Isn't this what Waze does for free or could this be a threat

[dmcconachie]

You're assuming a frictionless system. Which real life most definitely is not.

The friction exists independent of the elevation changes.

Correct. But it still reduces the accuracy of a perfect potential/kinetic energy payoff.

[fvwazing]

Hybrids are very fuel-efficient in stop-and-go-traffic.
If you drive a hybrid, the best you can do for the planet is line up in traffic and have Waze redirect all the gasguzlers.

[harling]

Braking doesn't matter. If the hill didn't exist you'd expend only the energy needed to accelerate, the extra needed to climb is being converted to potential energy which is recovered on the way back down...

Braking matters a great deal. If you use fuel to drive up a hill, coast down the other side, then brake from 60mph because your destination is at the bottom of the hill, more energy is converted to heat than if you drove around the hill and arrived at (say) 20mph, which means more fuel will have been consumed.

As for hills & valleys along the route: the impact on fuel economy of driving over a particular hill depends on the drivetrain and speed of the vehicle. If it's too steep to stay in top gear (and lockup for automatics) and/or the engine has to richen the mixture, then the hill will reduce fuel economy.

Whether the 20mph, winding road around the hill is more fuel-efficient, also depends on the drivetrain.

I just don't see how an app can take these factors into account. It can only be making generalizations; e.g., give preference to straight & level roads that average 40-60mph, and apply a penalty for faster & slower roads, hills etc.. If it isn't at least doing that, the "green" claim is pure marketing.

[jasonh300]

Eh, I couldn't get past the tree hugging, co2 preaching in the video.

+1

I really think that their gas saving routing isn't going to be much different from Waze's fastest routing technique.

Avoid sitting in traffic. Take the fastest route. Save gas.

[Karrows]

Eh, I couldn't get past the tree hugging, co2 preaching in the video.

But anyhow if it actually works for reducing gas usage, it could make progress. I'm not a save the planet guy, I'm just cheap. Save me a few bucks in gas every day and it adds up, I'd use it. It would be a great option for Waze to implement. Look for the route with a constant speed, fewest stops, least stop & go traffic, and shortest distance. Have some options for car profiles for different cars, hybrid/gas/electric/diesel. Then plug all that thru some calculations to find the cheapest route (or the greenest route for the tree huggers).

For their time savings claims, it sounds like BS. I heard/read something about simulations with all drivers using their software and the software literally reserving them a spot on the road in traffic. Sounds like a nice fantasy for calculating optimal driving habits on a global scale, but it may have little to no use without 100% compliance.

[WeeeZer14]

Well most fuel efficient is not always the quickest. Sticking to a minor/major highway where you don't exceed 50 or 60 mph will be slower but more fuel efficient than blowing down the interstate at 70 mph. Then you have situations where you could go a bit out of your way to avoid climbing a big hill.

[xteejx]

Coast on the way down lol

Sent from my GT-I9100P using Tapatalk 2

[xteejx]

Avoid Highways option is made for hybrids, and that's a bloody good suggestion!

Sent from my GT-I9100P using Tapatalk 2