[bwilson4web]

After getting OK from the original poster to cross post here, I needed another hill climb to compare with my data:

Phil Seastrand said:

I just wanted to share the mileage results from a recent trip we took from Roseville, CA to South Lake Tahoe and back. Each way is 94 miles. I reset the trip meter before each leg. Going from Roseville up to Tahoe (somewhere around 7000 ft at the pass) we averaged 38.5 MPG. Coming back down, we averaged 80.2 MPG. The overall trip was 59.35 MPG. The gauge peaked at about 85 MPG when we reached the bottom of the grade and then fell back to 80.2 by the time I reached the house.

Both legs I drove "normally" -- passing cars on the passing lanes, driving the speed limits, etc. The car handled the mountain road very well, even when pushed on some of the curves. I'm very impressed.

I'm going to use:

• 94 miles - user reported distance (Rocklin to Kings Beach is closer in distance)
• 38.5 MPG - user reported mileage
• 55 mph average speed - using Rocklin to Kings Beach, Google reports 93.4 mi, 1 hr 42 mins
• 56 mph - 75.6 mi, 1 hr, 21 min to Donner Summit Pass, Google report

So now to use my hill climb data at 55 mph climbing a 525 ft. hill:


Then we also need to calculate the linear fuel burn at 55 mph:


I would expect at 55 mph, to burn ~0.0680 gallons per 525 ft.. Next comes the fuel cost to travel 94 miles @ 55 mph and I would expect 64 MPG or ~0.0156 gallons per mile.

• 0.907 gals altitude change - 0.0680 * (7000/525)
• 1.466 gals distance @55 mph - 0.0156 * 94
• ~2.373 gals total from performance charts
• 2.44 gals - 94 miles / 38.5 MPG - user reported upgrade segment
• ~2.74% error - (2.44-2.373) / 2.44

Methodology:

1. Measure highest change in altitude (works for a single hill)
2. Measure distance traveled
3. Measure speed
4. Lookup fuel burn in climb chart and calculate altitude change fuel burn (note: multiple hills may require summing of climbs)
5. Lookup MPG at given linear speed and calculate trip distance change

Now I'll be insufferably smug for the rest of the day. <GRINS>

This ZVW30 is an excellent engineering system. The vehicle performance appears to be readily, reproducible. Of course there are minor variables that need to be included in a final performance model but the major ones determine the vehicle performance (my Thanks to Ken@Japan who several years ago emphasized the importance of altitude change in measuring vehicle performance.)

There is more work to be done to incorporate secondary effects such as fuel quality, tire pressure, road surface, wind, temperature, multiple hills and load. Also, I need to map the low-speed performance and factor in an 'age factor' for the traction battery. But like you, I'm very impressed with the ZVW30 and the engineering team that brought us this marvelous machine.

Bob Wilson