Honda Insight Forum banner

1 - 20 of 22 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
281 Posts
Discussion Starter #1 (Edited)
I've been on the 401 & 417 in Ontario Canada between Ottawa and Toronto, going about 1800 km ever couple of weeks the last 4 months. I've driven it like a speed demon (well okay, the I2 can get to speed but maintaining it is a different issue), and granny cautious..

My best drive so far has been the following:

Keeping the car at 112 km/h (70 mph)
Turning Eco off
Using Cruise Control as often as possible!
2 small grill blocks on right and left of the front plates

Obtained 4.8L (49.3 km, got as high as 49.7 but idling at light killed it so I snapped this one before it dropped further) in 4 hours 8 minutes - 440 km (273 miles). I also want to retry this for winter with all 3 grill blocks in place, I suspect I should be able to hit 51 mpg easily.

However, once I mixed Toronto traffic driving in there to the next fill up I was back up to 5.0L on the MID, at pump calculations it was 5.062 L.

Also some interesting notes & observations:

1) Eco On driving tended to put the MID on the more optimistic side and fill ups on 1/2 - 1/4 empty tanks produced the worst at pump and MID calculations off by as much as 1 L/100km. While less than 1/4 tank fill ups didn't matter if I got it down to range 0 or not produced a 0.8 L/100km difference

2) Echo off driving tended to be closer to the mid, but 3/4 - 1/2 empty tank fill up produces the worst numbers with as much as 0.5 L/100km difference (rounding?)

3) There's a very interesting power curve that occurs at 95 km & 112 km, they are identical in fuel use when I map out the data from the OBD-II. I'm not sure if anyone else has noticed this.

4) Paddle shifters on the EX is fun! :) drop it down one when you want to overtake a car and give it some gas.. The fuel use interestingly is slightly better than leaving it in gear, I haven't figured this one out yet.

5) Engine breaking does not generate more regen to charge the battery!

6) While city driving / cruising shift up (if you aren't in 7 already), this seems to save me a but of gas on the MID and seems confirmed on the OBD-II.

7) To ensure consistent fill ups I used 3 fingers from the front of the nozzle and inserted to that point, filled up until it "clicked".

8 ) Stock tires and PSI used, I wanted a less bumpy ride..

Note: I wasn't able to remove the geo-tagging my cell does for the photos so I didn't post it up. You'll just have to take my word for it. :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
281 Posts
Discussion Starter #3 (Edited)
If you can, drive at 60 mph. I've found that you can get about 60mpg on a flat road. It may be a pain to drive that slow, but there's a 5-10 mpg difference between 60 and 65mph.

Sorry, don't know the metric conversion there.
That is where the first power curve is, it's about 95 km/h (59 mph), the second is where I noted 70 mph. The odd part is I can't consistently access or duplicate this second power curve unless I'm on cruise and I let cruise take it over.

Also going 60 mph is a but dangerous considering how aggressive folks get, going 65 is about safe.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
649 Posts
i always drive with eco on no matter where i drive
today i drove with eco off on the freeway for the first time
i didnt feel anything diff but only the gas pedal was more sensitive
i feel like i spent more gas cause i would get blue more
will stick to eco on like always
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
281 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
I typically drive with eco off now, it takes some getting used to but with the hot humid weather I rather like the AC.. :) However, this suggestion is only for the highway, cruise and eco off.

In the 8 months since I've owned my I2, the best example is the "Eco On" error, my best MID tank ever was 4.6L, but calcualted it was 5.56L (I rejected those pictures if I can't confirm them at the pump). Those kinds of errors are just discouraging.. My fuelly numbes aren't the best but the areas I drive them seem reasonable (41.2 MPG, 5.7L, and calcualted on my spreadsheet is only slightly better), the MID lifetime still reads 5.3L..

But driving it and experimentation is still fun, with the GPS and OBD-II, I have found better routes around my more common driving areas.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
156 Posts
So what you are saying is that you get the best highway results with econ off and using cruise?

I discovered this a few months ago, but lately I've been questioning if this is the best way for me. I've been experimenting with econ on and off with cruise as well as econ off without cruise.

My highway mileage is suffering compared to my city mileage so I'm trying to improve this area.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
281 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
So what you are saying is that you get the best highway results with econ off and using cruise?

...

My highway mileage is suffering compared to my city mileage so I'm trying to improve this area.
I'm slow at discovering things, cause I tend to log everything and I mess around after I do to confirm, mostly to ensure it's not a read error.. I think it was from you that I attempted to do more regular eco off highway driving.

Since I've been doing the 416-401 (Ottawa-Toronto) stretch often lately, it's been easy enough to demarc points in my GPS and as I pass them change the driving style.

What are your typical mileage numbers for highway vs city? Mine are all over the place with the experimentation and some speeding.. :rolleyes: However, I average about, 5.6L (42 US MPG) city, and 5.1L (46.1 US MPG) highway.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
156 Posts
Lately it's been city 56 and highway 53 mpg on the MID. I live in a flat town. Though I really have to focus and work at it to get 53 (or I think of it as actually 50 real numbers) on the highway. When I do turn the ac on I set it at 77 and then turn it off when I climb some of the bigger hills or getting on the interstate. I drive right at 62 to 63 mph/100 kph. On the way back from Milwaukee yesterday I used cruise with econ off and got 54. 52 avg mpg on the way to Milwaukee where I used cruise with econ on, and also did a quarter of the driving without cruise trying to get better mpg which did a touch.

In town I drive 5 over the speed limit and set the cruise as soon as I hit 25 usually with econ on. In town I have the windows down. I feel the cars sweet spot is suburban driving of speeds 35 to 50
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
281 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
Those are great numbers, I'm almost jealous, but I haven't been trying as hard, the playful experimentation is just a lot of fun.. :)

Try to stay at 74-75 mph if you use eco off and cruise, this is where the end of the power curve that mirrors 59-65 is, and so in practice you should get much better MPGs since you're using the same amount of fuel but traveling more distance. Should be the sweet spot for flat highways.. :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
156 Posts
Try to stay at 74-75 mph if you use eco off and cruise, this is where the end of the power curve that mirrors 59-65 is, and so in practice you should get much better MPGs since you're using the same amount of fuel but traveling more distance. Should be the sweet spot for flat highways.. :)
Thanks!
Interesting because on a drive across the country I did notice I got better gas mileage driving 70 with econ off and cruise than I did driving 63 with econ on and cruise.
I'm going to have to increase the speed and see what happens.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
131 Posts
I tend to drive with Econ on all the time and use the cruise control. Personally I don't like how the car feels with the Econ off. I guess I have just gotten used to Econ being on.

I live in the mountains of North East Tennessee, needless to say it is pretty hilly. My city driving, I tend to get between 5 and 4.5 L/100 km. Not to shabby if I say so myself.

I have driven with Econ off on the highway with cruise control on and didn't notice any appreciable difference in fuel economy. So I leave Econ on whilst on the highway. My highway driving, I tend to get between 4.2 and 3.8 L/100 km.

Most of the time on the highway I will set my cruise at 100 km/h and let the car decide what it needs to do.:D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
605 Posts
Interesting thread - interesting info. about Econ on/off at highway speeds thanks.

FYI awhile back someone from Eastern Idaho posted about this issue based on his trips North to Montana and West to Northern Idaho. He drove 75-80 mph most of the way. His impression was the Econ off was slightly better mpg because of reduced benefit from the battery/electric motor at these speeds. He said the battery seemed to charge / discharge less often in Econ off then in Econ on. Hence a small mpg improvement with Econ off.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
281 Posts
Discussion Starter #13
GoMetric: Lol, 100 km/h is just too slow, 105 km/h around here is roughly where tractor trailers / trucks are governed to, so going at least that helps to avoid these trucks passing you. :) I just don't get those 4.2 to 3.8 numbers once I average everything out, I get as low as 2 L / 100km on a few 5 minute stretches on the highway, but it doesn't translate into much overall.. I'm going to keep track of it, the flash cards (4x8g) I use on my netbook are full of info that I never have time to process. I'm always trying to find ways to map out the data or do some processing on it.

MovieMike: Currently, I haven't figured out how to measure it or extract the data from the battery /electric motor. The curve for 75+ is higher than even 66-68, it seems the gas engine struggles a lot more, at least on the stretch I do. There's enough of a variation on elevation to try different techniques for 5-15 minutes at a time depending on the location, do you know how flat or hilly the stretch is? :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
605 Posts
MovieMike: Currently, I haven't figured out how to measure it or extract the data from the battery /electric motor. The curve for 75+ is higher than even 66-68, it seems the gas engine struggles a lot more, at least on the stretch I do. There's enough of a variation on elevation to try different techniques for 5-15 minutes at a time depending on the location, do you know how flat or hilly the stretch is? :)
Regarding the fella from Eastern Idaho? There is a major mountain range heading North into Montana with a pass at around 8000 feet. There is another range in Western Montana. I don't know but I'd guess the valleys between mountain ranges are in the 4-5000 foot range.

I'm not sure what makes up the curve you're referring to or the thinking around "measure it or extract the data from the battery /electric motor." but I'd love to know more.

In climbing long up grades (3+% grade 3/4 to 3 miles in length) I've noticed two major design problems with the I2 that impact mpg. First battery capacity is too small. So that at the beginning of the climb the battery / engine combination is strong enough to easily maintain around 50 mph. But the battery charge is quickly used up and total power and speed drop quickly. This brings up the Second problem. The electircal system goes into a forced battery recharging process. So as one adds power through greater gas pedal pressure and/or use of lower speeds in the CVT, much of that power is used to charge the battery, instead of being directed to the wheels where it is needed for climbing the steap upgrade.

My guess is that best flat terrain mpg occurs with the battery at charge level 6 or 5 on the MID. With no arrows from car to battery, there would be no battery charging and thus no battery charging drag or resistence to forward motion, needing gasoline usage / or gas pedal pressure to overcome. Higher then recommended tire pressures also help mpg at this point as well.

The role of Econ On vs Off in all this is not to clear to me, other then the comments of our friend from Eastern Idaho above.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
281 Posts
Discussion Starter #15 (Edited)
I'm not sure what makes up the curve you're referring to or the thinking around "measure it or extract the data from the battery /electric motor." but I'd love to know more.
This a 3d map of Rev per minute vs Instantaneous fuel consumption (X, Y), mapping with speed (Z), these are all readings you can get off the OBD-II and can be logged.

I need to figure out basically how to log the electric motor / battery or info on the hybrid system on the OBD-II. I presume they are custom values hidden somewhere.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
605 Posts
This a 3 (dimensional ?)map of Rev per minute vs Instantaneous fuel consumption (X, Y), mapping with speed (Z), these are all readings you can get off the OBD-II and can be logged.

I need to figure out basically hot to log (?) the electric motor / battery or info on the hybrid system on the OBD-II. I presume they are custom values hidden somewhere.
Thx. I'm not familar with the OBD-II, and the above curve would be most interesting. However it would be incomplete because of the varying contributions of the electric motor. That is, when the battery is fully charged the amount of "Asst" will be very high for a given rate of acceleration (hence a lower instantaneous fuel consumption). Then when the battery is say two thirds full (level 4 on the MID) or half full (level 3 on the MID) the amount of "Asst" will be much lower or will move into negative Asst / "Chg" mode (hence a much higher instantaneous fuel consumption).

Because of the above, in order for the resulting curve / output data to be accurate. My thought is that all OBD-II readings would have to be taken at a single battery state of charge level. Or taken at some specified and controled amount of current flow to the electric motor. Or you'd need to plug in some formula into a computer calculation which instantaneously accounts for changing electric motor output.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
281 Posts
Discussion Starter #17 (Edited)
Yes 3D and hot to log = how to log*.. Having a bad typo day today..

You are correct I did not factor in the electric motor; realized that after this exchange but because my trips and driving are pretty consistent and i know my starting battery level varies, I'll need to look at the start of my trips to figure out if there's something i can reverse. However, the observation I think would still be valid when it's flat given the removal of the battery / assist.

The battery and assist would also explain why I get the odd different where if I drop a gear and speed up the consumption is better than leaving it in gear in my first post thinking on it now.. Will need to think of it more.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
605 Posts
Yes 3D and hot to log = how to log*.. Having a bad typo day today..

You are correct I did not factor in the electric motor; realized that after this exchange but because my trips and driving are pretty consistent and i know my starting battery level varies, I'll need to look at the start of my trips to figure out if there's something i can reverse. However, the observation I think would still be valid when it's flat given the removal of the battery / assist.

The battery and assist would also explain why I get the odd different where if I drop a gear and speed up the consumption is better than leaving it in gear in my first post thinking on it now.. Will need to think of it more.
Thanks :).....I'm looking forward to learning about your findings!

BTW and as a reminder, the electric motor is connected to the crankshaft (which is connected to the CVT and the wheels). So to turn the crankshaft energy must ultimately come from gasoline or the battery or BOTH (in some unknown and constaintly changing proportion).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
281 Posts
Discussion Starter #19
So 4 months later, many miles traveled, and completing all 3 trophies..

I can say the battery charge only mildly affects MPG on slow acceleration, I've been driving the Insight pretty hard lately and my mileage reflects it. I've also figured out why the power curve is the way it is..

At the lower speeds going up small inclines there is still room to add some extra power for gas engine as a result small inclines, although the road may "seem" flat there are several factors that affect the power which are the surface type.

The section I drove over to do my initial measures in the first half of the year was repaved with tar but they had to chip the road to do it, and while the surface was rough the mileage dropped BIG time! Now that it's tar'ed the mileage has gone up again, and when it's not cold out there even exceeds the mileage I got.

So lesson learned from this: Staying between 59-65 produced very good results on small inclines and rough surfaces. When it's smooth and flat 70 is the way to go. The battery only affects mild acceleration and does not seem to help in this case when you're cruising.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
605 Posts
nameless00;180430The section I drove over to do my initial measures in the first half of the year was repaved with tar but they had to chip the road to do it said:
Thx for your posting.

I too have reciently become aware of the important role of road surface in mpg. Lately we've been getting warmer temperatures, into the mid 50's farenheint, but lots and lots of rain. Making very wet roads with lots of puddles. Ordinarily mid 50's temps. and dry pavement give really good mpg. But the effect of the warmer temps. have currently not improved the mpg, due to all the water on the road.

It seems that the water on the road increases tire roll resistence lowering mpg. Just like additional air in the tires and some new tire designs can lower tire roll resisitence increasing mpg.
 
1 - 20 of 22 Posts
Top