Built like a Mercedes (?)

You are going to tell me with a straight facer a Panda will deliver

70mpg with 4 adults on board? Give your empty head a shake!!!
*** Free account sponsored by SecureIX.com *** *** Encrypt your Internet usage with a free VPN account from
formatting link
***
Reply to
clare at snyder.on.ca
Loading thread data ...

some liberal publication that ignores all the true facts

Funny, my finance charges each year are zero. Fuel costs are $9 per

100 miles, maintenance is negligible since I refuse to waste money at a dealer, and a Honda requires virtually no maintenance, but figure $3 for that, $2 for insurance, $0 depreciation. That comes out to $14. Now, the fare for mass transit may only be $14, but that does not include the cost of road taxes that go to the mass transit that should be going to our roads, nor of gasoline taxes that are misdirected, and other taxes such as income and sales taxes that go to support Metra. Real cost, probably in the neighborhood of $75.

Clearly, mass transit is FAR MORE EXPENSIVE than autos, and does NOT PROVIDE service to the vast majority of people who need to be able to get to work and the store.

************************* Dave
Reply to
DTJ

Funny, nobody I know has ever been to pluto.

More than 1/2 of Americans have to have both halves of the couple work just to support the family because we keep shipping our jobs over to third world countries like Canaduh, India and China.

************************* Dave
Reply to
DTJ

I've no idea how they do those figures wrt number of persons on board but the latest diesel Panda can indeed do 70 mpg ( British gallons )

formatting link
" the Panda 1.3 16v MultiJet also manages to cover more than 75 mpg outside town, and even in the urban environment returns 52 mpg "

Graham

Reply to
Pooh Bear

latest diesel

But not fully loaded.

town, and even

*** Free account sponsored by SecureIX.com *** *** Encrypt your Internet usage with a free VPN account from
formatting link
***
Reply to
clare at snyder.on.ca

May be, but it's on the internet, so it's every bit as credible as the figures given by Huw. I'm not saying they are accurate, but they are no less accurate than those Huw is spewing.

*** Free account sponsored by SecureIX.com *** *** Encrypt your Internet usage with a free VPN account from
formatting link
***
Reply to
clare at snyder.on.ca

Until you buy another car when this one fails.

Rubbish. Its a machine, so it wants maintenance. Unless you don't change the oil, and never put tires or brakes on it, you put money into maintenance.

Over what period of time or mileage? Your figures have no basis if you don't quantify the duration over which you spend that money.

More rubbish, since you are claiming the costs are altered by corruption, taxes and fees that are not only unspecified in cost, but are unproven assumptions.

More crap. You haven't proven the expense, and worse, you haven't figured out the problem.

Reply to
Max Dodge

They use undisputed figures of actual energy use provided by the railways. No one but you disputes this.

You miss much. Here it is again and a cursory search for 'panda multijet' will get you reams of confirmitory information. You may not believe it but medium saloons regularly exceed 50mpg here.

formatting link
The fuel use figures you will find repeated for the car in most sites because they are the official EU figures, albeit in Imperial.

Not all figures come from a web site. From what you have said previously that should make them more credible LOL The suppliers of the figures are the individual networks that are plainly listed on the fact sheet which make up british rail.

I work with reality. You prefer an utopian fantasy.

It is the reality. Trains and all public transport on medium hauls [out of city] must run to strict timetables in order to satisfy the customer [who do not all enter at the first or launch point] and in order to link up with other vehicles to distribute or gather passengers to various destinations.

I have addressed all sensible points. As illustrated above I do not believe that you would admit to red being actually red if it didn't suit you.

Huw

Reply to
Huw

On a relatively clear road and with just my 300lbs on board but with a difficult undulating and twisty route I have managed to exceed 90mpg when driving with economy in mind. I have never come below 65mpg with two on board and driving fairly quickly if not hammering it in rural Wales. Next time I travel three up over a fair distance I'll get some more real life figures.

75mpg with two on board is not just realistic it is an easy reality.

Why do you have difficulty with this?

formatting link
formatting link

RUNNING COSTS Urban mpg 52.3 Extra urban mpg 76.3 Combined mpg 65.7 Tank capacity (gallons) 7.7 CO2 rating (g/km) 114 Insurance group 2 Typical insurance quote £244 % value retained (3yrs/36,000mls) 46% Typical contract hire rate (pcm) £200 Pence per mile 26 Servicing cost over 3yrs £570 Service intervals 12,000 Manufacturer's warranty 3yr/60k + 3yr Paint + 8yr Perforation

begin 666 sn_corner_red.gif M1TE&.#EA"0`6`+,``/_\_/[Y^>QU5)1?[V]NA>6N=23MP& M`/___P```````````````"'Y! $```L`+ `````)`!8`0 0;4*D!JI4XZYTI

4X"#G5> 0GNA(=M=&H7 LSUP$`#L` ` end
Reply to
Huw

I, too, drive a diesel as one of my rides, although it is a Mercedes 300SD,

1983. I have over 338,000 miles on it and it still runs, and looks, good. However, a disappointing thing has happened as of late--diesel fuel tends to be amongst the priciest fuels, sometimes even aceing out premium at the pump. For a fuel that is just a cut or so above lubricating oil, I find this hard to believe.
Reply to
wolfpuppy

For my use, even at the higher price, my MPG vs. a gasoline powered truck of the same model makes diesel a more economical choice.

Diesel is more costly now because of more detailed refining, such as the removal of sulfer. However, I'll agree that it makes little sense that fuel that used to cost about half what a gallon of gasoline did, now costs up to

25% more than a gallon of gasoline.
Reply to
Max Dodge

max, you naughty boy! i do believe that in the mist of the early morning, i hear the voice of max, yelling gleefully, "fish on".

Reply to
theguy

Pricing today is based on the number of BTUs you are buying - whether propane, coal, gasoline or diesel oil you will find the pricing very close. And Diesel contains some 20?% more energy than gasoline per unit of volume.

*** Free account sponsored by SecureIX.com *** *** Encrypt your Internet usage with a free VPN account from
formatting link
***
Reply to
clare at snyder.on.ca

Specific net calorific values are as below. There is nothing like a 20% difference between petrol and diesel. Fuel is priced according to supply and demand as well as value in comparison with other fuels so diesel and kero should be cheaper in Summer when domestic and industrial non transport use is lowest. The rise in price in relation to gasoline during recent years is a reflection of its increasing market share in relation to refining capacity as well as an element of opportunism by the oil companies.

toe/tonne

Refinery gas 1.150 LPG 1.130 Ethane 1.130 Motor Gasoline 1.070 Jet Fuel 1.065 Kerosene 1.045 Naphtha 1.075 Gas/Diesel Oil 1.035

As you can see there is less than 5% difference in energy density between them by weight. Gas [natural] and crude oil also vary in energy value according to region. If you really want the relationships I can provide them to you with a click.

Huw

Reply to
Huw

[...]

Bingo. What they've done up there is compare operating and capital costs of cars (including the rather large part of the cost of the roads covered by gas taxes) to the transit fare which covers none of the capital cost and probably less than half of the operating cost. While the out-of-pocket comparison might make sense for an individual deciding between the two, it makes no sense on a larger scale, because if you _do_ start getting a lot of drivers over to mass transit, and actually expand mass transit to handle the load, you actually dig yourself into a deeper hole.

Reply to
Matthew T. Russotto

All that means to me as a consumer is that they've invented a way to structure price for more profit.

Reply to
Max Dodge

"Can carry" is right. In peak hour it might. And the rest of the day?

DAS

Reply to
Dori A Schmetterling

We may also be msixing up 'long' and short' gallons.

BTW, my Honda 175, which I had in the late 70s returned about 70 mpg (imperial)

DAS

For direct contact replace nospam with schmetterling

Reply to
Dori A Schmetterling

What do you call an imperial gallon btw ? 16 or 20 fl oz ?

Graham

Reply to
Pooh Bear

I'm having fun just watching everyone duke it out here, but had to chime in on this one with my own $.02.

Since a gallon of gasoline contains ~19,000 BTU/gallon the value of 7,380 BTU/pass-mile works out to 2.6 miles/gallon, or when my wife rides along with me only 1.26 miles per gallon. Planning a trip through Death Valley pretty soon - doesn't look like we're going to make it across with only a 16 gallon tank in my car.

This one didn't quite pass the smell test.

Frank

Reply to
Raybender

MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.