Honda Insight Forum banner

Ultra mileage vehicle!

15K views 68 replies 27 participants last post by  jime 
#1 ·
Hello Forum!

It's been a while! I have bought another 2000 M/T Insight for modifying without limitations to achieve 200+ mpg at 55mph. What would you do to the first generation to make this happen? Serious engine mods, shaving weight and where? Body work? Deletion of equipment?

The car is strictly an R&D vehicle. I'm an individual and will be for non profit. I'd love to hear from you, and or try donated parts. The car is running, but needs a front bumper and left trim at the windshield.

Mike Cobb
cobbmp@yahoo.com
(504)338-8265 (cell with unlimited texts)
 
#3 ·
My thoughts are to relocate radiator to rear so front is completely sealed and aerodynamically refined. Engine removed, custom pistons to raise compression ratio, longest connecting rods, thermally ceramic coat combustion chamber, piston, valves and ports, insulate engine, extreme hot air mod, hot fuel mod, teflon coat piston skirts and tranny gears, remove A/C completely, remove entire IMA system.

Lean the weight by removing carpet, etc. install lighter seats, replace side/rear and hatch latch with Lexan, install deflector over wipers, install front wheel spats, modify rear spats, under body smooth panels, smaller 12 volt battery.

Thin aero tires and wheels, mirror removal, etc.
 
#4 ·
I'd say tear out everything in the interior that's not critical to the function of the car, but you might not wish to do that.

Add a turbocharger, make some door handle inserts, add water vapor injection system, remove the passenger seat, tear out all the interior (door sidings, carpet, etc, anything that doesn't hinder crash safety), no radio, speakers, A/C, power windows, or power steering, etc, etc... at least, that's what I'd do. ;)
 
#5 ·
Remove EPS system. Remove rear wiper. Remove antenna and cable.

Why do you want to move the rad to the rear? I think the extra piping and coolant will add considerable weight.

Maybe add electric waterpump.
 
#16 ·
Remove EPS system. Remove rear wiper. Remove antenna and cable.

Why do you want to move the rad to the rear? I think the extra piping and coolant will add considerable weight....
freezin4,

Theoretically at least, the biggest reason for putting the radiator in the rear, is at speed, there is a slight vacuum at the rear of the car relative to the front, and placing the radiator there automatically means more theoretical air flow without needing a fan to pull the air through.

I can't recall the name of the racing motorcycle right now, but about 10 years ago, and young and very creative engineer put the radiator under the rear seat cowling with great result. Very interesting to look at. The cycle was a 1000cc V-twin of his own design.

The extra piping, as you mentioned is something else to consider however, especially on a car. The motorcycle piping is naturally much shorter.

Jim.
 
#6 ·
I don't see how you'll get there without continuous electric assist. To that end, a very high capacity battery pack (40Ah) should do it.
 
#7 · (Edited)
I'm not going to say it's impossible because you can do pretty much anything with enough money. ;) To truly reach your goals is going to take some very significant modification.

Getting rid of the giant gaping hole in the front of the car would be a huge step forward. Weight savings are not realistically going to help much, the car is already very light. Key would be reducing aero drag. The weight reductions and reduction in 12V system draw and all the other little things combined might net you another 5-10mpg if you were really lucky. This might put you at 120mpg under ideal conditions at 55mph. Maybe. Speed kills - MPG in this case.

Engine mods are unlikely to result in any significant increases; most engine mods would tend to lower fuel economy. ;) Because of the integration with the IMA system, a re-tune isn't easy. Lean-burn further complicates matters, and modifying the lean burn window would likely take extensive research.

Ok, I'll say it - I don't think 200mpg @ 55mph steady state will be possible. The car can already only get ~120mpg under ideal, low speed conditions. But here's to trying! Good luck!
 
#9 ·
I'm not going to say it's impossible because you can do pretty much anything with enough money.
I don't know about that. Mercedes has been throwing money at their 1 Liter for years and they're not there yet.


The Insight is a 3 Liter car that can be coaxed into a 2 L with intense effort (and not at 55).

Jumping up to 200 mpg (US) would require one or more of the following nonsensical mods:

Chop 1,000 lbs off the weight (where you'd get it, I have no idea, but helium baloons would not work because of drag)

Find an Escher route where you are always traveling downhill.

Fit a huge battery pack and figure out some way to trailer about 3,000 square feet of solar panels - without adding weight.

Go with a smaller panel and limit yourself to 20 miles per day with 12 hours of charging.

Add a gasification system ("Mr Fusion") and use waste biomass to fuel the system. Instructions


Better to shoot for 150 mpg.
 
#8 · (Edited)
It is possible, but the end result would not be so glamorous as it will resemble the cars (vehicles) specially made for extreme MPG.

And since it will be a conversion the MPG will not be so extreme , and the vehicle will look weird.

One easy way is to remove the roof and the pillars, gut the interior and remove passenger seat, create a cock pit like in a jet fighter plane , (just for the driver ) and close the huge gap with a fiberglass or carbon fiber sheet. Make that cockpit roof(cover)out of plexiglass and on hinges so you can enter from there, remove the doors and seal with carbon fiber sheets the openings. Make a carbon fiber hood and replace the present one. Inflate the tires to 70 psi, clean the engine , get a brand new ima battery , remove the under body paneling and put carbon fiber sheets instead. Make a carbon fiber aero tail.

Loose weight if you have accumulated some over the years like me , the driver being 130 lb versus 230 helps too.

It will look like an ugly home made flying saucer at the end, but will be much closer to 200 mpg than a regular insight .

P.s: check if you will be allowed to drive the end result as it may be not street legal...
 
#13 · (Edited)
Assuming this was in a G1 Insight how exactly did you measure the fuel consumed for 25 miles?

138mpg US at 65mph (for how long?)

You'll need to back up these sorts of claims with some decent evidence for the sceptics and knowledgeable people on here.

I look forward to seeing your posts on the mpg supercar.
 
#12 ·
My goal is to retain as much of the original looks of the Insight as possible at this time. However, changes will need to be made to clean up the aerodynamics of the vehicle, but nothing too radical. The ideal shape is a tandem seating arrangement or better yet a single seat commuter (look at the cars on the highway! Nearly all have only one person in them!). A reduction in weight, frontal area and tapering of the rear is mandatory. Gotta think outside the box.

Radical and unorthodox changes will need to take place with the engine and fuel systems. The IMA is only used for acceleration and is dead weight for a mileage attempt.
 
#17 ·
Insight69

Please post your location, maybe other Insighters can get together with you and witness one of your massive mileage claims.
(I once got 150+ for 29 miles)....per the FCD

Willie
 
#20 · (Edited)
Not impossible: Here's a 1-Liter car

actually does a "liter" better... .9L/100KM.
About the same weight as a Gen1 Insight, too.
Mostly carbon-fiber and with a slightly smaller (800cc) TD ICE.

Set for limited-run production this year!

So it IS possible, just may be extremely difficult for a gen1 to get there.

So here's the link that I left out at first... you can google the VW XL1 if they disallow the link.

http://www.volkswagen.co.uk/about-u...eils-the-xl1-super-efficient-vehicle-in-qatar
 
#22 ·
#24 ·
Interesting. I couldn't find any info on the site about the powertrain other than it comes with a manual or an automatic. Since I pretty much get that mpg (and then some) already, it would be interesting to see what it could do if I drove it like I do the Insight.
 
#26 · (Edited)
The Elio will have a 3-cyl 1 liter, double overhead cam, Direct injection engine.(No HP est.)
(I've already tried to apply for the R&D department)

Willie
Another link:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elio_Motors

There are a lot of three wheeled vehicles being produced now. CAN AM/BOMBADIER etc.
 
#27 ·
The Elio will have a 3-cyl 1 liter, double overhead cam, Direct injection engine.(No HP est.)
(I've already tried to apply for the R&D department)

Willie
Another link:
Elio Motors - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

There are a lot of three wheeled vehicles being produced now. CAN AM/BOMBADIER etc.
I joined their page on Facebook and they sent me a ling to some specs on the engine and it stated 70HP. It also has a smallish 8 gallon fuel tank.
https://www.facebook.com/ElioMotors?sk=app_195269083843309&app_data
 
#30 ·
Remove the side view mirrors and replace with cameras mounted in the cabin. Don't know how much this would help. But it should help some.

-Bryan
 
#68 · (Edited)
They do a lot of this type of mods over on Ecomodder.com. It has been repeated several times and results in 3-5% MPG improvement, depending on the car and who is doing the test;) I got a bit over 3% on a Toyota Echo. Hucho in his book "Aerodynamics of Road Vehicles" concludes that the elimination ob both mirrors will reduce the Cd by .01+/- on most cars.
 
#32 ·
Another way to save

Before you go structurally redesigning the car, perhaps see the thread "As much lean burn as you want"... that might get you an additional 20% or more, depending of course on your driving habits and environment.

Oh, here's the link I forgot for the VW 1-Litre car, the XL1 coming out for production this year.

It's an Hybrid 800cc Turbodiesel with staggered seating, and gets .9L/100Km.
Imagine if they stuck with the original fighter-cockpit style seating!

http://www.volkswagen.co.uk/about-u...eils-the-xl1-super-efficient-vehicle-in-qatar
 
#40 ·
Guys,
I appreciate your inputs, however let's not lose focus on my original question. This topic is not to dispute my claims, but the dream mods to a vehicle to push our vehicles to a higher mpg.

FYI, a day my car was feeling good, I drove from my home in League City (just outside Galveston) to New Orleans (730 miles) and back, then to Austin and back (440 miles) on one tank of fuel with an average speed of approx 65 mph. Houston to New Orleans is flat and Houston to Austin is flat, until you get about 60 miles out then the hills start getting larger. In my "dream ride" I will remove the fuel tank and install a two gallon graduated tank for extremely precise measurements.
 
#41 ·
Interesting



Appreciate the engineering challenge you're posing. Intriguing, yes. Practical? Hmm. Still fun to spitball things like this.

Speaking of fuel tank, easy weight reduction is to run the car with less than a full tank to save weight. About 6 lbs+ per gallon savings. Probably no effect on steady state MPG but stop-and-go will improve. Of course, then you're stopping more often to refuel.

Love the idea of 500 lbs. off the car. BIG challenge to achieve that much. However, others have posted easy and not-so-easy removals to pare 100 lbs. off a Gen1. Lighter 12v battery, dump the A/C, remove passenger seat, etc.
 
#46 ·
Hahahaha.....

That's awesome. Love it.
 
#47 ·
We talk a lot about flat ground as ideal. I don't think it is. Light up and down hills seem to get me the best mileage. Think of it as altitude-based pulse and glide. If you do it right, it seems like you can gain more speed from the down than you lose from the up. There is a back road like this on my way to visit my hometown, and I can really boost my mean tank fuel economy when I take it.
 
#48 ·
I'd have to agree with you. I just keep the throttle in the same spot and let the speed rise and fall; driving with load if you will.
 
#49 · (Edited)
I also agree. If you'll notice in the GPS data I posted above, my total elevation gain was over 11,000' - the trip was through Colorado.

So not exactly rolling hills. But it's not hard to clamber up hills at ~60MPG @ 45MPH in lean burn, and then you go to infinity(And beyond! :D) on the way back down.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top