Fuel efficiency

[Chris Fleming]

http://autos.aol.com/article/slow-down-save-gas

An old article, from over a year ago, but becoming relevant once again. I was on a road trip recently and noticed how everyone loves to drive like 85 mph+ on the interstate, but probably have no idea what that is costing them for their choice in doing so.

[yusuf]

hey

I think it also depends on other factors. I used to drive at well over 90 for a 350 mile trip each way on weekends (70mph speed limit here in the UK). I did consider the fuel saving by going at 60, and tried it a coupel of times, but the delay in getting to my destination was more irritating than the extra cash in my pocket.

Now I only go 70 since apparently women know more about my driving ability than 20 years of speedfreakery . Oh and for the environemnt as well

yusuf

[Darth Rock&Roll]

I have a lawnmower that runs on bananas.

Here's how it works.

I eat a banana, then I go out and push my lawn mower.

now that's energy efficient!

I also have a two wheeled vehicle that runs on spaghetti!

[fuga]

I also have a two wheeled vehicle that runs on spaghetti!

Mine runs on coffee.

[Darth Rock&Roll]

I also have a two wheeled vehicle that runs on spaghetti!

Mine runs on coffee.

I'll bet I get more milage out of the spaghetti. But you probably get a better mph /kph reading early on.

lol

[dragontigerpalm]

I have a lawnmower that runs on bananas.

Here's how it works.

I eat a banana, then I go out and push my lawn mower.

now that's energy efficient!

I also have a two wheeled vehicle that runs on spaghetti!

Well I have some bananas and a lawn that needs cutting. When should I expect you.

[Darth Rock&Roll]

I'm not for hire.

unless the job is de-virgining hot 23 year old women...

[Chris Fleming]

hey

I think it also depends on other factors. I used to drive at well over 90 for a 350 mile trip each way on weekends (70mph speed limit here in the UK). I did consider the fuel saving by going at 60, and tried it a coupel of times, but the delay in getting to my destination was more irritating than the extra cash in my pocket.



yusuf

That is a consideration as well, especially equipped with what the total cost vs savings really is. If a person doesn't know what it is really costing them to drive 90, then all they are going off of is a perceived savings in time--which I do appreciate, but more and more, I'll take the cash. When driving for 4+ hours like I was on my recent trip, saving 25 minutes or so doesn't really matter to me.

Not to mention, I read somewhere that a crash at anything going 80 mph or above is almost certainly 100% fatal. People going that fast are unsafe drivers (I used to be one of them) because of the fact that they are going faster than everyone else, and have to take actions to remain the fastest on the road (get the hell outta my way!). I would guess that seriously fast drivers have never been in a serious or even semi serious accident or a serious near miss. Those things tend to really change ones priorities.

[qiphlow]

what's better for the environment: a chevy suburban carrying 7 people getting 14 mpg, or each of those people driving a honda civic getting 30 mpg?

[everything]

good point. carpooling is better.

here in the US the "cash for clunkers" program has started. I am thinking I should junk the SUV and get the $4500 incentive for a hybrid. Or maybe go really inexpensive with the Honda Fit (Jazz). I have to admit my SUV is quite comfortable and I like the view from higher up, but something fun to drive and tossable like a go kart would be a good trade.

[Chris Fleming]

Personally I can't wait for all of those losers who bought big trucks just for the look, not that they are doing any hauling or things like that, to not be able to afford to drive them anymore.

[fuga]

what's better for the environment: a chevy suburban carrying 7 people getting 14 mpg, or each of those people driving a honda civic getting 30 mpg?

I can't remember the last time I saw a Chevy Suburban carrying that many people. Usually it's a couple of bags of grocery and a kid in a car seat.

[qiphlow]

what's better for the environment: a chevy suburban carrying 7 people getting 14 mpg, or each of those people driving a honda civic getting 30 mpg?

I can't remember the last time I saw a Chevy Suburban carrying that many people. Usually it's a couple of bags of grocery and a kid in a car seat.

true, but my point is that we're demonizing the cars when we ought to be working on how they're used. i think that's your point as well.

[qiphlow]

good point. carpooling is better.

here in the US the "cash for clunkers" program has started. I am thinking I should junk the SUV and get the $4500 incentive for a hybrid. Or maybe go really inexpensive with the Honda Fit (Jazz). I have to admit my SUV is quite comfortable and I like the view from higher up, but something fun to drive and tossable like a go kart would be a good trade.

depends--your suv might be worth more than 4500 as a trade in. check the blue book value @ kbb.com--it'll give you a ballpark figure of the trade in value. the trick to cash for clunkers is that the car you're giving up has to be scrapped, so it works best for older cars that wouldn't be worth much anyway.

edit:
and personally, i'd go for a mazda3 or a honda civic si over a fit.

[yusuf]

it is strange that 100kg lumps of human flesh need 2 tonne vehicles to move them around, individually