Realistic fuel consumption - not so realistic after 1.58?

[Le5to720]

Hello, I put this topic in wrong section before so I hope here is OK.

I would like to pinpoint Realistic Fuel Consumption update after 1.58. As you everybody noticed fuel consumption dropped by a big margin in 1.58. It does not seem to be very realistic, I will explain why. I made some testing before and after 1.58. Before, average mpg I could achieve was heavily influenced by engine used, speed vehicle, load, etc... Average fuel consumption I had at 80k lbs and 65-70 mph with 16 liter engines (DD16) was 6-7 mpg, 13 liter engines 7-8.5 mpg and non aerodynamic trucks (W900, 389) with C15 CAT were in range 5-6 mpg. This was pretty similar numbers you would achieve with real trucks. After 1.58 I can consistently achieve with W900 C15 625 CAT at 80k lbs gross weight, 70-75 mph average 8 mpg, which is not even close to what would you achieve with this truck IRL. Next 600 hp DD16 Western star. Now I have average 9 mpg at 70-80k lbs and 70 mph highway speeds. 9 mpg is hardly possible even with DD13 in those conditions and weight let alone DD16. BTW with DD13 I have 10-11. IRL, you are not getting 11 mpg at average 65 mph, period. Empty only, not with load.
Basically, this update improved fuel economy on every truck by 2 mpg, destroyed differences between engines, because now every engine regardles of power has similar average mpg, and reduced difference speed vs mpg. After 1.58 I can haul down the highway at 75-80 mph and I can have instant fuel consumption about 10 mpg. Which is not going to happen IRL at those speeds, even with most aerodynamic truck.
From my point of view, either, game does not corectly simulate aerodynamic drag, or tire rolling resistance drag. Or both. Because now, when going with empty trailer, lets say at 65 mph average fuel consumption on aerodynamic truck is about 12-13 mpg and on W900 C15 about 10mpg which is quite realisitc. So with empty trailer avg fuel consumption is closer to IRL, but with loaded trailer is completely off after 1.58.

Edit> I tested Euro Truck Simulator 2 and is quite off aswell. Since I am IRL truck driver in Europe, I can compare it first hand with real world counterpart. I tested 4x2 configuration truck with 3 axle trailer, because I have most real world experience with such trucks. Most trucks at gross weight 40 tons have fuel consumption between 25-30 l/100km at speeds 85-90 km/h on flat road. Some of the best trucks I have driven were mid 20s. In ETS2, before update 1.58, it was achievable, most trucks was at 30 l/100 km/h with best ones about 27 l/100km/h. After update, in same condition, most trucks have fuel consumptio 18 l/100 km/h and best ones (newest MAN tgx) even less, which is absolutely not realistic at all. IRL, Such a fuel consumption I can achieve with empty truck (8 ton tractor + 7 ton emtpy trailer), not with 40 ton vehicle (25 ton cargo + 15 vehicle).

Everything else in update 1.58 is step forward, except update fuel consumption, which is in general less realistic than before. To be honest before 1.58 it was quite spot on (maybe 10% off compared to real one)

I hope that other IRL truck drivers who ocasionally play ATS or ETS2 write their opinion on this, and I hope that SCS team will review this and atleast verify that with some IRL truck drivers in their team. I heard that have some tester truckers.

Thanks

[nodisa]

I completely agree with you. The ATS's fuel consumption is extremely high, making it a bit disappointing to see my truck (a Kenworth W900 heavy-duty) averaging 9-11 mpg on full load.

[abasstreppas]

I only play ETS2 and I love to keep fuel consumption as low as possible, but now it's not fun anymore. I've started a new profile recently to go vanilla with a Scania R370, later upgraded to a 410 engine and even though I had to take a lot of heavy equipment in the beginning to get money to buy myself a curtain trailer, my average consumption is now 21.5l/100km. Ii expected to be at least at 25l/100km during this time. Spent all driving in Nordic countries.

Something is definitely wrong...

[Le5to720]

I completely agree with you. The ATS's fuel consumption is extremely high, making it a bit disappointing to see my truck (a Kenworth W900 heavy-duty) averaging 9-11 mpg on full load.

Yeah, I have same results with this truck. About 9-11 average mpg when I am driving under 60 mph, at 70 mph I have 8-9 mpg average at 80 000 lbs. W900 with full load (I mean 80k lbs) should be about 6 mpg, 7 mpg maybe in Cali with 55 mph speed limit. 9-11 mpg you would not achieve with this truck IRL, no chance, maybe empty and below 55 mph speed limit.

[Le5to720]

I only play ETS2 and I love to keep fuel consumption as low as possible, but now it's not fun anymore. I've started a new profile recently to go vanilla with a Scania R370, later upgraded to a 410 engine and even though I had to take a lot of heavy equipment in the beginning to get money to buy myself a curtain trailer, my average consumption is now 21.5l/100km. Ii expected to be at least at 25l/100km during this time. Spent all driving in Nordic countries.

Something is definitely wrong...

exactly. I tested fuel consumption on multiple 4x2 trucks with 3 axle trailer, when empty (15 tons) I achieved about 14 l/100km instant fuel consumption at 90 km/h. With full load I had instant at 90 km/h about 18 l/100km, which made average 22l/100km. Not realisitic at all. REAL Instant consumptions at 90 km/h I achieved with REAL trucks on flat road are empty 18-20 l/100 km, full 25-30 l/100 km. Average empty 21-22 average full 27-32. I even tested particularly Scania S580 because i have spent some km behind the wheel of real truck. Same gearing 1150 at 90 km/h. I had average with 40 tons gross weight on flat road trip 28-29 l/100 km. In ETS2 same truck 21-22 l/100km and in game are not even features like topography cruise control, eco-roll and other stuff. Absolutely unrealistic. Even at full trottle in 12th gear, real S580 has instant fuel consumption 87 l/100 km and ETS2 one 60 l/100 km. Same gearing, same engine over 40% difference. before update 1.58 it was like 75-80 l/100 km so pretty close, now it is so off that it is absolutelly obvious. I do not know how somebody during testing did not catch it.

[nodisa]

I hope this will be fixed in the next update.

[cydonianmystery]

I seem to be the only person glad they lowered fuel consumption. I have trucks that IRL people say should get 10-11 mpg finally doing that in-game, where before they struggled to make 7 mpg. I'm no longer hesitant to take at or near GVW loads for fear of recking the precious balance of my fuel economy now, and no longer fighting for every tenth of an mpg with ridiculous hypermiling tactics.

It's a big relief for my OCD. Good on y'all, SCS.

[J.Random]

I'm guessing their fancy little Trippy Trip cars didn't roll all that well, so they tried to "fix" it. I have a couple of theories. Either they added some phantom torque to counteract passive engine resistance or tyre rolling resistance (which would be why T680NG showed ~20% engine torque as an absolute minimum after the update), or they fiddled with the formulas involving resistance_torque engine value. It could be a timing issue (values incorrectly used between phys frames), but you'd really have to screw the pooch to get something like that.

[DemcoSVK]

Something is definitelly wrong. Even when you are off the throttle or idling, turbo gauge shows some pressure and it should not. Its like turbocharger was still pushing boost "for free" without fuel and thats affecting fuel consumption and rolling without throttle. Now it is possible to roll without throttle such a massive distances even with empty truck, that you can go from 12 mpg to 15 mpg in one downhill pass. I managed to have better fuel consumption with truck without trailer than in my real life SUV vehicle on highway. It is so easy to have good mpg that it is not even challenge. It is not interesting anymore. I can take most powerfull truck with heavy cargo and through Rocky mountains i will get 9.2 mpg. IRL new Cascadia in american reviews gets 9 mpg on flats. So think about it.
And I disagree with OP, this update was big step backwards in almost everything. Mpg, new type of hud, even new suspension physics does not make any difference driving truck. Those solid axles is only visual thing.
I bought almost every dlc and i am really disapointed with way where ATS is going. I will stay with 1.57 until they dont fix what they've broke. If they ever will do.

[marek17390]

I have to disagree with the general sentiment in this thread. As someone working in the transport industry, I find the 1.58 update finally brings the simulation to a realistic level.

Modern Euro 6 trucks are designed for maximum efficiency. The "high consumption" many users were used to in previous versions was actually the unrealistic part. In real-life international transport (with 20t loads), we see averages between 23-27 l/100km on a daily basis. Version 1.58 finally reflects how these modern engines and aero-dynamics actually work.

The way the truck now maintains momentum and uses eco-roll is spot on. If you find the consumption "too low," it might be because you were used to the old, inflated values. For me, this is the most realistic the game has ever been. Great job, SCS!