How bad do you want to get better mileage???

Well, I've been practicing some fuel saving techniques outlined in this thread and ended up getting a whooping 34.23 mpg on the most recent tank, which is the highest ever for me.

Instant win! (first) (shocked)

PS: This included a fair amount of rush-hour stop and go, and up to 10 near-redline shifts... I think with a little more effort I could break the 35 mpg mark!
 
Last edited:
Yea even with my auto, I've been getting 30+ MPG.

I wish!

Normally my automatic P5 reliably turns in 21-22 mpg in all city driving. By changing my route somewhat (for more stop lights, fewer stop signs) and then timing those lights it looks like the P5 will turn in around 24 mpg this time. In steady highway driving my P5 gets around 30 mpg.

Previous attempts to improve mpg on the route which had mostly signed stops were a miserable failure. Apparently the number of stops is the deciding factor, and it doesn't matter much if 35 mph -> 0 mph is accomplished by braking or coasting to a stop. The route with more lights provides more opportunities to not stop.
 
lip spoiler

Would anyone think the extra little lip of the dgm lip spoiler ends up pushing more air out of the way ( creating more drag? ) as opposed to what air would have gotten hung up under the car without the lip being there...
I've been getting easy 30 + on the highway with the lip ( and a fairly recent tune up )... at speeds keeping up with traffic... so I'm thinking that it does not...
 

Attachments

  • dgm lip 2 on my car 03 17 08.webp
    dgm lip 2 on my car 03 17 08.webp
    655 KB · Views: 160
  • dgm lip lights on 03 30 08.webp
    dgm lip lights on 03 30 08.webp
    358.7 KB · Views: 143
I've been getting 30+ as well so I think it may help very slightly if anything. It hasn't hurt anything at all as far as my MPG go.
 
Would anyone think the extra little lip of the dgm lip spoiler ends up pushing more air out of the way ( creating more drag? ) as opposed to what air would have gotten hung up under the car without the lip being there...
I've been getting easy 30 + on the highway with the lip ( and a fairly recent tune up )... at speeds keeping up with traffic... so I'm thinking that it does not...

I think the lip is not hurting anything, but that front plate! (shocked) (poke)
 
I think the lip is not hurting anything, but that front plate! (shocked) (poke)

Technically in California we are supposed to have one. Yet I see a large number of cars around without them, and those are cars where it could be just as hideously mounted on the front bumper as in the P5 pictured a post or two above.

I wish the DMV would issue some sort of "sticker" plate which could be molded to the bumper and not be such an air brake.
 
Technically in California we are supposed to have one. Yet I see a large number of cars around without them, and those are cars where it could be just as hideously mounted on the front bumper as in the P5 pictured a post or two above.

I wish the DMV would issue some sort of "sticker" plate which could be molded to the bumper and not be such an air brake.

Hehe, I'm pretty sure I'm supposed to have one here as well.

*looks around*

But it look so sweet without it! Plus, there is extra cooling to the radiator.
 
Just for kicks I worked out some drag figures for the tires hitting the oncoming air. Picture a line drawn perpendicular to the road passing through the center of the axle. The tire has radius R and the car is moving at velocity V. Let the center of the axle be position zero, and let "x" measure the distance below (positive) or above (negative) the axle. The velocity at the axle is V, at the contact patch zero, and at the top of the tire 2V. Consequently along this line

V(x) = V( 1- x/R)

This is also the velocity at the leading edge of the tire at position x below the axle. (The horizontal component of the velocity of the tire for all points at "x", not just along the line we started with, is the same.)

The drag due to air hitting the tire is proportional to V(x) squared, so

V(x)^2 = V^2 * (1- x/R)^2

For a P5 with 195/50R16 tires the diameter calculated here

http://www.miata.net/garage/tirecalc.html

is 23.7 inches.

Here is a little table showing the factor (1- x/R)^2 for various
values of x in inches:


Code:
 R-x         x  factor
   0     11.85  0.000  (contact at the ground)
   1     10.85  0.007
   2      9.85  0.028
   3      8.85  0.064
   4      7.85  0.114
   5      6.85  0.178
   6      5.85  0.256
   7      4.85  0.349
   8      3.85  0.576
   9      2.85  0.577
  10      1.85  0.712
  11      0.85  0.862
  11.85   0.00  1.000 (at the axle)
  23.7   11.85  2.000 (at the top of the tire)

As you would expect, there is not much to be gained by keeping the airflow off the bottom of the tire. A more interesting question becomes the Cd of the air diverter used. An air diverter attached to the body in front of the tire will be moving at velocity V. That's a faster velocity than any part of the tire currently exposed beneath the car. So for an air deflector in front of the tire to have any positive effect it must have a lower Cd than the tire cross section it covers. That suggests to me that a flat plate diverter (perpendicular to the flow, similar to the front air dam) would cause an increase in the overal Cd. A U shaped (low Cd) deflector a few inches tall might be useful though. Lowering the car two inches displaces the draggiest part of the exposed tires up into the body and so out of the airflow, and consequently lowers the overall Cd.
 
The real question is more if we make the upper grill solid, will that help smooth the air flow or add drag? Also smoothing out the fog lamps for smoother air diversion good or bad? I think the problem with the Lip is the holes in it that allow air through. If it where solid, I think you would have a better aero.

The point of the splitters in front of the tires is to not only divert the air away from the tires, but the suspension and the wheel well.

Solutions thus far?
-air splitters in front of wheels
-lower car
-remove rack
-remove front license plate
-smooth out grill and fog lamps?
-remove side mirrors
-make rear underside more aero
-make rear wheel well covers (ugly I know)
-solid wheel covers
 
Any smoothing of the front surfaces would increase airflow around the vehicle...which in turn would slightly increase aerodynamics...

Has nobody even suggested switching 5th gear to lower RPMs at highway speed....that's would be my #1...

plus reducing weigh on all parts on the engine itself..ie..lightweight pullies...more power to the wheels means less gas/energy to maintain a cruising speed. Also, lightweight rim/tire combos....smaller treadwidth..less friction with the ground = better rolling efficiency....
 
Has nobody even suggested switching 5th gear to lower RPMs at highway speed....that's would be my #1...

Alot actually. The hard part is finidng an easy bolt-on direct swap that is a substantial decrease. Many mazda trannies but not so many that can be easily swapped AND are a substantial drop (e.g. 8+%).
Mathematically, one from an RF-series Turbo Diesel motor would be best, same tranny but different gearing... but also impossible to locate in US....
 
Pssst... 626/MX6 2.0 FSDE... check out the gear ratios.

The Asian guys who only get the Ford Lynx/Tierra/Laser (Mazda Protege rebadge) in automatic have done the swap to the 626 gearbox. Gives you incredibly long legs. 5th gear is longer, and the final drive ratio is an incredible 3.8 or so. Especially nice for turbo guys.

I used to have one of those. Did top speed at over 5000 rpm, compared to the buzzy 6000+ ours does. Should be simple to find a scrapped 626 2.0, swap the transmissions and bolt the stock axles up to the tranny... I hope they bolt up, anyway. Make it a "free" upgrade? Sell your newer tranny to someone else. :D
 
Last edited:

New Threads and Articles

Back