What's your time worth? Fuel economy vs speed.

[euromodder]

On my 31 mile / 50 km (one way) commute, it seems to make bugger all difference wether I drive 85 kph or (try to) drive 120 kph.
I still leave home at the same time as years ago, I still arrive at work around the same time.
Going back home, it's the same.
My commuting time is obviously far more influenced by things happening on the road, than by the speed I drive.

On long trips, going faster can cut hours from the travelling time, which can be well worth it.

[meelis11]

Originally Posted by ProDarwin

Yes, but who is to argue this is wasted time? I enjoy surfing ecomodder, watching Breaking Bad, cooking my dinner, working on my cars, weightlifting, mountain biking, etc. much more than I enjoy my commute. Leisure time != wasted time.

I said that time will be spent, not wasted. Spent or wasted - thats your decision.
Spent time != wasted time

[CigaR007]

Arguing over time is a waste of time !

[redpoint5]

Vanity of vanities; all is vanity.

Time is always wasted.

That said, each of us has different ways we prefer to waste it. Some enjoy wasting it on the road, others in front of the TV, still others might prefer exercise.

[larrybuck]

If you are not driving in a wasteful manner, you should not feel guilty about when you drive, and about that you actually enjoy your time behind the wheel.

I understand the long trip; extra day if I go slower thought pattern, but for myself; it would be inexpensive campgrounds, or even less then that, instead of a motel/hotel.

This shows how different we all are, the values we were raised with: what is considered NORMAL to us!

I crave long road trips 5 states away at 50mph. Would enjoy going 70mph IF I had the wearwithall to afford a vehicle that could give me the early 60's mpg. my current ride gives me at 50mph. I do ALL I can to help faster traffic get by.

For those of us who can't afford a new car every 6 years or so, or don't like that new of a vehicle: some of us don't turn off the engine at every stoplight, we don't gas it up to 80% potential going up steep hills, and mountains....BECAUSE: we are driving vehicles with over 200,000 miles, or income is low, or non existant, so we want our rides to LAST basically forever, so we minimize any potential extra electrical wear, and tear, and keep the rpm's as low as possible because we want that engine to last forever!

Not exactly the dream situation, but the hard facts some of us have to live with.

It's my knowing the potential of harder times, that led me to wanting a 62.9 mpg ride. If I was fat, and happy $$ wise; conserving would probably never crossed my mind.

My cloud has its 62.9mpg lining, and I'm very proud of that. Regular was $4.17.9 around here just a couple of weeks ago. We know more of that, and more will return.

Just saying each situation is different. Its so easy to look down our nose at someone who doesn't think just like us club.

[jamesqf]

Originally Posted by larrybuck

...some of us don't turn off the engine at every stoplight, we don't gas it up to 80% potential going up steep hills, and mountains....BECAUSE: we are driving vehicles with over 200,000 miles, or income is low, or non existant, so we want our rides to LAST basically forever, so we minimize any potential extra electrical wear, and tear, and keep the rpm's as low as possible because we want that engine to last forever!

Of course the problem with that is the AFAIK untested assumption that those things do in fact cause significant extra wear.

[SentraSE-R]

The fallacy of the busy trap. It's nice to know someone recognizes what's going on in American society.

I know if I ask ten friends to go on the trip of a lifetime next month, 9 of 10 will say no, because they have to do laundry, or something similar. I've lived my life vowing I won't end up like them! So I've been to all the continents and oceans except Antarctica and the Great Southern Ocean, and guess where I'm going next?

[3-Wheeler]

It may just be my observation and I could be wrong, but it seems that the faster people travel on a regular basis, tends to aid them in being less patient.

When I think of people buzzing around because their time is "too short", I wonder how people who had only a horse/buggy for transportation, felt about "time" 100 years ago?

Jim.

[Saskwatchian]

Generally I would consider myself one of the slower drivers but in this group I could probably be lumped in with "faster people" and yup I travel on a regular basis. I am not sure what you are saying about patience, could you clarify?

I have 700km to drive tomorrow and 600km on thursday. Will I be speeding? yah sometimes.

Depending how the gravel is tomorrow I might be going 110-115 on the paved sections since I only have 8 hours to do the trip before someone else is sitting at the compound enduring unpaid overtime until I get back. Burning an extra $20 of gas would be worth not having a co-worker have to wait a whole hour for my return, keeping good work relations and also finishing on time.

On thursday I have no such constraints so normally I would be going slower but I want to test out how going 115km/h compares to 100, 105, and 110 for fuel efficiency in relation to the first post on this thread. I will be alternating my speed.


I bet you if people had places to be 100 years ago they pushed their horses a little bit harder to get there in a bit faster, no different than today.

[Saskwatchian]

I didn't get any more info on tuesday since I took the work truck but got some more interesting numbers yesterday on the drive home.

I was listening to an audio-book so decided to use the chapter lengths as my intervals. This time I recorded distances and did not throw out the "short" runs interrupted by towns or construction. I still didn't record anything from the first half hour or when there was other traffic on the road affecting my speed. Cruise control and max A/C.

Here is the raw data recorded from my scangage on each leg:
km/h (average) - l/100km - km traveled

100 12.6 58
114 13.6 92
105 13.3 64
110 11.3 59
100 10.6 57
114 13.8 72
104 11.8 48
110 12.1 30

Combining the new numbers with the old ones I made a bubble chart giving the old numbers a 50km weighting (since I was not so careful about conditions on those numbers)



115 is obviously NOT an efficient speed, but the flat trend between 105 and 110 is interesting.