Ever wonder what kind of gas miledge your LFS Street car is getting? Ever care about how much pollution you are adding to LFS world? Maybe this experiment will help you select your car wisely.



Tests were done utilizing the following control groups:
1. Patch X
2. Test track= KY Oval
3. 5% starting fuel
4. 1 lap
5. No wind
6. Each car using "Easy Race" setup
7. No passengers
8. Drove in the 3rd lane on the Oval (the lane you start in).
9. All cars started in 1st gear, auto clutch enabled, no clutch dumping



The following two tests were done:
1. 40% Throttle position acceleration up to 60mph, shifting at 6000rpms in each car. When 60mph was reached, car was put in top gear and consistent throttle was applied to maintain 60mph (+/- 1mph) for 1 full lap.

2. 100% throttle position for 1 full lap, shifting when the red light told me to.



The Results:
And since i also care about the rest of the world who do not use standard forms of measurement, i made a graph for you metric lovers!

Standard


Metric



I sure hope this brings up some discussion. These numbers just dont seem right at all (realistically). I promise you all these calculations and all these numbers are PERFECTLY ACCURATE. If i need to go more in depth with the experiment to prove my point, i certainly will. (IE, more data points at different scenarios)

Quote :

And since i also care about the rest of the world who do not use standard forms of measurement, i made a graph for you metric lovers!

Well, you didn't put it it l/100km, as is standard over here

Quote from Gil07 :

Well, you didn't put it it l/100km, as is standard over here

Fixed

The figures seem pretty high, compared to real world figures. If you were to knock 10-20% off they would be about right. I guess LFS is more economical than real life. But i suppose you've got to do what you can to reduce your carbon footprint!

Quote from Theafro :

The figures seem pretty high, compared to real world figures. If you were to knock 10-20% off they would be about right. I guess LFS is more economical than real life. But i suppose you've got to do what you can to reduce your carbon footprint!

FZ5 getting 16mpg in highway conditions?? what a fuel hungry 6cyl!!!

I've tried rolling around at low speeds driving economically before and found I got much higher mpg than I would expect in some cars. But I guess as long as LFS is doing a reasonable job with the mpg while racing it's ok.

+ u cant spell miledge

very cool
Interesting to see the XRT gets better economy in cruise mode than the XRG. Gearing I suppose :cyclops:
With the very notable exception of the FZ5(!), I would have thought the cruise figures are a bit low overall.

Quote from theycallmeebryan :

FZ5 getting 16mpg in highway conditions?? what a fuel hungry 6cyl!!!

no wonder I ran out of gas in my TC test.

Wow.

I didn't think the UF1 could get THAT good MPG.. Seriously.. 70?!

And the FZ surprises me as well.. It's only a 3.6L 6, but then again, it is Porsche-performance-oriented, and they don't really factor in fuel economy over performance..

Edit: i cleared this post because it will be useless anyway...


all i want to say is: there are more things which are much more urgent then the fuel consumption. IMO it is still too low on racecars or the cars can carry way too much for their size. future updates should enforce the need to pit and get fuel or tires or whatever... and no repair of suspension and deformation but... as i stated after the: edit NOTHING OF THIS WILL HAPPEN SOON...

You might have as well said imperial and standard insted of standard and metrix

I was interested in the boosted cars. Is it true to real life that turbo cars get better gas mileage? I would of figured they would guzzle gas because of the higher air ratios. I have done intake to my car and fuel millage has increased. Is it because it can breath more? Is a turbo more like this? Just some food for thought.

Quote from Infiniti :

I was interested in the boosted cars. Is it true to real life that turbo cars get better gas mileage? I would of figured they would guzzle gas because of the higher air ratios. I have done intake to my car and fuel millage has increased. Is it because it can breath more? Is a turbo more like this? Just some food for thought.

Yes its true,real cars get more mileage with turbos,becoz they are like "converting air to power" insted of using more gas to do the same.

had every car the exact same revs for the "cruise speeds"?
otherwise it aint really accurate
the gear ratios are just too different for each car for such a test imo.

i did fuel test with LX4 on oval also , and i found out that goind 60 km/h hasbetter fuel economy over speeding to 100 and then waiting till it drops to 40 and thenn speeding back and way better than top speed. it maked a several laps diference with acceleration against constant speed.

Quote from e2mustang :

Yes its true,real cars get more mileage with turbos,becoz they are like "converting air to power" instead of using more gas to do the same.

I'm afraid you're very wrong. Cars in LFS are running on petrol (at least I think they do) so the ratio fuel / air must be constant in order to get maximum power from engine, move over if you change this ratio too much (converting air to power instead of using more gas) the engine will stop working at all. That's very fundamental law of engine physics.

To have more power from turbo engine you need more air (buy pushing to higher RPM) and as a result of that you need more fuel so.... you've got less miles per gallon (or more L per 100 km).

But, if you're cruising at say 60mph, turbo cars will get a better mpg, won't they? If you can pick a high gear in the xrg and the xrt, and stay on 60mph, won't the xrt perform better? Even though the xrt is 200cc more, wouldn't the extra boost given by the turbo counteract that? AFAIK, the car would naturally travel faster with a turbo, so when you slow down, it should use considerably less petrol than non-turbo. I haven't tested this at all, so feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, but it's just my thinking.

Quote from e2mustang :

Yes its true,real cars get more mileage with turbos,becoz they are like "converting air to power" insted of using more gas to do the same.

Don't post if you don't know what you are talking about.

Quote from dougie-lampkin :

But, if you're cruising at say 60mph, turbo cars will get a better mpg, won't they?

If you are cruising at 60mph, then you are not making any boost. Unless you are driving a huge truck.

i was talkin about real cars.so tell me what is gonna be from the air that the turbo makes? u gonna get more power no? i said the turbo helps the engine burn less gas(called in usa the petrol..),by pushing more air into it.thats what i said in a different way.

Quote from e2mustang :

i said the turbo helps the engine burn less gas(called in usa the petrol..),by pushing more air into it.

But... That's wrong...

More power means more fuel is used, period. It's just math. A turbo doesn't convert air to power, it shoves more air into the engine so more fuel can be added while keeping the proper air/fuel ratio. More fuel=bigger explosions=more power.

A turbo engine may get slightly better mileage than a normally aspirated engine of the same power, but only because the N/A engine is likely to be larger in displacement.

Sorry mates, turbo engines get better mileage and more power when the difference is only "the same engine with and without a turbo". That is because of better fuel burning in the engine because of more air. (Although I'm not an automotive expert, this is how it was explained during our truck driving courses in the Army).

Imperial standard
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wi ... /SI-metrication-world.png

More air, less air, same amount of air, well, take two cases where you have same air/fuel ratio (which is likely to be) add more air and see if you add more fuel too to keep ratio same?

Now make graphs of how much more fuel and how much more air there is and you see how things are.

Try stoich for example (14.7 parts of air and 1 part of fuel that is.

Oh yes, I think some cars in LFS consume too little amount of fuel, XRG is really getting quite small consumption, but perhaps with constant 100kph you can get so low consumption, in reality there is accelerations etc. that reduce milleage <- correct spelling