Carfax, Buying Used, & Craigslist.org

Page 5 of 6  
AZ Nomad wrote:


that's odd. all the indian engineer's i've worked with have had excellent english. thick accents when speaking, but excellent written english. it's the language of all higher education in india from what i understand.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I dunno. They range all over the place. At one end of the spectrum, I have an indian coworker who can handle any idiom I care to use. At the other end of the spectrum is a coworker who can't assemble a complex sentence to save her life. The latter obviously didn't use 'british english' much if at all while growing up and must have used the regional languages primarily. She says that she went to grad school in london. I figure that it gave her about 2 years exposure to english which sounds about right.
And don't get me going about their seventy syllable names. Their name tags on the cubicles have to be done in an 8 point font.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I can see you have joined the elite club...

Break-in?? You must be kidding me... We were talking about 10k and 50k comparison, not the first thousand miles break-in. Sorry, but I was still unable to find a document comparing mpg of 10k and 50k cars. Can you be so kind (and wise) and give me the link you've refered to? I am not as good with google as you, and I was only able to find this page: http://autorepair.about.com/cs/generalinfo/a/aa022501a_2.htm To quote: "New Engines: New vehicles have not yet had an opportunity for the engine to break in (rings to seat, etc.). A typical engine will take three to five thousand miles to break in, and during this time period a gradual increase in fuel economy can be expected." I cannot see there anything about 50k miles car being better on mileage than a 10k car... Same here: http://www.autotrader.com/research/article/car-fuel-economy/27009/many-factors-affect-mpg.jsp?lcat=green&rdpage=ARTPOS1 "Engine Break-in New vehicles will not obtain their optimal fuel economy until the engine has broken in. This may take 3-5 thousand miles."
Nothing anywhere about the effects of engine break-in after the first 10k miles and between 10k-50k period.
Show me how you, my Master, use the google, please!
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

trying very hard to be funny? Show me a document proving what you said about the car engine @ 10k being tight and wasting more energy on frictionthan @ 50k.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Pszemol wrote:

no, i'm dead serious.

easy. click on that link and do some homework. or you can go to school and study things like engineering for a few years.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote

But if you pay a 1000 dollars more to save this $20 a month it sounds silly. $20 a month is $240 a year, so spending $1000 more (or maybe 5000 more in case of prius and other hybrids) would not equalize after so many years that the old car would not be worth this price difference...
Do you see my point?
Some people are so focused on milleage per gallon that they forget the bigger picture and they overpay for a car with a higher mileage much more than they save on gas through the life of the car.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

You are changing the location of the goalposts. :-)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote

Am I?
The goal is the same and has never moved: to get the car which will cost the least amount of money it is ever possible. High expected mpg is only one of many parts to the main equation.
Some people forget about it and are so hypnotized with mpg that they are ready to pay more money for a car with not much higher mpg, so not justify the price increase. At some point they pay more for the car than they are able to save on gas money and in the process they sacrifice car performance and the joy of driving a nice car.
The same goes with improving the gas mileage on the car we own. If we can bump the mileage +5mpg but have to spend $500 to do it, is is worth it? I am afraid, not.
There was a guy here or some other newsgroup moding his honda or nissan to get the extreme gas mileage - he has removed from his car EVERYTHING beside his driver sit, including spare wheel. Don't you think this is crazy? :-) One flat tire and towing would kill all his gas savings...
So it is good to keep in touch with the bigger picture to not get lost in the blind higher gas mileage chase... :-)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I did not pay a $1000 more.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote

More than what?
I was not talking about you but in general about car choosing process.
You look at the one car (civic 91 with 27 mpg city) and another (civic 93 with 29 mpg city) and you know that maximum you can save in IDEAL, LABOLATORY conditions is 2mpg. How much these savings are worth to you it depends on how much miles you make per year... That's all.
And this mileage applies to new cars - cars with high mileage will require a lot of work to reach that original, factory levels. So for used cars I do not think comparison of factory values makes any sense at all in terms of comarison. You can probably find out there 91 civic which burns much less fuel than a random 93 civic.
How much fuel will your burn? You will see, soon... I wish you good luck!
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Use the word "one" in place of "you," then.

Nonsense. My 91 Civic's mileage actually improved with age and is better than the EPA's stated values. I watch it like a hawk for the last five years, and it has not changed. You are not the least bit up to date on what old cars can do these days.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote

:-)

How can you explain old car with leaky cylinders and not perfect compression, dirty/worn out fuel injectors etc, etc, using up less fuel than when they were new?
How exactly do you measure your gas mileage and what is the mathematical error/uncertainity of this measurement?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Engine rings do not fail nearly as soon as they used to, that's all. Without googling, I'd say technology has improved additives to gas and engine oil, along with engine materials, so engines last longer. You can google and find more on why engines last longer these days. Even American manufacturers' cars are lasting longer.
I have not read of fuel injector problems here, though people have replaced them without any change in performance. Tegger did a report a while back on what he saw when he replaced his fuel injectors. Google the archives.
Seems like the only time we read here of a Honda with poor compression is when the car has been driven hard. It's rare to hear of someone's engine giving out here, unless it's due to a failed timing belt.

Trip odometer set to zero at every fillup. Fill to one click. Divide miles by gallons. Average over many fillups, or a few.
MPG often falls off for many people simply due to poor basic maintenance habits like not changing out the plug wires, plugs, distributor cap, PCV valve, air filter, etc. Also, failing to use OEM for these parts (air filter excepted) can be detrimental to MPG, IMO.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote

I am not saying they last shorter, I am just saying they consume little more than when they were new and all was clean, matching perfectly and in order.
I simply cannot compute the argument that the car with 185 thousand miles on the odometer can consume less fuel than when it had - let's say - 10 thousand and everything else was brand new and in perfect adjustment.

This is very unreliable method and you have many sources of error factored to your calculations!

I see I am unable to convince you... that is ok, too :-)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Then you are not acquainted with changes in technology. Just the use of unleaded fuel in the last 30 years has altered engine life dramatically.

Nonsense, but thank you for convincing me you are a bullshit artist.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote

Sure, and car after 200 thousand miles consumes less fuel than the same car when it was brand new... of course :-)

Here we go with name calling game... How mature is it? :-)
You simply do not realize where are the sources of BIG errors in your method. For example, starting at your shut-off nozzle, it will shut-off in very random place near the top of the tank. It will depend on the brand of the dispenser, velocity of the fuel in the hose (how strong is the submersible on the site) even the same nozzles will differ in the shut-off reaction time. Shut off time will even depend on how deep you put nozzle in... It will also depend on the particular fuel was delivered that day on the site you refuel... If the gasoline happens to be specially foamy that day, it may actuate the release mechanism in the nozzle prematurely, with the result that you end up with less than a full tank of gas. If you stop fueling in the middle and let the foam settle, then fuel to the top it will be different.
Mixing city and highway milleage is also a huge factor in error estimation. Ambient air temperature, weather condition (rain), holiday period and less cars on the road, less stops&go. Averaging can only help a little.
Well, good luck with your car! :-)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Pszemol wrote:

but that doesn't make a damned bit of difference to an average!

no dude, the average /defines/ the whole exercise.

good luck with your math.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

It does if you want to extract city mpg from highway mpg. If you take too much data into the average you will blurr the difference between city/highway mileage and for some cars it makes a huge difference.

It introduces some problems, too...
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Pszemol wrote:

spot data is not average data. spot data is used to compile average data.

eh? you don't seem to have a very good grasp of math principles. but the education system today is not very effective so it's probably not your fault.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

You should use data of the same kind when compiling average. If you mix city mileage and highway mileage you will not get either calculation improved by using average. You will get pretty useless mixture/average of mileage changing in time with no chanse of spoting the cause for increase/decrease.

Are you trying to compensate some of your own education problems with childish coments like this one?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.