fritter63

Well-known member
First Name
Mark
Joined
Jan 21, 2020
Messages
241
Reaction score
277
Location
Atascadero
Vehicles
2018 Model 3 LR, 2019 Model 3 SR+
Occupation
Software Engineer
Country flag
Generally even cruise control is more efficient than a human driver. Autopilot and FSD would be even moreso.

They won't hypermile or anything, but computers are really good at holding a steady speed.

-Crissa
And I’ll testify that AP in town is much lighter on the accelerator than I am. 😎





Advertisement

 

SparkChaser

Member
First Name
Leigh
Joined
Sep 10, 2020
Messages
14
Reaction score
27
Location
San Francisco CA
Vehicles
CyberTruck Ticket Holder
Occupation
Airline Inspector
Country flag
Great discussion. Some of the equations make my head spin a bit but I get the just of it.
improvements over time make the CT even better
 

ajdelange

Well-known member
First Name
A. J.
Joined
Dec 8, 2019
Messages
2,139
Reaction score
2,210
Location
Virginia/Quebec
Vehicles
Tesla X LR+, Lexus SUV, Toyota SR5, Toyota Landcruiser
Occupation
EE (Retired)
Country flag
Question about FSD..... will FSD have any negative effect on mileage range when engaged over a long trip?
The contrary. Every time the car speeds up a little it takes energy from the battery. When the car slows down most, but not all of it, gets returned to the battery. The autopilot holds speed better than you can so that it is more energy efficient but it should be clear that this is going to save a Wh or two per mile and not tens of Wh/mi.
 

FutureBoy

Well-known member
First Name
Reginald
Joined
Oct 1, 2020
Messages
544
Reaction score
687
Location
Kirkland WA USA
Vehicles
Toyota Sienna
Occupation
Private Lending Educator
Country flag
The autopilot holds speed better than you can so that it is more energy efficient but it should be clear that this is going to save a Wh or two per mile and not tens of Wh/mi.
Well, that assumes I try to drive in a fairly stable manner. LOL.

If I’m being sponsored by Redbull or Monster Energy I bet the difference would be more stark.
 
First Name
Douglas L McAllister
Joined
Aug 18, 2020
Messages
16
Reaction score
14
Location
Arizona
Vehicles
Toyota Tacoma
Occupation
Retired
Country flag
Future boy talked about doing 20 mpg while rock climbing, I hope he meant 2 mpg, even that’s pretty fast. The only time you would go 20 mph is if you rolled it bouncing down the rocks.
 

FutureBoy

Well-known member
First Name
Reginald
Joined
Oct 1, 2020
Messages
544
Reaction score
687
Location
Kirkland WA USA
Vehicles
Toyota Sienna
Occupation
Private Lending Educator
Country flag
Would the difference in efficiency drop down if one kept the driving speed on roads to be at the same speed as driving off-road? Ex: rock climbing at <20 mph so compare the different tire types efficiency on roads at <20 mph. I’m guessing that there wouldn’t be as much heat generated so less softening of the tires and less tire shape deflection. So possibly less difference in tire efficiency?
Future boy talked about doing 20 mpg while rock climbing, I hope he meant 2 mpg, even that’s pretty fast. The only time you would go 20 mph is if you rolled it bouncing down the rocks.
LOL. I was talking about tire efficiency and was trying to think of an example when efficiency could be compared without differences from tire heat, softened tires, or shape deflection. And I did use the "<" symbol to indicate less than.

But I'm guessing that the Trophy Trucks at Baja 1000 are doing their rock climbing at > 20 mph. Just sayin'.

For your example, I'm not sure how much the tire efficiency comes into play.
 

Advertisement





 


Advertisement
Top