MPG calculation: Help needed please
03-05-2004, 04:43 PM
#1
Contributing Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 10,916
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MPG calculation: Help needed please
My rig new had 265/70/16's. The tires were upgraded by the previous owner to 265/75/16's. I have been dividing my accumulated mileage per tank by the number of gallons used. I believe my odometer is slightly off due to the slight increase in tire size. My question is: How much is it off?
I will add the % increase to my excel spreadsheets to "correct" the equation.
I suck at math, and I really suck at story problems. Please
I will add the % increase to my excel spreadsheets to "correct" the equation.
I suck at math, and I really suck at story problems. Please
03-05-2004, 05:07 PM
#4
Contributing Member
Originally Posted by <96 Runner>
My rig new had 265/70/16's. The tires were upgraded by the previous owner to 265/75/16's. I have been dividing my accumulated mileage per tank by the number of gallons used. I believe my odometer is slightly off due to the slight increase in tire size. My question is: How much is it off?
I will add the % increase to my excel spreadsheets to "correct" the equation.
I suck at math, and I really suck at story problems. Please
I will add the % increase to my excel spreadsheets to "correct" the equation.
I suck at math, and I really suck at story problems. Please
original tires:
radius wheel = 265mm*%70= 185.5 mm or 7.3 in of sidewall + 8 inches or rim = 15.3 in
cirumference is 2*pie*radius = 96.08 inches
New tires:
radius wheel = 265mm*%75= 198.75 mm or 7.8 in of sidewall + 8 inches or rim = 15.8 in
cirumference is 2*pie*radius = 99.22 inches
so I get a difference of 99.22/96.08 = 1.032 or 3.2% larger
Last edited by MTL_4runner; 03-05-2004 at 05:10 PM.
03-05-2004, 05:09 PM
#6
Contributing Member
Originally Posted by <96 Runner>
Really? That much? Wow...anybody else?
Made a calculation mistake.
Should be about 3.2%
Last edited by MTL_4runner; 03-05-2004 at 05:11 PM.
Trending Topics
03-05-2004, 05:12 PM
#9
Contributing Member
Originally Posted by bamachem
yup... about 3.5% difference... multiply your mileage calculation by 1.035
Hey, engineering does come in hand after all.
03-05-2004, 05:18 PM
#11
Contributing Member
Originally Posted by <96 Runner>
Awesome, thanks a ton guys. I incorporated it into my spreadsheet.
I don't think you need to be any more precise than that tho.
03-05-2004, 06:01 PM
#12
The toyota odometer and speedometer aren't synchronized exactly either - or so I've read... Supposedly, with 265/70's the speedo is off by about 3-4% (you're going slower than it says) and the odo is dead on. With 265/75's, the speedo is now DEAD on and the odo is reporting 3-4% less distance than you actually traveled...
03-06-2004, 08:19 AM
#13
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NY State
Posts: 58
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How much do you subtract, and at what rate, for the wear of the tires themselves? They aren't the same diam when they're worn as when new. In other words, it ain't accurate to begin with so all this math is like tuning up the band while the ship is sinking - fruitless.
03-06-2004, 08:24 AM
#14
Contributing Member
Originally Posted by hypnotoad
How much do you subtract, and at what rate, for the wear of the tires themselves? They aren't the same diam when they're worn as when new. In other words, it ain't accurate to begin with so all this math is like tuning up the band while the ship is sinking - fruitless.
bamachem, has a good point. You need to know what tires came stock on the vehicle to calculate the total difference between your current tires and the stock tires (assuming the odometer and speedometer were dead on when new). Otherwise the best you can do is calculate the relative difference between the MPG of the old and new tires.
03-06-2004, 08:32 AM
#16
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NY State
Posts: 58
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by MTL_4runner
You are right, they do change diameter but it is so small relative to the size of the tire that it becomes negligible.
03-06-2004, 08:38 AM
#17
Contributing Member
Originally Posted by hypnotoad
sounds ligible to me. (is that the opposite of negligible?)
good one!I suppose if you go from brand new monster mudders to totally bald nobbies you would see a decent difference. It would take quite a while to show tho. You might be looking at a max difference of like 1-2% at the worst case.
03-06-2004, 09:55 AM
#18
Contributing Member
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Albuquerque, NM
Posts: 801
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Last edited by ALBPM; 03-06-2004 at 11:24 AM.
03-06-2004, 04:26 PM
#20
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Mountains outside of Boulder
Posts: 613
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by MTL_4runner
Just a by the way, I used 25.4 for converting mm to inches and 3.14 as pie.
I don't think you need to be any more precise than that tho.
I don't think you need to be any more precise than that tho.
