Small / economy car deathwatch: we've passed "peak econobox" again

[Xist]

There was a really old episode of The Simpsons, possibly back on The Tracey Ullman Show, where Homer test drove a car. It was tiny and they used something bizarre like furlongs per hogshead, but I wish that I knew for sure!

[cRiPpLe_rOoStEr]

Originally Posted by JSH

It isn't the volume of fuel going into the tank that matters it is the weight of the carbon coming out of the exhaust. Burning a gallon of gasoline creates 8.8 kg of CO2. Burning a gallon of diesel creates 10.1 kg of CO2. A gallon of diesel produces 15% more CO2 than a gallon of gasoline because diesel is more energy dense than gasoline. When regulatory bodies around the world started regulating g/km of CO2 they took away the advantage that diesel cars have by burning more energy dense fuel.

Since a lower volume of Diesel is consumed per distance travelled, it may either match the CO² emissions of a gasser or remain advantageous on that matter. What's really becoming troublesome are the NOx emissions.

[JSH]

Originally Posted by freebeard

Just be aware that the Imperial gallon is 0.8326716 of a real gallon.

I'm skeptical of the origin story. If today's mileage were available then we might be talking about miles per quart. It might have been available in gallon tins, but generally it was hand pumped into an elevated (graduated) sight-glass and then drained into the car by gravity.

In the one-time Republic of South Vietnam, they sold gas from roadside stands in American whisky bottles.

They still do that in Cambodia but my driver warned that most of the "gas" for sale at the roadside stands was cut with kerosene. That said it still worked for the Super Cubs that power that nation.

(90cc Super Cub pulling a giant trail using a "5th wheel" hitch)

Originally Posted by cRiPpLe_rOoStEr

Since a lower volume of Diesel is consumed per distance travelled, it may either match the CO² emissions of a gasser or remain advantageous on that matter. What's really becoming troublesome are the NOx emissions.

The only real advantage a diesel has over a gas engine today is the lack of the throttle plate in the intake. That said, adopting turbos and DI in gasoline engines brings the same emission problems as diesels. That is why gasoline engines are starting to get particulate filters.

Euro VI (HD) basically eliminates NOx but Brazil hasn't adopted it yet.

[redpoint5]

Originally Posted by Xist

I cannot find the video now, but someone explained that some dealerships have a trick to raise the sale price of a new car to cover the trade-in, so that you effectively give away your car for free.

Well the easiest thing for the dealer to do is apply the trade-in to the MSRP of the new vehicle and have the customer accept that deal. Dealers are willing to sell below MSRP for most vehicles that aren't in limited supply and high demand, and manufacturers offer discounts to help vehicle sales that aren't reflected in the MSRP.

The Chevy Bolt is going for about $10k under MSRP right now in some markets. Anyone trading in a vehicle against the MSRP price instead of the negotiated price is taking a massive loss. Then again, anyone trading in a vehicle is taking a massive loss because there's more to be gained private party.

[litesong]

Originally Posted by iikhod

Litres/100km is the most logic(sic) way/.....

Gallons/million miles is a great measure. If you average 10MPG in a car, you've wasted 100,000 gallons in a lifetime of driving. If you get 40MPG, you've still burned lots of fuel. If you haven't traveled a million miles in your life, you probably still accounted for lots of burned fuel.
We're all in this together.

[iikhod]

Originally Posted by litesong

Gallons/million miles is a great measure. If you average 10MPG in a car, you've wasted 100,000 gallons in a lifetime of driving. If you get 40MPG, you've still burned lots of fuel. If you haven't traveled a million miles in your life, you probably still accounted for lots of burned fuel.
We're all in this together.

I'm not sure if i get your point here...also,why would you edit my sayings when you quote me?

[Bicycle Bob]

Originally Posted by JSH

<snip> While the public talks about miles per gallon the standards are in grams of CO2 per mile (or KM, or HP-Hour, etc) It isn't the volume of fuel going into the tank that matters it is the weight of the carbon coming out of the exhaust. Burning a gallon of gasoline creates 8.8 kg of CO2. Burning a gallon of diesel creates 10.1 kg of CO2. A gallon of diesel produces 15% more CO2 than a gallon of gasoline because diesel is more energy dense than gasoline. When regulatory bodies around the world started regulating g/km of CO2 they took away the advantage that diesel cars have by burning more energy dense fuel.

I hope that helps clear up the confusion.

The main advantage of diesel is that it can run at a higher compression, and achieve higher carnot numbers.
Not having a throttle plate is not necessarily an advantage. It could also be replaced by a windmill. I'd really like to see an Eaton electric supercharger used as a generator as well. The numbers on my envelope are quite encouraging.

[litesong]

Originally Posted by litesong

Gallons/million miles is a great measure. If you average 10MPG in a car, you've wasted 100,000 gallons in a lifetime of driving. If you get 40MPG, you've still burned lots of fuel. If you haven't traveled a million miles in your life, you probably still accounted for lots of burned fuel.
We're all in this together.

Originally Posted by iikhod

I'm not sure if i get your point here...also,why would you edit my sayings when you quote me?

Its important to know how much fuel consumption we have in a lifetime.or don't you think so?
Also, do you think, "....Litres/100km is the most logic way/.....", needs no edit?

[cRiPpLe_rOoStEr]

Originally Posted by JSH

They still do that in Cambodia but my driver warned that most of the "gas" for sale at the roadside stands was cut with kerosene. That said it still worked for the Super Cubs that power that nation.

Isn't it quite curious that either a Diesel or a low-compression gasser may handle kerosene, while most newer gassers would knock with it? I once have lurked about trying to cut some gas with kerosene when my father had a '10-'11 Subaru Impreza (the regular one), as it had such a low compression.

(90cc Super Cub pulling a giant trail using a "5th wheel" hitch)

I have seen some motorcycles pulling trailers in Brazil, but those trailers were much smaller. Some had a motorcycle-specific trailer hitch at the swing arm of the rear suspension, while others had a frame reinforcement made out of some thick sheetmetal with a car-type hitch.

The only real advantage a diesel has over a gas engine today is the lack of the throttle plate in the intake.

Even though it's possible to make a gasser without a throttle plate, and in newer Diesels a throttle plate might be fitted in order to increase the control over some conditions that influence the effectiveness of emissions treatment devices.

That said, adopting turbos and DI in gasoline engines brings the same emission problems as diesels. That is why gasoline engines are starting to get particulate filters.

Unless biomethane becomes as relevant as ethanol for usage as a motor fuel, and some tech similar to that Freevalve system gets turned into a new standard enabling port-injection to remain widespread (on a sidenote, it's much easier to convert a port-injection engine to CNG than it would be to do the same in one with direct injection), I wouldn't hold my breath for gassers to take over the role of a Diesel engine on certain operating conditions. The only advantage for gassers is an easier NOx control even with direct injection, taking the example of some engines with dual injection.

Euro VI (HD) basically eliminates NOx but Brazil hasn't adopted it yet.

AFAIK it's scheduled to be implemented here around 2022 or 2023.

[iikhod]

Originally Posted by litesong

Its important to know how much fuel consumption we have in a lifetime.or don't you think so?
Also, do you think, "....Litres/100km is the most logic way/.....", needs no edit?

To be honest, i think that it is not that important to know how much one has burned fuel in a lifetime. At least for me that is the last thing i want to discuss on my last moments. Is it not enough to try and consume as little of resources as possible? That is what i do.

And yes:I do think that my saying does not need editing. L/100km is the most logical way IN MY OPINION. May it be wrong or right in YOUR OPINION.
If you quote someone, please quote it as it was written.