Effect of tire pressure on mpg: collecting data

How will you measure the suspension components wearing out faster due to less energy being “absorbed” by the higher inflated tires.

I’m sure you’ll find some like @Grit that take hypermiling seriously participate.

Not bad mpg on your display though.

 

I don't believe most hypermilers would agree that there is that much difference. The rolling resistance vs pressure graphs posted long ago just didn't support that much improvement.

 

how many times do you have to repeat a test with few controls to be legitimate?

 

Suspension components will not wear out faster due to higher tire pressure. While it seems like an obvious result that the wear will increase, the statement is so vague as to be nonsense. In fact, I would bet that Ray the Beagle does not even know the units of measure for spring rate calculations, or the parts that may be affected by wear if the spring rates are changed. And whose specs are you going to use, anyway? The PSI on the door sticker? On the sidewall of the tire? In a writing posted to the world wide web?

Come on Ray: Which parts will wear faster with higher tire pressure? Hint: All tires do not have the same spring rate at 35 PSI. And the spring rate of the tire is only one factor in rolling resistance, which is the number uno factor affected with increased tire pressure.

By my calculations proven in real life trials, 5 pounds of increase in tire pressure from 35 PSI brings 5 mpg more efficiency, while increasing the spring rate by only two nanouggaduggas (2 ndg) -- the universal unit of measure for confined atmospheric induced change of spring rate. The calculation and units are very similar those used to understand the relative variance gravity effects of the turbo encabulator.

 

No sense name calling and pretending to know someone’s knowledge level.

I’m a degreed engineer whose worked with springs and related equipment in industrial settings.

I for one have noticed a ride difference when I “overinflated” our tires.

And all you mentioned is one component of the suspension.

And a coworker of mine has a PIP and had a similar commute and he maxes out the pressure (something like 45-50 psi).

He replaced the shocks at 120k as they were worn out. Mine were in the same worn out position at 180k miles.

While your talking about springs specifically, I’m talking about the gas shocks, the rubber bushings and even some components that rattle more in the cabin due to the rougher ride.

Keep it positive and think a bit about the total picture my pink Prius friend.

 

Oh, the comfort afforded by cognitive bias. "Feeling" a ride difference does not have the sharp edge of definition that bespeaks a fair judgement about reality.

Worn shocks on two cars owned by two people at different miles driven on different routes aren't the type of comparative data that has any value. At least for actual analysis. So, a sample of two, if tire pressure is THE factor in shock wear, says that 150,000 miles is the average life a shock absorber at a range of 35 to 40 PSI. Keeping in mind, of course, that a single pothole can destroy a shock at any time.

 

Since MPG is a function of several variables, % difference of MPG is also a function of the % difference of those variables; if you didn't hold everything else constant (and you didn't--wind, traffic, exact temperature, direction of sunlight [differential heating of tires on each side of the car], etc. all changed), then you need to know the % difference in each of those and calculate the partial derivatives with respect to each variable to find how much the tire pressure actually contributed. Not an easy task! I appreciate what you're going for here, but there are simply too many other factors to start ascribing changes in MPG solely to tire pressure.

The best way to do this, I think, would be to rent a large hanger or other long, indoor space where you can let the car coast in neutral and measure the distance covered from an arbitrary speed to an arbitrary lower speed. That would remove the aerodynamic influence of wind and other cars, the gravitational force due to elevation grades, and temperature variations (assuming it's a temperature-controlled space). Next best thing would be a level test track outdoors, where the effect of wind could be calculated and temperature variations compensated for if measured at the time of testing.

 

+1

I completely agree with the above statement. It is just not possible to determine the real effect of tire pressure on mpg by just changing the tire pressure and driving around.

 

Yes it is, and I've had 2 Prii long enough to know door jam vs 42f/40r the difference IS very noticeable long term. But as they say, YMMV.

 

while its not scientific, we appreciate your time and effort. with each test, i see a bit more 'proof'

 

We also have numerous pieces of actual scientific or research lab proof too. Not large improvements, but still noticeable.

 

Why not rent a speedometer calibration stand and calculate mpg from that. If all you are really concerned with are the deltas for different tire pressures at different speeds, you can effectively establish controls on such a test stand. I would guess the most significant/difficult variable to control would be starting and ending tire temperature and pressure. But even that would be easier to control on a test stand than by driving a circuit.

 

If you are implying that in this situation personal opinion is powered by cognitive bias, what makes you think that?

What makes you think that? Is there a law of physics that supports your opinion?

 

I have never been a dedicated hypermiler, but I did explore the effect of some driver-controlled factors on energy efficiency. After 160K+ miles in an hybrid and an EV, here is what I have come to believe that the speed and the driving technique affect the mpg and mi/kWh more significantly than other factors. Increasing the tire pressure from 35 psi to 40+ psi didn't seem to yield visible improvement in efficiency. I don't have a record of the facts and figures, though.

 

Don't you find it odd that your use of the word "notice" was changed to "feeling" while it was being cited as a form of "cognitive bias"?

...Just saying.

 

No. What's your point? I would appreciate it if you would let me know what the difference is. "I noticed," seems analogous to, "I felt," to me. Both are subjective, unless there is quantitative expression added to the statement. Or am I missing the nuance?

Here is the first synonym that came up in Google: "Notice: to become conscious of someone or something by seeing, hearing, or feeling ..."

I don't think Ray was saying, I" noticed, based on the difference in before and after data from vibration analysis using a Fluke 250 handheld vibration meter, that the ride was more harsh." I think he was speaking qualitatively. Using the seat of the pants meter. Which is subject to cognitive bias.

 

Guess I won't be able join with my mid 40s psi data over the past year. Oh well, this wine will make this frown turn upside down.