Smacky. Must we smack you, Smacky?

[detroiter]

Whatever happened to just driving the car and enjoying it? There's such thing as hypermiling but geez, give me a break.

[otterhere]

Originally Posted by detroiter

Whatever happened to just driving the car and enjoying it? There's such thing as hypermiling but geez, give me a break.

Amen to that; I tried "hypermiling" for one day and had a headache at the end of it. If this car isn't fuel-efficient without breaking your back to achieve it, then it's not fuel-efficient.

[1stToyota]

Originally Posted by otterhere

Amen to that; I tried "hypermiling" for one day and had a headache at the end of it. If this car isn't fuel-efficient without breaking your back to achieve it, then it's not fuel-efficient.

I also "hypermiled" for 1 day and I've seen a major improvement ever since; I sold a 6.0 GTO and bought a 1.5 Yaris

[Rick]

I can think of only two sources of energy for a Yaris. The driver and the gasoline.
You turn the steering wheel, push the pedals, flip the switches, etc. ALL other energy dissipated (heat, light, motion, etc.) ultimately comes from burning gasoline. The battery is an imperfect energy storage device. More than you take from it must be put back by burning gasoline. What do you think isn't proven already??

BailOut is right ...... Those who claim wiper and fan energy usage is very small are right..... Those who think energy is entering the system from something other than driver and gasoline are wrong.

Conserve that tiny amount of energy if you like, Ignore it if you like.

Move on.

[1stToyota]

Not sure if that was based on facts or opinion. Any documented proof around here about running the fan speed on low will burn X amount of fuel, while running fan speed at a higher setting will cause the engine to use more fuel?

[BailOut]

I wasn't going to do this as I have little patience for your overall attitude but I got bored on the drive home today and played around a bit.

What I found not only supports what we have been telling you over and over and over but also shows that the energy cycle is more impacting than any of us thought.

This is detectable even while hill climbing but it is easier on flat ground or on a decline unless you have a very steady throttle foot. All measurements were gained using a ScanGauge II. Its voltage measurement only goes to one decimal place so the measurements are rough but solid.

At "rest" and with the engine running the electrical system sits at 14.1 volts. Since my DRL was on turning on the headlights doesn't produce much of a difference by itself, but combining that with the stock radio on a volume setting of about 20 and using the blinkers was enough to knock the measurable voltage down to 14.0V. After about 2 seconds of this the voltage goes up to 14.2V for a while, which indicates that the alternator is clutching and producing a higher output. Once done the voltage drops back to 14.1V and will stay there if you stop the additional drains, otherwise it will repeat the cycle of dropping to 14.0V and charging back to 14.2V. Using the high beams can produce this effect almost immediately as it is a rather large draw on the electrical system, though not nearly as much as most aftermarket stereo setups, and the alternator clutches for longer to deal with it.

So I got to wondering how much this minor clutching of the alternator was dragging on the engine. I wasn't sure if it would be measurable or not. So I brought up the "load" meter on the SGII. It reads 40 at its lowest and 100 at its highest. Every single time the alternator clutched and produced 14.2V the load reading went up by 1. As soon as the alternator calmed down it went back to 1 lower number. The instant MPG display also drops 1-2% during this time.

These measurements mean that the effect of minor electrical drains in the Yaris isn't 0.1% as was arbitrarily suggested, but is more like 1.5-2%! It will be even more under heavy, constant loads from things like large sound systems, producing even more of a fuel economy drain.

So, there you have it. You wanted numbers and documentation, and I just gave you both. Anyone with an SGII can verify my findings.

[colb]

So your gas mileage dropped by 1 to 2% for "about 2 seconds" when you turn on the radio? How much do you lose in steady state?? And how fast were you going?

Also, alternators don't have clutches -- you are opening and closing loads in the electrical system and the voltage regulator is making up for it.

[BailOut]

Originally Posted by colb

So your gas mileage dropped by 1 to 2% for "about 2 seconds" when you turn on the radio? How much do you lose in steady state?? And how fast were you going?

Also, alternators don't have clutches -- you are opening and closing loads in the electrical system and the voltage regulator is making up for it.

I know the alternator doesn't actually clutch but that's the easiest way to explain a load on it to most of the readers here. If you get too technical, like explaining that energy isn't free, it seems to confuse some people.

No, the mileage doesn't drop for just 2 seconds (unless you immediately stop the draw, which I did several times), but that seems to be the minimum load adjustment time for the alternator. If you leave equipment running the lower MPG and higher load state remains steady, or at least fluctuates as the voltage bounces between 14.0V and 14.2V.

My speed was 45-50 MPH.

[Altitude]

Just think of it like this - the regulator increases the current to the electro-magnetic rotor based upon the demands of your electical system and this in turn increases the attractive magnetic force, making the rotor want to 'stick' to the stators even more. This increase in force makes the alternator harder to spin - ergo more load on your engine.

Think of the force it takes to remove a rare earth magnet from your refrigerator versus one of those cheap 'carry-out restaurant' magnets and you'll get the idea.

[yaris-me]

Originally Posted by BailOut

I wasn't going to do this as I have little patience for your overall attitude but I got bored on the drive home today and played around a bit.

What I found not only supports what we have been telling you over and over and over but also shows that the energy cycle is more impacting than any of us thought.

This is detectable even while hill climbing but it is easier on flat ground or on a decline unless you have a very steady throttle foot. All measurements were gained using a ScanGauge II. Its voltage measurement only goes to one decimal place so the measurements are rough but solid.

At "rest" and with the engine running the electrical system sits at 14.1 volts. Since my DRL was on turning on the headlights doesn't produce much of a difference by itself, but combining that with the stock radio on a volume setting of about 20 and using the blinkers was enough to knock the measurable voltage down to 14.0V. After about 2 seconds of this the voltage goes up to 14.2V for a while, which indicates that the alternator is clutching and producing a higher output. Once done the voltage drops back to 14.1V and will stay there if you stop the additional drains, otherwise it will repeat the cycle of dropping to 14.0V and charging back to 14.2V. Using the high beams can produce this effect almost immediately as it is a rather large draw on the electrical system, though not nearly as much as most aftermarket stereo setups, and the alternator clutches for longer to deal with it.

So I got to wondering how much this minor clutching of the alternator was dragging on the engine. I wasn't sure if it would be measurable or not. So I brought up the "load" meter on the SGII. It reads 40 at its lowest and 100 at its highest. Every single time the alternator clutched and produced 14.2V the load reading went up by 1. As soon as the alternator calmed down it went back to 1 lower number. The instant MPG display also drops 1-2% during this time.

These measurements mean that the effect of minor electrical drains in the Yaris isn't 0.1% as was arbitrarily suggested, but is more like 1.5-2%! It will be even more under heavy, constant loads from things like large sound systems, producing even more of a fuel economy drain.

So, there you have it. You wanted numbers and documentation, and I just gave you both. Anyone with an SGII can verify my findings.

Very smart!

[1stToyota]

Originally Posted by BailOut

I wasn't going to do this as I have little patience for your overall attitude but I got bored on the drive home today and played around a bit.

What I found not only supports what we have been telling you over and over and over but also shows that the energy cycle is more impacting than any of us thought.

This is detectable even while hill climbing but it is easier on flat ground or on a decline unless you have a very steady throttle foot. All measurements were gained using a ScanGauge II. Its voltage measurement only goes to one decimal place so the measurements are rough but solid.

At "rest" and with the engine running the electrical system sits at 14.1 volts. Since my DRL was on turning on the headlights doesn't produce much of a difference by itself, but combining that with the stock radio on a volume setting of about 20 and using the blinkers was enough to knock the measurable voltage down to 14.0V. After about 2 seconds of this the voltage goes up to 14.2V for a while, which indicates that the alternator is clutching and producing a higher output. Once done the voltage drops back to 14.1V and will stay there if you stop the additional drains, otherwise it will repeat the cycle of dropping to 14.0V and charging back to 14.2V. Using the high beams can produce this effect almost immediately as it is a rather large draw on the electrical system, though not nearly as much as most aftermarket stereo setups, and the alternator clutches for longer to deal with it.

So I got to wondering how much this minor clutching of the alternator was dragging on the engine. I wasn't sure if it would be measurable or not. So I brought up the "load" meter on the SGII. It reads 40 at its lowest and 100 at its highest. Every single time the alternator clutched and produced 14.2V the load reading went up by 1. As soon as the alternator calmed down it went back to 1 lower number. The instant MPG display also drops 1-2% during this time.

These measurements mean that the effect of minor electrical drains in the Yaris isn't 0.1% as was arbitrarily suggested, but is more like 1.5-2%! It will be even more under heavy, constant loads from things like large sound systems, producing even more of a fuel economy drain.

So, there you have it. You wanted numbers and documentation, and I just gave you both. Anyone with an SGII can verify my findings.

I wasn't going to use one of your quotes, but I gues I will.

As best as I can remember, and adjusted for current topic...

"I need mileage logs for 3 tanks, using the radio, and 3 logs without the use of the radio, or your findings are meaningless"

You can do that if you like, but I've got better things to worry about than saving a few cents per year, as in not using the blower for the next 60 years.