|
Damn SUVs (pg. 5)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| dallastar |
| quote: | Originally posted by ChemEnhanced
I don't even have my new vehicle two weeks and an SUV backs out of a parking spot right into the rear driver's side wheel.
It is a little freaky when you are sitting that low and an SUV is backing into you. |
terrible! What a stupid ! |
|
|
| Euphorica |
cosmic is right. drag and speed is definately a factor in mpg and its DIFFERENT for every car. its not the same for each car.... since each car has different drag coefficients and engines.
low rpm isnt always better either(depending on engine). something like an ls1 (camaro..older vette). can chug along at 1500 rpm and it pulls off its best mileage there on the highway... while something like a civic would get WORSE mileage cruising that low in the rpm range because its torque output is much less ..therefore you need to give it more gas (load) for it to keep that speed up. Where it could handle it much better at 3000 rpm and have enough torque (and hp)to keep moving forward and for you not to be in it so much.
rpms actually have less of an effect on gas consumption compared to load(howmuch you are pushing the gas). a car running at 13 vaccum and 4000 rpm will burn less gas compared to a car running at 2000 rpm but needing more load (less vaccuum)..say 8 .
gear ratios , tire size, unsprung weight etc..ALL play a role in gas consumption.
srt8 jeep rocks..
it cost me $49 to fill my car the other day(premium) and thatll get me about a week and ahalf (depending on how far i go) |
|
|
| DigitalMP |
ok, for the blind...
| quote: | | Originally posted by CosmicFur That's only right if you're driving through a vacuum. |
| quote: | Originally posted by tranceinurpants
Not true |
This is stating that Cosmic is WRONG by saying the vacuum factor is the ONLY factor.
| quote: | Originally posted by Cosmic Fur
Umm.. thanks for proving that it IS a factor, as I've been saying all along. |
Again, he never said it wasn't a factor. You were the one saying nothing else is a factor.
| quote: | Originally posted by Euphorica
drag and speed is definately a factor in mpg |
thanks, Captain Obvious.
| quote: | Originally posted by Euphorica
low rpm isnt always better either(depending on engine). something like an ls1 (camaro..older vette). can chug along at 1500 rpm and it pulls off its best mileage there on the highway... while something like a civic would get WORSE mileage cruising that low in the rpm range because its torque output is much less ..therefore you need to give it more gas (load) for it to keep that speed up. |
You're talking about unique situations, like a big car struglling at low RPMs and low speeds, or a small car at low RPMs at high speeds. But in typical situations, driving at 1500 RPMs at 45 MPH in 5th gear, then downshifting to 4th and hitting 4500 RPMs at 50 MPH is definitely going to drop your MPG, and for those who want to use that argument to push the MPH issue, you can also substitute that with climbing through the gears at 40 MPH and 4000 RPMs in 4th before shifting into 5th.
But yes, I will also state that a vacuum has very great factors ;) |
|
|
| Cosmic Fur |
DigitalMP, I guess reading for the blind is not a volunteer activity well suited for you, because I don't see one place where I said that drag was the only factor. You were talking about engine speeds, and I said that what you said is only true if you are driving in a vacuum (i.e. discounting the force of drag). I was telling that you were forgetting about drag, not that drag was the only factor.
Edit: I see where you may have gotten confused: I said that drag was the number 1 factor, not the only one. Looking back, i think it's best to retract the "number 1" classification since I do not know that for sure. |
|
|
| DigitalMP |
| quote: | Originally posted by Cosmic Fur
DigitalMP, I guess reading for the blind is not a volunteer activity well suited for you |
lol...as I pick up my hammer and saw |
|
|
| Cosmic Fur |
| quote: | Originally posted by DigitalMP
lol...as I pick up my hammer and saw |
:conf: |
|
|
| exstasie |
| So I guess the moral of this story is if you want to conserve gas...DRIVE FASTER! |
|
|
| tranceinurpants |
| quote: | Originally posted by exstasie
So I guess the moral of this story is if you want to conserve gas...DRIVE FASTER! |
He pritty much got it right on the button (kinda) |
|
|
| exstasie |
I do my part. I've been pretty good. I drive quite often from TO to Mississauga along the QE at night, and tend to drive around 160km/h...Thankfully I haven't see any cops, but there's always one dude that wants to race me on the highway.
Highway racing isn't good, because your constantly accelerating, braking, accelarting, braking...which is hard on your fuel efficiency! |
|
|
| Euphorica |
| quote: | Originally posted by exstasie
\
Highway racing isn't good, because your constantly accelerating, braking, accelarting, braking...which is hard on your fuel efficiency! |
lol, racing in general isnt good for fuel efficiency...doesnt matter where. LOL |
|
|
| Euphorica |
| quote: | Originally posted by DigitalMP
But in typical situations, driving at 1500 RPMs at 45 MPH in 5th gear, then downshifting to 4th and hitting 4500 RPMs at 50 MPH is definitely going to drop your MPG |
not necessarly. x car might have more vac at 4500 rpm @ 50 mph then at 1500 rpm and 45 mph. (which can happen in many cars) .... the car with more vac (less load) is burning less gas. |
|
|
|
|
