I read flight log data daily. And in looking at my flights and others, the R/C Stick input is not the greatest. One downfall to that is, it is one of the most neglected in the way that pilots don't do a good job at calibrating their R/C's. Some say they calibrated on day #1 and nothing else since.Good. Thank you.
There have been a number of threads in the past discussing this and as I remember, most people believe(d) that max throttle in GPS was most efficient but somebody did a test and claimed that slightly less than max throttle in GPS was slightly more efficient than max throttle in GPS. And that equates with what Frank says above.
That may explain my forced landing into the middle of a corn field a little over a mile away. I was gong for distance, - little over 4 miles, and thought Atti was the most efficient. I'll try GPS next time. - ThanksThat makes sense logically, but if you think about it, GPS is still best for efficiency. If you're heading into a certain direction and GPS is not fighting the wind for you and keeping the AC direction aligned, then you will have to fight the wind manually which won't be as efficient as the computer doing it for you. And you'll almost certainly end up taking a longer path.
Also, there is more to ATTI than the manual leads one to believe. It's not just about lack of GPS. ATTI is like injecting nitro to a gas engine. It makes the motors race. It's similar to "sport mode" in the P4. But at full throttle, it causes the battery to come down in charge quickly and is inefficient. And at full throttle, it's also dangerous on the latter end of the flight because voltage lag is more pronounced which can cause auto land or worse.