Q: why are some cars so much more efficient than others?
Many people will say small=good, big=bad.
That’s a pretty good start, because big cars are probably heavier and also have more wind resistance.
But the rule does not work universally. Sports cars may be small – and look aerodynamic, but may still use lots of fuel so what’s going on there?
The sad reason for that is that the cars and trucks we drive have most often been optimised for speed, power and appearance and not necessarily for efficiency. This may be due to the circumstances in the 20th century – in which the vehicles we use today evolved – where the supply of oil appeared more-or-less infinite and where there were apparently no consequences for burning it.
So what factors determine how efficient a car or truck will be?
#1 Engine type
There are two major competing technologies – petrol and diesel.
Diesel engines were not promoted for many years (for cars) as they tend to be sluggish and noisy. However they are the more efficient technology in terms of miles per gallon and carbon dioxide emissions (CO2 is the main ‘greenhouse gas‘).
However they have become steadily smoother and more refined and really took off in the 80’s – helped somewhat by government incentives (mainly in mainland Europe). However, they soon became implicated in city smog problems, so many incentives were dropped.
The engines continue to improve with efficiencies now perhaps 20% better than the equivalent petrol version – and as concern over CO2 grows diesel engines are again increasing popularity.
So why are diesel engines more efficient?
This is for two reasons: firstly, the engine internal losses are lower; petrol engines control their speed by ‘throttling’ the air supply to the engine – that is to say they hold back the air and make the engine suck it in through a small gap – a tactic which takes a lot of energy. Diesel engines just let the air in with arms wide open.
Secondly, diesel engines have a higher compression ratio which allows them to extract more energy (according to the laws of thermodynamics). Petrol engines cannot compress their fuel any more than they already do because petrol will spontaneously explode if compressed too much, and push the compressing piston backwards. It was this very problem that led Rudolf Diesel to invent the Diesel engine in the first place. In his design the fuel is only added after the air is compressed, totally side-stepping the issue.
#2 Car Dimensions
The most important measurement is the frontal projected area; this is unfortunate because a big cross section is what makes a nice roomy car. Tall cars are bad, wide cars are bad. It’s best to use the length if you need volume – which is the trick trains use.
It also turns out that nice fat tyres are also bad. Sorry. Biscuit wheels have less rolling resistance.
What about aerodynamics though? Surely a Ferrari slips through the air? Yes, to a degree, but not as much as you might hope – for one thing, Ferraris are surprisingly wide, but more interestingly, they are not actually designed to slip through the air – they are in fact designed to push the air upward in order to get downforce. Those big wings at the back are not there to cut through the air – they’re there to give the tyres more grip…
#3 Car Mass
It is hard work to lug a heavy suitcase around. It is obviously hard work to lug a heavy car around. That said, the laws of physics say that heavy items also have more momentum and so will roll further once moving – so you can in fact recover much of the energy if you take advantage of that momentum. The energy is really only ‘lost’ when you use the brakes and turn it to heat.
This energy recovery trick, combined with ‘regenerative braking’ can reduce the impact of car weight, however generally speaking all additional weight is bad.
PS. I will cover efficient driving tactics and also ways to recover energy from the brakes in forthcoming articles in this series.
I know automatic gearboxes are nice. They free up the brain to worry about other things. But they are still bad for fuel efficiency – and for some interesting reasons.
Firstly, fuel efficiency depends on always being in the right gear to get the most out of the engine. However even the best and newest models still don’t change gear at the ideal time – whereas a skilled driver could. Why not? Surely the brainy chaps at Toyota have perfected it all by now? Alas, no. The reason is this: the gearbox doesn’t have all the information the driver has. The driver may know he or she is about to crest a hill or hit some traffic. The gearbox can’t know this – it simply has to make a judgement based on the angle of your foot on the pedal and the current applied torque.
Secondly, some automatic gearboxes are less good at ‘coasting’ (i.e disconnecting the wheels from any internal machinery to reduce friction and engine resistance).
Aside for health and safety officials from the government: Some might say coasting is unwise; it is suggested that having the power to both slow down or speed up a short notice may improve safety; it is also suggested that engine braking is safer than foot braking because it is less inclined to the lock the wheels. These arguments do actually hold some water. While it is in fact possible to use engine braking to put the car into a skid, it is, in general, wise to take corners in gear as you will have more precise control over speed, and in the (rare) case of brake failure (or the more likely case of a foot slipping off the brake pedal), control is more likely to be maintained. I suggest therefore that coasting should only be done in safe conditions and at low speeds.
The last problem with automatic gearboxes is all the fluid. While manual gearboxes do have some oil to churn, the average automatic gearbox is a veritable fountain. The engine connects to the gearbox through a torque converter, which is a cunning clutch-like device based on discs spinning in fluids.
In the gearbox itself, the rotating shafts are used to pump fluids at high pressures through various tight channels and orifices in order to drive actuators that engage and disengage the absurdly clever planetary gearing. All this fluid-flow has inherent frictional loss, and thus reduces efficiency.
#5 Efficiency of Utilisation
What do I mean by ‘utilisation’? Well answer me this: what is more efficient, a Toyota Prius or a Grand Voyager?
The answer is clear: it depends – on how many people you are carrying.
Much can be said for using the vehicle right for the job. If you need a big van once every six months, look at renting or borrowing one, and drive something smaller.
#6 Age and Embodied carbon
This time I am asking: what is more efficient, a nice new Prius or your 3 year old one? You might think a new one would have the edge, but what you need to remember is that it takes an awful lot of carbon to make a new car, and it may take years to work that off. Rather keep your three-year-old in tip-top shape and hold onto it until its efficiency starts to dip – until the new model really is significantly better.
If however you don’t have a Prius but have an old guzzler, the carbon may balance out rather more quickly – it really won’t do to keep driving your 3-litre Cortina for ever.
#7 On-board computer
If you get a car with an instantaneous fuel consumption display, you may find yourself trying to set a record – and learning a lot on the way.
In my next article I discuss some of the innovative green car technology that is on the horizon.
3 thoughts on “What makes an efficient car?”
Magnets are ever lasting, free energy, polution free and will be technology for the future in transportation. I have always wondered why this was never created. And I thought of creating it myself. I searched online and find this, check it out.
A good resource to use to challenge yourself here:
The free energy scam draws on the addictiveness of conspiratorial thinking, so look up on that too: Brian Dunning has summarised that in one of his excellent audio podcasts so you can put up your feet, put a skeptical expression on your face, and listen: