Correct, I ran out of time to finish. I do agree that it is important to account for the SOC change. Over a series of pulses assuming that some charging occurs, the error will become considerably smaller. For a single if one determined the SOC change only for the glide and determined that the particular pulse had no charging component (no SOC change) then one could do an efficiency based conversion and not need to subtract from the pulse. The problem in accounting for SOC change is in figuring the MPG equivalent. One needs both the kwh and an efficiency conversion to gasoline. This makes the calculation considerably more complicated than the OP was indicating. (And the kwh/mile varies with speed as well.) 100 mpg was far too low of a value to begin with, because it puts upper limits well below what can be acheived. And that is a big part of the problem, the mpg figure for the glide is a WAG, but a critical one because the glide distance tends to be several times longer than the pulse distance. This is a difficult problem because as soon as one starts to add gallons to a the glide a whole Pandora's box of required assumptions, correlations, other data such as SOC, etc. is needed to do the accounting both for the glide and the pulse.