Scangague II in Smart

[NCC1701]

Try the GPH (gallons per hour). That's one of my normally selected displays. It makes it easy to see the effects of things like A/C useage, sitting at idle, nearby extraterrestrial craft, and coasting.

[fastturb]

I trust the scanguage more than some 10 year old pump outside day in day out that has had someone fiddling with its mechanical roller gauge. If they were checked each week and calibrated, the story would be different. Every time I've heard of them being checked, 90% of them are off - can't even pump an even measured gallon.

Of course when you pay you have to pay what it says regardless of the inaccuracies....

[gabe1475]

Out of curiosity. Are people who have not adjusted the setting (have it set to 1L engine with 9gal tank) noticing scangage overcalculating or undercalculation MPG or is it mixed results?

[rfernatt]

Originally Posted by mvaldes

It gives good relative mpg readings, but I never could get mine to give consistently accurate averages over a tankful (i.e. ones that matched up with my calculated mpg from measured mileage/gallons added.) ... IMHO, it's feedback and other capabilities make it a worthwhile investment. Besides, it's FUN!

+1. I don't rely on the Scangauge for MPG, but it is a handy tool. I prefer odometer readings and pumped gallons over several tanks for the most meaningful average MPG (see Fuelly.com). However, the real time feedback is useful for tuning your style in different conditions at first. After you've got that figured out, though, it's not really that helpful for MPG on an on-going basis, IMHO.

Originally Posted by NCC1701

Try the GPH (gallons per hour). That's one of my normally selected displays. It makes it easy to see the effects of things like A/C useage, sitting at idle, nearby extraterrestrial craft, and coasting.

I like to use GPH as well.

Originally Posted by gabe1475

Out of curiosity. Are people who have not adjusted the setting (have it set to 1L engine with 9gal tank) noticing scangage overcalculating or undercalculation MPG or is it mixed results?

I don't believe the tank size will matter in the real time MPG calculation. I think it's using the GPH reading (fuel being used) versus miles traveled. It would, however, throw off tank MPG calculations.

[gabe1475]

My first TRUE tank came out to 42.2MPG (Scangauge was showing 45.4MPG). There is a disconnect as there was 60 miles of driving where I did not have the Scangauge. I also need to calibrate to my car which will not happen until my next fill up. Overall happy with the mileage as the car is not broken in and I was getting higher results towards the end (52MPG on the last 4 trips). I did put a little extra air in the tires, but I did not go over the max PSI recommended (40). I also had one day where there was a natural gas leak on the way home and I sat in traffic for a 4 block radius for half an hour getting around the area (this bought me from my 47.5 through that point in time down to the 45.4MGP that I ended Up with ). I also just added the pressure to the tires two days ago and have been noticing 3-4MPG more since making that change. I don’t typically use pulse and glide, but probably end up using it inadvertently because of all the lights on the way to work (22 Miles, lights about every half mile – probably only catch about 10-15 per day). I wanted to post this out there for those who feel that this car does not get great gas mileage. I think 45MPG will probably be the norm for my commute and hopefully I can work on that to hit 50 every so often. I did have some light AC use, and will probably continue at that rate until we cool down here in AZ. I have decided not to include the first fill up as I do not know how long the car idled at the dealer as well as how much gas was put in the tank when it was filled up. Will post more once I get to my second tank.

[TMACK]

Just finished playing around with my new toy from Smartmadness: ScangageII.
Regret not getting it sooner.
One question, though. Has anyone had problems with the fast sampling rate. Or for that matter, the slow rate? Or is normal, well, the norm?

Opinions, please.

[gabe1475]

Never read the instructions, what is the fast sampling rate?

[rfernatt]

Yeah, I wish you could set longer sampling intervals to smooth out the dramatic swings in MPG - one second you see 24 MPG and the next it's 124 MPG. I know you should use the trip function for a stretch of road, but I don't see anything wrong with extending the sampling rate.

[gabe1475]

It is giving you a glimpse of what you were doing about 2 seconds ago. The only way to see what you are doing is to hold the pedeal at the same place for a while and you can get some steady MPG readings. It works alot better on the highway. Other than that I keep an eye on the Avg MPG.

[TMACK]

Originally Posted by gabe1475

Never read the instructions, what is the fast sampling rate?

Dunno. It's in the last part of the micro manual. Sez one can set slow, normal or fast sampling rates, but also sez can cause mal-operation, (I asume of the gauge, not the car).

Just havn't found the nerve to change anything yet, thought I'd do the tick from someone else's vein.