Fuel Efficiency and the Yaris

[sbergman27]

Originally Posted by Boost Addicted

I also have to disagree with this lol. As you DO get zero mpg while warming up, you're getting worse fuel mileage driving it cold, especially in the winter... In the summer, not so much.

This very interesting topic is one which calls for a great deal of quantitative testing. It can't be discussed in coarse terms like "driving vs not driving" or "winter vs summer". Obviously, putting it in drive and letting the idle speed pull you toward the edge of the parking lot is going to get you better FE than just sitting there idling. On the other hand, turning the key and tooling out onto the 70 MPH Interstate is going to be worse than just sitting there at idle for a while. The truth lies in the minute details of the specific situation.

Intuitively, I would say that if it is practicable to drive very slowly and leisurely until the "Cool" light goes off (which happens at about 128F coolant temperature, BTW) then that is probably the best thing to do. I you must push the engine hard from your cold start position, then it may be best to warm it up a bit. This is not a question with a simple answer. And I'm not Aristotle. So I won't claim to have an answer based upon pure logic and reason.

We need some experimental data to sort this one out.

-Steve

[Boost Addicted]

Honestly I don't feel the truth lies in minute details of the situation... But none the less, the huge factor of increased engine wear is at play. And mileage doesn't matter too much when you have worn piston rings at 150K.

And this isn't based on ''pure logic and reason'', its based on fuel mileage calculation.

[sbergman27]

Originally Posted by Boost Addicted

Honestly I don't feel the truth lies in minute details of the situation... But none the less, the huge factor of increased engine wear is at play.

That is a different, but valid, vector, which I was not addressing. But I would say that it actually *increases* the complexity of the question. I would agree that including that metric would shift things a bit toward delaying, or slowing down the allowed driving speed.

Consider that you are going to get more miles out of the engine if you start it and let it idle in drive, at whatever speed that gets you, and if conditions allow, than if you just sit there getting 0 miles per revolution out of it.

Actual data *is* needed to map this landscape.

-Steve

[Boost Addicted]

Meh ::shrugs::, I'll drive how I drive and you guys can drive how you drive lol, I was just throwing in my .02

All I'm saying is, with the way I drive as specified above (this is for the Jetta, my girlfriend has the Yaris) I get 34mpg combined city highway... And I have about 275wtq. I'm not bragging about numbers, I think the Yaris is a very solid built car, everything feels tight, its comfortable, and its practical... I'm just saying that if its possible for a larger displacement engine with much more power to get as much fuel mileage as it does, you Yaris owners could benefit from the same techniques and practices I use to get the full potential out of your car.

[sbergman27]

I'm not certain that warming up vs not makes an easily measurable difference, depending upon how you do it. I do maintain that if one carefully measured the differences, the resulting data set would likely be interesting. And perhaps hold unexpected surprises for both of us.

I'm curious. Once you finish warming up... where are you, typically, 3 minutes later?

-Steve

[Boost Addicted]

No, I agree with the idle vs. cold run thing, but shifting at higher RPM's, coasting in gear, and crusing at higher RPM's definitly seems to help me save a bunch of fuel. Infact if you try shifting at 3-3.5K vs. 2k RPM's, you can feel a difference.. An ease, if you will, between the two. Certainly a smoother clutch engagement.

As for 3 minutes idle warmup, in summer, fall weather, I'm probably between 120 and 130*F. 190*F is op temp. In the winter, weather really varies... Sometimes its 5 minutes to get up to that temp. I usually start driving at 120-140*F cause by the time I'm at the end of my street, I'm at 190*F.

[Loren]

Originally Posted by Boost Addicted

All I'm saying is, with the way I drive as specified above (this is for the Jetta, my girlfriend has the Yaris) I get 34mpg combined city highway.

34mpg is good for your car, I'm not going to say it isn't. But...

34mpg is only 17% more than the EPA rating of 29 hwy for your Jetta.

Who do we trust for advice on how to most efficiently drive a Yaris? The guy who drives a Jetta and only beats EPA by 17%... or the guys who drive Yarii, and regularly beat EPA by over 30%?

I took the advice of the guys getting over 30% better than EPA (that's 47+mpg), learned and practiced the techniques, and now I *am* one of those guys.

[Boost Addicted]

lol my friend, I'm not driving an RX-8 with a wankel rotory engine... Our engine designs are nearly identical. Four pistons, same injection system, both gasoline engines, and so on... Theories that work on a Volkswagen will work on a Toyota, a Honda, a Ford, and so on. Both are manual transmissions... So think about it. And learn to read, because 34mpg is my combined city/highway. Pure highway is about 37mpg.


Must I say again, this is my two cents... Take it or leave it. I don't care. But please don't argue untill you read thuroughly and know the facts of the argument, like internal combustion engine function, and transmission syncro operation. Not tryin to be a dick here, my initial intentions were to help out. Clearly I am not, so I'll end this here... If I wanted to fight with people I'd head to vwvortex.

[sbergman27]

Originally Posted by Boost Addicted

But please don't argue untill you read thuroughly and know the facts of the argument, like internal combustion engine function, and transmission syncro operation.

Actually, this can all be settled in a fairly straightforward way. As I've said before, we need data. And that's exactly what the Scangauge II collects very well.

To what temperature would you recommend warming the engine before starting to drive? (The "Cold" light goes off at 130F.)

I can simply pick, say, two very different courses. One which requires only light throttle to reach a particular close by destination. And another which involves getting right onto the highway.[1] Both courses can be run, always from a cold start at similar ambient temperature, with a warm up period, and without.

That should throw some illumination upon this subject of contention. And the results might suggest a further experiment or experiments. Arguing in a vacuum is kind of pointless.

This would address the fuel consumption issue. The engine wear issue is, unfortunately, more difficult to put numbers on.

That said, I'm off to the Rocky Mountains shortly, and will likely not begin to address this until at least early next week. But anyone with the proper instrumentation should feel free to start without me. ;-)

-Steve

[1] Making certain, of course, that both courses are long enough that the engine is at 180F by the end of them, even without a separate warm up period.

[Boost Addicted]

''Collects very well''? Did I read that correctly? You use a $200 scan tool that has 5 buttons to figure out all the necessary information? Soo... Can you read fuel maps/trims? Read individual measuring blocks for injector pulse width and duty cycles? Open and closed loop? Monitor and log multiple sensor outputs? Suggested vs. actual MAF, MAP, TB measurments? ... Do you even have wideband oxygen sensors to measure your precise fuel combustion? Oooor... Do you just have some magic program that calculates fuel mileage? Cause I have that on my dashboard in the Jetta... I don't need a scan tool to do this. I can just go ahead and do it for you if it's gonna be the same thing.

Come back when you have a TIS Techstream.

Until then, Mr. Burgman, you can get yourself a nice magnetic drain plug, and again, as said before, drive one cycle of 5000 miles driving cold, right off the bat... No waiting. Then another 5000K miles letting the car warm (in winter months), or giving her 10 seconds minimum for proper distribution of lubrication if in summer months, then compare volume of metal material on the magnet.

If you don't give a damn about engine wear and all you care about is fuel mileage, then by all means let me dismiss this situation now... Because you've got larger problems in life to deal with if you consider engine wear<minimal fuel savings.

[sbergman27]

Originally Posted by Boost Addicted

''Collects very well''? Did I read that correctly? You use a $200 scan tool that has 5 buttons to figure out all the necessary information?

The necessary information to resolve the fuel economy question is nothing more than total fuel consumption for the trips. Think about it. So all of your hand waving about sensor outputs, etc. is completely irrelevant. I have already expressed, clearly, in a previous post in this thread, that engine wear is a factor that needs to be taken into account. Engine overhauls represent a fair investment in resources. Not to mention personal expense. But I also noted that engine wear is more difficult to quantify and would be beyond what my methodology would try to address. You might want to review the thread.

I'm not addressing the magnetic drain plug bit since I assume that it was not intended to be taken seriously. I suppose something might be done using UOA results, to the extent that one trusts them... which I don't particularly.

BTW, you didn't answer my question about your preferred target temperature for the warm ups.

Also, you really need to calm down. Your post is borderline irrational, and frankly, inappropriate in tone. In short, you seem to be frothing a bit.

This is the only response that I intend to make to a nonconstructive post in this thread. Life is too short to waste time on such things.

-Steve

[127.0.0.1]

Originally Posted by Boost Addicted

''Collects very well''? Did I read that correctly? You use a $200 scan tool that has 5 buttons to figure out all the necessary information? Soo... Can you read fuel maps/trims? Read individual measuring blocks for injector pulse width and duty cycles? Open and closed loop? Monitor and log multiple sensor outputs? Suggested vs. actual MAF, MAP, TB measurments? ... Do you even have wideband oxygen sensors to measure your precise fuel combustion? Oooor... Do you just have some magic program that calculates fuel mileage? Cause I have that on my dashboard in the Jetta... I don't need a scan tool to do this. I can just go ahead and do it for you if it's gonna be the same thing.

Come back when you have a TIS Techstream.

Until then, Mr. Burgman, you can get yourself a nice magnetic drain plug, and again, as said before, drive one cycle of 5000 miles driving cold, right off the bat... No waiting. Then another 5000K miles letting the car warm (in winter months), or giving her 10 seconds minimum for proper distribution of lubrication if in summer months, then compare volume of metal material on the magnet.

If you don't give a damn about engine wear and all you care about is fuel mileage, then by all means let me dismiss this situation now... Because you've got larger problems in life to deal with if you consider engine wear<minimal fuel savings.

is 11 years 190,000 miles considered long enough ?


I 'll say something for engine wear and toyota motors. I operate a 5VZFE. I owned my 4runner from new in Dec 1998 to today, it has 190,000 + miles on it. all it ever got since mile 600 was mobil 1 5-30 every 8000 miles.

(plus timing belts and regular owners manual maint. at the dealer)

I always, ALWAYS just jump right in and drive it, zero or minimal warmup
(only as long as it takes me to adjust whatever I am doing. I get in car and always go immediately.) transmission and engine still run better now than the first 10,000 miles. ya I don't stomp it hard until it is warm but I go the speed limit. engine is still maybe 40 or 50 deg and climbing I am already doing 40mph.



so....I live in NE and oh yeah you betcha I do this when it is 10 deg out as soon as I get in it I drive it. I start the thing so often I am on my 3rd set of starter contacts. and guess what ? NO damage to motor of any significance...it is just getting broken in at 190,000 miles.

today, it still gets better than EPA, in 8000 miles it burns only 2mm of oil
level on the dipstick and passes emissions with tests with ease. it makes all the compression it should, it makes more BHP than it should on 87 octane no engine mods whatsoever.


this is not the 50's anymore with your grandpa-era motors found in high school shop class...


...engine wear schmengine wear just drive the thing immediately it will not do any harm if you plan on keeping a toyota..what ? 11+ years like I have...and it is real in-my-driveway-come-look-at-it-for-yourself results, not some crap from a book

I will say it may not be fair to compare a 5VZFE...the motor is legendary as being absolutely bombproof...same with my A340 tranny
and transfer case

[sbergman27]

127.0.0.1,

My Chevy Sprint (Suzuki 1.0L 3 cyl) has about 350,000 miles on it and has had 3 overhauls. The first one was at 140,000 miles and not due to any sort of wear, but due to a ring which had lost tension. (This engine uses a special low friction ring configuration with 1 oil ring and 1 compression ring, so there is not a lot of margin for error.) Typically, over temperature is the cause of this. But we never determined for sure. Anyway, the engine looked great so we just did rings and bearings. Though the existing bearings actually looked pretty good.

The second overhaul was at 260,000 and was actually due to a mistake made during the first overhaul which ended up causing the timing gear keyway at the front of the crankshaft to wallow out, destroying the crankshaft. We were impressed that at 260,000 we only had about 0.004 - 0.005 cylinder wear. We did rings and bearings again, in addition to replacing the crank. The existing bearings looked remarkably good. And the crank was fine... except for the keyway.

At 318,000 miles it cracked a piston. Probably that 0.004 - 0.005 cylinder wear had increased and fatigued the piston. This time we bored it and went with new pistons. The cam shaft was still in great shape. No action was necessary there.

So that engine went 318,000 miles before a wear condition caused problems. The first 2 overhauls were completely unrelated to wear.

I've always been a fan of Mobile 1, which is what I always attributed the low wear to. But I've never been one to formally warm an engine up. I do try to go easy on them until they are at least partially up to temperature.

-Steve

[Boost Addicted]

Originally Posted by 127.0.0.1

is 11 years 190,000 miles considered long enough ?


I 'll say something for engine wear and toyota motors. I operate a 5VZFE. I owned my 4runner from new in Dec 1998 to today, it has 190,000 + miles on it. all it ever got since mile 600 was mobil 1 5-30 every 8000 miles.

(plus timing belts and regular owners manual maint. at the dealer)

I always, ALWAYS just jump right in and drive it, zero or minimal warmup
(only as long as it takes me to adjust whatever I am doing. I get in car and always go immediately.) transmission and engine still run better now than the first 10,000 miles. ya I don't stomp it hard until it is warm but I go the speed limit. engine is still maybe 40 or 50 deg and climbing I am already doing 40mph.



so....I live in NE and oh yeah you betcha I do this when it is 10 deg out as soon as I get in it I drive it. I start the thing so often I am on my 3rd set of starter contacts. and guess what ? NO damage to motor of any significance...it is just getting broken in at 190,000 miles.

today, it still gets better than EPA, in 8000 miles it burns only 2mm of oillevel on the dipstick and passes emissions with tests with ease. it makes all the compression it should, it makes more BHP than it should on 87 octane no engine mods whatsoever.

this is not the 50's anymore with your grandpa-era motors found in high school shop class...


...engine wear schmengine wear just drive the thing immediately it will not do any harm if you plan on keeping a toyota..what ? 11+ years like I have...and it is real in-my-driveway-come-look-at-it-for-yourself results, not some crap from a book

I will say it may not be fair to compare a 5VZFE...the motor is legendary as being absolutely bombproof...same with my A340 tranny
and transfer case

So what you're saying is;

1. You have put your 4Runner on a dyno? Makes MORE BHP than it should? I'd like to see that dyno sheet.

2. You go 8,000 miles before changing your oil... And continue to say you have more EPA horsepower ratings, fuel mileage, etc?... Right. Proof?

3. ''All the compression it should'', yet you don't have a number...

4. No damage to the motor whatsoever? So you must know of Blackstone Labs? May as well post up your progressive stack of every oil analysis you've gotten, along with that dyno sheet.

I'm afraid, my friend, I do not go to high school , so the cars you speak of, ''grandpa era'', are not a factor. But it made you sound kinda badass I guess

Mr. Burgman... I'm seriously convinced you have no idea what you're talking about. I'll take your ignorance to my last post as a sign of you not knowing what aaannny of that actually is (measuring blocks, open/closed loop, etc). Using biiiig sophisticated words doesn't help the fact that you're talking from your ass... And speaking to me as a lesser person isn't gonna go very far. Props for trying though. This is a technical forum, not a pissing contest ().

And in all seriousness, the two of you should check out mobil 1's formula list...

[127.0.0.1]

Originally Posted by Boost Addicted

So what you're saying is;

1. You have put your 4Runner on a dyno? Makes MORE BHP than it should? I'd like to see that dyno sheet.

2. You go 8,000 miles before changing your oil... And continue to say you have more EPA horsepower ratings, fuel mileage, etc?... Right. Proof?

3. ''All the compression it should'', yet you don't have a number...

4. No damage to the motor whatsoever? So you must know of Blackstone Labs? May as well post up your progressive stack of every oil analysis you've gotten, along with that dyno sheet.

I'm afraid, my friend, I do not go to high school , so the cars you speak of, ''grandpa era'', are not a factor. But it made you sound kinda badass I guess

Mr. Burgman... I'm seriously convinced you have no idea what you're talking about. I'll take your ignorance to my last post as a sign of you not knowing what aaannny of that actually is (measuring blocks, open/closed loop, etc). Using biiiig sophisticated words doesn't help the fact that you're talking from your ass... And speaking to me as a lesser person isn't gonna go very far. Props for trying though. This is a technical forum, not a pissing contest ().

And in all seriousness, the two of you should check out mobil 1's formula list...

What I said was: NO damage to motor of any significance.

You are preaching 'technical', yet cannot even read correctly. idiot.

I am not saying it will never wear out, I am saying that 11 years of 'start and go immediately' have no real impact
on the thing as a daily driver. you can sit and warm up your car all you want there, Chieftain... all you will
do is waste gas. I can start and go and still have a decent engine at 11 years plus. so there. real world use.

if you race a car that is a different matter entirely. warm ups are needed on race engines.

yes, a warm motor does perform better, but is warmup needed on a daily around town driver. NO.

Whatever. I am not into finite oil or engine analysis on my cars. it is a friggin car, not a nuclear warship. I worry more about steam engines and ceramic impellers in real life.
----
tests were done at 166,340 miles

dyno results were

original dyno run at 2000 miles was
163 hp /234 torque (186 hp adjusted)

166,340 miles run was
168 hp /234 torque (190 hp adjusted)

compression tests at 166,355 miles

1- 178psi
2- 175psi
3- 181psi

4- 188psi
5- 182psi
6- 179psi


all 6 tested on warm engine within 2 minutes

I did these checks because I -was- gonna sell it, but then decided I will never
sell it



Do I know of Blackstone Labs ? sheesh are they any better than Lockheed Martin or Pratt and Whitney at
materials analysis ? want me to send you some NASA stickers ? done with this one. pointless.

[sbergman27]

Originally Posted by 127.0.0.1

What I said was: NO damage to motor of any significance.

From my own experience, I would be inclined to say "impressively little" wear. Significance is relative. I tend to keep my cars a very long time. Like 20 and 40 years. (Call me sentimental.) And I dread overhauls. They always seem to result in some sort of complication. And, at the very least, expense... no matter how long the original lasts. It's possible that a certain amount of extra warm up might be beneficial over the very long run. Or... it could be, as you say, insignificant... even in my situation.

It's an interesting topic. Actually "topics", since we have two questions. How do warm ups affect fuel economy under different use scenarios? And how do they affect wear? I was planning on scoping out the easier of the two: fuel economy, this week. But surely Car & Driver, or Consumer Reports, or *someone* with better resources has researched these things.

I just now got back from a long trip and am not too keen on a Google-hunt, sorting out all the credible wheat from the unreliable chaff. But I figured I'd mention.

-Steve

[Boost Addicted]

Originally Posted by 127.0.0.1

What I said was: NO damage to motor of any significance.

You are preaching 'technical', yet cannot even read correctly. idiot.

I am not saying it will never wear out, I am saying that 11 years of 'start and go immediately' have no real impact
on the thing as a daily driver. you can sit and warm up your car all you want there, Chieftain... all you will
do is waste gas. I can start and go and still have a decent engine at 11 years plus. so there. real world use.

if you race a car that is a different matter entirely. warm ups are needed on race engines.

yes, a warm motor does perform better, but is warmup needed on a daily around town driver. NO.

Whatever. I am not into finite oil or engine analysis on my cars. it is a friggin car, not a nuclear warship. I worry more about steam engines and ceramic impellers in real life.
----
tests were done at 166,340 miles

dyno results were

original dyno run at 2000 miles was
163 hp /234 torque (186 hp adjusted)

166,340 miles run was
168 hp /234 torque (190 hp adjusted)

compression tests at 166,355 miles

1- 178psi
2- 175psi
3- 181psi

4- 188psi
5- 182psi
6- 179psi


all 6 tested on warm engine within 2 minutes

I did these checks because I -was- gonna sell it, but then decided I will never
sell it



Do I know of Blackstone Labs ? sheesh are they any better than Lockheed Martin or Pratt and Whitney at
materials analysis ? want me to send you some NASA stickers ? done with this one. pointless.

Hahaha yes indeed, I must be an idiot. Well I guess the three of us can agree on one thing... That this is a complete waste of time. So this shall be my final post as well on this thread.

[sbergman27]

Originally Posted by Boost Addicted

Well I guess the three of us can agree on one thing... That this is a complete waste of time. So this shall be my final post as well on this thread.

Boost Addicted,

I don't think that this thread necessarily has to be a waste of time. It could be a good thread or a bad thread, depending upon how the participants handle it. 127.0.0.1 and I tend toward the "just drive it" opinion. You're the fellow carrying the "warm it up first" side. And that's a very reasonable view. But maybe it seems like we're ganging up on you or something. I don't know.

I'm less concerned about right or wrong, or the winning or losing of an argument, than I am with what useful, helpful, or education information comes out of the thread.

I'm wondering... where is the pivot point? How far or little can you push the throttle before wear per mile stops decreasing and starts increasing... or fuel per mile stops decreasing and starts increasing.

-Steve