One reason DRLs shouldn't be opposed...

Yes, I'll never forgive Cutler for that.

Matt

What is a small engine? A 1.5 with an automatic I'll agree with you. Most 1.8 L or larger engines with 4 speed (or more) automatics with locking converters will give the average driver of a manual trans one real good run for his money.

Matt, it uses the same amount of fuel to accelerate whether the lights are on or not (in addition to what is required to run the lights) andf on decel, even with the lights on, the fuel injectors on many cars are shut off COMPLETELY. The alternator is still charging, and using no fuel. The kinetic energy of the car in motion runs the alternator - and the alternator slows the car down marginally.

| >> On Mon, 02 Aug 2004 19:49:40 GMT, 223rem wrote: | >>

| >>

| >>>

| >>>Larry Bud wrote: | >>>

| >>>

| >>>>Hey Dan, bite me. Are you an asshole in real life, or just on usenet? | >>>>

| >>>>There is hardly a discussion of any calculations here, except for the | >>>>info on howstuffworks, and they don't break it down per vehicle. 400 | >>>>million gals/year is peanuts. Nowhere in their "calculations" do they | >>>>indicate the number of cars, or covert that into MPG. So I'll do that | >>>>for you Dan. | >>>

| >>>

| >>>I think the issue is that you were not aware of the principle of | >>>the conservation of energy, which is taught in any elementary physics | >>>course (high school level). | >>>

| >>>Some people have little patience when confronted with ignorance combined | >>>with arrogance. | >>

| >>

| >> Another thing not taken into account is that whenever a car is | >> decellerating or coasting, going down hill, etc, the alternator is not | >> using ANY gasoline to produce the power. In typical urban driving | >> cycles, that would be well up in the 25% plus range. If not in | >> gridlock, possibly over 50%. Try driving an electric vehicle sometime | >> to see. This will skew the calculations a bit!!! | >

| >Sure it is. It is using some of the gasoline that was used to | >accelerate the car to speed or to climb the hill that it is now going | >down. There is no free lunch. | >

| >

| >Matt | Matt, it uses the same amount of fuel to accelerate whether the lights | are on or not (in addition to what is required to run the lights) andf | on decel, even with the lights on, the fuel injectors on many cars are | shut off COMPLETELY. The alternator is still charging, and using no | fuel. The kinetic energy of the car in motion runs the alternator - | and the alternator slows the car down marginally.

It's still the same amount of kinetic energy that has to be made up to maintain vehicle speed. Think about it. Downhill at 60MPH with DRLs the car increases speed by 5MPH...without it increases by 6MPH...the car will coast farther on the flat or at the next hill before fuel is required to maintain original/desired speed if the DRLs are off. Where the energy would be close to being "free" is when coming to a stop where the kinetic energy would normally be wasted in the heat of friction within the brakes anyway.

Good examples of either kind of knobs have thier charms.

From

"Another trend is the use of automatic transmissions in heavy-duty trucks. Last year, 18% of all Class 8 trucks built and sold were equipped with automatic transmissions, up from 5% in 1996. "A big factor is the change in the responsiveness of diesel engines as a result of pollution controls," he explains. "Despite all the electronics on today's engines, there can be up to three seconds of low or no torque between shifts when you use manual or automated mechanical transmissions."

Also see

Allison has been making automatic transmissions for large trucks for at least 30 years. The difference in mileage is minimal (and possibly the automatics actually can do better now). The difference in maintenance is not - the trucks with the automatics almost always cost less to maintain. However, they aren't cheap to buy, and most "professional" drivers don't want them.

Regards,

Ed White

They won't get me as a customer.

------------- Alex

They don't necessarily "do better," and more and more fleet buyers of big trucks are going with automatics (FWIW- Greyhound busses have been mostly automatics since the early 70s). Owner/operators will always go for gear-jammin' instead of automatics as a matter of pride and preference, but the fleets are seeing the benefits of autos more and more.

Yep- the voltage is proportional to how much current the alternator pushes into the load/battery combination. Ohms law still applies- the alternator produces a current, which results in a voltage... and its that voltage that the regulator senses.

Me either. Its Chrysler first (until Diamler screws it up too bad) and then Ford. Warts (aka modular engines) and all, I still prefer Ford over GM by a wide margin.

BZZZZT! Wrong again.

The alternator load slightly decreases the distance that the car will coast at the bottom of the hill, meaning that you have to get back "on" the gas sooner than you would have if the alternator hadn't been drawing any power.

You NEVER get something for nothing, not as long as the laws of Thermodynamics are in play.

BZZZZT! There you go, trying to violate the laws of physics again.

Oh, I don't know. I really like my over-boosted '66 Polara. There's still road-feel, just on a different scale... But people that are completely unaccustomed to it get pretty wide-eyed the first time they drive it :-)

But in general, I agree. Modest steering boost (but most modern cars don't have enough, and in fact the PS seems to inhibit rapid maneuvering) and no power brakes are my preferred combination.

Well, they WERE indestructible (just like their instruments). HP printers and MODERN computers are nothing special- they aren't even "really" HP. The company now known as Agilent is the "real" Hewlett-Packard.

Me and my family's experience with GM products have all been bad. So even without the DRL and data recorder fiascos I would not consider them. We've had good results with Chrysler, Ford, Nissan, Toyota, and Mazda's.

-------------- Alex

Yes, and this marginal slow down means that more gas is used to climb the next hill. As much as you want to believe it, it takes chemical energy to create electrical energy in a car.

Matt

I don't consider 18% market share to be a success. Maybe in another 20 years...

Matt

On Tue, 03 Aug 2004 20:24:20 -0400, Matt Whiting

And Xerox was creating 3 decades ago.

-- There's no way to delay that trouble comin' everyday