Real World MPG vs. DIC MPG?
#21
EPA estimates are really only useful for comparison purposes (and only then, comparing cars that were all tested under the same form of the test EPA was using at the time) and, in fact, do assume/utilize some pretty specific high-MPG producing techniques - see this: http://www.caranddriver.com/features...-mpg-estimates
I'm not complaining that my Corvette does not get 30+ - it's a fun car for me, not my DD. The 25-26 it gets in highway driving is almost as good as my last couple of DDs have gotten and I think is pretty good for a 1990s designed performance car.
#22
Race Director
Member Since: Apr 2007
Location: South Western Ontario
Posts: 11,061
Received 845 Likes
on
721 Posts
I checked my car the first summer after I bought it. It was consistently within 0.5MPG but it was on the high side.
FYI, the 6-speed and auto C5's were re-rated 26mpg & 24mpg highway.
You should try looking at any Canadian fuel economy ratings. What a load of crap they are. For example, the most efficient Ram is rated almost 31MPG highway in Canada but only 25MPG highway in the US. We must have fuel that goes further....
The F150? The bosses truck displayed 12L/100km on the first trip with it. The truck got 15.6MPG calculated. No wonder they didn't bother with the decimal place. Being out by 4L/100km the decimal doesn't matter.
FYI, the 6-speed and auto C5's were re-rated 26mpg & 24mpg highway.
You should try looking at any Canadian fuel economy ratings. What a load of crap they are. For example, the most efficient Ram is rated almost 31MPG highway in Canada but only 25MPG highway in the US. We must have fuel that goes further....
The F150? The bosses truck displayed 12L/100km on the first trip with it. The truck got 15.6MPG calculated. No wonder they didn't bother with the decimal place. Being out by 4L/100km the decimal doesn't matter.
Last edited by lionelhutz; 01-07-2014 at 03:31 PM.
#23
Pro
Reasons for real MPG differences and optimistic DIC MPG readings:
One of the variables involved in MPG is Altitude . I am at 5200 to 5800 feet above sea level and all of the fuel injected vehicles that I have owned get 2-3 more MPG than at sea level. But then- the DIC should take altitude into consideration when calculating . But Fuel injected vehicles will always get more MPH at higher altitude.
The fuel injection system lessens the amount of injector duty time when altitude is increased.
All stock speedometers are calibrated optimistic for stock tires with new tread depth at the highest possible tire temperature and maximum tire pressure,at maximum load- that the car will experience. As the tire wears-the speedometers will become more true.
Many vehicle tires are not correctly inflated and manufacturers want the speedometers to show optimistic or near correct speed-even when the tires are low on pressure. Optimistic speedometers are less likely to cause a speeding ticket.
One of the variables involved in MPG is Altitude . I am at 5200 to 5800 feet above sea level and all of the fuel injected vehicles that I have owned get 2-3 more MPG than at sea level. But then- the DIC should take altitude into consideration when calculating . But Fuel injected vehicles will always get more MPH at higher altitude.
The fuel injection system lessens the amount of injector duty time when altitude is increased.
All stock speedometers are calibrated optimistic for stock tires with new tread depth at the highest possible tire temperature and maximum tire pressure,at maximum load- that the car will experience. As the tire wears-the speedometers will become more true.
Many vehicle tires are not correctly inflated and manufacturers want the speedometers to show optimistic or near correct speed-even when the tires are low on pressure. Optimistic speedometers are less likely to cause a speeding ticket.
Last edited by phoneman91; 01-07-2014 at 06:13 PM.
#24
Instructor
Instrument accurracy
This thread on C5 MPG (http://forums.corvetteforum.com/c5-t...6-avg-mpg.html) included many comments citing MPG that forum members have gotten on their C5s. I've seen many, many other posts with claimed MPG numbers. It appears that most of these cited MPG figures are based on the readout from the DIC. Only occasionally will the poster note that the cited MPG was based on calculations from miles traveled divided by # of gallons used.
I calculate MPG on every fill-up and also note the DIC readout MPG. Typically, the DIC readout is notably higher than the manual calculation (actually not manual - I use an online MPG tracking site that does the calculations). For example, the last few months of fill-ups show this:
Calculated MPG/DIC MPG Readout (Difference)
25.0/26.5 (+1.5)
16.3/19/4 (+3.1)
24.1/25.9 (+1.8)
19.1/22.1 (+3.0)
15.5/14.2 (-1.3)
17.2/19.1 (+1.9)
22.6/24.6 (+2.0)
18.5/21.4 (+2.9)
22.2/24.8 (+2.6)
19.2/22.1 (+2.9)
17.9/20.0 (+2.1)
The DIC MPG is consistently a couple MPG higher than the calculated MPG, which raises doubt as to the accuracy of the DIC MPG and which, therefore, calls into question all the claims of 30, 31, 32 MPG here on the forum. The best MPG I've gotten in the 3.5 years I've owned my '99 (auto, 3.15) is 26.3. My father had this car before me and the best he ever got was 29 (although that was a fill-up, get immediately on the interstate, drive 130 miles with top and windows up, get off the interstate and immediately fill up again).
So, a number of questions are raised. Why are the DIC numbers so far off the actual? Is this just my car? Hard to tell as I suspect the vast majority of C5 drivers who post MPG claims are basing those claims solely on the DIC readout. I would be interested in hearing from others who have similar comparative data.
K9Leader
Red cars are faster.
I calculate MPG on every fill-up and also note the DIC readout MPG. Typically, the DIC readout is notably higher than the manual calculation (actually not manual - I use an online MPG tracking site that does the calculations). For example, the last few months of fill-ups show this:
Calculated MPG/DIC MPG Readout (Difference)
25.0/26.5 (+1.5)
16.3/19/4 (+3.1)
24.1/25.9 (+1.8)
19.1/22.1 (+3.0)
15.5/14.2 (-1.3)
17.2/19.1 (+1.9)
22.6/24.6 (+2.0)
18.5/21.4 (+2.9)
22.2/24.8 (+2.6)
19.2/22.1 (+2.9)
17.9/20.0 (+2.1)
The DIC MPG is consistently a couple MPG higher than the calculated MPG, which raises doubt as to the accuracy of the DIC MPG and which, therefore, calls into question all the claims of 30, 31, 32 MPG here on the forum. The best MPG I've gotten in the 3.5 years I've owned my '99 (auto, 3.15) is 26.3. My father had this car before me and the best he ever got was 29 (although that was a fill-up, get immediately on the interstate, drive 130 miles with top and windows up, get off the interstate and immediately fill up again).
So, a number of questions are raised. Why are the DIC numbers so far off the actual? Is this just my car? Hard to tell as I suspect the vast majority of C5 drivers who post MPG claims are basing those claims solely on the DIC readout. I would be interested in hearing from others who have similar comparative data.
K9Leader
Red cars are faster.
#25
Tech Contributor
Member Since: Dec 1999
Location: Anthony TX
Posts: 32,736
Received 2,180 Likes
on
1,583 Posts
CI 6,7,8,9,11 Vet
St. Jude Donor '08
I you ever change the fuel injectors to other than OEM Stock, you will need to go into the PCM and readjust the calculated parameters based on injector pulse width.
Bill
Bill
#26
Safety Car
Hmmm. I must be a strange specimen in the corvette lab. I don't calculate my MPG every fill up. Sometimes I don't fill up, honestly. Sometimes it's cold and windy so I just put in four gallons to get home. Guess I just don't see the point in meticulously calculating MPG. Either that or I just have a life. Probably the first option.
#28
Drifting
...calls into question all the claims of 30, 31, 32 MPG here on the forum.
All the numbers I quote below are hand-calculated, not DCI... I average 26 mpg from tank to tank--that's anywhere from 25.7-26.3 for "local" driving depending on weather, traffic, and destination.
If memory serves, my best is 26.8 for a 6,000 mile round trip drive from podunk, Mississippi to San Francisco. The 26.8 overall figure includes 2 weeks of metropolitan heavy commute driving. Excluding the 2 weeks (about 800 miles), the freeway-only number was 28.3 (that's not memory, that's my recorded number), rolling hills and all. My freeway speed averaged 73mpg (just under the 5-over limit in most states--yeah, I could go faster, but you wouldn't bleeve how many cops love to hassle me because of the MS plates; after all, I'm just a trespassin' dumasped furrin rednek); allow spurts to ~90 for passing, and a "constant 85mph" when I was blessed with a scout car I could pace behind. There's only two places in the country that I've driven where I can recall driving long stretches (~100mi or more) of flat ground in the Vette--AZ, and FL. On one of my trips, once, I got a DCI-claimed 33-something mpg, but that was only for the time I was stuck behind an 18-wheeler through 25 miles of a one-lane road 55mph construction zone once in flat west Texas. We were cheating at 62mph.
If you look at the EPA estimate, it's only 28mpg for the later model c5s, so 25 or 26 are prolly the numbers to expect. Skin out the AZ, FL, OK, KS, NE, etc responses for their "flat" terrain, and you'll probably see that most results tally with that 'real-world' EPA numbers. But I'd stipulate that a 28-32mpg claim from some of our flat-land writers ain't all DCI smoke.
Last edited by dork; 02-23-2015 at 11:40 AM.
#30
Haha, true, but some of us are just nerds
I calculate most of my fill-ups in the vette as well. It's a sanity check to me, but also just another source of info to check up on my efficiency with the car.
Best I've ever gotten was 28.0 (hand calc'd) and 30.2 on the DIC. That was from Gatlinburg, TN to western KY (not sure on mileage). That's in my 02 z06 running between 65 and 80. Full bolt-on car with mail order tune. It varies but is always between 1-2.5mpg high.
I calculate most of my fill-ups in the vette as well. It's a sanity check to me, but also just another source of info to check up on my efficiency with the car.
Best I've ever gotten was 28.0 (hand calc'd) and 30.2 on the DIC. That was from Gatlinburg, TN to western KY (not sure on mileage). That's in my 02 z06 running between 65 and 80. Full bolt-on car with mail order tune. It varies but is always between 1-2.5mpg high.
#31
Drifting
HMMMmmmm... "I do, I do" says the nerd kid with his hand up at the back of the class... Pure fact:
I traded a Prius for a Corvette. No lie. I just now figured out gas is costing me an extra $282/year (for 20,000 miles of freeway driving). Insurance costs are the same believe it or not; $20 more for the same coverage per year. Who'da thunk it?
I *do* miss that Prius fuel display: "44mpg" in street driving, but then, I shouldn'ta traded the second Prius for a Suburban. (one accident in the Prius vs. a GM 4x4 convinced us to get out of them) And I just figured out what driving an 'armored car' costs vs. a Prius--$2100/year for gas. A piddlin'.
Sooo... the moral of the story is, a C5 Z will only cost ya about another $300/year ifn it's your freeway cruiser (with a 20k mile cap). The Prius only got 37.5 across country; its' strength is commute traffic. So now ya know. Yeah, yeah.... I know; you wasn't interested in the first place. I'll go away now.
I traded a Prius for a Corvette. No lie. I just now figured out gas is costing me an extra $282/year (for 20,000 miles of freeway driving). Insurance costs are the same believe it or not; $20 more for the same coverage per year. Who'da thunk it?
I *do* miss that Prius fuel display: "44mpg" in street driving, but then, I shouldn'ta traded the second Prius for a Suburban. (one accident in the Prius vs. a GM 4x4 convinced us to get out of them) And I just figured out what driving an 'armored car' costs vs. a Prius--$2100/year for gas. A piddlin'.
Sooo... the moral of the story is, a C5 Z will only cost ya about another $300/year ifn it's your freeway cruiser (with a 20k mile cap). The Prius only got 37.5 across country; its' strength is commute traffic. So now ya know. Yeah, yeah.... I know; you wasn't interested in the first place. I'll go away now.
#32
Instructor
K9Leader
If you own or know someone that owns EFI LIVE Tuning Software ( I don’t know if HP Tuners has it or not) you can FINE TUNE the reported DIC MPG and AVERAGE mpg reading.
For those of us who have changed fuel pressure or changed fuel injector size, we have to use those tuning tables to RE-ADJUST that calculation.
So, it’s possible for you to get it more accurate.
Bill
If you own or know someone that owns EFI LIVE Tuning Software ( I don’t know if HP Tuners has it or not) you can FINE TUNE the reported DIC MPG and AVERAGE mpg reading.
For those of us who have changed fuel pressure or changed fuel injector size, we have to use those tuning tables to RE-ADJUST that calculation.
So, it’s possible for you to get it more accurate.
Bill
My C5Z always reads 7% high. Just this morning I calculated 14.4 MPG and the DIC was 15.5 MPG. I don't know exactly how the calculations are performed, but I am going to change the B3501 scalar from 1.0 to 0.93 and see how that averages out.
#34
Burning Brakes
My DIC is usually very close..
But I believe that some of the optimistic figures may be accounted for
by the amount of ethanol in your fuel..
Remember, ethanol does not provide as much energy as gasoline.
So even though you used 10 gallons of gasoline to X amount of miles,
it may take 10.2 gallons if you have 10% ethanol.
Also, I don't know if the C 5's have an ethanol fuel map.
The Air Fuel Ratio Stoic of gasoline is 14.7. The Stoic of
gas/ethanol is lower ( i think something like 14.3 ish).
So in my opinion, this may account for mileage being "off".
I try to get NO Ethanol fuel, but around here I can only find in 87 octane.
So I have to make a choice of no ethanol OR add octane boost - which most have alcohol in them, so I guess it's a toss up
But I believe that some of the optimistic figures may be accounted for
by the amount of ethanol in your fuel..
Remember, ethanol does not provide as much energy as gasoline.
So even though you used 10 gallons of gasoline to X amount of miles,
it may take 10.2 gallons if you have 10% ethanol.
Also, I don't know if the C 5's have an ethanol fuel map.
The Air Fuel Ratio Stoic of gasoline is 14.7. The Stoic of
gas/ethanol is lower ( i think something like 14.3 ish).
So in my opinion, this may account for mileage being "off".
I try to get NO Ethanol fuel, but around here I can only find in 87 octane.
So I have to make a choice of no ethanol OR add octane boost - which most have alcohol in them, so I guess it's a toss up
#35
Le Mans Master
Member Since: Apr 2001
Location: Was New Orleans but swam to Baton Rouge LA
Posts: 5,928
Received 275 Likes
on
232 Posts
Cruise-In IX Veteran
I do not really drive my Z much anymore now that I have a VW for my commute. I did however start using fuelly to track my fill ups. My mileage these days is always 15-17 mpg in the Z. I mainly just drive it around the city and goof off when I am in it. If anyone cares to start tracking their mileage Fuelly offers a great site, and you can look at other cars as well.
http://www.fuelly.com/driver/sigforty
http://www.fuelly.com/driver/sigforty
Last edited by Sigforty; 02-26-2015 at 04:39 PM.
#36
Burning Brakes
I completely top off the tank every time I fill up. Why? Because if I experience a dramatic reduction in mileage, I have an indicator that something is wrong. Sometimes, a gas mileage "hit" is the very first indication that something is wrong somewhere in "there."
I calculate, manually (in my head - I AM a CPA, after all), my gas mileage but never pay any attention to the DIC's mpg data. In my judgment, the DIC is incapable of accurately accounting/adjusting for the number of variables that occur. Actual miles divided by actual gallons (using a calculator if you wish) is always CORRECT.
One other thing I do (with all three of my cars) is check the miles I have driven just before filling the tank, then predict (based on the "normal" mpg I get for each car) how many gallons I'm going to put in the tank. Never get surprised in my C-5.
In my daily driver, I occasionally get surprised when a fill-up requires more gallons than I predicted. But virtually always, that discrepancy is accounted for by the fact that my wife drove my car during this tank-full. She loves to start the car, then let it idle in the driveway while she screws around with girly things (hair, make-up, cell phone calls, etc.). Particularly wasteful when the air conditioner's running, and she typically leave the AC "on" even in the winter.
I rarely have the AC on at all (unless I'm using my car in "commute mode"). I'd rather have the windows down, and listen to the mechanical music my car makes. After all, that's why I own it.
Lastly...I absolute WON'T drive my car in cruise control mode. WTF? My 600+ rwhp C-5 is for driving, for goodness sake. Plus, on Texas highways I can't drive at a constant speed for any long stretches. I always fudge and go +10 mph whenever I can; and I invariably run up on a pink-haired lady, or out-of-state licensed car, who persists in going 2 mph UNDER the posted speed, and in the passing lane. (In my judgment it's why the right to bear arms was one of the first amendments to the constitution, but that's another thread).
The Lizzard
I calculate, manually (in my head - I AM a CPA, after all), my gas mileage but never pay any attention to the DIC's mpg data. In my judgment, the DIC is incapable of accurately accounting/adjusting for the number of variables that occur. Actual miles divided by actual gallons (using a calculator if you wish) is always CORRECT.
One other thing I do (with all three of my cars) is check the miles I have driven just before filling the tank, then predict (based on the "normal" mpg I get for each car) how many gallons I'm going to put in the tank. Never get surprised in my C-5.
In my daily driver, I occasionally get surprised when a fill-up requires more gallons than I predicted. But virtually always, that discrepancy is accounted for by the fact that my wife drove my car during this tank-full. She loves to start the car, then let it idle in the driveway while she screws around with girly things (hair, make-up, cell phone calls, etc.). Particularly wasteful when the air conditioner's running, and she typically leave the AC "on" even in the winter.
I rarely have the AC on at all (unless I'm using my car in "commute mode"). I'd rather have the windows down, and listen to the mechanical music my car makes. After all, that's why I own it.
Lastly...I absolute WON'T drive my car in cruise control mode. WTF? My 600+ rwhp C-5 is for driving, for goodness sake. Plus, on Texas highways I can't drive at a constant speed for any long stretches. I always fudge and go +10 mph whenever I can; and I invariably run up on a pink-haired lady, or out-of-state licensed car, who persists in going 2 mph UNDER the posted speed, and in the passing lane. (In my judgment it's why the right to bear arms was one of the first amendments to the constitution, but that's another thread).
The Lizzard
Last edited by LoneStarLizzard; 02-26-2015 at 06:23 PM.
#37
Melting Slicks
If you rely on Computers you are out of your mind. It ain't no question, you are wrong, simple as that. It is virtually impossible for computers to calculate precision at this level. If you think so, show me.
#38
Instructor
The computer should be able to calculate the MPG to a reasonably high degree of accuracy.
The computer knows how many revolutions the rear axles are turning from the speed sensor on the differential. This should be as accurate as the agreement between the computer's programmed value for tire size and the actual circumference of the tire. Hysteresis of the rubber might cause some minimal fluctuation in the diameter of the tire and centrifugal force will cause a very slight increase in the tire diameter with increasing speed, but I would estimate either of those variables to be much less then 1% at highway speeds.
The computer can also keep track of the individual pulses of the fuel injectors, and here is where a much higher order of variability is encountered. When in new or freshly serviced condition, injector flows rates are well known and match closely across a set. After years of service flow rates drift and vary, nozzles become clogged, and the pressure regulator may be off from its initial rated value. The injectors spray fuel into a manifold that can be in a state of flux pressure wise, causing variations in the quantity of fuel delivered. Voltage fluxuations can increase or decrease the pulse width time. Changing fuel temperature changes the density of the fuel, I think that is totally unaccounted for in the programming.
What does it mean? How accurate can the computer be?
I think it is best determined empirically.
My C5Z DIC is off by 7% consistently. 2% from different sized tires and 5% "other". Once I "true" the fuel economy scalar in EFI live, I'll can track the MPG and see if it matches more closely with my calculated number.
How do I account for fuel temperature and corresponding density change from fuel delivered at the gas pump?!
Maybe I'm putting a little too much thought into this.....
The computer knows how many revolutions the rear axles are turning from the speed sensor on the differential. This should be as accurate as the agreement between the computer's programmed value for tire size and the actual circumference of the tire. Hysteresis of the rubber might cause some minimal fluctuation in the diameter of the tire and centrifugal force will cause a very slight increase in the tire diameter with increasing speed, but I would estimate either of those variables to be much less then 1% at highway speeds.
The computer can also keep track of the individual pulses of the fuel injectors, and here is where a much higher order of variability is encountered. When in new or freshly serviced condition, injector flows rates are well known and match closely across a set. After years of service flow rates drift and vary, nozzles become clogged, and the pressure regulator may be off from its initial rated value. The injectors spray fuel into a manifold that can be in a state of flux pressure wise, causing variations in the quantity of fuel delivered. Voltage fluxuations can increase or decrease the pulse width time. Changing fuel temperature changes the density of the fuel, I think that is totally unaccounted for in the programming.
What does it mean? How accurate can the computer be?
I think it is best determined empirically.
My C5Z DIC is off by 7% consistently. 2% from different sized tires and 5% "other". Once I "true" the fuel economy scalar in EFI live, I'll can track the MPG and see if it matches more closely with my calculated number.
How do I account for fuel temperature and corresponding density change from fuel delivered at the gas pump?!
Maybe I'm putting a little too much thought into this.....
#39
Instructor
Member Since: Jan 2015
Location: williamstown nj
Posts: 103
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Last week, I made a 100 mile run up the New Jersey Turnpike. Filled it before I left and filled it when I got back. I have a 99 6 spd. I got 25.5 mpg dividing gals used against miles traveled. My DIC said 21.3.. Bruce
#40
Race Director
Member Since: Nov 2000
Location: Beverly Hills (Pine Ridge) Florida
Posts: 10,152
Received 525 Likes
on
374 Posts
Are you getting the correct amount of fuel you are paying for (I know, "state certified" and all that)?
And don't forget that 10% ethanol results in about 5% less fuel economy......
Plasticman
Last edited by Plasticman; 02-27-2015 at 10:28 PM.