Fuel Economy Challange

  • Thread starter Thread starter barmyclown
  • 31 comments
  • 3,235 views
B

barmyclown

Messages
60
Finally got some time to myself and managed to get the Laguna Seca 200 mile race finished. Has anyone else managed to do this race without refueling.

I used a Caterham Fireblade, running Racing Softs, I think the hardest tyre you cold use might be Racing Mediums anything harder than that might not prove fast enough to do it. Completion time was 2:20: and some seconds.
 
Well done sir 👍

(No sarcasm intended)
 
barmyclown
Finally got some time to myself and managed to get the Laguna Seca 200 mile race finished. Has anyone else managed to do this race without refueling.

I used a Caterham Fireblade, running Racing Softs, I think the hardest tyre you cold use might be Racing Mediums anything harder than that might not prove fast enough to do it. Completion time was 2:20: and some seconds.
Click to expand...

I take it you won the race?
 
Yes by ten laps. I'm sure you could do it with less laps spare, and save even more fuel by not accelerating so hard out of corners, and using the superier cornering ability of something light with a small but powerful engine.
 
Next you should try a tire distance challenge. Jimmy Clark won the Indianapolis 500 in his Lotus 38 Ford on one set of tires, leading 190+ laps.
 
I finished the first endurance race (forgot the name) and only refueled 5 times in my X1!
 
I always wondered if anyone else would want to try a fuel economy race. See who can go the farthest without refueling while maintaining a minimum average speed or minimum lap time.
 
Does the fuel economy actually differ per car? Or does every car use the same amount of fuel?
 
It does differ. I was in an edurance race with super cars and the v12 vantage uses much more than the sp1 does.
 
Lotus380
Next you should try a tire distance challenge. Jimmy Clark won the Indianapolis 500 in his Lotus 38 Ford on one set of tires, leading 190+ laps.
Click to expand...

190 laps on one set of tires?
mother-of-god-template.jpg
 
So far the car with the worst "fuel" economy I've encountered is ironically the Tesla Roadster.

I'm actually amazed that PD simulated different fuel consumptions. I usually race five laps at the nurburgring 24h in arcade mode just for fun and I've seen different consumptions even in cars eith similar stats. I once ran in a 75hp Suzuki Cappuccino and I only spent an amazing 1/8 of the tank. I ran with a 71hp VW 1200 later and although the cars have similar power and weight, I spent a bit more than 1/4 of the tank. I know the bug's engine is almost as twice as large and it has one more piston, but I would assume that since the cappuccino has a forced induccion high reving engine, it would consume more or the same amount of fuel.

Anyway, what matters here is that PD is awesome for taking careful attention to this.
 
Last edited:
Not necessarily surprising, fully electric cars are known for their poor range, hence why they aren't as "big," if you will, as gasoline or diesel powered cars.
 
HuskyGT
So far the car with the worst "fuel" economy I've encountered is ironically the Tesla Roadster.

I'm actually amazed that PD simulated different fuel consumptions. I usually race five laps at the nurburgring 24h in arcade mode just for fun and I've seen different consumptions even in cars eith similar stats. I once ran in a 75hp Suzuki Cappuccino and I only spent an amazing 1/8 of the tank. I ran with a 71hp VW 1200 later and although the cars have similar power and weight, I spent a bit more than 1/4 of the tank. I know the bug's engine is almost as twice as large and it has one more piston, but I would assume that since the cappuccino has a forced induccion high reving engine, it would consume more or the same amount of fuel.

Anyway, what matters here is that PD is awesome for taking careful attention to this.
Click to expand...

Neat! I pay attention to the gas mileage sometimes, but it's usually when I've been driving hard, which translates to pretty wimpy gas mileage. My worst so far was a Toyota MR2 that ate up 1/4th of a tank after one lap on SSR7. :scared:
 
I've wanted to tackle the 9hr Tsukuba race in the Touring Car Prius to see how it went. Before the most recent patch, it was the only car that could maintain it's charge, therefore, power from it's electric engine long enough to be competitive.

Since the patch has adjusted how the cars recharge their battery power from braking, it makes me wonder how the Honda's would go. Previously Tsukuba was the only track with short enough straights and enough braking zones to make it work, also being on Sports tires it helped as you had to brake and coast more.
 
As far as racing goes fuel economy is loosely related to power, as most of don't drive up the straights at part throttle so the more power the more fuel you burn. Some engines will be slightly be more economical than others, so might give an odd lap advantage.

On the tyres side of things I was managing around 20 Laps a set on Racing Soft, with possibly a couple more laps left in them, but wanted to leave a safety margin, and they didn't really change from dark blue.

But I reckon if your careful and went to a harder tire, and were willing to slipstream the rabbit the whole way round, and do a crafty overtake in the last lap, this could be achieved with more fuel in the tank than I had left, or more variation in vehicles that can achieve this (about enough for another 4 - 5 laps).
 
I wonder how much diesel you'd end up using if you used the Tank Car then? :sly:

Or how much petrol an American muscle would use?
 
Is there actually a tyre compound that will last as long as your fuel tank would make you able to stay out of the pits?

And if so, where is the crossover on average (tyre lasting longer than fuel)? And, yes, I know it depends on cars, tracks and driving style. From my experience, I highly doubt it, because tyre durability has been reduced for most compounds and none last longer than when GT5 was released.


Unfortunately, if you have to come into the pits anyway, fuel economy is fun to try out, but a side issue. What's really missing in GT5 are "Racing Superhards", which last approximately as long as your fuel.
 
The other thing as well, I noticed that it takes so long to change tyres that that you could always get some fuel in if you wanted. Not like F1 4 second stops where you would be lucky to get the hose on and off by the time the tyres are swapped.
 
taken from another thread I posted this:

Took the Chevelle for a spin, 6 laps Route X

First 3laps on full throttle: 9 gallons

the other 3 laps doing 90mph: 3.5 gallons!

Now with doing some 90mph in a race is of course nothing to recommend, but it show´s the mentioned detail PD puts in these things, and thats amazing!

Another thing I tested was 20 laps at Tsukuba with the 120i BMW and compared to the 120d their consumption was almost equal, wich is rather unrealistic. A modern Diesel vehicle using injection rails uses around 20 - 25% less compared to an equally powered Gasoline powered Motor (both BMW were stock btw)
 
Last edited:
The 2011 Red Bull averaged 4-5 mpg on the B spec Indy 500.
 
Flaco13
A modern Diesel vehicle using injection rails uses around 20 - 25% less compared to an equally powered Gasoline powered Motor (both BMW were stock btw)
Click to expand...

This is what especially diesel-drivers will tell you at least. As one of the four things everyone in the world lies about, fuel consumption of their own cars is rather questionable.

You're comparing two engines in a high-performance situation. Where do you have the accurate real-life data from about what fuel consumption those engines will have close to the red line? I'm asking this, because engines can behave completely different in rpm-ranges that are not being tested for the official stats. And fuel consumption is in a completely different area when hotlapping. (E.g.: In an interview one of the BMW test drivers said that at the Nürburgring an M3 driven at full speed will use about 40L/100km)

Especially the diesel engines are engines that are not designed to be driven at high rpm-ranges. It could well be that at full throttle the two engines use more or less the same amount of fuel. I'm not saying they do - I don't know for a fact either.
 
snowgt
This is what especially diesel-drivers will tell you at least. As one of the four things everyone in the world lies about, fuel consumption of their own cars is rather questionable.

You're comparing two engines in a high-performance situation. Where do you have the accurate real-life data from about what fuel consumption those engines will have close to the red line? I'm asking this, because engines can behave completely different in rpm-ranges that are not being tested for the official stats. And fuel consumption is in a completely different area when hotlapping. (E.g.: In an interview one of the BMW test drivers said that at the Nürburgring an M3 driven at full speed will use about 40L/100km)

Especially the diesel engines are engines that are not designed to be driven at high rpm-ranges. It could well be that at full throttle the two engines use more or less the same amount of fuel. I'm not saying they do - I don't know for a fact either.
Click to expand...

1st off I never said I tested them in a high-perfomance situation. I haven´t been hotlapping them, and I´m fully aware of the way you get most of the torque range while driving a diesel fueled car. The 120i I almost flat out while with the 120d I shifted earlier apart from that I moved them around the course in a gentle manner, so I could compare better. And what Real Life Data do I have? Well no Data at all but having driven both 120i and 120d BMW in RL for a longer period than just a testdrive I can assure you that the 120d, the Diesel, uses less fuel on 100km than the 120i. :)
 
I ran my CR-X around Spa-Francorchamps in free run for ages and the petrol gauge never moved, is there something wrong with my GT5? :(

I know that the CR-X is good on petrol consumption, but surely not that good :confused:
 
JBanton
I ran my CR-X around Spa-Francorchamps in free run for ages and the petrol gauge never moved, is there something wrong with my GT5? :(

I know that the CR-X is good on petrol consumption, but surely not that good :confused:
Click to expand...

You are aware of that, in order to have fuel consumption, you must turn Tire wear/fuel consumption ON before you start a free run, aren´t you?

If you did, there might really be something wrong!
 
Flaco13
You are aware of that, in order to have fuel consumption, you must turn Tire wear/fuel consumption ON before you start a free run, aren´t you?

If you did, there might really be something wrong!
Click to expand...

I didn't know it was possible to turn it off.
 
Back