The high price of brains is the problem.
Slow Down a Little, Save a Lot of Gas
- Thread starter Cory
- Start date
- Status
exactly. it's easier to complain about things than doing something about it.
related: I experiemented w/ back to back fill ups. only changed my driving style. driving like everyone else, I would get 25.2-25.6 in my VUE. has a hwy rating of 29, so I thought it was ok. last week, for the whole tank, I concentrated on doing the speed limit, shifting at the shift light, no jack rabbit starts, and anticipating stops/coasting to a stop. mpg went up to 28.65.
I know what you mean about those cummins dodges. and explorers, and jeeps. they all fly by me. I set the cruise at whatever the speed limit is, and it's like I'm standing still, to them. AND, it still takes me about the same time to get to work, so it's all good.
related: I experiemented w/ back to back fill ups. only changed my driving style. driving like everyone else, I would get 25.2-25.6 in my VUE. has a hwy rating of 29, so I thought it was ok. last week, for the whole tank, I concentrated on doing the speed limit, shifting at the shift light, no jack rabbit starts, and anticipating stops/coasting to a stop. mpg went up to 28.65.
I know what you mean about those cummins dodges. and explorers, and jeeps. they all fly by me. I set the cruise at whatever the speed limit is, and it's like I'm standing still, to them. AND, it still takes me about the same time to get to work, so it's all good.
Back when gas first went over $3 in Sept 06 on my trip down to Fl. I was passing more vehicles then passed me running 65 mph in a 70 mph zone. Today on that same trip it doesn't happen anymore.
90% of the vehicles I'm sharing the road with are passing me.
I limit my speed to no more than 65 mph on the highway.
The old girl a Volvo 740 turbo wagon with 360K miles on her gets in the 29-30 mpg range and my highway car a 97 960 gets around 29 mpg at 65 mph. The 960 to and from Florida (1180 miles) at the speed limits which run up to 70 mph the mileage drops close to 25.5 mpg for the trip. If I limit my speed to a maximum of 65 mph that same trip I run 28.5 to low 29's depending on the weather and winter/summer gas. So over all I save roughly 5 gallons of gas each way by limiting the speed and it only adds about 45 minutes to an hour to the trip.
90% of the vehicles I'm sharing the road with are passing me.
I limit my speed to no more than 65 mph on the highway.
The old girl a Volvo 740 turbo wagon with 360K miles on her gets in the 29-30 mpg range and my highway car a 97 960 gets around 29 mpg at 65 mph. The 960 to and from Florida (1180 miles) at the speed limits which run up to 70 mph the mileage drops close to 25.5 mpg for the trip. If I limit my speed to a maximum of 65 mph that same trip I run 28.5 to low 29's depending on the weather and winter/summer gas. So over all I save roughly 5 gallons of gas each way by limiting the speed and it only adds about 45 minutes to an hour to the trip.
I've been crunching a few sets of theoretical numbers, but losing $.54/gallon by doing 70 instead of 60 just doesn't add up.
Unless you normally get around 12 mpg on the highway and the only drag factor was wind resistance [neglecting the mostly linear friction and rolling resistance].
I conclude there is a false premise in the original post.
Unless you normally get around 12 mpg on the highway and the only drag factor was wind resistance [neglecting the mostly linear friction and rolling resistance].
I conclude there is a false premise in the original post.
Originally Posted By: Cory
Quote:
In a typical family sedan, every 10 miles per hour you drive over 60 is like the price of gasoline going up about 54 cents a gallon.
Some neglect to see the difference of 4mpg but putting it this way may have people thinking about their speeds a little more closely?
Story found at CNNMoney.com
So that's about a 14 or 15% decrease in mileage.
OK, so let's say that we have a 7 hour trip at 60 MPH or 6 hours at 70MPH. This is a 420 mile trip given the numbers.
We'll use 14% more fuel, but take 14% less time, if I have this right in my head.
So at 60MPH we get 28MPG and take 7 hours and burn 15 gallons of fuel. At $3.25/gallon we'll spend $48.75
Using the articles numbers at 70MPH we get 24MPG and take 6 hours and burn 17.5 gallons of fuel. The cost of the fuel is $56.88. A free hour for anyone is likely worth the approx $9.
Time is still more valuable than fuel in most cases.
Quote:
In a typical family sedan, every 10 miles per hour you drive over 60 is like the price of gasoline going up about 54 cents a gallon.
Some neglect to see the difference of 4mpg but putting it this way may have people thinking about their speeds a little more closely?
Story found at CNNMoney.com
So that's about a 14 or 15% decrease in mileage.
OK, so let's say that we have a 7 hour trip at 60 MPH or 6 hours at 70MPH. This is a 420 mile trip given the numbers.
We'll use 14% more fuel, but take 14% less time, if I have this right in my head.
So at 60MPH we get 28MPG and take 7 hours and burn 15 gallons of fuel. At $3.25/gallon we'll spend $48.75
Using the articles numbers at 70MPH we get 24MPG and take 6 hours and burn 17.5 gallons of fuel. The cost of the fuel is $56.88. A free hour for anyone is likely worth the approx $9.
Time is still more valuable than fuel in most cases.
Originally Posted By: javacontour
A free hour for anyone is likely worth the approx $9.
Time is still more valuable than fuel in most cases.
Regarding this "time value of money" business. When I'm off work and leave the office, I drive home. Frankly, the drive home is one of the most enjoyable parts of the day for me.
I like to drive my car. I certainly wouldn't consider it a penatly (or that I am losing money) for it to require a few more minutes to get home.
Say I'm driving with my wife somewhere on vacation. Same deal. For me the ride is a part of the journey, itself.
I usually get about 26 mpg over a tank. Not bad for an inline 6.
Every monster truck, building contractor urban assault vehicle I see on the way home never has that throttle working less than 80 mph. Without a doubt, for all the moaning and groaning about fuel prices, I don't see driving behavior changing. At least not yet.
I do see more Honda Fit wagons (and their Toyota and Nissan counterparts) on the roads these days. I kind of like that Honda Fit. It looks like a driver ought to be able to get a solid 30 mpg (if not more) in one. I think cars like the Fit will be alot more common in the future in this country.
A free hour for anyone is likely worth the approx $9.
Time is still more valuable than fuel in most cases.
Regarding this "time value of money" business. When I'm off work and leave the office, I drive home. Frankly, the drive home is one of the most enjoyable parts of the day for me.
I like to drive my car. I certainly wouldn't consider it a penatly (or that I am losing money) for it to require a few more minutes to get home.
Say I'm driving with my wife somewhere on vacation. Same deal. For me the ride is a part of the journey, itself.
I usually get about 26 mpg over a tank. Not bad for an inline 6.
Every monster truck, building contractor urban assault vehicle I see on the way home never has that throttle working less than 80 mph. Without a doubt, for all the moaning and groaning about fuel prices, I don't see driving behavior changing. At least not yet.
I do see more Honda Fit wagons (and their Toyota and Nissan counterparts) on the roads these days. I kind of like that Honda Fit. It looks like a driver ought to be able to get a solid 30 mpg (if not more) in one. I think cars like the Fit will be alot more common in the future in this country.
Let's assume it _really is_ effectively an extra 54 cents per gallon for every 10mph over 60. Figure a movie is $9 for two hours' entertainment at a regular movie theater.
Miata: $4.89 / hour (at 70mph)
Movie: $4.50 / hour (sitting still)
Evenly matched, although I'd say the Miata fun is the better value.
Miata: ~$34.00 / hour (at Hallett)
Movie: $1.50 / hour (at the scary theater)
No contest in terms of dollars spent, but still...
Miata: $4.89 / hour (at 70mph)
Movie: $4.50 / hour (sitting still)
Evenly matched, although I'd say the Miata fun is the better value.
Miata: ~$34.00 / hour (at Hallett)
Movie: $1.50 / hour (at the scary theater)
No contest in terms of dollars spent, but still...
Good post, GeaugaFletcher: Not many films out right now that I'd even pay $4.50/hour to watch.
But in an hour on a curvy, hilly, country road in a well-tuned Miata. That would be alot of fun. Certainly $4.50 worth of fun. To me, at least.
Part of this is just comes down to how much people enjoy driving a car that's fun to drive.
But in an hour on a curvy, hilly, country road in a well-tuned Miata. That would be alot of fun. Certainly $4.50 worth of fun. To me, at least.
Part of this is just comes down to how much people enjoy driving a car that's fun to drive.
Slower is better but also staying off that brake pedal by looking and planing ahead. You must drive beyond your hood.
Don't forget income tax. That $9 came from $12 in earnings.
I had a friend who worked for minimum wage of $8/hr, and she used to drive her Intrepid 130 km/h on the highways. I tried to explain to her that if she saves an hour by driving fast, the extra gas burned will cost her two hours slaving away at work to pay for it.
I had a friend who worked for minimum wage of $8/hr, and she used to drive her Intrepid 130 km/h on the highways. I tried to explain to her that if she saves an hour by driving fast, the extra gas burned will cost her two hours slaving away at work to pay for it.
Originally Posted By: Al
eljefino said:Pulled 46.9 in a saturn going 58, with the window cracked an inch, and the HVAC on vent with some fan pressure, in June, so the air was warm and thin./quote]
I assume that was on the instantaneous readout? Not really realworld. My Sentra gets well over 40 at those speeds. But even on a nonstop 300 mile drive at 55 mph it maybe gets 34+ mpg
Nope... straight shot. I filled when the car was warm, drove 150 miles, and filled again.
Either the previous or following (I forget) tank was 43 including some city driving, so not (just) a pump calibration error when divided by a relatively meager 150 miles.
Also saturn has no realtime readout, that would add weight, LOL.
Seems like there is a little doubt here about my 45.04 mpg in my 00' Saturn. It really happened, that is all I can say guys.
I'm not sure why so many of you are only considering a single trip "so to speak" and what it saves or doesn't save.
The real world factors here and what I was thinking when I posted the original post are the daily commuters. I for one drive 100 miles round trip every work day as well does my wife. At the projected 54 cents per gallon multiplied by 8.5 gallons (approx. the sum of gasoline that both vehicles consume daily on average) comes to a daily savings of $4.59. Multiply that by an average of 21 working days per month and then again by the number of months in a year gives me this "PROJECTED" savings of $1156.68 per year!
Heck with going to the movies, I'm going to start saving for my new Theater Room. SWEET!
The real world factors here and what I was thinking when I posted the original post are the daily commuters. I for one drive 100 miles round trip every work day as well does my wife. At the projected 54 cents per gallon multiplied by 8.5 gallons (approx. the sum of gasoline that both vehicles consume daily on average) comes to a daily savings of $4.59. Multiply that by an average of 21 working days per month and then again by the number of months in a year gives me this "PROJECTED" savings of $1156.68 per year!
Heck with going to the movies, I'm going to start saving for my new Theater Room. SWEET!
I just ran the numbers myself with the posted analogy...
Quote:
Engineers at Consumer Reports magazine tested this theory by driving a Toyota Camry sedan and a Mercury Mountaineer SUV at various set cruising speeds on a stretch of flat highway. Driving the Camry at 75 mph instead of 65 dropped fuel economy from 35 mpg to 30.
My math matches theirs. It would cost you 54 cents more a gallon to drive 75mph.
11.428 gal x $3.25 = $37.14 driving 65mph
13.333 gal x $3.25 = $43.33 driving 75mph
So, to spend the same amount of money as driving 75mph ($43.33) but by driving 65mph and using the original gas consumption of 11.428 gal / $43.33 = $3.79 per a gal of gas or $3.79 - $3.25 = $.54 savings per gallon!
Scenario to my 50 mile commute to works...
Time = 50 miles / 65mph or .769 hours or 46 minutes
Time = 50 miles / 75mph or .666 hours or 40 minutes
So to drive faster at 75mph (rushing to get to work, woohoo) I save 6 minutes.
But if I look at it in an alternative manner, it takes me 6 minutes longer.
Some have said "time is money." It most certainly is....taken from my previous post, it takes me 2.125 gal to drive to work approximately one way. 2.125 gal x $.54 = a predicted $1.1475 saving for 6 minutes of my time or $11.48 an hour. Not a bad wage for enjoying my car with some tunes or an audio CD. Now I'm paying myself to drive slower. Not a bad incentive, is it??
Making any of you think differently? Think of this over a course of a year and consider the savings.
Quote:
Engineers at Consumer Reports magazine tested this theory by driving a Toyota Camry sedan and a Mercury Mountaineer SUV at various set cruising speeds on a stretch of flat highway. Driving the Camry at 75 mph instead of 65 dropped fuel economy from 35 mpg to 30.
My math matches theirs. It would cost you 54 cents more a gallon to drive 75mph.
11.428 gal x $3.25 = $37.14 driving 65mph
13.333 gal x $3.25 = $43.33 driving 75mph
So, to spend the same amount of money as driving 75mph ($43.33) but by driving 65mph and using the original gas consumption of 11.428 gal / $43.33 = $3.79 per a gal of gas or $3.79 - $3.25 = $.54 savings per gallon!
Scenario to my 50 mile commute to works...
Time = 50 miles / 65mph or .769 hours or 46 minutes
Time = 50 miles / 75mph or .666 hours or 40 minutes
So to drive faster at 75mph (rushing to get to work, woohoo) I save 6 minutes.
But if I look at it in an alternative manner, it takes me 6 minutes longer.
Some have said "time is money." It most certainly is....taken from my previous post, it takes me 2.125 gal to drive to work approximately one way. 2.125 gal x $.54 = a predicted $1.1475 saving for 6 minutes of my time or $11.48 an hour. Not a bad wage for enjoying my car with some tunes or an audio CD. Now I'm paying myself to drive slower. Not a bad incentive, is it??
Making any of you think differently? Think of this over a course of a year and consider the savings.
If you have a regular commute you can save gas by counting the number of times you push on the brake pedal and try to keep the count low. Sometimes good mileage is a matter of getting involved. You know how to do it, you just have to keep at it.
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2002
- Messages
- 39,798
Quote:
Not a bad wage for enjoying my car with some tunes or an audio CD. Now I'm paying myself to drive slower. Not a bad incentive, is it??
Making any of you think differently? Think of this over a course of a year and consider the savings.
Well, I do admire the perspective. I tend to incorporate it into most of my purchasing/usage. Kinda a lifestyle thing.
Just keep in mind if any one individual buys a cup of coffee somewhere ... they just wiped out the avoided losses.
The stuff is still too cheap.
Not a bad wage for enjoying my car with some tunes or an audio CD. Now I'm paying myself to drive slower. Not a bad incentive, is it??
Making any of you think differently? Think of this over a course of a year and consider the savings.
Well, I do admire the perspective. I tend to incorporate it into most of my purchasing/usage. Kinda a lifestyle thing.
Just keep in mind if any one individual buys a cup of coffee somewhere ... they just wiped out the avoided losses.
The stuff is still too cheap.
savings are in after-tax dollars, too.
Driving slow also is kinder on your suspension components, electrical connectors, steering, and you're less likely to get black bagged after an accident.
Driving slow also is kinder on your suspension components, electrical connectors, steering, and you're less likely to get black bagged after an accident.
Going from 35 to 30 MPG is about a 16% difference.
16% of 3.25/gallon is only about $0.38, not $0.54.
Also, losing 5 MPG simply going from 65 to 75 seems like a LOT to me, and more than I ever encountered or would expect.
16% of 3.25/gallon is only about $0.38, not $0.54.
Also, losing 5 MPG simply going from 65 to 75 seems like a LOT to me, and more than I ever encountered or would expect.
Originally Posted By: mechtech2
Going from 35 to 30 MPG is about a 16% difference.
16% of 3.25/gallon is only about $0.38, not $0.54.
The cost savings and MPG differences are not linear thus cannot be compared. Look at my numbers once again from my earlier post. If it makes it any easier, I should have stated that the first numbers...
11.428 gal
13.333 gal
in my previous equations are the number of gallons consumed based on the data provided from the original story "Over the course of a 400-mile road trip."
It's 54 cents savings based on this data.
Going from 35 to 30 MPG is about a 16% difference.
16% of 3.25/gallon is only about $0.38, not $0.54.
The cost savings and MPG differences are not linear thus cannot be compared. Look at my numbers once again from my earlier post. If it makes it any easier, I should have stated that the first numbers...
11.428 gal
13.333 gal
in my previous equations are the number of gallons consumed based on the data provided from the original story "Over the course of a 400-mile road trip."
It's 54 cents savings based on this data.
A 16% loss = a 16% loss.
And this high 16% is based on an unreasonably high 5 MPG difference for a relatively small speed change.
And this high 16% is based on an unreasonably high 5 MPG difference for a relatively small speed change.
- Status
