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

Reply  Post New Thread
 
Submit Tools LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 01-01-2008, 10:54 AM   #11 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
basjoos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Upstate SC
Posts: 1,059

Aerocivic - '92 Honda Civic CX
Last 3: 70.54 mpg (US)

AerocivicLB - '92 Honda Civic CX
Team Honda
90 day: 55.14 mpg (US)

Camryglide - '20 Toyota Camry LE
Thanks: 6
Thanked 590 Times in 277 Posts
All of this talk about "putting cars on a diet" reminds me about the hype being put out by car manufacturers and car magazine writers back in the late 70's when they were downsizing cars.

The FE benefits of weight reduction are most evident in stop and go traffic and when driving up and down hills. I haven't done any weight reduction on my car other than removing the front passenger's seat, mainly because I rarely carry a passenger and makes it easier to load bags of feed into the car onto the resulting low load floor.

__________________
aerocivic.com
  Reply With Quote
Alt Today
Popular topics

Other popular topics in this forum...

   
Old 01-02-2008, 01:20 AM   #12 (permalink)
Who
UnderModded
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: San Jose
Posts: 319

Pablo - '07 Hyundai Santa Fe AWD
90 day: 23.62 mpg (US)
Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
SVO, I drive a vehicle that has a fairly efficient engine, okay gearing if you don't mind 50-52 MPH but it's heavy (if only it weighed 1000 pounds less), and you realize just how heavy watching the ScanGauge whenever the road rises or falls and whenever you accelerate.

Just like cycling, what you lose on climbs you never gain as much back on descents, and the heavier you are, the worse the loss to gain ratio gets.

Not saying that I wouldn't mind way more gearing options as well. A 6 x 3 transmission in a vehicle could really help out as well. CVTs are an excellent concept but I have suspicions that they have a lot of friction and I am somewhat doubtful about their lifespans.
__________________
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2008, 01:36 AM   #13 (permalink)
Dartmouth 2010
 
SVOboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Hanover, NH
Posts: 6,427

Vegan Powa! - '91 Honda CRX DX
Team Honda
90 day: 66.52 mpg (US)
Thanks: 92
Thanked 114 Times in 82 Posts
Send a message via AIM to SVOboy Send a message via MSN to SVOboy Send a message via Yahoo to SVOboy
I know, I was just whining because I get the feeling that instead of making a serious and much needed lifestyle change we're going to end up paying a bunch more money for some more landboats,
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2008, 02:05 AM   #14 (permalink)
MechE
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Bay Area
Posts: 1,151

The Miata - '01 Mazda MX-5 Miata
Thanks: 0
Thanked 21 Times in 18 Posts
So it's the only way huh....

So 27.5 v. 35mpg

27.5 + 1.10 = 30.25 :/ A bit short

Of course, the change is welcomed.. But the "only way" is a clear cop out :/
__________________
Cars have not created a new problem. They merely made more urgent the necessity to solve existing ones.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2008, 02:26 AM   #15 (permalink)
Depends on the Day
 
RH77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Kansas City Area
Posts: 1,761

Teggy - '98 Acura Integra LS
Sports Cars
90 day: 32.74 mpg (US)

IMA - '10 Honda Insight EX
Team Honda
90 day: 34.76 mpg (US)

Tessie - '06 Acura TSX Base
90 day: 28.2 mpg (US)
Thanks: 31
Thanked 41 Times in 35 Posts
Gloomy Gus

I've got a big "Whatever" for this mandate.

Isn't this very similar to what President Carter implemented in the late 70's and got rolled back anyway? I don't think the requirement will last. Some lobby group will chip away at it until we're back to where we started again.

It's either up to consumer education and awareness, economic impact of fuel costs, or citizen response that will carry the torch. Otherwise, the whole mess is moot.

RH77
__________________
“If we knew what we were doing, it wouldn't be called research” ― Albert Einstein

_
_
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2008, 11:00 AM   #16 (permalink)
Batman Junior
 
MetroMPG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: 1000 Islands, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 21,659

Blackfly - '98 Geo Metro
Team Metro
Last 3: 70.09 mpg (US)

MPGiata - '90 Mazda Miata
90 day: 53.78 mpg (US)

Winter beater Metro - '00 Chevrolet Metro
90 day: 61.98 mpg (US)

Fancy Metro - '14 Mitsubishi Mirage top spec
90 day: 58.72 mpg (US)

Even Fancier Metro - '14 Mitsubishi Mirage top spec
90 day: 66.29 mpg (US)
Thanks: 3,405
Thanked 6,215 Times in 3,221 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by basjoos View Post
The FE benefits of weight reduction are most evident in stop and go traffic and when driving up and down hills. I haven't done any weight reduction on my car...
Weight reduction is critical to the overall fleet because it will help "typical" drivers much more than it will help the tiny fraction of efficient drivers like ourselves.

We tend to DWL when cruising, and as much as possible avoid throwing away our momentum via the brake pedal/engine braking. Pretty much the opposite of the way a normal driver does things.
__________________
Latest mods: 3-cylinder Mitsubishi Mirage. EcoMods now in progress...
Ecodriving test:
Manual vs. automatic transmission MPG showdown



EcoModder
has launched a forum for the efficient new Mitsubishi Mirage
www.MetroMPG.com - fuel efficiency info for Geo Metro owners
www.ForkenSwift.com - electric car conversion on a beer budget
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2008, 09:08 PM   #17 (permalink)
Depends on the Day
 
RH77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Kansas City Area
Posts: 1,761

Teggy - '98 Acura Integra LS
Sports Cars
90 day: 32.74 mpg (US)

IMA - '10 Honda Insight EX
Team Honda
90 day: 34.76 mpg (US)

Tessie - '06 Acura TSX Base
90 day: 28.2 mpg (US)
Thanks: 31
Thanked 41 Times in 35 Posts
Reply

Sorry guys, I'll admit that my last post was off-topic a rather worthless. The topic is weight reduction...

My thoughts are that the city cycle mileage should improve with less mass to move from a standing start. But focusing on it?

Weight and size go hand-in-hand -- look at the Altima and Camry over the years -- plumped. But now consumers expect it bigger. Frankly, the latest Camry feels like a big marshmallow without the SE suspension. It could lose a few pounds.

All the rest applies -- powertrain and aero. They're just making a spectacle of the new requirement by announcing a brilliant plan to reduce weight! Forget R&D I suppose...

RH77
__________________
“If we knew what we were doing, it wouldn't be called research” ― Albert Einstein

_
_
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-2015, 06:06 PM   #18 (permalink)
EcoModding Lurker
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 1
Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
It is now 2015. Have the objectives of weight reduction been met?
  Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to dude18 For This Useful Post:
Xist (01-14-2015)
Old 01-16-2015, 04:57 AM   #19 (permalink)
EcoModding Newb
 
redpoint5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Oregon
Posts: 8,091

Acura TSX - '06 Acura TSX
90 day: 26.38 mpg (US)

Lafawnda - '01 Honda CBR600 F4i
90 day: 47.32 mpg (US)

Big Yeller - '98 Dodge Ram 2500 base
90 day: 21.82 mpg (US)

Prius Plug-in - '12 Toyota Prius Plug-in
90 day: 57.64 mpg (US)

Mazda CX-5 - '17 Mazda CX-5 Touring
90 day: 28.8 mpg (US)
Thanks: 2,710
Thanked 3,165 Times in 2,358 Posts
I lost 10% of my weight in that time frame, by accident and by not exercising. I'm trying to gain it back.

I agree with RH77 saying weight reduction doesn't matter much. It doesn't really, unless the vehicle is going to have a proportional reduction in engine size. If a manufacturer reduces weight, they will keep the same powerful engine so the brochure can boast of faster quarter mile times, because we all run the quarter mile sprint as we take Johnny to daycare. The consumer tends to demand higher performance over fuel efficiency. Consumers will have to change their priorities for manufacturers to do anything meaningful with weight reduction.

You'll know we're headed in the right direction when you see more commercials touting efficiency or environmentalism than "Zoom, Zoom". I don't watch commercials, so let me know when this happens, please.

__________________
Gas and Electric Vehicle Cost of Ownership Calculator







Give me absolute safety, or give me death!
  Reply With Quote
Reply  Post New Thread


Thread Tools


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
cheap, light-weight EV battery? eta Fossil Fuel Free 5 05-15-2009 01:00 AM
All New Nissan Models to Feature Fuel Efficiency Gauge MetroMPG General Efficiency Discussion 6 11-18-2008 04:57 PM
Oil weight question: 0w30 or 5w20? MetroMPG EcoModding Central 4 11-25-2007 08:57 PM



Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.5.2
All content copyright EcoModder.com