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

View Poll Results: What 0-60 mph acceleration time is acceptable to you?
0-60 in under 10 seconds 5 8.06%
0-60 in 10-15 seconds 26 41.94%
0-60 in 15-20 seconds 16 25.81%
0-60 in 20 seconds or more 15 24.19%
Voters: 62. You may not vote on this poll

Reply  Post New Thread
 
Submit Tools LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 10-04-2008, 02:50 PM   #41 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Earth
Posts: 5,209
Thanks: 225
Thanked 808 Times in 592 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clev View Post
Fortunately all cars decelerate well enough to get out of that situation.
Not necessarily. He was even with the rear wheels of the tractor, so to get to a safe position had to either move 10-15 feet ahead, or maybe 4 times that to the rear. Could he have decelerated quickly enough? Maybe, but then he'd have been moving very slowly, and thus risking a possible rear-ender from following traffic.

  Reply With Quote
Alt Today
Popular topics

Other popular topics in this forum...

   
Old 10-04-2008, 02:50 PM   #42 (permalink)
Wannabe greenie
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Yorba Linda, CA
Posts: 1,098

The Clunker (retired) - '90 Honda Accord EX sedan
Team Honda
90 day: 29.49 mpg (US)

Mountain Goat - '96 Ford Ranger XLT 4x4 SuperCab
90 day: 18 mpg (US)

Zippy - '10 Kymco Agility 125
90 day: 65.03 mpg (US)
Thanks: 5
Thanked 53 Times in 40 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by SuperTrooper View Post
My point is: Do you think that a car that takes 20 seconds to reach 60 mph could have accelerated out of that situation?

I don't.
I guess my next car should go 0-60 in 4.5 seconds. After all, what if I was at the trailer's rear wheels? Do you think a car that takes 7 seconds to reach 60 mph could have accelerated out of that situation?

My point is: acceleration shouldn't be the only, or even default, option. The situations where acceleration is the only way out are extremely rare, and in most of those cases, it's the driver's fault for getting into them (i.e. pulling out in front of a fast-moving vehicle.)
__________________

  Reply With Quote
Old 10-04-2008, 02:51 PM   #43 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
roflwaffle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Southern California
Posts: 1,490

Camryaro - '92 Toyota Camry LE V6
90 day: 31.12 mpg (US)

Red - '00 Honda Insight

Prius - '05 Toyota Prius

3 - '18 Tesla Model 3
90 day: 152.47 mpg (US)
Thanks: 349
Thanked 120 Times in 79 Posts
W/ the auto stop/start systems I've seen popping up as well as six speed manual boxes there is absolutely no reason to not be able to put out something compact that'll do 0-60 in ~6-8s and average ~50mpg. Acceleration and efficiency are not exclusive.
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-04-2008, 02:59 PM   #44 (permalink)
Wannabe greenie
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Yorba Linda, CA
Posts: 1,098

The Clunker (retired) - '90 Honda Accord EX sedan
Team Honda
90 day: 29.49 mpg (US)

Mountain Goat - '96 Ford Ranger XLT 4x4 SuperCab
90 day: 18 mpg (US)

Zippy - '10 Kymco Agility 125
90 day: 65.03 mpg (US)
Thanks: 5
Thanked 53 Times in 40 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by roflwaffle View Post
W/ the auto stop/start systems I've seen popping up as well as six speed manual boxes there is absolutely no reason to not be able to put out something compact that'll do 0-60 in ~6-8s and average ~50mpg. Acceleration and efficiency are not exclusive.
True, but that same car that does 0-60 in 10 seconds might get 55 mpg or more, and 6 seconds is faster than an '89 Ferrari Testarossa. Cars needing 6 second 0-60 for "safety" reasons is exactly the same logic that people use to justify commuting in an Excursion.
__________________

  Reply With Quote
Old 10-04-2008, 03:27 PM   #45 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Auburn, NH
Posts: 451

Wicked Wanda - '99 VW Beetle GLS
90 day: 29.59 mpg (US)

Green Monster - '99 Ford Explorer Sport
90 day: 16.73 mpg (US)

Dad's Taxi - '99 Honda Odyssey EX
90 day: 24.23 mpg (US)
Thanks: 0
Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by roflwaffle View Post
W/ the auto stop/start systems I've seen popping up as well as six speed manual boxes there is absolutely no reason to not be able to put out something compact that'll do 0-60 in ~6-8s and average ~50mpg. Acceleration and efficiency are not exclusive.
The 2009 Jetta TDI DSG does it in 8.0 seconds (MotorTrend) and will get 50+ mpg in the real world.

SHAZAM!
__________________
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-04-2008, 03:49 PM   #46 (permalink)
CAUTION: May Stink!!!
 
BlackDeuceCoupe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Central Arizona (USA) Missing Posts: 225
Posts: 210

BDC's Honda CiViC HX/Si - '98 Honda CiViC HX/Si (HX Shell/Si Swap)
90 day: 40.56 mpg (US)
Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Send a message via ICQ to BlackDeuceCoupe Send a message via AIM to BlackDeuceCoupe Send a message via MSN to BlackDeuceCoupe Send a message via Yahoo to BlackDeuceCoupe
Quote:
Originally Posted by SuperTrooper View Post
SHAZAM!
Exactly!

I agree with you!

There's nothing wrong with having a 8-second cake, and eating it too...
__________________
.:: B16A2 HX/Si Coupe | '98 HX shell with full '99 CiViC Si swap | 40+ MPG
Listen to the people who fail. They know what they're talking about!
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-04-2008, 04:07 PM   #47 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
tasdrouille's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Mirabel, QC
Posts: 1,672

The Guzzler - '08 Hyundai Elantra GL
90 day: 33.12 mpg (US)

Got Soul? - '11 Kia Soul 2U
Thanks: 35
Thanked 83 Times in 55 Posts
Had you been in a 20 second car, you would probably just have stayed behind the big rig. Since you were already at the tractor when he started to drift, he knew you were there and coming. He probably had judged your speed, the speed of the truck in front and was starting to pull left a bit so he would not have to swerve. But anyway, even if you had not been able to pull it, I don't see why the big rig would not have braked or pulled left earlier before you could pass him. It's not as if the truck in front just popped in his face out of nowhere.
__________________



www.HyperKilometreur.com - Quand chaque goutte compte...
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-04-2008, 04:28 PM   #48 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Auburn, NH
Posts: 451

Wicked Wanda - '99 VW Beetle GLS
90 day: 29.59 mpg (US)

Green Monster - '99 Ford Explorer Sport
90 day: 16.73 mpg (US)

Dad's Taxi - '99 Honda Odyssey EX
90 day: 24.23 mpg (US)
Thanks: 0
Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by tasdrouille View Post
Had you been in a 20 second car, you would probably just have stayed behind the big rig. Since you were already at the tractor when he started to drift, he knew you were there and coming. He probably had judged your speed, the speed of the truck in front and was starting to pull left a bit so he would not have to swerve. But anyway, even if you had not been able to pull it, I don't see why the big rig would not have braked or pulled left earlier before you could pass him. It's not as if the truck in front just popped in his face out of nowhere.
I'm pretty confident he had NO IDEA I was there. He put on his blinker and IMMEDIATELY started to pull into my lane. I barely got past his bumper. I bet I scared the crap out of him. He also started the lane change much earlier than I expected, since he still had about 400' to the lowboy. I think he was trying to change lanes before other cars further back trapped him behind the lowboy, and while focusing on them he didn't see me.
__________________
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-04-2008, 11:57 PM   #49 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Earth
Posts: 5,209
Thanks: 225
Thanked 808 Times in 592 Posts
Something to think about: the fuel economy vs acceleration thing seems to be an artifact of internal combustion technology: that is, there's no physical law that says that the energy needed to reach speed X depends on the rate of acceleration. (Just the opposite, in fact.) So if you had an electric car, or a hybrid with good boost, it seems that you would no longer be affected by that tradeoff. Do 0-60 in 5 seconds, or 50, the energy used would be the same.
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-05-2008, 03:53 AM   #50 (permalink)
dcb
needs more cowbell
 
dcb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location:
Posts: 5,038

pimp mobile - '81 suzuki gs 250 t
90 day: 96.29 mpg (US)

schnitzel - '01 Volkswagen Golf TDI
90 day: 53.56 mpg (US)
Thanks: 158
Thanked 267 Times in 210 Posts
There exists a fundamental compromise between acceleration and economy regardless of the technology. There are practical limits (low and high) on efficient acceleration once you look more closely than f=ma.

More acceleration means:
1. more internal losses (battery losses, bearing loads, fluid drag)
2. more time spent at higher speeds, thus more aerodynamic losses.
3. more weight for more power to do the accelerating with.
4. increased braking losses over time (faster and heavier)
5. increased hysteresis in the flexible parts if the driveline

__________________
WINDMILLS DO NOT WORK THAT WAY!!!
  Reply With Quote
Reply  Post New Thread


Thread Tools


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
smart cdi (diesel) owner from BC, Canada smartzuuk Introductions 29 09-06-2018 03:09 PM
Fuel Economy related papers tasdrouille General Efficiency Discussion 38 09-10-2017 12:48 AM
mileage computer for a carbureted engine diesel_john Instrumentation 221 05-01-2014 10:38 PM
Acceleration and Fuel Economy Tested SVOboy Hypermiling / EcoDriver's Ed 7 01-09-2009 12:06 PM
Basic EcoDriving Techniques and Instrumentation SVOboy Instrumentation 2 11-17-2007 11:38 AM



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