Fuel efficiency

I will restate that. i di an experiment on the way home from work. It actually does even better at 100! (kMH, that is!! ;)

Reply to
Hachiroku
Loading thread data ...

Every Toyota I have ever had has gotten better mileage at 70 than at 55. Usual mileage at 55 was around 30MPG, at 70 it was 33-36MPG...

Luckily, I never got a ticket!!

Reply to
Hachiroku

I'm *almost* jealous!!

(I like the Mustang...Ford would be my next choice after Toyota..)

Reply to
Hachiroku

Consumer Reports did test runs at different speeds just to measure the effect of speed on MPG.

2005 Toyota Camry 4 cyl: 75mph: 30mpg 65mph: 35mpg 55mph: 40mpg

2005 Mercury Mountaineer SUV (V8):

75mph: 18mpg 65mph: 21mpg 55mph: 24mpg

The other big thing was drag, at least for the Camry. A car top carrier reduced its fuel efficiency drastically, but had only a minor effect on the Mountaineer (which after all has the aerodynamics of a brick).

Things that did not matter much: tire inflation, clean/dirty air filter, AC vs open windows.

Article here:

formatting link
Chris

Reply to
Christopher Wong

Gradually raise the tax on gasoline by an extra $3/g, but rebate all the revenue equally to every person. That way people who use less gas than average end up with a net tax decrease.

Reply to
larry moe 'n curly

Why are we subjected to half truths? At 70 mph you were the only one in the car and at 55 mph you had your whole family with you. Folks, meet the Governor, err, I mean speed governor, Mrs. Hach!

Reply to
mark digital

My car is 2litre straight 4 and gets best efficiency around 70, its more to do with how the ECU is set up these days than the engine type, though some innevitable truths cant be passed over.

A 2 litre at 3000rpm uses less fuel than a 4 litre at 2000 revs.

mark_digital=A9 wrote:

Um its hearse, not hearst.

Reply to
Coyoteboy

Because if we all take that view in 50 years time the world would be a stinking, smoggy, polluted and horrible place to live, even ignoring climate change.

Reply to
Coyoteboy

Communist......

Oh my....

Why don't you go to Cuba to live.....

Reply to
Scott in Florida

Oh, I agree with you 100% there! There is often No Good Reason to drive one of those behemoths other than they are the 'in' thing to drive.

A lot of them are available with 2 wheel drive. But, I love seeing some woman (sorry, Ladies!) who could barely drive a Moped get behind the wheel of one of these things, talk on the phone, do her nails and eat a sandwich! (I am NOT kidding!!!! I saw this once.) Of course, there was also the Ditz I saw in morning commute traffic with one hand on her Walkman, DANCING in her driver's seat, no hands on the wheel, coming to a bottleneck where the cars were stopped. She was driving a Nissan Altima or something, so she posed a little less danger to the rest of the motoring public.

But, what I *REALLY* love, is when the price of gas goes up a dime or so, and the local News media goes out and talks to the 'man at the pumps'; invariably there is one guy pissing and moaning about the cost of fuel while he gasses up his non-Diesel Excursion!!! Don't cry to me! I've been driving Toyotas all my life! If anything, I should get some kind of reduction in my price of fuel for being so energy concious all my life!!!

Reply to
Hachiroku

No, my wife and I worked at the same place for years, so we drove one car. The GT-S Corolla consistantly got 34-36 MPG at 70MPH, and her Honda got about 30; 27 at 60 MPH.

She was also sitting very calmly in the passenger's seat when I put the Corolla up to 128MPH on the Trans-Canada. Would have gone more but the front end was starting to lift...

Reply to
Hachiroku

That's nice. Except for a handful of eco-pests such as yourself, we pretty much *do* all take that view - at least if sales of fuel thirsty vehicles is any indication. The world has yet to go to hell in a handbasket and I have yet to see any credible evidence of what you envision for our future (I'm a nuclear engineer by training and can spot "junk science" when I see it). Additionally, the increased enviromental impact of, say, a Hummer as compared to a Pius is trivial compared to the infrastructure needed to support *any* car - roads, refineries, parking lots, paving machines, etc.

Finally, unless and until you're footing my gasoline bill, you have absolutely zero say in the matter. "Anyone who thinks he has a better idea of what's good for people than people do is a swine."

ObToyota: My wife and I shared a 95 Tacoma pickup for daily driving until about three months ago when we bought an 87 Corolla as an alternative to me driving the Willys at times when we both needed a car. This was purely an economic decision - $100 a week versus $30 a week in gasoline.

Reply to
Mike Harris

Only pro-terrorist chickenhawks will oppose this plan, and I hear you clucking, Scottie boy.

Reply to
larry moe 'n curly

Based on these data shouldn't we expect even better mpg at 45 mph?

I think you will find that the slowest speed allowing the car to stay in the highest gear for the most time will get the best overall mpg. In other words, if at 55 mph the car needs a lower gear (to make more power) to climb an incline or maneuver in traffic then 60 mph may return better average mpg. Add a few passengers/luggage and expect the car to need more power (higher speed) to keep in the highest gear.

Reply to
ACAR

Only a person with a very simple mind could come up with such a 'simple' solution like that LOL

mike hunt

Reply to
Mike Hunter

Can't prove that by what I see with my cars. You may be confusing (horse) power with toque. My V8 car will go up over the top of hills in fifth gear, that my lighter V6 car needs to drop to fourth from sixth gear, to go up over the top at the same speed.

mike hunt

Reply to
Mike Hunter

My 3 speed gets over the same hills in third....LOL

Reply to
Scott in Florida

Or torque? A "toque" is a hat. ;-P

Cathy

My V8 car will go up over the top of hills in fifth gear,

Reply to
Cathy F.

How about a different question?

"How could Americans increase fuel efficiency as a whole?"

It's hard to mandate fuel efficiency when drivers don't cooperate. On the other hand, encouraging *voluntary* cooperation will go down easier. One gadget that would help would be an MPG gauge. It gives you instant and constant feedback on how much that lead foot of yours is costing you. Make that gadget prevalent, and many drivers will be trained -- voluntarily -- to drive in a more fuel efficient manner. It's in their own best interest.

Chris

Reply to
Christopher Wong

Chris,

F*** that. Gas is cheap, even at four bucks a gallon. If I want to waste it, I don't need a "nanny gauge" to tell me that I'm doing so. I'm not an idiot - I know which driving habits cost me money, reinforced every time I fill the tank. Sometimes I care; usually I don't. I'll cheerfully take the ball peen hammer to that particular gauge - and then look suspiciously at you for forcing me to pay for the useless thing.

BTW, you may not be old enough to recall that Ford did exactly that in the mid 70s. It was actually a vacuum gauge with an idiot light that would come on when you were driving "inefficiently," not nearly as sophisticated as the fuel meters which could be crafted today. In any case, the first thing that owners did was to disconnect the f***ing thing. Sometimes with that ball peen hammer.

Reply to
harriswest

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.