If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Some Guy)   Average mpg for cars sold in 1980: 23.1. Average gas mileage for cars sold in 2005: 24.7. Glad to see all of those technological advances being put to work   (dailyfueleconomytip.com) divider line 299
    More: Asinine  
•       •       •

6919 clicks; posted to Main » on 20 Oct 2006 at 12:59 AM (7 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



299 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all
 
2006-10-19 11:54:28 PM
Thank all the people who think it is "cool" to drive an SUV, even though 99% of them would do just fine with a car.
 
2006-10-20 12:45:29 AM
AntiNorm: Thank all the people who think it is "cool" to drive an SUV, even though 99% of them would do just fine with a car.

For some, they know they don't need an SUV, but with all the extra vertical interior space to do stuff easier, like getting in and out, moving around the cabin, taking stuff out of the "trunk", and maybe buckling in their kids (if they have them), or letting them have a little extra fresh air, they find it's quite convenient to have one.

/knows someone with a Honda Element who would concur
 
2006-10-20 12:59:02 AM
TRANSLATION: People have not evolved whatsoever since 1980. That's almost 30 years ok! It took monkeys millions of years to walk upright so stop being so hard on us!!!! EEEEEEK EEEEK EEEEEEEEEEEEEEK! (((( FLINGS POO ))))
 
2006-10-20 01:03:02 AM
Ahh, what's the point of progress, let the good times roll!
 
2006-10-20 01:03:35 AM
Here comes the Hour of Hate for everyone that drives something bigger than a Civic.
 
SGF
2006-10-20 01:04:16 AM
CArs are heavier now, and driven by idiots with their foot to the floor
 
2006-10-20 01:04:17 AM
Horsepower is way up....
 
2006-10-20 01:04:20 AM
I want a car powered entirely from the spite of really cranky old people. I mean, if their nastiness can keep them alive, imagine what it could do for the world if employed for better use.

Thirty miles per 'get off my lawn!'
 
2006-10-20 01:04:31 AM
AntiNorm: people who think it is "cool" to drive an SUV, even though 99% of them would do just fine with a car.

They aren't spending your money to buy the vehicle.
 
2006-10-20 01:05:34 AM
That's cool. Do what you want, I get 32 MPG in my Integra, and others pay for their gas...

/restoring a 1986 Corolla FTW. :) 30-40 MPG.
 
2006-10-20 01:06:31 AM
The technology DID go to work. Making the emissions cleaner and upping the horsepower ratings.

Strip the emissions and youd see the mpg skyrocket.
 
2006-10-20 01:07:51 AM
SGF

Cars are made from LIGHTER materials and idiots have ALWAYS held the pedal down. Moran.
 
2006-10-20 01:08:25 AM
Cars don't suck as much as they did then.
 
2006-10-20 01:08:38 AM
Well, the number of trucks and SUVs sold today will skew that figure down. However, cars today can get better fuel economy than the 1980 models despite more horsepower and weight through advances in fuel injection and computer management.
 
2006-10-20 01:09:03 AM
mikemikeb: For some, they know they don't need an SUV, but with all the extra vertical interior space to do stuff easier, like getting in and out, moving around the cabin, taking stuff out of the "trunk", and maybe buckling in their kids (if they have them), or letting them have a little extra fresh air, they find it's quite convenient to have one.

That doesn't matter. The only reason you can buy an SUV is if you take it off roading, and only off roading. If you ever drive it on a public street you are an asshole.

Wait, nevermind. You were right. People buy cars for many different reasons. The real assholes are the people that think it is their business what other people drive and for what purposes they are allowed to own them. And seeing this is Fark this thread is about to be overrun with these assholes.
 
2006-10-20 01:09:28 AM
Horsepower is way up....
QFT. If the average horsepower in cars had stayed the same, mileage would be way up.
 
2006-10-20 01:09:35 AM
Am I wrong, or is the amount of time you sit in traffic not part of the CAFE calculations?
 
M-G
2006-10-20 01:10:16 AM
Other reasons that they don't mention in TFA:

* Safety requirements have increased. Crash structures, air bags, etc all add weight.

* Consumer demands have increased. It's difficult to find a car these days without air conditioning. All the other features desired add weight and/or load on the engine.

* Engines are creating a lot more power these days. In 1980, we were still in the dark days of underpowered engines.

* Fuel mixtures aren't the same. The adding of ethanol, for example, results in poorer mileage.
 
2006-10-20 01:11:17 AM
my 69 corvette 350/300hp 4spd - 10mpg
2006 corvette 350/400hp 6spd - 30mpg


some where along the way some one did something right.

this is all under light and easy driveing conditions. if i keep my foot down ill only get 8mpg at best. i forget what the exact number for the 06 is, but im pretty sure its 22 or so.
 
2006-10-20 01:11:32 AM
Car mileage has hardly gone up because we've taken almost all the gains in performance instead. Now all of a sudden the average suburbanite needs a 250HP engine in the sedan.

Add in the SUVs and increased sales of light trucks used as passenger vehicles to get an overall fleet average and that number actually goes DOWN rather than the slight rise.
 
2006-10-20 01:12:00 AM
I thought that the EPA changed the rules on how to compute mileage. It might not be fair to compare.
 
2006-10-20 01:13:47 AM
Evil

Yes, but the idiots are heavier.
 
2006-10-20 01:15:12 AM
Don't forget, the very largest of the SUVs and trucks being sold to pick up the kids from school have by far the worst mileage, and aren't even counted in the CAFE averages the article writes about.
 
2006-10-20 01:16:22 AM
bulldg4life: They aren't spending your money to buy the vehicle.

nah, but they are making the roads more dangerous for the rest of us.
 
2006-10-20 01:16:29 AM
Here's an example...

1988 Toyata Corolla FX: 74hp 1.6L, 30/37mpg, 2190 pounds (manual)

2006 Toyota Corolla CE: 126hp 1.8L, 32/41mpg, 2590 pounds (automatic)

The 2006 model, despite a larger and more powerful engine and 400 extra pounds, gets better mileage than the 1988 model. BTW, 1988 is as far back as the data went on MSN Autos.
 
M-G
2006-10-20 01:17:18 AM
flyinmonky: Am I wrong, or is the amount of time you sit in traffic not part of the CAFE calculations?

You're right. CAFE is based on the EPA ratings. And the 'city' value is based on a stop-and-go cycle, not a huge amount of time sitting stagnant in traffic.

So bad traffic will sink your observed mileage, but means nothing in terms of CAFE.
 
2006-10-20 01:17:26 AM
Arnold T Pants: The only reason you can buy an SUV is if you take it off roading, and only off roading.


Bite my ass. I don't offroad.

I do however often haul a trailer w/4500lbs of inventory in it.
 
2006-10-20 01:17:33 AM
I drive a 2006 Kia Rio, stick shift.

I've had it for about a year, I've put almost 15k miles on it. The last time I measured my milage, it came out to over 35 miles/gallon. I figure that's fantastic. Sadly the EPA rates it at 43miles/gallon.

Still, now that gas prices are back below $2/gallon it's great knowing that even with the fuel light on, I can gas all the way up and not pay $20.
 
2006-10-20 01:17:38 AM
madgonad: Horsepower is way up....

Yes, but torque is down. It's all a tradeoff...

The real measure of efficiency would be comparing BSFC.
 
2006-10-20 01:19:09 AM
 
2006-10-20 01:19:40 AM
Program User:

"Taking all the gains in performance" is a misleading statement. There's a limit to how gasoline engines operate that doesn't let you apply most of the advances to economy. My Toyota minivan has a 3.3 liter engine, 10% smaller in displacement than the engine in my prior minivan, but with more horsepower. In theory you could've made it smaller still and given up some of the horsepower, but this would've expanded its operating regime into its upper range, putting more stress on components and bearings and causing maintenance problems and meaning the engine would have to be rebuilt or replaced much sooner. The expenses and environmental cost of all this repair work would cut heavily into any savings achieved and would annoy the consumer.
 
2006-10-20 01:20:19 AM
another-farker: my 69 corvette 350/300hp 4spd - 10mpg
2006 corvette 350/400hp 6spd - 30mpg
some where along the way some one did something right.

Chevy did amazingly well with that new 'Vette engine. The gas mileage they get out of that thing given the power it makes is pretty damn good. Unfortunately, it's a rare exception.

The majority of the autos (trucks, mostly likely) the American marques sell get poor gas mileage. We don't need a big SUV argument to know they obviously bring the average down.
 
2006-10-20 01:21:01 AM
You're a Mean Drunk R2D2:

I was going to bring up the same issue... I remember a story on this about a year ago. However, I thought that the EPA calculations still had not been changed and were based on data that had little-to-nothing to do with actual on-the-road MPG of a particular vehicle. I remember that there were a bunch of people upset because real day-to-day mileage on most cars was lower than the EPA estimates.

Does anybody know any more about this? How does the EPA really figure out their mpg estimates?

For what it's worth I also remember a news story stating that if you owned a hybrid vehicle your total savings over the life of the vehicle was only about $500.
 
2006-10-20 01:21:17 AM
mikemikeb: For some, they know they don't need an SUV, but with all the extra vertical interior space to do stuff easier, like getting in and out, moving around the cabin, taking stuff out of the "trunk", and maybe buckling in their kids (if they have them), or letting them have a little extra fresh air, they find it's quite convenient to have one.


That's what minivans are for. Minivans have FAR more interior space, way easier kid buckling, far easier to move around the cabin, more fresh air, more storage space, safer for the other people on the road, and somewhat better mileage.
 
2006-10-20 01:23:42 AM
Calvin Coolidge: Here comes the Hour of Hate for everyone that drives something bigger than a Civic.

Except for the part where my Civic only gets 20 mpg in city. Kicks ass on highway, though.

//'88!
 
2006-10-20 01:23:45 AM
Ikarus: Yes, but torque is down. It's all a tradeoff...

Horsepower and torque are essentially the same. The numbers are tuned for the right spot at the right gear at the right RPM.


pdieten: QFT. If the average horsepower in cars had stayed the same, mileage would be way up.

True, but only people with small penises want an efficient car. Hence, Americans have the biggest wangs in the world.
 
2006-10-20 01:24:27 AM
2006-10-20 01:04:31 AM bulldg4life

AntiNorm: people who think it is "cool" to drive an SUV, even though 99% of them would do just fine with a car.

They aren't spending your money to buy the vehicle.


Oh yes the fark they are! Because of the decreased efficiency of the popular SUV, demand for gas is much higher than it should be. Higher demand equals higher prices. I, like the rest of you, have to pay more for my gas because so many others think they need a damn SUV.
 
M-G
2006-10-20 01:25:30 AM
You're a Mean Drunk R2D2: I thought that the EPA changed the rules on how to compute mileage. It might not be fair to compare.

No, they're talking about a new method, but they've been using the same one since 1978.

Program User: Add in the SUVs and increased sales of light trucks used as passenger vehicles to get an overall fleet average and that number actually goes DOWN rather than the slight rise.

Nope. Light trucks have a different CAFE standard to meet than cars. The car fleet CAFE has been pretty consistently rising. The light truck CAFE has been stagnant. It's combining the two together that you see the total fleet CAFE doing poorly.

I should also clarify something I said above about air conditioning. The EPA tests are currently done with A/C off, but you still have the extra weight of the hardware.
 
2006-10-20 01:26:52 AM
picturescrazy: Oh yes the fark they are! Because of the decreased efficiency of the popular SUV, demand for gas is much higher than it should be. Higher demand equals higher prices. I, like the rest of you, have to pay more for my gas because so many others think they need a damn SUV.



and then there are all the indirect costs of being gasoline hungry, like having to maintain an oversized military to ensure a stable supply of crude oil, and perversely, financing islamic oil-rich countries.

oh, we pay.
 
2006-10-20 01:28:09 AM
On behalf of the entire mechanical engineering community; Submitter, go fark yourself. If half you farking hypocrites gave two shiats about it, you'd actually try to study the problem and help find solutions. But instead, you anonymously and endlessly biatch and expect somebody else to do it. Check back with me in another 30 years and let me know how that works for you.
 
2006-10-20 01:28:15 AM
Well, we do have gas-guzzling shiatboxes like the H2s and Suburbans skewing the curve a bit.
 
2006-10-20 01:28:19 AM
Great Janitor

They tell me, if you drive in the highest gear possible, just above "rumbling" RMP, you'll maximize milage.
 
2006-10-20 01:28:48 AM
Look at what China is doing. They're supposedly behind us in environmental standards, but they sure as hell are taking the lead with fuel efficiency.


http://www.treehugger.com/files/2005/07/chinese_fuel_ec.php
 
2006-10-20 01:29:37 AM
picturescrazy

Get off it. There are other, more signigicant factors increasing the demand on oil than SUV drivers. And you still pay less than the rest of the world. You want outrage, go buy a gallon of milk and compare the price between that and your precious gas.

Here's a hint to why demand is so high:

Starts with a C, ends with an A, and has a HIN in the middle.
 
2006-10-20 01:30:09 AM
Let's turn this into another "post the car you drive" thread. I'll start. btw, I still get over 20 mpg.

images6.theimagehosting.com
 
2006-10-20 01:31:46 AM
I have three cars.

1995 Honda Civic Coupe, 1.6L 4 cylinder, 5 speed, EFI, 29 MPG HWY

2004 GMC Envoy, 4.2L straight 6, automatic, EFI, 17 MPG HWY

1999 Ford Crown Victoria Police Interceptor 4.6L V8, automatic, EFI, 27 MPG HWY

I just want to know why in the hell the ex cop car gets way better mileage (pound for pound) than the others. Especially seeing as they are all tuned perfectly, and the CVPI has the most miles out of the three.

I mean if they're doing something to make them more affordable for municipalities to operate shouldn't they be doing it to civilian models too?
 
2006-10-20 01:32:14 AM
M-G

I should also clarify something I said above about air conditioning. The EPA tests are currently done with A/C off, but you still have the extra weight of the hardware.

Doesn't the mere existence of the fanbelt traveling around the clutch affect the mpg adversely, although minutely?
 
2006-10-20 01:34:20 AM
Immaculate_Misconception

Presumably the Envoy is trying to move a heavier car with less power = more rpms and more of a fight.

The more powerful and lighter crown vic needs to use less of it's grunt to achieve cruising speeds.
 
2006-10-20 01:36:10 AM
I didn't read the thread but I've said this a thousand times.

"If your SUV doesn't have mud on it, you don't need it."
 
2006-10-20 01:37:41 AM
Coupla years ago, in Grassroots Motorsports magazine, they did an autocross test with a Porsche 356, a Jag XKE, and a '02 Honda Odyssye minivan.

Guess which one won?

/yeah, cars don't get much better gas mileage.
//but they sure do drive better
 
Displayed 50 of 299 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report