How much fuel does ASS (Auto Start Stop) save?

[THAW]

Note that the tests he's taking about were done over 2,300 miles. That should mitigate your previous concerns about ASS not lasting 100 miles.

That's not really the concern I stated. ASS can obviously last nearly indefinitely at low usage/mpg-savings rates, it just can't sustain a 37.8% engine-off rate over 14 hours as is implied by the 100-mile table data.

Sponsored

 

[Ratbert]

That's not really the concern I stated. ASS can obviously last nearly indefinitely at low usage/mpg-savings rates, it just can't sustain a 37.8% engine-off rate over 14 hours as is implied by the 100-mile table data.

Doing that for 100 miles is most likely not implied for those that are accustomed to seeing fuel usage reported that way.

The standard is gallons (or liters) per 100 miles (or kilometers). It definitely stands out for those of us that use an inverted approach, but it'd be stupid for them to convert those numbers to something with a smaller unit.

 

[Jtphoto]

The bigger the engine, the more difference it will make.

 

[THAW]

Doing that for 100 miles is most likely not implied for those that are accustomed to seeing fuel usage reported that way.

The standard is gallons (or liters) per 100 miles (or kilometers). It definitely stands out for those of us that use an inverted approach, but it'd be stupid for them to convert those numbers to something with a smaller unit.

I understand liters per 100 kilometers is a standard in parts of the world (gallons per 100 miles not so much).

Publishing a fuel savings percentage with a 100-mile standard when it realistically won't be achieved over that distance is either dumb or dishonest.

 

[Ratbert]

I understand liters per 100 kilometers is a standard in parts of the world (gallons per 100 miles not so much).

However, publishing a fuel savings percentage with a 100-mile standard when it obviously cannot be achieved over that distance is either dumb or dishonest.

Converting it to ounces per 1 mile would result in the same percentage change. I'm guessing that's what you were expecting? Or maybe you'd want them to figure out an average commute distance and use that?

Is there a chance that you'd call it a crap study no matter what units were used?

 

[THAW]

Converting it to ounces per 1 mile would result in the same percentage change. I'm guessing that's what you were expecting? Or maybe you'd want them to figure out an average commute distance and use that?

Is there a chance that you'd call it a crap study no matter what units were used?

No. As I stated, they should've reported the actual fuel savings amount during the 1.18 mile, 9 minute, 58 second test - the percentage would remain the same and mpg was covered. Extrapolating that volume figure to a 100-mile rate is dumb or dishonest.

Also, I offered several other reasons it's a crap "study".

Sponsored