Correct me if I'm wrong, but: EV miles divided by gallons saved gives "HV mpg". HV miles divided by "HV mpg" gives gallons used (as calculated from gallons saved).
T That's how I would do. The HV MPG gives me close to my lifetime HV MPG. I think that's more accurate than potentially off by 0.499 gallon.
Agree. The fact that 'EV miles/gallons saved' gives different results to different drivers means that gallons saved (precise to the tenth of a gallon) is personalized by the car computer.
I just tried it for several tanks of mine and the HV mpg was off by 20-50 percent. I think we came to the conclusion awhile back that this is a less accurate way of figuring HV mpg then the old "add 0.5"
WOW this is one amazing result! about 158 charges in August! this is almost 6 charges a day on average! Any time to do something else?
I don't know enough about the workings of that HV mpg read to say except that it seemed high by 15-20%. Consistently though, nothing like the 50% you mentioned - do you recall what the numbers on that one were ? You already know my opinion on the "add .5" - that one can be so far off just using a flat 53mpg is more accurate. Just look at Retired4999's latest - absolutely amazing result but 103miles and 1 gallon... going to 2g's in another mile or three... Using a flat 53mpg means that formula would use a more accurate 1.95 on that calc we're already making assumptions on the 15% charging loss, so to me a better assumption on gas used doesn't hurt just my opinion
I thought so. However, in this post you said several days ago that you had a 500 miles round trip in August that was all HV. Since I did not see these 500 miles in your report I deducted the report is after this trip... Can you explain? was the trip done with another PIP?
I total agree, this is my HV mpg since new. HV miles 5202, 38 percent 50.89 HV mpg. I had 5 gas fills bring my car back from the west coast, winter temps time frame, cold windy, 65-75 mph, 26 degree temps and driving into 35 mph winds on left front of car, drove non stop so no charging at all. Only got 44.26 mpg for 1505 miles. Since then I have 3696 HV miles and averaged 54.19 mpg. So I guess If you were to average at 53.0 miles HV you would be really close! Don't you think?
500 miles was total for my trip. I left home with out a full tank and I knew I did not have enough gas to get home, so while I was in northern Minnesota I filled up for my return.
Using flat 53 mpg would indeed be more accurate for the very high EV% driver, however I think it will hurt those with higher HV% that are achieving 60-65 mpg on HV (warm ICE, better regeneration etc.) What about a combination of the two: 53 or 54 mpg for updates with only 0, 1, or 2 displayed gallons used, the "+.5 g" method for the rest? Just a thought.
You guys do realize that even in a worse case scenario for our original method compared to the new one you are proposing is only about a 3% difference in the final MPGe number? Chances are for most people it would be off by only 1 or 2%. Not to mention that for some people using 53 would lower their MPGe more than what it should be.
I think that's selective as well - the contest was for 1,000 minimum and many can't keep up a great tank for so long. Markable tried to keep this simple which is probably best. Plus there's an existing top 20 list - trash ? recalc ? Poor Retired4999 would have to start all over once Wisconsin winter ends next July
You are correct. That is one of my biggest goals in this whole thing...to keep it very simple. And you are right...it would be a nightmare if we changed a big rule.
I do not really care myself! I just added the info. People were coming up with ideas. I just thought I would give my two cents! I vote to keep things just as they are!