GCarp

Has anyone adjusted their commuting based on the terrain to increase their mileage? If you have a choice between a hilly route to your destination that is shorter vs a flatter route that is say twice as long, does it make a difference?

My commute is about 8 miles each way using the hilly route. The flatter way, still hilly but maybe not as bad, (still has to be checked with a topo map) is longer (maybe not twice as long, but longer). Just started thinking about this as another way to increase mileage.

Is it worth it though if it takes you longer and consequently going through the tank faster just to get better mileage?

twistrman

i have a big hill i have to drive down to work and up to home every day. I don't really get a choice if i want a less hilly route, since i live at the top of the hill.

But, i would choose a slightly longer route, if it had less stop and go, since that seems to be what kills the mpg. No matter what way i go i get a ton of lights and/or stop signs, so the option isn't there for me.

It's a pretty big hill i go up though, and i have been able to get 18-24 mpg on the instamatic mpg. So the hill really isn't too bad, just al the dang stopping.

I don't understand this statement you made:

wouldn't it be a trade off, either a longer route where you get better mpg, but it takes longer OR a shorter route with hill and worse mpg?

It should be a close trade. If you take the hypothetical long route for the better mpg, you wouldn't be going through your tank faster, it would hopefully be the same, just trading time for mpg, right? Or am i reading it wrong?

GCarp

I may not have phrased it quite right, but wouldn't there be a break even point where the additional mileage would negate the effects of better gas mileage? - And ultimately wind up costing more gallons than you would save in the better mileage?
Part of this is hypothetical, but I am considering trying it. My regular route has a couple of pretty steep hills. One is pretty close to my destination, so when I am on my return trip, I am hitting it when the engine is not fully warmed up.
If even though at the end of the day, the elevation changes are the same from point A to point B, and back again, there may be a savings if the hills in between arent so steep (provided the additional mileage doesn't eat up more gallons at the end of the day).

I'm kinda' thinking this through as I'm typing.

GRUMPEE

San diego consists of communities and industrial parks built on flat top hills (mesas) all connected by freeways or surface roads. The only way to avoid hills is to not drive

I have two ways to get to work. Route 1 - one hill with 12 lights in between home and work. Route 2 - two hills and 4 less lights. For me either way is the same.

twistrman

let us know how it goes.

speed down the hills to gain momentum for going up the next one? I know it's not practical, but it always goes through my head

mchuntley

I have adjusted my route as well.
I live in California, in the 'OC'. I commute from Costa Mesa to Aliso Viejo and back. The new building is right next to the 73 toll road.

I have a 1 way commute of about 15 miles by toll road, and about 20 miles using the 405/5 freeway.
I have found that I get better mileage using the 405/5 freeway versus the 73 toll road. The 73 toll road has a big 6% grade in the middle between home and work. I think it is about a 1000 foot climb. Not taking the toll road has saved me fuel $ as well as not having to pay the $3.50 toll each way.

Matt

GCarp

After one week, I'm getting 23.5-23.8 (DIC hasn't quite settled yet) on my "normal" route. Babying it as much as I can - including bumping into neutral for the down hills. This compares to about 21.5 for my "normal" driving on this route. One thing I've noticed is the traffic lights I usually get caught at are at the bottom or on the up side of hills . I plan to give it one more week then switch to my other route that should be a little flatter.

GCarp

The tally after 2 weeks was 23.9 on my regular route. I only used about 1/3 tank of gas.
I am now trying my alternate route and so far it looks promising. I'm at about 25.5 - 26.0. I am just continuing on the same tank of gas though. To make it legal though, I should fill up again, so there is the same fuel load for the test. I don't usually fill up until about 1/4 tank though.

The traffic on this route seems lighter too (maybe another reason why it's better.) There is a big hill in the middle of the route but the car is warmed up and I can get a run on it.

Reminder to self: check what the distance is...

GCarp

Well, after one week of alternate route, distance is 8.2 miles one way. Getting 26.8 and actually hit 27.0 at one point. Only 26.8 because I had a dentist appt. on wednesday and the office is along ... you guessed it ... my old route. That night, on the way home, I watched the mileage drop like a stone down to 25.5 in one trip! Finished out the week though at 26.8. I think I just found me a new route to and from work and the distance is not as much different as I originally thought.

Even if I don't start with a full tank of gas, I think the existing difference is enough to just bag the whole experiment and go with the new route.

Just goes to show, that the easiest route (original, only two roads) is not always the better (best?) route (new, 6 different roads). Traffic seems definitely lighter although that will remain to be seen when school starts again. But until then, I'm going to stick with the new way.

GCarp

Just finished my second week on the new route. Finished up with 26.8 MPG and needed to get gas. This is the best I've ever gotten for local driving only! :twothumbs I think even without trying to squeeze mileage out of it, the new route wins. Even though it is a full mile longer, it actually takes less time. I finally clocked the old route - it was only 7 miles each way.

Bottom line is the shortest route may not be the best route if you are looking for mileage !