I think something that waze can integrate could be tips to improve your fuel consumption.
one route might be a bit faster but certain factors can make it use more fuel then a route that might be a bit longer. highways vs. city streets.
Waze can figure out how to factor in wind, temperature and other factors that can affect fuel consumption. The us is seeing high gas prices and Israel is seeing insanely high prices. I might be tempted to drive 120 km an hour and if waze would tell me i would be better off at 80 KMH based on my planned route, that would be huge.
there are a lot of options and you guys are smart enough to work it in.
Generally not a bad idea. However for me the shortest route will probably in most cases be the most fuel saving one. (My car stops the engine when standing still e.g. at a red traffic light) Your car will always consume less fuel when driving at 80 instead of 120 km/h (unless you drive 80 in 2nd gear ) And you may also drive 80 when the speed limit is 120 (though it’s less fun…)
I think waze also lacks some information to fully compute a least-cost-route. It only saves average speed for segments, no information about acceleration and breaking. A road where the speed limits constantly changes from 60 to 120 in short intervals will make you burn more fuel than a street where you’re constantly rolling at 80. To Waze these streets have the same speed. Waze has no information about slopes either, so it can’t tell a mountainous route from a flat one.
I doubt that waze can efficiently help us to save fuel…
Surely to some extent, the fastest route would be the most fuel efficient route. If wazes routes go off the average speed for each road then it would pick the fastest (assuming you pick the fastest and not the shortest). The faster roads generally have less stop lights or roundabouts anyway, otherwise the average speed would probably be a lot lower and waze would avoid routing that way. I don’t have these fancy stop start cars but if I ever get into a queue at a red light, I usually just switch my engine off anyway. And pray that it starts again! There are loads of little tips that can help you save fuel
Not entirely correct. If you car has no start/stop feature then a tiny amount of fuel WILL be spent while idling at the lights. But if you are letting the car deaccelearate using enginebraking then yes the electronic fuel ignition will turn off fuel supply as long as your engine maintains a certain amount of revs. My 2012 VW Passat runs around 700-800 rev before it starts sending fuel to the engine again. Provided the right gradiant I can actually safely and effeciently drive roughly 2.5 miles without touching the throttle and just coast for free
My 2010 Audi A3 stores the energy gained from (engine-)braking to provide it for accelerating or restarting the engine (similar to KERS in Forumla 1 race cars ), so it won’t consume fuel while idling around at a red traffic light and it doesn’t burn extra fuel for turning the engine over. If you keep the (Otto/Diesel-)engine running while standing still, it will keep drinking fuel, also at 500rpm. What else would keep the pistons go up and down? (left/right for boxers)
However, I don’t see how Waze could help me with that. It has other strengths…
You are indeed correct about that. Hence why I mentioned the start/stop package installed in some cars, which turns the engine off if you are not moving and have you foot on the brake. That way you can enginebrake towards a traffic light, slowly start to brake and “freeroll” to a stop and the engine turns off.
Im personally still on the fence in regards to start/stop considering the amount of fuel you actually as opposed to the amount they claim you save.
I would say the first route would actually be better on fuel consumption, even if it’s longer in distance; it’s shorter in time which means less time that the engine is on for, therefore burning less fuel, and if it’s mostly highway then it’s going to be a lot less stop, start driving which of course affects fuel consumption. It is often tempting to take the shorter route, and to be honest, I do most of the time aswell because I don’t trust waze’s estimated arrival times. At the end of the day, it’s upto you, local knowledge beats Waze any day, you will know which is the best route to take. Just last week I went to the garage with my mate to get my tyres replaced and even though I knew the route home, I decided to follow waze to try and beat my mate back and be smug by how I thrashed him home. I got back and he had been home for 5 minutes… Sorry, slightly off topic but it just shows that you should know which is the best route to take, waze can’t always be trusted. Experiment.
The first route is clearly better for gas consumption.
There is a local road I can’t stand because it has something like 9 stop signs over less than two miles. Even driving downhill, I only get about 30 mpg in my little Smart Car. Driving down a parallel road that has no stop signs, I get about 50 mpg.
Not only do you get poor mileage when going zero to 30, but you also get poor mileage when driving slowly (such as when slowing down to a stop).
i havent studied them in depth but i know sygic has a economical routing option. it looks like a hybrid of fastest route and shortest route. i dont know if following that route would be any better.
But that’s probably because, by driving the friend’s route, you updated (or initilally set?) the speed averages for these roads, since Waze only learns your preferred destinations not your routes.
How Waze will route you to your (preferred) destinations depends solely on speed averages and reported traffic, as far as I know.
My Garmin has a fuel saving feature that determines how efficiently you are driving by calculating acceleration rates. The faster you accelerate the lower your rating. The faster you drive, the lower your rating. Also, the Garmin calculates your fuel economy once you input the basic information like average MPG.
But I prefer the alternative routing Waze offers. Nothing waste gas like sitting in traffic, no matter what you drive; hybrid or not.
) And you may also drive 80 when the speed limit is 120 (though it’s less fun…)
), so it won’t consume fuel while idling around at a red traffic light and it doesn’t burn extra fuel for turning the engine over. If you keep the (Otto/Diesel-)engine running while standing still, it will keep drinking fuel, also at 500rpm. What else would keep the pistons go up and down? (left/right for boxers)