Go Back   EcoModder Forum > EcoModding > General Efficiency Discussion
Register Now
 Register Now
 

Reply  Post New Thread
 
Submit Tools LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 01-22-2011, 11:08 AM   #11 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
euromodder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Belgium
Posts: 4,683

The SCUD - '15 Fiat Scudo L2
Thanks: 178
Thanked 652 Times in 516 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by BHarvey View Post
that people actually believe today's cars are more efficient than 20+ years ago.
It just depends on what you buy.
And on what you can buy.

My current car is a lot more efficient than the first one I bought 20 years ago.
It's emissions are also a lot cleaner overall.

A 20+ year old car may get the same mpg than a car you can buy today, but it'll still be polluting a lot more, and be a lot less safe.

__________________
Strayed to the Dark Diesel Side

  Reply With Quote
Alt Today
Popular topics

Other popular topics in this forum...

   
Old 01-23-2011, 02:34 AM   #12 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Silly-Con Valley
Posts: 1,479
Thanks: 201
Thanked 262 Times in 199 Posts
And, generally speaking, will take 1.5 times as long to accelerate to 60 MPH when driven all-out.

More room, more power, more features, more passive safety--more more more more more! That's why cars don't get much better mileage now than they did 20+ years ago.

Oh, yes--less polluting emissions as well. At least one thing is less.

-soD
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2011, 03:14 AM   #13 (permalink)
(:
 
Frank Lee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: up north
Posts: 12,762

Blue - '93 Ford Tempo
Last 3: 27.29 mpg (US)

F150 - '94 Ford F150 XLT 4x4
90 day: 18.5 mpg (US)

Sport Coupe - '92 Ford Tempo GL
Last 3: 69.62 mpg (US)

ShWing! - '82 honda gold wing Interstate
90 day: 33.65 mpg (US)

Moon Unit - '98 Mercury Sable LX Wagon
90 day: 21.24 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1,585
Thanked 3,555 Times in 2,218 Posts
Less affordable, less easy to fix...
__________________


  Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2011, 08:40 AM   #14 (permalink)
EcoModding Apprentice
 
LUVMY02CREW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Mid TN
Posts: 152

TANK the fifth - '02 Chevrolet S10 Crew Cab 4x4 LS
90 day: 20.44 mpg (US)
Thanks: 4
Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by BHarvey
Funny that people actually believe today's cars are more efficient than 20+ years ago.
From a strictly MPG point of view, it seems like cars have NOT made as big of an increase in effeciency as folks think they should.

But, looking at the big picture, I do believe cars are more effecient than they were 20 years ago. I say this based on this explanation of the word effecient from "wiktionary.org" - "Making good, thorough, or careful use of resources; not consuming extra. Especially, making good use of time or energy." That 1 gallon of gas gets you a little farther(better MPG) and also lets your car do more for you:

Quote:
Originally Posted by some_other_dave View Post
More room, more power, more features, more passive safety--more more more more more! That's why cars don't get much better mileage now than they did 20+ years ago.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arragonis
It seemed to me that the efficiency gains of a modern engine, FI etc. had been put into adding performance and space and not into increasing FE.
__________________
  Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to LUVMY02CREW For This Useful Post:
Arragonis (01-23-2011)
Old 01-23-2011, 12:30 PM   #15 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Earth
Posts: 5,209
Thanks: 225
Thanked 811 Times in 594 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank Lee View Post
Less affordable, less easy to fix...
But also less need to fix - at least if you stick to Honda & Toyota. Just consider the difference between having to mess with points & carbs, vs electronic ignition & fuel injection.

And I will put the Insight up against any production car (OK, except the Leaf & Tesla) in the fuel economy department :-)
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2011, 01:15 PM   #16 (permalink)
EcoModding Apprentice
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: duluth mn
Posts: 117
Thanks: 20
Thanked 14 Times in 10 Posts
I think you get more and better efficiency in general... Cars are bigger now, heavier and FA. More safety features and other features. Everyone talks about how much safety weighs but I think those are negligible compared to size and power increases, ac, climate control, power everything...

Cost and Weight Added by the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards
Quote:
...NHTSA estimates that the FMVSS added an average of $839 (in 2002 dollars) and 125 pounds to the average passenger car in model year 2001. Approximately four percent of the cost and four percent of the weight of a new passenger car could be attributed to the FMVSS. An average of $711 (in 2002 dollars) and 86 pounds was added to the average light truck in model year 2001.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2011, 02:02 PM   #17 (permalink)
The PRC.
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Elsewhere.
Posts: 5,304
Thanks: 285
Thanked 536 Times in 384 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by LUVMY02CREW View Post
From a strictly MPG point of view, it seems like cars have NOT made as big of an increase in effeciency as folks think they should.

But, looking at the big picture, I do believe cars are more effecient than they were 20 years ago. I say this based on this explanation of the word effecient from "wiktionary.org" - "Making good, thorough, or careful use of resources; not consuming extra. Especially, making good use of time or energy." That 1 gallon of gas gets you a little farther(better MPG) and also lets your car do more for you:
Nail -> head as far as Ecomodder goes.
__________________
[I]So long and thanks for all the fish.[/I]
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2011, 10:38 PM   #18 (permalink)
EcoModding Apprentice
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 119

Laura the Lancer - '81 Mitsibishi lancer LX
Thanks: 0
Thanked 28 Times in 8 Posts
the only safety features on these cars is the fact that it is sooo light that it can stop really quickly (and i mean really quickly)



a basic tutorial of the toyota starlet (not my videos)
why they weigh so little:


this is what happens when you put a 4age (from the toyota corolla) them
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2011, 02:57 PM   #19 (permalink)
EcoModding Apprentice
 
NHRABill's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 191

Tahoe - '95 Chevrolet Tahoe LT
90 day: 13.22 mpg (US)

SRX - '04 Cadillac SRX AWD

XL - '05 Harley Davidson Sportster XL
90 day: 49.97 mpg (US)

Alero - '02 Oldsmobile Alero GLS

Corvette - '75 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray
Thanks: 3
Thanked 8 Times in 8 Posts
New braking compounds can help an older car stop faster as well. I see the OP point in making this post that there have been only slight improvements. Many members here drive a Metro what if they kept revising the 3cyl metro trying to keep with its original function fuel economy. Sure they make some great new cars that get moderate gains in mpg's but in my opinion it is not enough to offset the cost to putrchase a new one.

Finally we are starting to see high 30's even 40 in new cars but it should have been here 10 years ago, just too slow in making improvements.

__________________
2012 Chevrolet Traverse *active*
2002 Oldsmobile Alero GLS *active*
2002 S10 2wd p/u 139,000mi. *active*
1975 Corvette Stingray *active*
1994 Camaro Z28 Convertible 149k *Sold 2013*
1998 Blazer ZR2 189k *Sold 2012*
1995 Tahoe LT 250k *Sold 2011*

  Reply With Quote
Reply  Post New Thread






Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.5.2
All content copyright EcoModder.com