Question:
What can you do to absolutely minimize your fuel use?

Answer:
Not drive a car.
(You peaked at the picture header, didn’t you!?)

As much time and effort as we all put into making our cars and trucks more efficient, its easy to forget that even at their absolute best, a motor vehicle is still a pretty inefficient way to get from point A to point B.
Even with a 100% efficient engine, which would of course violate the laws of thermodynamics, the machine is still using more energy to move itself around than to move you.   In most modern gas powered cars, only about 1% of the energy in the fuel is actually being used to transport you from place to place.  With extreme hypermiling, we might raise that to 2%, or even 5%, but the best-case-scenario is pretty awful.

There is only one machine which is actually more energy efficient than the mode of transportation God gave us and that is the bicycle.
By combining human legs with the power of the wheel and the leverage of gears, it is possible to easily travel over 6 times further in a given time span (or the same distance 6 times faster) than you could with just a pair of shoes.
In contrast to the 6x multiplier effect a bicycle has over walking, driving a car only nets about a 4x multiplier in speed/distance compared to a bike.

Given that this is ecomodder, chances are that many readers probably fall into one of two categories:

1) People who already bicycle to work everyday, and as much as possible for errands
(perhaps for all trips below 5 miles?)

2) People who want to bike to work everyday, but have a good reason why they can’t (but still ride for short trips whenever possible!)

The reasons for not doing it are usually distance, weather, traffic, and/or needing to carry a large amount of people or stuff.  (UPDATE – Or, “I don’t own a bike” – in which case please read this article)
And I get that.  I own 2 motor vehicles myself.  There would be no reason to be on ecomodder if we had no motor vehicle to mod.

But May is National Bike Month, and for just one day this month, one day out of the entire year, I challenge everyone from the second category to try cycling to work, no matter how good your excuse is the other 364 days a year.

If that means you have to bring a change of clothes and wash off with a cloth in the bathroom because there are no showers, transport stuff to the workplace (laptop, work tools, whatever) the day before, get up an hour and a half earlier, invest in a super bright headlight and taillight to stay safe, or even if it means buying studded tires so you can ride through the snow, do it.

If it is still an insurmountable challenge, you could try taking public transit part of the way and biking the rest, or if there is no transit, you could even drive halfway with your bike in the trunk, park, and bike the rest of the way.  You would still be cutting your fuel use in half for that commute, reducing your impact on air quality, saving money, and getting some exercise.  (You should spend at least 30 minutes exercising everyday anyway, so when you look at it that way, you could actually be saving time.)

One way or another, no matter how inconvenient it is, just this one day, give it a try.

And even though it is called “Bike to WORK Day”, it doesn’t really have to be to work.  You can bike to school, the supermarket for groceries, or where ever you have to go that day.  If you don’t need to go anywhere that day, it can be another day the same week.  Or at least in the month of May.
At some point in the month of May, use a bicycle as a means of transportation to somewhere you needed to go anyway.

Bike To Work Day, originally created by The League of American Bicyclists, is a tradition going back 56 years.
In the majority of the country it falls on Friday, May 18th, so you have a little time to get ready.  (EDIT: this was posted a week later than intended, for administrative reasons.  So you don’t have much time after all.  And everything in the next paragraph is now past tense)

In a few areas it is celebrated on a different date; in the San Fransisco Bay Area (including Oakland, Berkeley, San Jose, and the rest of the 9 county metropolitan area) it is coming up fast: Thursday, May 10th!

As usual we, the East Bay Bicycle Coalition, will be providing energizer stations all morning with free goodie bags for everyone on a bicycle, as well as a free pancake breakfast at Oakland City Hall, where we will also be providing free valet bike parking all day for anyone who works in the area or wants to catch the train from the 12th St Station.  After work there will be a bicycle block party from 5:00pm to 8:30pm at Ninth and Washington Streets in Oakland.
(Sure, you may have to get up 2 hours earlier to bike to work, but I’ll need to get up by 4am to get to Oakland city hall by 5:30am, and then I’m working until at least 8:30pm.  So no complaining.  Its only one day a year…)

For a list of whats going on in your own neck of the woods, contact your local Bicycle Coalition, or check in at any local bike shop.  Or just Google “bike to work day” plus your own city or county name.  You can also find many events on the League’s website. In the even that there are none, you can create one for your local area yourself, and then post info about it on their website.

It will take some time until we get there, but hopefully someday our future will look just like this:

and ecomodding will become an even more strange and esoteric hobby than it is today.

Good morning fellow ecomodders, hypermilers, and efficiency enthusiasts of all kinds.

The EcoModder blog has been inactive for over a year (save Tim’s two most recent updates), and I have been asked to help pick it up again.

So, since I also have not been active on this site for nearly a year, to start I thought I would re-introduce my self:

My name is Bakari Kafele.  My internet screen name (or at least one of them) is Jacob Aziza.
You may remember me from such internet sites as the EcoModder Forum and Instructables.com

I have an old (1983) full-size truck with a 6.9L diesel V8 that I use for deliveries and hauling and occasionally towing.  It would be a monstrosity for a commuter vehicle, but it’s about the smallest thing that could serve my work needs – most people hauling loads heavy loads (see below) would use a box truck, a flat bed, or maybe even a dump truck.

At the very least an F-350 or equivalent.
So, depending on how you look at it, getting 15 miles per gallon, (as I was five years ago), could be considered decent, given the type of work being asked of this old truck – 15 mpg being what I measured I was getting, which coincided more or less with what most people report getting in the same make model and year truck.

Then, in 2008, I read an article about Wayne Gerdes.

I found it to be revolutionary and inspirational.  It was one of those moments where it seemed like the idea should have been glaringly obvious all along, and yet somehow never occurred to me.  Slow down, accelerate with moderation, coast early instead of braking last minute.  Obvious stuff, right?

While I had always been environmentally conscious (I was running the truck on biodiesel most of the time,  and my personal transportation was – and is – mostly done by bicycle), I had also been a speed enthusiast in my youth.  The only reason I gave up on casual street racing, drifting, and other performance and trick driving in my Honda Civic was that I totaled it when I attempted to take a tight turn (the sign recommended 20MPH) at 55MPH.
I never put two and two together; never recognized the direct correlation between driving habits and resource consumption.

After reading the article, my driving habits underwent a 180 degree turn.
Despite having once received a letter from the DMV warning me that I was one point away from a suspended license, I now started driving below the speed limit, anticipating stops, and even coasting.

And after a few months, I was pulled over by the CA Highway Patrol once again.
Not that driving 50MPH on a 65MPH highway is actually illegal in CA; but because EVERYONE speeds here, all the time, the officer assumed I must be intoxicated to actually drive below the speed limit.  When I passed the breathalyzer, I was free to go.

I found that to be a (tragically) funny thing – I am surrounded by people breaking the law.  I am the one person NOT breaking the law.  And I am the one who gets stopped by law enforcement, because it is suspicious that I am not breaking the law like everyone else.  I thought that would be an interesting story to share, especially with people who were also trying to get the best possible fuel mileage from their own vehicles.
So I went online, and tried to find out if there were any discussion boards specifically dedicated to this “hypermiling” thing.

And that’s how I discovered:  EcoModder.com
Wow.  A whole new level.  Not only were there dozens of more in-depth secrets to driving technique, but people were actually modding their cars – not to make them faster or look cooler – but to actually make them more efficient.  Revolutionary, mind-blowing, and in the end as it turned out, life changing.

I won’t chronicle the entire process here, because I already did in the forums, as it was happening.

During this process a friend of mine (and fellow mechanic at the bikeshop I worked at at the time) convinced me to write about my truck mods for Instructables.com.

They happened to be doing an energy efficiency contest at the time, which I entered and took second place in, winning a T-shirt!
But even better, the founder and CEO of the company noticed my contest entry, and personally hired me to do a little work at his home.  How cool is that?

Throughout this time period, I had also been writing my own personal blog, and one of the founders of faircompanies.com, Kirsten Dirksen, happened to run across my article on anthropogenic global warming, in which I argue that the evidence is still inconclusive, but we should be acting as though it is true regardless of what science eventually finds.  She asked if I would post some of my content on their website, which I began doing.
About a year or so later she emailed me saying they were taking a trip to the US (from Spain) and asking if I would be willing to be interviewed on camera.

I was still new to hypermiling and hadn’t started ecomodding when the video was taken, so while I did mention driving the smallest vehicle that meets ones needs, fuel efficiency, and bicycles, the portion on my small home got most of the attention.

As my ecomodding habit began, since I was already posting eco related content to the Faircompanies website, Kirsten followed the development of the truck, and its transition from 15mpg to up to 30mpg. The next time she came to the US, several years later, she requested a follow up interview – and the new video which came out recently is all about hypermiling and ecomodding.

That brings us to today.

I recently looked into replacing the rear differential, as was suggested to me in the forums, but it turns out the 2.73  and 3.08 were never made for the stronger 8 lug / F-250+ wheels.  So I’m back to wanting to replace the transmission with one that has overdrive to lower my highway RPMs, but I haven’t found a diesel ZF with the granny gear yet.

I’ve been getting slightly lower mileage than my peak, just over 25 miles per gallon over the past 6 months, VS 29MPG average over the 6 months before that – but still a whole lot better than the 15MPG I started out at.

I suspect this is mostly due to having re-installed the alternator after my onboard 120v charger died, and being lazy about pulse and glide (as in, not doing it at all).
Between the video coming out and writing here, I’ve been more motivated to get my mpgs back up.

I’ll let you know how that goes.

UPDATE – I recently replaced all four tires with the General Grabber HTS, which is one of only two brands that is supposedly low rolling resistance in a tire with a 120 load rating.  I have only had them on about a week, so its too soon to say if/how much they will help (they are replacing on/off road tires in back, and dangerously worn road tires in front) – but what I can say is that the first time I drove with them fully inflated (the shop of course only inflated to 50 – even though I specifically asked them to go to the sidewall max of 80PSI) it was so easy to turn the (manual) steering wheel that for a split second I actually thought there might be something wrong.  I had gotten used to the old tires, and these ones turn with so little resistance that it feels like power assist by comparison.  That feels like a good sign to me.
I also just received my new battery charger (yesterday!) so I can take the alternator belt back off.  Between the two, I’m hoping to hit my 5th 30+mpg tank average – and then keep it there.  We’ll see…

EcoModder forum member, Brucepick has been working on an interesting alternator delete for a while now. He wanted to eliminate the load on the alternator, but didn’t like the idea of just replacing the starting battery with a deep cycle lead acid battery. The downside of doing this is that as the battery discharges the voltage sags lower and lower. The lower the voltage is the dimmer your headlights get, your blower motor slows down, etc.Some speculate that the lower voltage might also negatively effect the ignition system and thus lower engine efficiency. While most have found this is a negligible consideration, Brucepick simply didn’t want to deal with it, so he found another way to go about things.

Brucepick decided to add a second battery. This second battery would be a lithium iron phosphate battery (LiFePo4). The LiFePo4 battery has a higher voltage than a normal lead acid battery. With both batteries fresh off a charger the lead acid would be around 12.7V versus the lithium’s 13.2V. This may not seem like much, but when the alternator in a car is hooked up, it keeps the system voltage at 13.5-14.5V. When you go from that down to 12V, that is a ~15% drop in voltage. The lithium battery helps negate that penalty.

Brucepick’s setup is unique in that he starts his car with the lead acid battery, but the rest of his car runs off the lithium battery. He also has a few switches though, so if he has to travel farther than the lithium battery he can simply switch the alternator back on and run off of the lead acid battery like a normal car would. When he can, he plugs in the lithium battery to go back to running without the alternator.

For more information and a full walk through of what Brucepick has done, you can check out his forum thread.

EcoModder forum user CigaR007 has been working on grill blocks for his Toyota Echo for a while now. He started with some simple pipe insulation stuffed between the grill slats as shown above. This version worked well for him and didn’t look bad either as it matched the car’s grill color fairly well. It was also easy to adjust for winter/summer by just pulling some insulation out or adding some insulation back in.

However, he wanted to improve on things. So, his second version was made of coroplast wrapped in some carbon fiber vinyl wrap. This looked better than the last version and seemed to work a bit better at blocking the grill off.

A bit later on, he also did the lower grill block in a similar fashion. This time he used rigid extruded polystyrene foam (the pink/blue foam they use to insulate houses) and again wrapped it in carbon fiber vinyl wrap to make it look nice.

In the mean time he also played around with some ducting behind the grill block to ensure that the air that does go through the grill goes through the radiator instead of going around it. As a side note, the Toyota Prius also does this to improve cooling.

Still not satisfied with what he had, he set upon the next step in improving the grill block. He removed the front pumper cover, lined the grilled area with foil and newspaper, and then poured two part foam into the cavity. It then expanded and formed itself perfectly to the grill opening. With a little sanding, the foam takes its shape.

He also made a foamed grill block for the top as well.

The final step with the foamed grill blocks involved some body work. He filled the air pockets that the foam left with some body filler (bondo), and then put some epoxy resin over it. Then he primed and painted the blocks to the matching colors of his car. As you can see, if you didn’t look closely you wouldn’t even be able to tell that the grill blocks aren’t an OEM part of the vehicle.

For more information on the evolution of CigaR007′s grill blocks, you can check out his forum thread that details out every step of the process.

Originally posted by low & slow on the EcoModder forum.

There has been quite a bit of interest in Alan Smith, an accomplished motorcycle hypermiler and Vetter Challenge competitor, so I drafted some questions for him to answer. Following are the questions and his responses.

Alan, please tell us about yourself, your work history, and your interest in motorcycle hypermiling.

I retired after working 33-years in the electronic industry. I started riding motorcycles right after high school. My interest in what is now called hypermiling started after the first gas crisis in 1973.

Please let us know about your progress in becoming one of the premier motorcycle hypermilers.

I started with a motorcycle that was noted for good fuel economy and just kept going from there.

Why did you select the Ninja 250 for your Vetter Challenge ride?

My fist serious attempt was with a Honda CRF230. It had great potential but being air cooled it would overheat with a streamliner shell. Used Ninja 250s are plentiful, water cooled, and cheap. And they are fun to ride.

What have you done to your Ninja 250 and what are its capabilities?

The engine is still stock but the sprockets have been changed to lower engine RPMs. The aerodynamics made the biggest difference. I don’t know its full capabilities yet.

How about future modifications for the Ninja 250?

Currently, I am doing major aerodynamic upgrades for the 2012 summer competition season. An all new tail and nose is being built.

In 2011 you went on a cross country ride of the USA, please give us some highlights of that epic trip.

That trip was 10,200-miles in 6-weeks. The Ninja 250 actually performed very well. My Ninja 250 had no problems cruising above freeway speeds. Crosswinds blew the light weight bike around some.

What kind of fuel economy do you get with your Ninja 250 outside of competitions?

When not in competition I generally get 88-90 MPG and that is not riding the bike gently.

You’ve gotten as high as 116 mpg in 2011, can you go higher?

I would say yes. In last year’s aerodynamic body my arms and legs were out in the wind. The new aerodynamic nose will cure this. Also tweaking the engine might improve the fuel economy.

How did you become friends with Craig Vetter?

Competing against him. With the streamliner competitors we are all friends trying to improve our fuel economy.

What are you proudest of in the arena of motorcycle hypermiling?

Getting accepted by people who ride large motorcycles. Most people think a 250cc motorcycle is only good for running around town. My streamlined Ninja 250 can keep up on the freeways and is a blast to ride on the back roads. The large trunk comes in handy to haul my buddies riding gear.

What advice would you give to motorcyclist wanting to get better fuel economy?

I guess it depends on what level of improvement in fuel economy you want. I have a Suzuki Bandit 1200 that was partially streamlined and I got some good results. I could only go so far with a 1200cc motorcycle. I finally decided to get serious and started looking for a much more fuel efficient motorcycle.

For more info on Alan and Craig’s work you can check out Craig’s website here.

A while back I wrote a blog article on how to winterize your car ecomodder style. Now that its spring again I figured a nice topic would be how to summerize your vehicle for better fuel economy. So, here are some tips that the guys from the forum and I came up with:

Install summer tires (preferably LRR)
Winter tires get very soft in summer heat and wear very quickly. Those mushy tires give poor handling as well as require more energy to push down the road (there of course are exceptions). As things warm up, changing back to summer or all season tires is a good choice. If its time to get new tires for the car you should definitely consider a set of low rolling resisance (LRR) tires. They’ve come along way in recent years and generally don’t cost anymore or perform any worse than a normal tire.

Check tire pressure
For many ecomodders this is a normal task. However, with summer warming things up it is sure to affect tire pressure. You might find that your tire pressure is too high for your liking. Or perhaps you haven’t checked it all winter (like me!) and see that your tires need some additional air.

Install seat covers
A lot of ecomodders love beaded seat covers because they help to keep you cooler and stop you from sweating. This means you can comfortably drive in warmer weather with less cooling needs (be that A/C, fan usage, or windows rolled down). Another alternative is a fan powered seat cover. This will actually blow air over the area where your body touches the seat.

Adjust your grill block
If you live in a cold climate like me you can nearly get away with a full grill block through most of winter. However, that will not work well in summer at all (there are exceptions of course). Take some time to adjust your grill block and open it up a bit so that adequate cooling can be had. An easy way to see if your engine is running too warm is to install an indicator light that shows when your radiator fan is turning on. If it turns on all the time, you should open that grill block a little bit. Conversely, if you never see it turn on, you can feel safe blocking more of the grill off.

Adjust your warm air intake
If you run an agressive warm air intake to help keep engine temperature up you may need to tone it down for summer to keep that coolant fan off as well.

Adjust block heater timer
While a block heater isn’t as useful in summer, it can still help out quite a bit especially if you have a short commute. However, it won’t need to run as long as it does in winter. So, take some time and adjust the amount of time it is on before you leave.

Get out the window sun shade
A sun shade blocks and/or reflects infrared heat away from the car. This is a great way to keep your car cooler while it sits in the sun all day long. Some of our users even make a sun shade for their sunroofs. Hybrids especially benefit from a cooler cabin as the batteries don’t like extreme heat.

Verify optimal air conditioner operation
Try out that A/C before it gets scorching hot out. If anything is in need of repair now is the time before it gets too hot out.

General maintenance
Now that its warmer out its a great time to do a few simple things like topping off fluids, and cleaning out the car. For trucks and other RWD vehicles you can remove any weights you use for winter traction. A couple forum members recommend checking to make sure those salty roads haven’t bound up your brakes. Every spring they jack the car up and just make sure the wheels rotate freely. That would be a great time to check tire wear while you’re at it, and how much pad is left on the brakes.

A few months back, Darin and Ben (EM’s founders) asked me to review the new ScanGauge-E. I gladly accepted and tried it out for a few weeks. You can see the full review here. For the blog we’ll keep it short and to the point.

First up, we’ll look at some of the limitations of the ScanGauge-E. The first thing I noticed was that it only has one cable connector on it. The ScanGauge-II has two, one on the back and one on the front. This isn’t a big deal unless it interferes with how you want to mount the ScanGauge, or on the off chance you want to daisy chain two or more ScanGauge-Es together.

I was able to daisy chain my ScanGauge-II from my car with the ScanGauge-E on the end of the chain though.

Probably the biggest thing most users will note is that the ScanGauge-E only shows two gauges instead of the ScanGauge-II’s four gauge display. While this isn’t quite as nice, Linear Logic has done a few things to negate this limitation.

First off, they have added a bar graph to the left of the display. The graph always tracks MPG over time. However, the scale of the graph, or how it displays information is configurable. By default, the graph’s zero (halfway) shows as your trip average. Therefore you know if you’re doing better or worse than your current average. This is a pretty nice setup.

You can also set the graph’s zero point to a set MPG. They call this “GOAL”, and you can manually set whatever MPG you want as your zero point (0-255). With GOAL you can see if you are hitting the MPG you want or not. You could even set GOAL to the EPA rating of the car to see how well you’re doing compared to it. In addition, you can change the time scale of the graph to show a history of 20 seconds to 16.5 minutes.

Second, they have added gauge sets. You can scroll through the gauge sets with the left buttons. There are three default (not customizable) gauge sets, and two customizable sets. The default gauge sets show instant and trip MPG, the next shows trip CO2 emissions and today’s CO2, and the third shows trip fuel cost and today’s fuel cost. In addition to those three default gauge sets, you can make your own two custom gauge sets like you do with the ScanGauge-II. The buttons on the right cycle through the available gauges just as normal. While using the ScanGauge-E I found these gauge sets to be extremely useful. I really wish the ScanGauge-II had this same feature now.

The last things that the ScanGauge-E doesn’t have is the X-gauges, and performance features. The X-gauges are really nice if you own a hybrid since you can get info on your battery pack and a few other nifty things. I use them all the time with my PHEV Prius. I definitely don’t like to see them go. The performance features you loose out on are 0-60 timing, 1/4 mile timing, and 60-0 timing. But being fuel economy nerds, those are of little use to us anyway!

Let’s move on to what Linear Logic has added to the ScanGauge-E. It does have several features that the ScanGauge-II does not have. I already talked about the MPG graph and the gauge sets. In addition, the ScanGauge-E also calculates CO2 emissions. They have added two new gauges that calculate the CO2 emissions of your vehicle. The first one is “CO2″ on the display, it shows how many pounds/kilograms of CO2 your car has put out on the current trip. The next one is “TCO”, and it shows how many pounds/kilograms CO2 your car has put out for the entire day. In the trip meter section you can also see how many pounds/kilograms you’ve put out for the entire tank too.

In conclusion, I don’t think the SGe it is for everyone. But, it’ll be a very good fit for some people, including those looking to save money. You get almost all the features of the ScanGauge-II, but at 2/3rds the price (about $50 savings). That makes the payback much quicker. I think my ScanGauge-II paid for itself quite fast. That makes the ScanGauge-E a no brainer if you’re looking to save money. The other group of people I’d suggest this to would be the more casual ecodrivers out there. Its a nice gauge, gives lots of info and will help increase your mileage. There isn’t too much to look at on the screen; it’s smaller and fits in nooks a bit easier.

All that being said, I wouldn’t recommend the SGe to one specific group of people: the hardcore hypermilers. These folks  love info and will use every bit they can get their hands on to increase their mileage. That means needing the 4 gauges up all the time to optimize driving. I also wouldn’t necessarily recommend the ScanGauge-E to hybrid owners. The loss of the X-gauges is a big price to pay for hybrid owners who can gain a lot of functionality through them.

Of course, EcoModder sells both the ScanGauge-E and the ScanGauge-II. They can both be found in the EcoModder Store.

For the last several months, Ecomodder forum member t vago has been working on a custom aeroshell for his 2000 Dakota Quad Cab pickup truck. While many fuel conscious people will look down on pickup trucks as eminently wasteful, truck owners are a group that has uniquely embraced the spirit of ecomodding. After all, they represent one of the biggest opportunities for improvement in modern motor vehicles.

It’s true: trucks are by in large not built with fuel economy in mind. While this is lamentable, it does give ambitious ecomodders a great place to start. The most glaring deficiency of the pick up truck’s design (from a fuel economy point of view, of course), is the aerodynamics. This is where t vago’s recent efforts come in to play.

If you want the nitty gritty, you can take a look at the original thread, where t vago and others go over their plans in detail. Here we will take a brief look at the origins and progress of the project – a sneak peek into the large amount of time and effort that goes into designing and building an aeroshell from scratch.

In the next two pictures you can see t vago’s humble beginnings:

This original design was built with foam insulation and designed in Microsoft Excel (of all programs) using calculations from this paper.

Unfortunately, this original design was too weak and eventually failed, though not before t vago could quantify a 1 mpg gain.

Here are t vago’s mockups of his first, unsuccessful design, as well as his second design:

First

Second

From there, in true EcoModder fashion, many other users chimed in with design advice as well as some of their own mockups. Here is just one example of the efforts put in on this project by user NeilBlanchard:

Though it took some time to get back on track, t vago was eventually able to produce a mockup of his next aeroshell:

Initial tests with the new aeroshell demonstrated significant gains over his truck’s previous configuration:

Eventually, the cap made it from foam to a more stable, stronger version as we can see here:

The cap is still in progress as just recently t vago has noticed some possible design problems:

A couple of nights ago, I was able to view the wake of my truck with the cap installed, in the rain. I noticed what appeared to be a couple of visible counter-rotating vortices right on either side of the back of the truck. From reading Hucho and looking at the pictures that Piwoslaw has in his album, it would appear the the inward-moving air stream at the sides of my aerocap are interacting with the air stream moving rearward on the sides of the truck. I think this is forming the vortices I’m seeing.

Hopefully we will be able to see a final version of this exciting project soon. In the future we will be talking more about these unique pickup-based modifications here on the EcoModder blog, so look forward to an update on t vago’s project in our next edition!

EcoModding is all about DIY. While it’s nice to see the automakers doing their bit every so often, the things people dream up in the own garages are always infinitely more cool. The Illuminati Motor Works Seven is no different.

Runner up at the Progressive Automotive X-Prize, the Seven has recently posted impressive numbers at Chrysler’s proving grounds in Michigan. To be exact, they managed a cool 207.5 MPGe over the same course where the obviously impressive Nissan Leaf only managed to 99 MPGe.

This is an impressive feat considering that this number was posted using the official EPA test cycle for electric vehicles. Many people could squeak out that kind of number scooting around in a circle at 10 mph, but that’s not the case here.

Here are the final stats from the team’s run through the EPA test cycle:

207.5 MPGe

160.42 Wh/mile

Vehicle Weight = 2900 lbs.

Here’s some other stats for you to feast your eyes on:

Top Speed: 130 mph

0-60 Time: 8 secs

Range: 200 miles

Source: Illuminati Motor Works

Thanks, Treehugger! Last year, we won editor’s choice, and this year we got to take home the readers’ choice award for best transportation website. The editor’s choice winner this year was Green Car Congress, a fabulous blog that gives in depth looks at all the technical aspects of modern fuel economy, so congratulations go out to Mike over there as well.

To check out the results, visit Treehugger’s Best of Green.

It’s that time of year again, where Treehugger lets readers choose the best green sites on the web in various categories. As usual, EcoModder has been nominated along with our prestigious peers.

Unfortunately, however, we’re currently lagging in the votes! While each of the sites on the list is great and offers a unique set of information to a unique audience, EcoModder is the only one where you can get great DIY projects, advice, and information from fellow members across the world.

We’re really appreciate your vote, so please head on over to Treehugger!

The electric car has had a rough history in the last 100 years. Hell, the battle we are seeing now was fought out over 100 years ago. The introduction of the motor carriage opened up a new opportunity for an array of drivetrains. There was a time when steam, electricity, gasoline, and even some gas/electric hybrids (Porsche, see left) fought for supremacy in automobile motivation, and it’s easy to see who won out. Gas was cheap, plentiful and very, very powerful. Not only that, but it also was quick to refuel, and as long as there was a supply of fuel the gasoline car could go anywhere. However, the electric car was left in the dust- there were severe limitations to its range and our electric infrastructure was no where ready to supply power where needed.

Enter the last 20 years, and after learning lessons from a few fuel crises we are once again looking at the little electric car. Without conspiracy theories, the technology still wasn’t quite there for it, and the costs were too high to make a reasonable business case for much of anyone. However, in the last 5 years things have changed. We have an infrastructure that supplies electricity farther than any gas station, and a push for technology that can give birth to legitimate electric cars for mass production.

And this is where Nissan and the dowdy-looking Nissan Leaf come in. Maybe dowdy is too harsh, but it’s awkward with a reason. Nissan’s brutal GTR has a drag coefficient of .27. The Leaf, which spent more time in the wind tunnel to fine tune its shape according to the spokesman, manages a drag coefficient if .28, a massive improvement over the .31 of the Nissan Versa on which the Leaf is based on. While not totally outstanding, that is near supercar aerodynamics in a 4 door hatch back. One of the troubles engineers had to deal with was wind noise- While wind noise is a part of regular NVH (Noise, Vibration, Harshness) concerns for gasoline cars, it’s an even bigger concern on the near-silent electric car with the lack of drivetrain noise. The bulbous headlamps on the Leaf play a role in fighting wind noise caused by the mirrors in that they’re raised several inches above the hood-line in order to split the air flow ahead of the mirrors, so that air passes over and under the mirror, instead of into the mirror. Taking advantage of the compact electric drivetrain, the low hood-line smoothly transitions into a laid back windshield, the shape as a whole contributes to the odd styling, but all in the name of aerodynamics. The wheel wells, which are small by today’s standards, house relatively small 16” wheels. The small wheel openings aid in reducing drag, and there are sharp creases along the rear flanks of the Leaf’s fenders, and with the shaped tail lights the design assists in bringing air smoothly away from the car’s rear. All of this is wrapped in Nissan’s new design language, which shares some of its DNA with their Juke. The Toyota Prius and Chevrolet Volt lean towards more conservative styling, but the Leaf is here to stand out.

For the tech geeks, the Leaf haz ze teknology. Some of the things worth mentioning are the LED headlamps, which consume less power than standard headlamps. The battery is actually 40 independent cells, each of which can be replaced if malfunctioning instead of the entire battery pack. The pack itself is surprisingly compact, but still heavy at 600 lbs. On the plus side, it’s mounted low and centered in the chassis, giving the Leaf a lower center of gravity than a standard car. And most importantly, it does not intrude into the passenger compartment, unlike the Chevy Volt’s T-bar battery which consumes the center of the interior. The interior floor appears to be just the same as it is in a gasoline car, and even still shares the vestigial hump in the center of the rear seat floor, though only an inch or two high.

Speaking of the interior, outside of the digital interfaces it’s absolutely nothing to write home about. The dash is hard plastic, but touch points are soft fabric and no better or worse than any other car in the segment, including the Corolla and Civic. I found the armrest to be a little high, and the steering wheel could use more than just up-and-down adjustment, but other than that the ergonomics are quite fine. Seats are softer than expected, but quite welcoming. And Nissan touts that most materials are made from recycled plastics. But, the juicy bits are the unique displays and controls of an electric car. Gone is a tachometer, and in comes an energy meter. Instead of displaying engine RPM, it displays how much electric power is being demanded, or alternatively when coasting how much is being regenerated. A gas gauge is predictably replaced by a battery meter, but unexpectedly is the coolant temp being replaced with a battery temp gauge. The standard PRND is replaced with a toy-like selector that pivots around 4 different positions. Center is where the shifter sits when released, moving it left and up selects reverse, moving it left and down selects drive (selecting drive again engages or disengages ECO mode), and simply moving it left selects neutral. Pressing the top button in the selector’s resting position engages park. It sounds more complex than it really is, and comes across as little more than a joy stick to select a gear. The parking brake handle is replaced with a pull-up button that electronically engages the brake. This is an electric car, everything has to be different somehow, right? Thankfully the center cluster is conventional by all means, and with in easy reach.

What is unique is when you press the “Zero Emissions” button, which brings up an array of menus on the Leaf’s LCD screen related to the electric drive and charging systems. The Leaf has taken a page out of the GTR’s wizardry, giving more bar graphs, detailed information, and charging options than the average person would know what to do with. However, like the GTR, this information is directed solely for the intended enthusiasts. G-Meters and 0-60 timers are replaced with energy consumption dials, detailing power usage by the motors, accessories like radio and climate control, and finally “other systems,” whatever those maybe. It shows real time how using the various accessories affect the range. Another nifty feature is the programming that one can apply to the Leaf. Not only can you tell it to only charge between certain hours, in order to take advantage of off-hour rates, but also when to automatically kick on the heater or A/C at a set time so that the interior is at-temp before you get into the car, eliminating the need to split the energy between both systems while driving. Another adaptation for the electric car is what is displayed on the GPS. The map has a pair of circles, which show the Leaf’s range overlaid the map. The inner circle shows the low-ball estimate of the car’s range, and the outer circle shows the outer reaches of the range. A quick zoom out quickly demonstrates how much ground can becovered on a charge, and it’s a bit of a surprise at just how far you can go on this glorified golf cart. It can also update regularly with new charging locations, and display those on screen. And, as you run the battery lower and lower, it will eventually default the GPS to show local charging stations in a passive attempt at getting you to juice it up. And you can kill it dead, there’s no back-up battery to save stupidity. There is relief though, that most major cities plan to put in place charging stations at major stores, fastfood joints, and businesses so that the car can be charged while you’re out and about. Even 440v DC “Fast chargers” are an option so that the car can be charged from 0%-80% in roughly 25 minutes. These will even be placed between various cities so that cars like the Leaf can run on longer trips, albeit with a 20 minute break during the trip. This almost sounds like a deal breaker, while keeping in mind that the Leaf is meant to be a commuter car, much of the “range anxiety” can be relieved by changing how you treat a “fill up,” meaning unlike a gas car where it’s no problem to run it down near empty and refill it, it’s a good habit to top-off the Leaf where ever it can charge.

Introductions aside, it’s time to drive. Coming into this, it must be said that I drove to the event in a 1969 Chevrolet CST/10 pickup. It’s loud, rough, and has enough 40 year old components remaining that it shakes, rattles, and rolls down the road with quite a presence. I get into a Leaf, adjust my seat, and start to poke around for the “start” button when I’m told it’s already running. I know this is an electric car, but it’s still…odd… to hear nothing. When you do actually “start” the car, it does play a little juke while lighting up the gauge cluster to let you know that it’s actually on. The throttle is a bit spongy at low speed, but the Leaf’s instant 200 ft lb of torque makes its presence known if you dive deeper into the throttle. It’s an experience unlike any other car. Even though it’s an electric car, you can find an excuse for traction control at speeds where most 4 bangers are still building steam. Off the line it surges with authority, and thanks to the lack of a transmission, it steams right on up with an uninterrupted, slightly sci-fi soundtrack from the electric motor. No peaking power bands, no shifting… Just forward. And during all of this, the Leaf is beautifully smooth, quiet and dare I say; graceful. During cruising you’re more likely to hear the hum of the A/C blower motor than you are of the drivetrain. Wind noise is well controlled, an achievement that the reps were very proud of. It’s a level of cabin noise that’s surely lower than the best luxury cars, an interesting side effect to the electric drivetrain. It may still use a dated suspension, but the ride is well controlled and the handling is surprisingly quite precise and a little tossable thanks to the low center of gravity.

And it creates quite the proposition for future drivetrains. Here we have a $25,000 car with NVH levels competitive with cars twice its cost. A premium experience, in this regard. Without pistons violently thrusting up and down and transmissions jumping through gears it provides smooth thrust that will never be matched by a piston engine. Not even a CVT can provide the smooth responsiveness that the direct-drive electric motor gives. It gives a small car a level of refinement that manufacturers can only dream of with a gas engine, especially to the bread-and-butter cars. To the average consumer there’s less maintenance to worry about; there’s no oil to change, emissions systems to inspect, or cooling systems to worry about. Brakes are even given a lengthy life span thanks to their job being shared with the regenerative braking/charging system. In the future land of beige, it’s easy to see electric cars cross-shopped with Corollas, Cruises, and Civics. Its price is competitive with them, for instance to get the options that you get in the Leaf, a comparable 2011 Honda Civic runs the MSRP of just under $25,000. And other than out-right range, it just does everything better than they can. With all off this, and the fact that you’ll never buy gas for the damn thing, it starts to make sense, even financially. The current short comings of electric cars are solvable problems in time. Nissan has committed to designing the battery pack to be replaceable with future innovations, and designing the unit so that future Nissan EVs with more advanced batteries can have their guts transplanted into the Leaf, keeping older models relevant in 5-10 years.

However, there must be time taken to look at it from an environmental approach. And to me, it’s one that has few grounds to stand on. Whileelectricity has the advantage of being DIRT CHEAP (Even if gas was under 1.50/gallon, the cost to run the Leaf off your house is still cheaper, according to Nissan’s statistics), it’s not clean energy for the majority of the US. Roughly 48% of our electrical energy comes from coal. Only 7% comes from renewable resources, such as wind or hydroelectric power. Ever notice that any Nissan advertisement with Zero Emissions* has an astric? Their ad campaign is built on the fact that there are zero *tailpipe emissions. While you do have to consider the lack of pollutants being burned by the car, it must be said that it’s not free and clear from pollution. Granted, the extra demand for electricity from the cars will be insignificant for now, and the expansion of cleaner energy such as nuclear, and fuel cell technology in the future can be the better answer to that problem. The batteries are a point of scrutiny in most cars, but Nissan claims that they are recyclable, and even if the cells become too weak for automotive use, they can still be used for stationary applications as energy storage. One last point of contention on Lithium Ion batteries is the fact that the materials have to be mined. Keep in mind, so does the material for your cell phone, iDoodad, laptop, and high-performance R/C car. We’re already mining the materials, it’s wrong to scrutinize the electric car battery when lithium already powers an array of other devices in our lives.

So what does this mean for the piston engine? It means nothing in the short run, but maybe everything in the long run. The electric car is just moving past the point of being a novelty; it’s now a legitimate player. It’s the birth of a new era for the automobile, one that’s deprived of cam shafts, valves, pistons, and gasoline. It’s strange to think that there is going to be a time where the familiar exhaust note is nowhere to be found in new cars. And in part it’s because the electric motor can accomplish everything we want piston engines to do; flat torque curve, smooth power delivery, low noise, low maintenance, efficiency and low center of gravity. As time progresses, outright performances gets better and better as well (Fisker and Tesla want to show you). While the source of power may change and evolve (to one that doesn’t rape the land for battery materials with the impression of environmental goodness), the electric drivetrain is going to make its comeback over the next century.

The 20th century will always be the rise of the gasoline engine. Maybe the 21st will be the rise of the electric motor.

Okay, I know the photo isn’t great, but I didn’t have much time to snap a picture on my phone and the car had already disappeared by the time I returned. For those of your who can’t quite make out the photo, it is of a Nissan Leaf standing in the taxi line. While I have seen several Mitsubishi iMiEVs running around town here in Japan, this is the first time I’ve seen Nissan’s EV offering in regular service.

While the car was adorned with markings of “EV Taxi” and the like, it was clearly a regular service vehicle, picking up fares at normal rates along will all the other taxis. This is an important test of the EV platform, as taxis are a large contributor to downtown air pollution and fuel use, as their regular service cycle includes hours of idling and heavy stop and go traffic. If EVs can effectively replace gas vehicles as taxis, it will be a big step forward for air pollution issues in cities across the world.

However, there is one big issue standing in the way of widespread EV use for taxis – battery recharge takes time. While a normal gasoline vehicle can be filled up in a few minutes after several hours of work, EV charging can take hours and if rushed can lead to eventual battery damage or a reduction in total cycles.

Unfortunately I couldn’t get out the door fast enough to get a ride, but next time I see one on the street we’ll go for a spin and see how the Leaf stacks up against your average Japanese taxi cab (aka, the Toyota Crown).

Sure, while we like to call it ecomodding (with no hyphen), we’re still happy that the term is poised to jump the shark as it is begins to be used by mainstream media companies. Not only are we glad to see PM picking up on the term, but they’ve applied it to factory changes made GM on the Chevy Cruze, as opposed to the usual aftermarket modifications done by the dedicated ecomodders you find both on and off this site.

So cheers, Popular Mechanics, for picking up on the best automotive trend in the last several years.

EDIT: I’ve been told I don’t know what “jumping the shark” means. This is true. But let’s just pretend I meant we’re so cool we don’t want the mainstream media catching on to it, .

[singlepic id=130 w=560]

Infrequently do we find a homebuilt car that is well-designed, aesthetically appealing, environmentally friendly, and inexpensive. In Dave Cloud’s Dolphin — originally discussed (with many more photos) in the EcoModder forum — we find that all our expectations for a homebuilt EV are surpassed. That’s probably because Dave has had his fair share putting together electric cars, having done over 45 conversions.

While the Dolphin may look like nothing you’ve ever seen before, the base vehicle is a 1997 Geo Metro, one of the classical examples of frugal driving. There are plenty of examples of Geo Metros being converted, but none are quite as unique as the Dolphin (if you need more examples, check out our very own ForkenSwift).

The Dolphin was put together for a miserly $3,000, but can do impressive things for the meager amount of money that was used to create it. Running on used batteries, the car managed a 70mph top speed and overall range of upwards of 80 miles, despite the fact that curb weight is well over 3000 pounds. The Dolphin is designed for highway cruising, lacking a transmission and geared to top out at 71 miles an hour. While this does allow for efficient highway cruising, it makes low speed operation and acceleration inefficient, dragging down the vehicle’s overall impressive numbers.

[singlepic id=138 w=560]

Here’s a quote direct from Dave Cloud on the comprises that were made to keep the project under budget:

Another thing I would like to clarify is that my goal was to build a vehicle that can go 200 miles on a single charge with a speed of 60-65 mph for 85% of the miles, for under $3,000. I accomplished this goal. Because of my $3,000 limitation I made a lot of compromises in the chassis design hoping that the aerodynamics of the vehicle would make up for those inefficiencies. Inefficiencies such as front wheel bearings that rumble, back tires that are 10 years old and misshapen, single speed dual series motors (that were $100), no re-gen and inexpensive Curtis controllers.

Using the conversion factor listed on Wikipedia (33.4 kWh/gal) and Dave Cloud’s own estimates of power usage, the Dolphin clocks in at an amazing 214MPGe, beating everything on the road (and everything likely to be on the road in the near future). While this is an amazing vehicle, it’s unfortunate it was built for a specific EV distance challenge and will probably not be explored in depth in the future.

Here are the Dolphin’s in depth stats (found on EValbum):

Basic Vehicle: 1997 Geo Metro

Motor: Advanced DC 203-09-4001 Series Wound DC 2X “Shorty’ version of typical 8″ ADC motor

Drivetrain: 8″ ADC motor on each rear wheel, with independent battery packs and controllers

Controller: Curtis 1209B-6402 72 Volt, 400A

Batteries: 60 Interstate Various, 12.00 Volt, Lead-Acid, Flooded Group 56 BLEM batteries, 33 lbs ea.

Voltage: 72V

Top Speed: 72 mph

Range: 200 miles

Watt Hours/mi: 162 wh/mi

Weight: 3,200 lbs

—

More information:

• Check out the EcoModder forum discussion about this car, with much more information & photos, including several posts by the builder.
• For more on Dave Cloud, check out the below videos:

httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nBhIhdLKKTI

httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yravv7jT-jE&feature=player_embedded

httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jTqcb0bLv1I&feature=player_embedded

[imagebrowser=11]

It was just the other day when I was regaling a few friends with an account of the time that California’s governor, Arnold Schwarzenegger, almost walked right over me while I was taking a photo. I was alerted that Gov. Schwarzenegger had just visited Japan to check out the shinkansen (high speed rail) system we have here, which made for a very kitsch news piece about Schwarzenegger towering over everyone present during his inspection.

While the shinkansen was theorized in many years before actually being built in Japan, the project really came together when it got government backing in 1958. From that point, it only took 6 years to open the main line, stretching from Kyoto to Tokyo to the public, in 1964. Since then the line has been aggressively upgraded with new extensions added to bring most of the country into the reaches of the system. For more about the history of the shinkansen, check out wikipedia.

I’m sure you’re all thinking, “So what? That was then, this is now. The issue in the Northeast is complicated especially by all the existing, modern infrastructure.” That’s true, so let’s compare it to a modern example of shinkansen building in Japan, which, as luck would have it, is happening right in my back yard. The project to which I refer is the Kyushu shinkansen line stretching from Fukuoka to Kagoshima.

This project has taken a bit longer, with the inaugural stretch from Yatsushiro to Kagoshima City taking from 1991 to 2004. Progress here, of course, was slowed by the mountainous terrain in Japan’s westernmost reaches. However, major construction on the Kumamoto section of the rail only began in the last few years and is scheduled to be completed on March 12th, 2011, meaning that hundreds of kilometers will be spanned by completely new rail in just a few years.

Back to the U.S., ABG reports that Amtrak is planning on building a high speed rail stretching from Boston to Washington D.C.. The proposed line would cut the commute by train from over six hours to less than four.

I’m sure there are many good reasons why they are predicting a project on the East Coast could take 30 years to complete. Expenses, construction equipment, location, etc. all factor in to such a protracted timeline. However, if you really want to cut to the quick of the issue, it’s all about priorities. It might cost more, it might be loud and noisy, but if we really wanted a convenient, fast, low-impact transit solution between Boston and Washington D.C., we could have it in 10-15 years.

So the real question is, how much is an extra 15-20 years of high speed rail worth to commuters and taxpayers? I’m no engineer, but doubling the cost and floating some debt might be worth it to give our aging transportation infrastructure along the coast a full two decade jump ahead of the current best estimate.

Photo credit: laszlo photo

This post is a continuation/generalization/more organized version of my earlier blog post.

There are a lot of improvements possible for internal combustion engines (aka ICE’s).  It helps to list the areas that are causing losses, to start:

– The geometry of the physical layout of the piston, connecting rod and the crankshaft is less than ideal.  The connecting rod needs to be ~60 degrees past top dead center to get the best leverage on the crankpin; but the pressure from the fuel ignition occurs much earlier than this; when the connecting rod is essentially trying to bend the crankshaft sideways.  The motion of the piston is necessarily sinusoidal.

- The power stroke is only 25% of the full cycle, and there is a lot of mass that has to be accelerated, stopped and accelerated again.

- The valvetrain has to physically resist being moved, and it has to work against the air flows.

- The piston tends to scrape the sides of the cylinder, because it would “rather” twist that stay straight.  The rings must exert friction on the cylinder.

- The oil must be pumped through little tiny passageways.

- Electricity must be generated.

- An ICE is a self-powered air pump, in essence.  Air flow and the pressures generated, and the cyclical nature of them cause resonances, and backpressures, and the gasses become spring-like.

- Small volumes, like the space above the top ring and the top edge of the piston, trap unburned fuel because the flame cannot reach it.

- Everything flexes and springs — the crankshaft and the camshaft flex torsionally and longitudinally, the piston vibrates and distorts, as do the cylinders.  Valves bounce and stretch and distort into potato chip shapes.

The list goes on…  The net result is a typical internal combustion engine that uses ~20% of the energy in the fuel for output motion at best, and requires a transmission to keep the torque of the engine relatively close to the speed of the vehicle.

So, knowing all this, how can we make incremental or wholesale improvements?

+ Offsetting the crankshaft center away from the power downstroke gives the connecting rod some better mechanical leverage — but is the compression stroke adversely affected?

+ Variable valve timing allows the torque to be available over a broader range of RPM’s.

+ Valves can be electrically/hydraulically moved in both directions (opened and closed) to avoid fighting the springs.  This also makes it easier to use subtle or more abrupt adjustments to the valve timing.

+ Use cams rather than the crankshaft, to gain a lot more mechanical leverage, and to allow the piston motion to be controlled by the designer; like the Revetec:

Revetec trilobate cam drive animation

This particular design also reduces piston scrape (but it introduces some tendency to rotate the piston within the cylinder).  It also avoid big changes in crankcase pressures (in configurations with even numbers of pistons).  This design effectively doubles the efficiency.

+ Use the Atkinson valve timing, like the Prius does, which has a lot of overlap of the exhaust valve with the beginning of the intake downstroke (I think?) so that there is built in exhaust gas recirculation (aka EGR).  This also effectively doubles the efficiency.

Hmmm, how well would a 2-cylinder Revetec with Atkinson cycle and electrically activated valves work?

+ Use a rotary design that reduces the reciprocal motion.

+ Use a 2-stroke design to cut the parasitic losses in half.

++ Use a continuous burn design to further reduce the cyclical nature of the engine; or at least reduce the time between power cycles.

+ Figure out how to reduce waste heat from being produced, and then try to use the remaining excess heat to produce output.

What are other ideas to improve ICE’s?

<<<<   >>>>

While power plant efficiency is a very important factor to the overall vehicle’s efficiency, there are lots of ways to improve the rolling chassis, as well.

Rolling efficiency is the most basic function of any vehicle; however it may be powered.  This involves:

* Tires, wheels, wheel bearings, suspension, wheel alignment (loaded and in motion).

* Ride height and attitude — both of these are critical to good aerodynamic drag, and we should not leave them to chance.

* All aspects of aerodynamics: overall shape and size, specific details, ventilation of the passenger compartment, motor/drivetrain cooling/temperature control.  By using good passive air management, we can both improve the air flow around and through the vehicle; and avoid needing a power input to actively solve these requirements.

* Weight and friction of all moving parts (if you can avoid power steering and power brakes, this reduces the losses of operating the vehicle).

+ Temperature stability affects a lot of things: the people, and the drivetrain in particular.  Learning from buildings, we should use insulation and low-e glazing to help stabilize the temperatures.

+ Braking should be regenerative: either electrical whenever possible, or, we should use hydraulic motors and a small accumulator; instead of friction brakes which produce waste heat.

+ Especially if the brakes are regenerative hydraulic, then the suspension should also be regenerative; and use the shock pistons to also pressurize the accumulator.  If possible, the entire suspension springing should be hydraulic, I think.  Because flexing springs also produce waste heat.  Alternatively, the suspension could be electromagnetic.

Can you add to this list of improvements, please?

Remember the Tornado? That little piece of foil you stuck instead your car’s intake with the hope of improving your fuel economy? Despite the fact that I still see one from time to time at the local car parts store, I’m thankful to say that this ill-advised craze has passed, for the most part.

However, there seems to be a grassroots revitalization of the tried and true “put some junk in your intake and increase fuel economy 150%” formula for selling these scams. Recently, I noticed one, known as the Gadgetman Groove, has gotten a local NPR reporter to take the bait.

This scam sports all the warning signs of your classic fuel economy scam:

• Claims to work on any vehicle, regardless of fuel type;
• Takes almost no time;
• Increase power, fuel economy, while reducing emissions;
• Is cleverly overlooked by every vehicle manufacturer in every model of vehicle ever made;
• Uses current events (this time, the oil spill) as well as fuel prices in order sell the product;
• Claims scientific proof, but presents none;
• Offers to turn you into a distributor of the product/service.

If you want to know more, don’t hesitate to check out the gadgetman’s site, but please, don’t swallow the medicine on this one. If you need an in depth discussion of these issues, please check out Tony’s Guide. For those of you who don’t want to do the reading, here’s his summary:

So in summary:

• Engines already have high levels of turbulence, and the physics is well understood
• Adding more turbulence can give only a tiny fuel economy benefit – this is proved by experiment
• Ignition must be adjusted to suit the faster burn, or the effect will be worse economy
• Increased turbulence at full load will most likely damage the engine unless the ignition is retarded
• Anything in the inlet manifold is extremely unlikely to affect in-cylinder air motion anyway

I think that the X-Prize competition is fulfilling the objective of focusing on vehicle efficiency.  Starting with the results so far, I am hoping to contribute to the discussion and to the process.

Here’s the link to the PDF that shows the results of the X-Prize Knockout Round.

The measured MPGe of the teams in this round — remember this is the Combined number from the City, Urban, and Highway tests:

American HyPower    54.5    Hybrid
Spira        84.8    ICE (E10)
FVT eVaro        152.5    Hybrid (serial)
Zap        111.0    EV
Tata        134.3    EV
Electric Raceabout    128.1    EV
AMP         86.7    EV
West Philly (MS)    63.5    Hybrid
West Philly (Alt)    53.7    Hybrid
Global-E        50.4    Hybrid
Li-ion         182.3    EV
Aptera        140.1    EV
TW4XP        107.0    EV
WWU        92.5    Hybrid
Tango        86.8    EV
BITW        51.1    ICE (diesel)
X-Tracer (#72)    180.0    EV
X-Tracer (#79)    188.8    EV
Illuminati        119.8    EV
Enginer        53.0    Hybrid (electric/ICE w/ steam heat recovery)
Edison2 (#95 Alt)    97.0    ICE (E85)
Edison2 (#97 MS)    101.4    ICE (E85)
Edison2 (#98 MS)     80.3    ICE (E85)

I think these results speak for themselves!  The electric cars are in general, giving much better efficiency, and several of those (the X-Tracer, FVT, Tata, and the Aptera) also have excellent acceleration.  The Li-ion,  Illuminati, TW4XP, and Edison2 (among others) were not as quick — the Li-ion and Edison2 cars are through to the finals, though.  I am sad that neither the FVT eVaro nor the Illuminati Seven made it through, due to (relatively) minor technical reasons.  They failed at the moment (which is how racing/competitions work, to be sure), but I think their problems are solvable, and the strong merits of their vehicles are obvious.

The Aptera is through, but still a bit disappointing — it’s aero is equal or better to anybody (save the X-Tracer), but their efficiency seems to have suffered.  It barely betters the Tata, which is “just” a well executed EV conversion of a decent but ordinary hatchback.  The Global-E had an ignition mapping error that made their number lower.

So the lowest MPGe of an electric drive; the AMP’d Sky was 86.7MPGe (Tango was 86.8), while the best of a car with an internal combustion is the Edison2 #97 at 101.4.  (Actually, the FVT has a ICE powered generator onboard, but did not need it *at all* in the X-Prize. It would be great to see how the eVaro does for MPGe in charging mode!)  The hybrids all were all below the 67MPGe — except the WWU at 92.5 (and the FVT).

The average of the 12 vehicles using electric drive MPGe (I’m including the FVT in this) was 134.7MPGe
The average of the 6 hybrids (not including the FVT) was 61.26MPGe (please note, these are all parallel hybrids?)
The average of the 5 internal combustion drive cars was 82.92MPGe

The X-Prize results table does not include weights, but I daresay that the average weight of the internal combustion cars was lowest (the Edison2 and Spira are all much lighter!).

The best aero drag is on the X-Tracer, followed by a very close group including the Aptera, Edison2, Li-ion.

As many have said, the X-Prize is setting a very high standard (which is both good and bad).  They are essentially looking for the complete package, and virtually no glitches.  Even the well financed/professional teams had several glitches.  I would have set up the X-Prize a bit differently; to measure (and therefore emphasize and encourage) the four main things that need to be improved to get the maximum efficiency.

Those four critical things are; from most important to least important (as I am interpreting the Knockout results):

* Drivetrain Efficiency
* Aerodynamic Drag
* Weight
* Rolling Efficiency

I would have scored these in relative terms, which pits each vehicle against the others (rather than setting standards that are somewhat arbitrary).  On drivetrain efficiency, I would either use a dynamometer or the best result of the three economy tests: the City, Urban, or Highway.  (This will indicate what vehicle is good for a particular role, and measures the drivetrain at it’s best.)

For Drivetrain Efficiency, the points awarded would be the best MPGe x Number of Seats.  So, using the Overall MPGe for 23 vehicles that competed in the Knockout Round listed above (we do not have the separate measured results from the City, Urban, and Highway test): the X-Tracer #79 would be 188.8 x 2 = 377.6 points, and so on.  The best mainstream MPGe was the Illuminati Seven: 119.8 x 4 = 479.2 points.

Aerodynamic Drag would use the Weight and the Rolling Efficiency, and the results of a Coastdown test to determine the Cd of each car.  I would take the inverse of the number of entrants divided by the Cd, then multiplied by the Number of Seats: So the Aptera and the Li-ion and the Edison2 alternate cars may be at the top: 23 (22, 21) / 0.15 x 2 = ~306.6 and ~293.3 and ~280 points respectively.  The Edison2 mainstream cars would get 20 and 19 (or higher depending on their Cd) resulting in 20 (19) / 0.15 x 4 = 533.3 and 506.6 points respectively.

For Weight, I would take the lightest one and score it by inverting the number of Entrants x the Number of Seats – the Spira would get 23 x 2 (seats) giving it 46 points.  The Edison2 alternate car would be next with 22 x 2 = 44 points.  The two Edison2 mainstream cars would be 21 x 4 = 84 points and 20 x 4 = 80 points respectively; and so on.  This give priority to the cars that seat more people, and it is realistic in terms of what is achievable in the real world.

Rolling Efficiency includes tires and alignment and would be prorated for weight – a slower coastdown test using a ramp would be needed.  I think an inverted number of the entrants would be a fair way to award points.

Obviously, all four of the critical factors are interrelated, and they all would be reflected in the Overall MPGe number – but testing for them and awarding points (in some manner) for them separately, helps focus the designs on the most important aspects – and more importantly helps demonstrate their performance; whether or not the designs get ALL of them right and in the right balance, and if there is something that lags (or breaks) and the vehicle is DQ’d, people will still be able to judge the merits of the design.

We could quibble about how each of these was scored – I am just throwing this out there.  At this moment in time, I feel that the emphasis on the safety, and meeting the letter of the rules, etc. are  distracting the designers from the main point; of maximizing the efficiency.  Obviously, for a finished, production, reasonably priced, appealing vehicle – ALL of these things are also critically important.  These would be determined by finished vehicle, and the buying public.  But, I feel that an emphasis on the overall efficiency, and the four most important factors that directly contribute to maximum efficiency, would have better served the purposes of the X-Prize.

One of the most important things I learned while I was at the X-Prize Knockout competition was: do not dismiss or ignore anybody!  There is a LOT more than meets the eye with all of the entrants, and no matter the results, all the designs have strengths – and weaknesses that are all very informative.

I also was floored by the height of passion by so many people.  The sight of Oliver Kuttner with tears streaming down his face; returning from the starting line of the City Test with the first of his cars about to actually get to the heart of the matter; moves me to tears, as well.  And I’m quite sure that every person involved in the X-Prize, who has put in a similar Herculean effort, feels the same.

This year, for the first time ever, EcoModder has been nominated Best of Green by the wonderful site Treehugger. From now through April 2nd, you can vote on your favorite green things here, and EcoModder can be found under the transportation category.

It’s always nice to be nominated, but it’s even better to win. So please vote for us!