Global Green Challenge daily results

[Swordsman88]

Originally Posted by ea90gl

Why base the test on how much better the cars real economy figures are than ADR figures? Logic assumes the winner should be the car that uses the least fuel, or maybe even a simple calculation based on power/displacement to fuel used ratio. so imagine if Maloo wins, this thing will be marketed to death giving the false impression it used the less fuel since majority of people probably think that is what determines the winner.

That is a bit of a tough one. On the one hand it is as much a win for the drivers/team support. These guys are trundling along at 70km/h average speed in 40 degree heat with the aircon off and window up. So if you beat your ADR number by the most you probably worked pretty hard. Of course manufacturers put cars on the test that they know will work well (and those that have unsuitable cars (toyota) avoid it). The XR6T is on that test largely in an attempt to do just that.

But there is a catch. HSV have put a maloo on the test to win it based on biggest % improvement. But who on earth buys a maloo to save fuel? Its a pointless bit of marketing because it wont' get them any sales. HSV admitted itself that it was pushing ahead with LPG V8s even though the dealers say the customers don't wan it. Its about having a green image...so people can tell their concerned friends that while they bought their V8 it can be quite frugal. Of course that is a pointless statement since everyone knows driving a car in its ideal situation (wich for a v8 large car is at constant throttle on a highway) always makes it look good. The XR6T is at least driven by alot of non-performance fans (so not sure why their bought it anyway) so it is helpful for Ford to show its great real world economy.

Either way the Fiesta econetic is going well so in terms of overall fuel burn it is going to win most likely. Which WILL BE USEFUL when marketing it as the lowest fuel burnign car in australia (particuarly against the mini which is its nearest rival and is currently burning more....)

[Gaz]

Originally Posted by Swordsman88

Especially when you consider that the whole reason the HSV is winning %wise is because its rubbish ADR number (14.1) is generate due to woeful city fuel economy.

15.1 ....

[Bossxr8]

Originally Posted by ea90gl

Why base the test on how much better the cars real economy figures are than ADR figures? Logic assumes the winner should be the car that uses the least fuel, or maybe even a simple calculation based on power/displacement to fuel used ratio. so imagine if Maloo wins, this thing will be marketed to death giving the false impression it used the less fuel since majority of people probably think that is what determines the winner.

Isn't there 2 parts of the comp, one for lowest overall fuel burn, the other is for highest percentage under the ADR figure.

Thats why Ford entered the Fiesta to try to win overall, plus the XRT for highest percentage under the ADR figure.

[Swordsman88]

Originally Posted by Gaz

15.1 ....

My error.....thanks for the correction. Is that manual or auto? I'm not sure what the entered car is...

[EFFalcon]

Originally Posted by Ghiadude

And what about the the co2 emmisions from the coal burning power stations that will charge those electric cars? what about all the diesel thats burnt by the trucks and the machinery to dig it out of the ground and transport it to the power station??

Our electrical Power stations are more efficient at generating power then a petrol motor.

add to that once the infrastruture is in place, you don't need trucks to transport power as you do to transport LPG/ULP/Diesel.

[kircher]

I can't believe they're fuelling the cars in such an un-scientific manner. From the above comments I have gathered they are filling from fuel stations? It really should be done in such a way that each vehicle is fueled with an accurately measured volume of fuel, with the fuel added at a set temperature, and the air pressure measured at each fill, so any discrepancies in volumes can be calculated. A commonly used standard for gathering scientific data is 20 degrees celcius and 1 atmosphere of pressure. That is unrealistic out in the desert, but there should be a better way to accurately measure and deliver the fuel, especially when the competition is so close.

[aquahead2001]

Originally Posted by kircher

I can't believe they're fuelling the cars in such an un-scientific manner. From the above comments I have gathered they are filling from fuel stations? It really should be done in such a way that each vehicle is fueled with an accurately measured volume of fuel, with the fuel added at a set temperature, and the air pressure measured at each fill, so any discrepancies in volumes can be calculated. A commonly used standard for gathering scientific data is 20 degrees celcius and 1 atmosphere of pressure. That is unrealistic out in the desert, but there should be a better way to accurately measure and deliver the fuel, especially when the competition is so close.

Your right. I would have assumed that the fuel would be weighed and then the fuel volume calculated by the weight / the specific gravity (or whatever the correct formula is) at a corrected 20 degrees c and 1 atm pressure. But seeing the cars are all operating under the same weather conditions, I don't know if local temp and atmospheric conditions would come in to play. If the cars were all running at different times of the day, then I'd question the methodology.

[R-Design]

Originally Posted by CarPoint

Organisers recalculate economy run figures for all teams

The dust storm may have passed but a new storm was soon brewing on the Global Green Challenge yesterday.

Late last night (Monday 26 October ), event organisers were re-calculating the economy figures for the entire field for the previous three days, and the updated results aren't likely to be known for another 24 hours.

At a meeting in Alice Springs with all team managers, organisers agreed to measure economy based on map distance, rather than the distance travelled according to each car's odometer, as has been the case from day one.

As is the industry norm, car odometers can vary by one or two per cent. But when each team is trying to save fractions of a per cent, every discrepancy counts.

The revised measurements are unlikely to see a dramatic change in the overall results.

At the end of day three, the two fastest and thirstiest cars in the field -- the HSV Maloo ute and Ford Falcon XR6 Turbo sedan -- continued to lead the pack with the biggest reduction in consumption compared to their official fuel rating labels, while the smaller diesel and petrol cars made modest improvements in economy because they are already so frugal in the first place.

Other issues raised included more consistent refueling. All cars are refueled by the technical director but some cars have had a tendency to take on less fuel in hot conditions than others, and this has in some cases led to wildly unrealistic examples of fuel consumption.

All will be worked out once the cars are brimmed on the final day, however, some teams wanted more consistent fueling each day.

The changes mean the cars won't be refueled until each morning when conditions are cooler and therefore safer.

The trade-off is that provisional economy results for each day will now be published the following day, instead of the same day as each leg, making it difficult for media to get up to date information.

On leg four today (Tuesday 27 October), for safety reasons, organisers have introduced a compulsory 15 minute 'pit stop' to allow crews to regroup, relax, and get some cool air and water.

With temperatures of 40 degrees plus, and with all teams electing not to use their air-conditioning systems, fluid loss is a major factor for drivers.

That said, teams were treated to cooler conditions on the run yesterday (Monday 26 October) from Tennant Creek to Alice Springs, with a maximum of 32 degrees Celsius.

Day four departs from Alice Spring at 8am this morning (Tuesday 27 October) and is due in Coober Pedy in the late afternoon.

The event finishes in Adelaide on Friday.

http://carpoint.com.au/news/2009/hsv...-on-hold-17184

[SLO AU XR8]

Doing it in the manner that they are, it will allow the general public to see that these highway figures are not a load of BS and that they can manage the same if they drive correctly. It also shows that they are using the same fuelling methods that Average Joe will use.

[Polyal]

That Maloo is still as ugly as it was yesterday........

Shame there is a little unrest, we want the results to be without any (minimal) errors or external factors influencing the readings.

[kircher]

Originally Posted by SLO AU XR8

Doing it in the manner that they are, it will allow the general public to see that these highway figures are not a load of BS and that they can manage the same if they drive correctly. It also shows that they are using the same fuelling methods that Average Joe will use.

But if there is no control over the accuracy of the measurements, then the data is almost meaningless. The results of an experiment are only as good as the quality of the data used to reach said results. Besides, using more accuracy will translate to the real world in that the better car will win.

Example: Joe Average living in city 'X' gets better fuel economy than Joe Average with an identical car, in identical driving conditions living in city 'Y' because city X is colder, and therefore the fuel he gets is denser (more mass of fuel per litre). This is not a good comparison of fuel efficiency because there is no standard condition to compare the two.

[Luke Plaizier]

So are they all using a control fuel? Are they refuelling from supply trucks? Do they all use fuel with the same Octane rating?


Lukeyson

[Bossxr8]

Originally Posted by Luke Plaizier

So are they all using a control fuel? Are they refuelling from supply trucks? Do they all use fuel with the same Octane rating?


Lukeyson

They would all fill from the same servo wouldn't they? Possibly even the same pump.

[naddis01]

On a side note, is it just me or do those DRL's on the Maloo look like they are in the completly wrong spot? Not to mention the other garbage styling on the Maloo.

[kircher]

Originally Posted by naddis01

On a side note, is it just me or do those DRL's on the Maloo look like they are in the completly wrong spot? Not to mention the other garbage styling on the Maloo.

The Maloo does look odd. And the lights look no good. It's a poor attempt at something Audi does extremely well. The word often used by motoring journalists to describe styling like it is 'fussy'. In all the pictures it also looks like it's under heavy braking, but that's just because of the forward slanting lines of the design that so many new vehicles now have. It's not a look I really like.

[The G6ET Spot]

Originally Posted by Transfiguring R

The Maloo would probably consume around 5.3l/100km if the road was all down hill, or if it was being towed.

I wonder if someone actually checked to see if they hadn't fitted the AFM into it.

Seeing as the test is all open highway it would certainly attain those sort of figures and I wouldn't put it past Holden and HSV to do it.

After seeing the pic of the Maloo, it is one damn ugly car as well

[irish2]

Originally Posted by RAPID XR8

I wonder if someone actually checked to see if they hadn't fitted the AFM into it.

Seeing as the test is all open highway it would certainly attain those sort of figures and I wouldn't put it past Holden and HSV to do it.

After seeing the pic of the Maloo, it is one damn ugly car as well

Even with AFM you wouldn't get those figures. A big car will not get the economy of a small 4 cylinder even if it drops to 4 cylinders. The other 4 are still rotating in the block and would count for a significant friction loss.

[Swordsman88]

Originally Posted by kircher

But if there is no control over the accuracy of the measurements, then the data is almost meaningless. The results of an experiment are only as good as the quality of the data used to reach said results. Besides, using more accuracy will translate to the real world in that the better car will win.

Example: Joe Average living in city 'X' gets better fuel economy than Joe Average with an identical car, in identical driving conditions living in city 'Y' because city X is colder, and therefore the fuel he gets is denser (more mass of fuel per litre). This is not a good comparison of fuel efficiency because there is no standard condition to compare the two.

You are indeed correct kircher. Although being operated under the auspices of FIA it is not clear now 'scientific' this challenge is. It is obvious that the car companies are taking this a hell of alot more seriously than last year. Not a single car in the field (to my knowledge) is using air con regularly. Even though on the open highway its been proven to cost you less than 0.2-0.3 L/100km if that. hell they have cracked open the windows to take that into account and the air con off benefits you about 0.1. it is that tight.

The Ford Fiesta Econetic team say that one o fthe reasons the numbers are being recalculated is because the officials spilt some of the diesel when refueling their car. NOt clear how much they spilt but teams are being very careful. Kia and Hyundai are in an actual argument (which is hillarious since the Sante Fe diesel/sorento have the same engine....and Hyundai owns Kia!!!) over dirty tactics involving drafting. One manufacturer accused others of using support cars for drafting (imagine the little fiesta sitting in behind a Territory Turbo...hmmm, no resistance LOL!)

All cars have to pass scrutineering but it is not clear what is involved. An internal check to see if the car is running AFM internals (effectively an SS engine with a HSV engine cover) would probably not be picked up but you'd have to think HSV would have more ethics than that. As an engineer i certainly hope the HSV engineers wouldn't do that.

For me the % improvement while interesting is a pretty pointless test RE the atcual cars involved. If anythying it proves how well the cars are suited (i.e. who is most suited to highway driving versus their ADR number) and the effort put in by the teams.

The true winner is the one that burns the least.... While that is also dependent on the size/performance of the car at least that way people can view the results, look at the real fuel misers and see if they are suitable to their lifestyle. For example, if you were looking for a low fuel burning car because you were passionate about the environment, you might go straight for a prius because of its history and the hype. After this challenge is run cars like the fiesta econetic and mini D (and even diesel SUVs/sedans,) may be looked at because it gets their name out there.

[vztrt]

http://www.caradvice.com.au/46197/fo...een-challenge/

Ford Fiesta ECOnetic, Falcon XR6 meet Global Green Challenge

October 27, 2009 by Matt Brogan

The Ford Fiesta ECOnetic and Falcon XR6 taking part in the Global Green Challenge are achieving better than expected fuel economy figures.

There was a change in regulations at the end of day one (Alice Springs) requiring the results to be recalculated across the board. This caused a hold to the official day three fuel economy results until half way through day four.

By day two the Fiesta ECOnetic continued to be the most fuel efficient car in Australia, it’s fuel economy figures were 3.19L/100km on day one and 3.13L/100km on day two. This is a big improvement over official ADR fuel economy figures of 3.7L/100km.

The Falcon XR6 achieved 7.09L per 100km on the second day, almost a 40 per cent improvement over its official ADR fuel economy figure of 11.7L per 100km.

The teams have battled 40-degree temperatures, dust storms and long stretches of road without a single bend.

Day four is a nine hour drive from Alice Springs to Cooper Pedy covering around 685kms, this is the longest distance of the whole Challenge.

[FERG_51]

This is very impressive stuff. plenty of amo for the blue oval in the future.

[Franco Cozzo]

Are they new cars? Wouldn't they get better as they "loosen up"? Reckon the Fiesta will drop into the high 2s say 10,000km on its clock?

[Wretched]

Originally Posted by Polyal

Surely the % improvement isn't the deciding factor...the ADR is just a system in which vehicles are tested. Im assuming the claimed figures are combined cycles and not highway, if so how is that relevant?

I would have thought whoever uses the least amount of fuel who be the winner.

This is what I was wondering. I would rather have seen a combined cycle figure comparison instead of a hwy drive. It seems kind of pointless.

[sgt_doofey]

Originally Posted by Wretched

This is what I was wondering. I would rather have seen a combined cycle figure comparison instead of a hwy drive. It seems kind of pointless.

They did a city stint in Darwin before they left and they'll be doing another on in Adelaide for the finish too.

[kircher]

Originally Posted by XCPWSF

Are they new cars? Wouldn't they get better as they "loosen up"? Reckon the Fiesta will drop into the high 2s say 10,000km on its clock?

I wondered the same myself.

[Joe5619]

i do have to laugh.. The officals filled of the Fiesta up, only to over fill it & have petrol drop on the floor!! How are they going to account of the dropped fuel is anyones guess.

[Swordsman88]

Originally Posted by Joe5619

i do have to laugh.. The officals filled of the Fiesta up, only to over fill it & have petrol drop on the floor!! How are they going to account of the dropped fuel is anyones guess.

That bits easy. They have to make up a quick equation which notes that the car was 'fully filled' at that stop. I.e. right up the filler pipe. They said there weren't going to do it till the end for safety reasons but they will have to take it as that for that stop otherwise it wont' work.

As noted by others they really should be using specialist rigs and refuelling all the cars at the same time etc. etc. But, assuming they use the same pump for all cars (well all diesel, all petrol) and the cars are done in order it should be relatively accurate....

[FERG_51]

Any wonder they are over filling the FIESTA the mileage its getting you would just pull the trigger and it would be full again.

[Wretched]

Originally Posted by sgt_doofey

They did a city stint in Darwin before they left and they'll be doing another on in Adelaide for the finish too.

Driving the long distances on the HWY would negate any of the city driving.
I would rather instead of doing such large stints on the HWY, do a standard average stop start and some HWY/FWY driving, that's the real mileage.

[kircher]

Originally Posted by Wretched

Driving the long distances on the HWY would negate any of the city driving.
I would rather instead of doing such large stints on the HWY, do a standard average stop start and some HWY/FWY driving, that's the real mileage.

If you live in the city. For those of us fortunate enough to be able to drive regularly on highways and traffic that flows smoothly this is an excellent test. We already have the ADR figures which are combined city and a little highway. If you only drive in stop-start, then go by ADR, or other road tests like the one Wheels did on Mount Panorama.

[Swordsman88]

Originally Posted by Wretched

Driving the long distances on the HWY would negate any of the city driving.
I would rather instead of doing such large stints on the HWY, do a standard average stop start and some HWY/FWY driving, that's the real mileage.

You are correct wretched. The HSV maloo will win the biggest % improvement purely because the test is over 90% highway based on distance. Though it burns a shocking 20.1 L/100km in the urban ADR test (versus the XR6T at 16. something) the urban portion of the challenge is not big enough to reverse its % advantage. Ford should have put a GT-E on this test and they would have done better. They probably didn't because the BOSS is being retired soon and the I6 is aussie built.....

Never mind, for me its the car that really delivers the lowest that matters, and Ford is looking good with the Fez for that. The Suzuki alto is going well but it is technicaly a micro (sub light) car and with a 1 litre engine with a wopping 90nm and 50kw i'd say it is a fair bit less exciting to drive than a fietsa econetic (which has in excess of 200nm....) Skoda diesels have been goiing well, in the 4.7 range which is great for a largish sedan....

EDIT: They have updated the website with the data cumulative up to the end of stage 4. Can be accessed with greenfoam's original link at the top of this thread. Highlights:

- hyndai just pipping kia in the same engineed cars (sante fe versus sorento
- Fiesta still leading over the mini Ds but it is getting closer....
- Maloo still leading the % improvement (no shock there)
- XR6T running 6.98 L/100km cumulative. THAT IS INSANE for a car of that grunt to get into the 6s. The Omega sportwagon is doing a 6.4 so far....so even though it is highway buffered (with the maloo at 7.6....) getting a similar weight car to do within 0.5 L/100 with an engine 33% bigger, with 42% morem power and a disturbing 84% more torque..... staggering....