Thanks to Frank Reiner I think we've figure it out! I tried a negative 6% value a few weeks ago, but found the displayed mpg about the same or slightly higher!
I thought maybe it just needed a larger correction value, but in fact I had it backwards.
I decided to try again and entered a positive 6% value last night and watching the display while driving today, noticed the mpg shown was lower! Looking
back through my records, I've seen between a 4-8% discrepancy between the displayed and actual fuel milage with the default setting for the OM648,
so hopefully a 6% correction will greatly improve the accuracy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by shertex
That makes sense....so looks like I got it backwards.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank Reiner
In the rest of the world, consumption is expressed as:
Litres per 100 kilometers>L/100km
It is the reciprocal of distance per litre, or miles per gallon.
Hence, entering a positive correction factor will result in a displayed reduction of miles/gallon (1/miles/gallon=gallons/mile, which is the form of the correction).
|