Go Back   EcoModder Forum > EcoModding > EcoModding Central
Register Now
 Register Now
 

Reply  Post New Thread
 
Submit Tools LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 11-28-2011, 10:22 AM   #21 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 328
Thanks: 11
Thanked 79 Times in 54 Posts
Send a message via MSN to markweatherill
Stop-start technology would save fuel in a huge way, but as I understand it, cars fitted with stop-start don't show any increased EPA mpg numbers, due to the way the test is carried out. So few vehicles sold in the US have stop-start.
Whereas, in Europe, the official emissions figures are arrived at using a test which gives an advantage to stop-start, so you find it being fitted to more and more new cars.

  Reply With Quote
Alt Today
Popular topics

Other popular topics in this forum...

   
Old 11-28-2011, 10:44 AM   #22 (permalink)
EcoModding Apprentice
 
tim3058's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Northeast
Posts: 147

Silver Bullet - '86 Chevy Camaro Z28
90 day: 19.74 mpg (US)

New Blue - '96 Chevrolet Camaro Z28
90 day: 20.46 mpg (US)

Diesel - '96 Chevrolet Tahoe LS
Last 3: 13.56 mpg (US)

Tahoe #2 - '95 Chevrolet Tahoe LS
90 day: 13.05 mpg (US)

SuperDuty - '08 Ford F-350 dually Lariat
90 day: 9.34 mpg (US)

Fundai - '09 Hyundai Elantra
90 day: 26.45 mpg (US)

HRV - '17 Honda HRV LX
90 day: 31.39 mpg (US)
Thanks: 7
Thanked 18 Times in 12 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by markweatherill View Post
Stop-start technology would save fuel in a huge way, but as I understand it, cars fitted with stop-start don't show any increased EPA mpg numbers, due to the way the test is carried out. So few vehicles sold in the US have stop-start.
Whereas, in Europe, the official emissions figures are arrived at using a test which gives an advantage to stop-start, so you find it being fitted to more and more new cars.
That'd be a great way to do more in the US easily. Doesn't (to my knowledge) require massive investments in new/untested technology, and can be adapted to current platforms being built. As much time as people in the US spend at stoplights, it'd save a lot. Someone on here once posted research saying 20% of all fuel is wasted at red lights.
__________________


  Reply With Quote
Old 11-28-2011, 12:11 PM   #23 (permalink)
The road not so traveled
 
TheEnemy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: New Mexico
Posts: 679

The Truck - '99 Nissan Frontier xe
90 day: 25.74 mpg (US)

The Ugly Duck - '84 Jeep CJ7 Rock crawler
Thanks: 18
Thanked 64 Times in 55 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by brucepick View Post
IHMO the biggest improvement would be to wean American drivers off vehicles that have twice the power needed.

My '89 Euro-beast weighs about 3070 lb and the engine is 115 hp.
My 84CJ is rated at 115hp and about 3000lbs, it can do 75mph on the flat, it has trouble maintaining speed with hills, but thats because most of its power is taken up by the fact that it has the aero of a cinderblock. With the gearbox I want to put in it, if I can get the tires to stick it will be able to climb a tree.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MetroMPG View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by DifferentPointofView
Some trucks that have a v8 get better fuel economy than the v6 version cause they don't have to work as hard to do the same amount of work.

That sure sounds like an urban myth to me! (But I'm willing to stand corrected if you can point me to EPA figures that show this.)
Its more of a case of cherry picking the data. Under very specific circumstances the vehicle with the larger engine will get better FE.
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-28-2011, 03:01 PM   #24 (permalink)
tru
EcoModding Apprentice
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: FL
Posts: 126

tru - '05 Ford Focus ZX3
90 day: 39.46 mpg (US)

the truck - '02 GMC Sierra Denali
Thanks: 0
Thanked 7 Times in 6 Posts
a good example of this would be chevy 1500 series trucks. the mileage is almost identical for the 1999-2005 ish models ranging from the 4.3L V6 4.8L V8 to the 5.3LV8.
__________________
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-28-2011, 03:09 PM   #25 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
JasonG's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Charlotte NC / York SC
Posts: 726

05 DMax - '05 Chevrolet 2500HD
90 day: 18.48 mpg (US)
Thanks: 107
Thanked 54 Times in 50 Posts
This makes we wish we could just go with the ISO standards.
Get rid of the US standards and many more options become available that actually save fuel !
Unfortunately Americans are too big-headed to change.
__________________




I can't understand why my MPG's are so low..........
21,000lb, 41' Toy Haulers are rough on FE!
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-28-2011, 06:32 PM   #26 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Silly-Con Valley
Posts: 1,438
Thanks: 182
Thanked 236 Times in 181 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by tim3058 View Post
It's easy to rage against the evil right ...
Sorry, but I didn't see anything political in the post you were quoting. Just a rant against "Americans" who feel that they are entitled to use as much fuel as they can.

An attitude which too many of us seem to have, regardless of political leanings. Which was the point of your post, wasn't it?

Hmm, let me just crawl back under this rock over here....

-soD
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-29-2011, 12:38 PM   #27 (permalink)
EcoModding Apprentice
 
tim3058's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Northeast
Posts: 147

Silver Bullet - '86 Chevy Camaro Z28
90 day: 19.74 mpg (US)

New Blue - '96 Chevrolet Camaro Z28
90 day: 20.46 mpg (US)

Diesel - '96 Chevrolet Tahoe LS
Last 3: 13.56 mpg (US)

Tahoe #2 - '95 Chevrolet Tahoe LS
90 day: 13.05 mpg (US)

SuperDuty - '08 Ford F-350 dually Lariat
90 day: 9.34 mpg (US)

Fundai - '09 Hyundai Elantra
90 day: 26.45 mpg (US)

HRV - '17 Honda HRV LX
90 day: 31.39 mpg (US)
Thanks: 7
Thanked 18 Times in 12 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by some_other_dave View Post
Sorry, but I didn't see anything political in the post you were quoting. Just a rant against "Americans" who feel that they are entitled to use as much fuel as they can.
-soD
My post was in response to the poster's previous comments that ...we are god's chosen people and are meant to have all the energy we want....just ask the right? No matter if we steal it or trash the planet? God is on our side and that is just that . My understanding is the poster blames some right-wing religious group for the situation. As some_other_dave also summarized, its definitely a bipartisan problem.
__________________


  Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2011, 12:47 AM   #28 (permalink)
EcoModding Apprentice
 
JackMcCornack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Southern Oregon
Posts: 179
Thanks: 5
Thanked 39 Times in 23 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by brucepick View Post
IHMO the biggest improvement would be to wean American drivers off vehicles that have twice the power needed.
brucepick's comment was posted four years ago and it's still true. One easy way for a manufacturer to get its fleet average to 35 mpg is to sell more economy cars and fewer juggernauts. The way to achieve that is to increase customer demand for efficient cars--cars that are smaller, lighter, and less powerful than the high-profit-per-unit cars the manufacturers want to sell us. The manufacturers are strongly motivated to sell us more car than we need, for the same reason McDonald's wants you to supersize your fries: there's bigger money to be made by selling bigger cars (or meals).

It would sure help if motor fuel was expensive enough to make people feel really stupid if they buy inefficient cars. $3 a gallon was enough to make Hummers ridiculous--twenty years ago when they first came out (and fuel was cheap) they were pretty cool and their drivers were envied and admired, but for the last five+ years they've been the butt of jokes. People didn't quit buying them because they couldn't afford the fuel (a 2006 H1 cost over a hundred grand; if you could afford one you could afford to put fuel in it), they quit buying them because buying a Hummer makes you look Really Stupid.

Unfortunately, fuel prices have to go considerably higher before the average overpowered oversized automobile looks sufficiently stupid to demotivate purchasers. I think gasoline has to hit $5 a gallon before Ford and Chrysler's flagship Mustang and Charger (at 17 mpg each) look Really Stupid.

I know what would work--a 100% fuel tax, which would bump fuel at the pump to five bucks a gallon or so. Put the tax money into improving (or at least maintaining) the country's transportation infrastructure; we'd have good roads again, we'd keep more of our money in America, and I'll bet in three years we'd have a 35 mpg national fleet.
__________________
Modding MAX, a Kubota-powered classic sports car
http://www.kineticvehicles.com
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2011, 07:12 AM   #29 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
JasonG's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Charlotte NC / York SC
Posts: 726

05 DMax - '05 Chevrolet 2500HD
90 day: 18.48 mpg (US)
Thanks: 107
Thanked 54 Times in 50 Posts
Why in the 70s/80s did my parents, my 2 brothers and I fit in a Chevy cavalier/Hyundai excell but now it takse an Excursion/Escallade/Van to do the same ? My brothers are both 5'11" 190lbs.
Dad had a F250 for the camper/boat/logs that was rarely driven empty.
__________________




I can't understand why my MPG's are so low..........
21,000lb, 41' Toy Haulers are rough on FE!

Last edited by JasonG; 11-30-2011 at 07:22 AM..
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2011, 11:55 AM   #30 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 588

Ladogaboy - '11 Mitsubishi Lancer EVO GSR
Team Emperor
90 day: 27.64 mpg (US)

E85 EVO - '11 Mitsubishi Lancer EVO GSR
90 day: 21.38 mpg (US)
Thanks: 59
Thanked 59 Times in 47 Posts
The problem is, Americans have been told that they can have it all, and so, that is the expectation. We operate with the assumption that we might, possibly, do anything we can think of in the future: Move large furniture; transport a soccer team; inexplicably find ourselves entered into the Indy 500.

My friend and I were discussing this in reference to electric vehicles, and we came to the conclusion that EVs would not be a viable option for Americans until those vehicles were able to transport four people 400 miles on a single charge. Forget the fact that almost no American requires that capability regularly (a rental car a few times a year would be a much better option), the fact that they might, one day, need a vehicle capable of doing that is enough to drive the average American away from EVs.

__________________
  Reply With Quote
Reply  Post New Thread


Thread Tools




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.5.2
All content copyright EcoModder.com