Does fuel economy matter to you at all?
- Thread starter ZZman
- Start date
- Status
Weight takes more...
Originally Posted By: Ducked
Interesting but saddening that environmental protection doesn't feature AT ALL in the above statements, not even mine (though it is at the back of my mind as an underlying concern). No Prius Posters? Poor old planet.
Yeah right. Environmental gurus like Al Gore fly around the world in their private jets sucking up more fuel than all my driving would in 100 lifetimes. Remember John Denver? Always singing "nature and environmental songs?" Had a 5000 gallon gas tank to fuel his exotic cars installed at his house during one of the early international fuel shortages. I would like to see a environmental impact study done on any and all of those that claim to be concerned about the environment. Bet the results would be very interesting.
Interesting but saddening that environmental protection doesn't feature AT ALL in the above statements, not even mine (though it is at the back of my mind as an underlying concern). No Prius Posters? Poor old planet.
Yeah right. Environmental gurus like Al Gore fly around the world in their private jets sucking up more fuel than all my driving would in 100 lifetimes. Remember John Denver? Always singing "nature and environmental songs?" Had a 5000 gallon gas tank to fuel his exotic cars installed at his house during one of the early international fuel shortages. I would like to see a environmental impact study done on any and all of those that claim to be concerned about the environment. Bet the results would be very interesting.
Last edited:
I have found that regardless of the cost of fuel, it matters very little what MPG I'm getting. I simply don't drive enough for it to make any type of difference in my life from a cost standpoint. With that said I won't deny the fact it, "feels good" to get good, efficient fuel mileage. Since I bought this new 2018 Camry a week ago, I've put 200 miles on it, and it's only used 1/4 of a tank. (The car was delivered with a full tank). It averaged over 41 MPG on the ride home from the dealer.
My 2015 HEMI Jeep Grand Cherokee has averaged a bit over 17 MPG since we bought it. To me both are delivering very good performance, along with good fuel mileage for the type of vehicles they are. And if fuel were to suddenly double in cost, it really would not have an effect on which vehicle I chose to drive.
Here in Arizona we are blessed with all but perfect driving conditions most all the time. From a "cold" start engines reach operating temperatures very quickly. As opposed to places like Chicago in Winter, where you can easily have sub zero temperatures, and heavy snow to navigate through. Both of which take their toll on fuel economy. Much like a bad marriage, you don't realize how bad it is there until you get out, and have something better to compare it to.
My 2015 HEMI Jeep Grand Cherokee has averaged a bit over 17 MPG since we bought it. To me both are delivering very good performance, along with good fuel mileage for the type of vehicles they are. And if fuel were to suddenly double in cost, it really would not have an effect on which vehicle I chose to drive.
Here in Arizona we are blessed with all but perfect driving conditions most all the time. From a "cold" start engines reach operating temperatures very quickly. As opposed to places like Chicago in Winter, where you can easily have sub zero temperatures, and heavy snow to navigate through. Both of which take their toll on fuel economy. Much like a bad marriage, you don't realize how bad it is there until you get out, and have something better to compare it to.
It does to me... three angles:
1) leave oil in the ground for my kids to use cheaply and enjoy.
2) CO2 emissions
3) being able to import less/ export more, keep the dollar strong, and starve terrorist nations who hate our freedom.
To that end I ride a van-pool car share for half my commute, a 30 MPG 4 cyl camry, and the occasional use of wifey's Prius.
1) leave oil in the ground for my kids to use cheaply and enjoy.
2) CO2 emissions
3) being able to import less/ export more, keep the dollar strong, and starve terrorist nations who hate our freedom.
To that end I ride a van-pool car share for half my commute, a 30 MPG 4 cyl camry, and the occasional use of wifey's Prius.
Originally Posted By: SilverSnake
Originally Posted By: Ducked
Interesting but saddening that environmental protection doesn't feature AT ALL in the above statements, not even mine (though it is at the back of my mind as an underlying concern). No Prius Posters? Poor old planet.
Yeah right. Environmental gurus like Al Gore fly around the world in their private jets sucking up more fuel than all my driving would in 100 lifetimes. Remember John Denver? Always singing "nature and environmental songs?" Had a 5000 gallon gas tank to fuel his exotic cars installed at his house during one of the early international fuel shortages. I would like to see a environmental impact study done on any and all of those that claim to be concerned about the environment. Bet the results would be very interesting.
I would be willing to be studied if you think it'd help, though I wouldn't bet on it being interesting.
As I said, I think I'm on about 16km/L but I havn't updated the spreadsheet for a while.
I'd guess other impacts probably fairly low compared to an average American, (But then who isn't?) maybe not compared to an average Indian.
Originally Posted By: Ducked
Interesting but saddening that environmental protection doesn't feature AT ALL in the above statements, not even mine (though it is at the back of my mind as an underlying concern). No Prius Posters? Poor old planet.
Yeah right. Environmental gurus like Al Gore fly around the world in their private jets sucking up more fuel than all my driving would in 100 lifetimes. Remember John Denver? Always singing "nature and environmental songs?" Had a 5000 gallon gas tank to fuel his exotic cars installed at his house during one of the early international fuel shortages. I would like to see a environmental impact study done on any and all of those that claim to be concerned about the environment. Bet the results would be very interesting.
I would be willing to be studied if you think it'd help, though I wouldn't bet on it being interesting.
As I said, I think I'm on about 16km/L but I havn't updated the spreadsheet for a while.
I'd guess other impacts probably fairly low compared to an average American, (But then who isn't?) maybe not compared to an average Indian.
Last edited:
Quote:
You can't adjust for inflation, because if you do then the gas prices in NA are about the same as in 70s when adjusted for inflation.
What remained the same is the amount of taxation. Europe consistently taxes fuel a lot higher then US. It was a nessessity coming out of the war, bit it isn't now. The only reason they are still so high is because the nut jobs in charge want it that way.
And the V8 behemoths are still aplenty on NA roads, but they're called pickup trucks now.
Nothing wrong with that, unless you're one of the nutcases that thinks you know what's best for everyone.
Taxes rose with inflation too. The duties on gas in the UK have since WW2 accounted for around 65% of the pump price. I wish I was buying gas at £0.42 per liter instead of £1.20, which would be the case if fuel duty had remained at £0.03 per liter as it was in the 1950's.
Claud.
You can't adjust for inflation, because if you do then the gas prices in NA are about the same as in 70s when adjusted for inflation.
What remained the same is the amount of taxation. Europe consistently taxes fuel a lot higher then US. It was a nessessity coming out of the war, bit it isn't now. The only reason they are still so high is because the nut jobs in charge want it that way.
And the V8 behemoths are still aplenty on NA roads, but they're called pickup trucks now.
Nothing wrong with that, unless you're one of the nutcases that thinks you know what's best for everyone.
Taxes rose with inflation too. The duties on gas in the UK have since WW2 accounted for around 65% of the pump price. I wish I was buying gas at £0.42 per liter instead of £1.20, which would be the case if fuel duty had remained at £0.03 per liter as it was in the 1950's.
Claud.
Originally Posted By: eljefino
It does to me... three angles:
1) leave oil in the ground for my kids to use cheaply and enjoy.
2) CO2 emissions
3) being able to import less/ export more, keep the dollar strong, and starve terrorist nations who hate our freedom.
To that end I ride a van-pool car share for half my commute, a 30 MPG 4 cyl camry, and the occasional use of wifey's Prius.
That oil is coming our regardless of your MPG. Gasoline isn't the only petroleum byproduct.
CO2 is not a pollutant, but better MPG does reduce pollutants that actually matter, like NOx and PM.
A strong dollar hurts exports, actually.
Because the dollar is the world's reserve currency and, until this year, the exclusive way to buy oil globally, we have a duty to run trade deficits and export dollars.
It does to me... three angles:
1) leave oil in the ground for my kids to use cheaply and enjoy.
2) CO2 emissions
3) being able to import less/ export more, keep the dollar strong, and starve terrorist nations who hate our freedom.
To that end I ride a van-pool car share for half my commute, a 30 MPG 4 cyl camry, and the occasional use of wifey's Prius.
That oil is coming our regardless of your MPG. Gasoline isn't the only petroleum byproduct.
CO2 is not a pollutant, but better MPG does reduce pollutants that actually matter, like NOx and PM.
A strong dollar hurts exports, actually.
Because the dollar is the world's reserve currency and, until this year, the exclusive way to buy oil globally, we have a duty to run trade deficits and export dollars.
Last edited:
I wouldn't mind an economy car for my long work commute....
but the extra insurance costs and another vehicle payment
(I don't have the cash to buy one right now)
negate any fuel savings (about $100-$150 a month).
I use my F150 for FAR too many tasks to think of getting rid of it and having a car only.
but the extra insurance costs and another vehicle payment
(I don't have the cash to buy one right now)
negate any fuel savings (about $100-$150 a month).
I use my F150 for FAR too many tasks to think of getting rid of it and having a car only.
No. We only drive less than four thousand miles a year now. I check the mileage to see if a mechanical problem is developing.
Our little red Chevy Sonic 1.8l automatic gets 22 - 26 in town , depending on A/C or not . 32 - 35 on the road .
The Buick Lacrosse 3.8 gets 18 - 19 n town & 27 - 28 on the road .
The Buick Lacrosse 3.8 gets 18 - 19 n town & 27 - 28 on the road .
Patman
Staff member
It is relatively important for me, but luckily my two cars get pretty decent mileage. My Honda gets 40-45 MPG on the highway, and so far the best average I've seen on the highway with my Corvette is 36.2. I know that people don't usually worry about MPG when they own a Corvette but I love the fact that I can take it on long highway trips and not have to spend a fortune on fuel. We will be using the Corvette to drive back and forth to Florida (to stay there for the winters starting in 2022) and will also be doing a ton of long road trips in it too (on one of our return trips home from Florida we're going to drive across the US to California and then drive up the coast along the PCH, then stop in British Columbia for a bit, then meander back to Ontario again, probably driving through the northern US instead of through Canada since the prairies are not all that scenic)
Originally Posted By: Ducked
Interesting but saddening that environmental protection doesn't feature AT ALL in the above statements, not even mine (though it is at the back of my mind as an underlying concern).
No Prius Posters?
Poor old planet.
There's lots of Prius haters on this forum. (I might be one of them). Saving the environment is great, but not if you can't get out of the way. What use is it to do so if you're just clogging up the roads? The only thing they're good for is cutting them off because they're so slow, it's easy.
There's an arms race going on in the US, more SUV's and trucks are sold than cars as cars now make up less than 50% of the market. Number of people getting killed are going up too while everyone is texting and talking on the phone. Probably being in a slow death trap isn't the ideal way to go these days.
Interesting but saddening that environmental protection doesn't feature AT ALL in the above statements, not even mine (though it is at the back of my mind as an underlying concern).
No Prius Posters?
Poor old planet.
There's lots of Prius haters on this forum. (I might be one of them). Saving the environment is great, but not if you can't get out of the way. What use is it to do so if you're just clogging up the roads? The only thing they're good for is cutting them off because they're so slow, it's easy.
There's an arms race going on in the US, more SUV's and trucks are sold than cars as cars now make up less than 50% of the market. Number of people getting killed are going up too while everyone is texting and talking on the phone. Probably being in a slow death trap isn't the ideal way to go these days.
Originally Posted By: KrisZ
Nobody is against better fuel economy, but people are against artificial increase in fuel costs to force people into smaller vehicles. That's what happens in England and most of Europe.
It's over ten years since I left the UK, but the roads were full of big SUVs and stationwagons at the time.
The average driver's mileage there was about 6,000 a year, so the difference between an SUV that got 20mpg and a micro-car that got 60mpg was only about 1,000 pounds a year. Much less than the depreciation on said SUV, at least if you bought it new to keep up with the Joneses.
Heck, my Forester here is more economical than the car I drove there. But since I only paid $2,000 for the car, fuel costs were tiny compared to depreciation on something bought new.
Nobody is against better fuel economy, but people are against artificial increase in fuel costs to force people into smaller vehicles. That's what happens in England and most of Europe.
It's over ten years since I left the UK, but the roads were full of big SUVs and stationwagons at the time.
The average driver's mileage there was about 6,000 a year, so the difference between an SUV that got 20mpg and a micro-car that got 60mpg was only about 1,000 pounds a year. Much less than the depreciation on said SUV, at least if you bought it new to keep up with the Joneses.
Heck, my Forester here is more economical than the car I drove there. But since I only paid $2,000 for the car, fuel costs were tiny compared to depreciation on something bought new.
I drive 30-35K miles / year, most of them city miles, so it matters a lot to me, and the economics of a hybrid are clear. If I was a normal driver doing 6-12K / year in a 50/50 mix, then I would be driving something else, and depreciation, maintenance cost, and comfort would be higher priorities than fuel economy.
Originally Posted By: eljefino
......leave oil in the ground for my kids to use cheaply and enjoy.
That in reality is a fallacy. Look at how much fuel is wasted by the airlines in this country. When I lived in Chicago, I used to drive around O'Hare on the way home for work every night. You would see dozens of commercial and private jets all lined up on the taxiways, all their engines running while waiting for their turn to take off.
How many airliners take off with less than half the seats occupied? Remember a 747 takes 3,000 gallons just to take off and climb to 35,000 ft. After that it consumes 1 gallon per second at cruise. 60 gallons a minute. 3,600 gallons an hour. Like most airliners, it's only "efficient" when it's full. Most aren't except for the long haul routes.
Hybrid cars are another fallacy. Most don't deliver any better actual mileage than the same model with a gas engine. And unless you drive in stop and go traffic, they are worthless for any type of fuel mileage gain. At steady freeway speeds they offer little to nothing in mileage improvements. And good luck when it's time to replace the batteries if you keep the thing. You'll really wish you bought the gas only model. Same with 100% electric vehicles. Because most all the electricity delivered to their batteries from your home or anywhere else, comes from a coal or oil generated electrical power plant. So the reality is they most likely pollute worse on a mile per mile basis. Not to mention who wants a car that goes less than 200 miles before it needs a recharge lasting hours. Good luck driving across Nevada from south to north. Finding a gas station is hard enough. You'll find gold before you find a, "Tesla Charging Station".
So when you take all of this into account, a few extra MPG in your vehicle really doesn't matter that much, if at all. It's mostly something the greenies like to bark about, because it makes them feel good when they do it. A bit like taking Fentanyl for terminal cancer. Today's cars are delivering more fuel economy with less pollutants across the board. From the biggest, most powerful SUV's, to the smallest roller skate packed full of batteries.
......leave oil in the ground for my kids to use cheaply and enjoy.
That in reality is a fallacy. Look at how much fuel is wasted by the airlines in this country. When I lived in Chicago, I used to drive around O'Hare on the way home for work every night. You would see dozens of commercial and private jets all lined up on the taxiways, all their engines running while waiting for their turn to take off.
How many airliners take off with less than half the seats occupied? Remember a 747 takes 3,000 gallons just to take off and climb to 35,000 ft. After that it consumes 1 gallon per second at cruise. 60 gallons a minute. 3,600 gallons an hour. Like most airliners, it's only "efficient" when it's full. Most aren't except for the long haul routes.
Hybrid cars are another fallacy. Most don't deliver any better actual mileage than the same model with a gas engine. And unless you drive in stop and go traffic, they are worthless for any type of fuel mileage gain. At steady freeway speeds they offer little to nothing in mileage improvements. And good luck when it's time to replace the batteries if you keep the thing. You'll really wish you bought the gas only model. Same with 100% electric vehicles. Because most all the electricity delivered to their batteries from your home or anywhere else, comes from a coal or oil generated electrical power plant. So the reality is they most likely pollute worse on a mile per mile basis. Not to mention who wants a car that goes less than 200 miles before it needs a recharge lasting hours. Good luck driving across Nevada from south to north. Finding a gas station is hard enough. You'll find gold before you find a, "Tesla Charging Station".
So when you take all of this into account, a few extra MPG in your vehicle really doesn't matter that much, if at all. It's mostly something the greenies like to bark about, because it makes them feel good when they do it. A bit like taking Fentanyl for terminal cancer. Today's cars are delivering more fuel economy with less pollutants across the board. From the biggest, most powerful SUV's, to the smallest roller skate packed full of batteries.
If they can manage to get this thing up and running worldwide, it would constitute an enormous actual fuel savings.
https://www.timesofisrael.com/israels-fuel-saving-taxibot-deployed-in-german-airport/
https://www.timesofisrael.com/israels-fuel-saving-taxibot-deployed-in-german-airport/
Originally Posted By: billt460
If they can manage to get this thing up and running worldwide, it would constitute an enormous actual fuel savings.
https://www.timesofisrael.com/israels-fuel-saving-taxibot-deployed-in-german-airport/
Every single one of those movement is 0.00005% of the US daily consumption of oil.
Whereas 0W16 is mere tenths of a percent.
If they can manage to get this thing up and running worldwide, it would constitute an enormous actual fuel savings.
https://www.timesofisrael.com/israels-fuel-saving-taxibot-deployed-in-german-airport/
Every single one of those movement is 0.00005% of the US daily consumption of oil.
Whereas 0W16 is mere tenths of a percent.
Europeans are starting to drive bigger and stronger cars, but even the largest SUVs like Q7 or ML are diesels. On average a 200-250 HP / 400-500NM will consume somewhere between 10-12 L/100. Probably even less.
American SUVs consume more.
American SUVs consume more.
- Status
Similar threads
