Discover and share the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.
Warning: The Content in this Article May be Inaccurate
Readers have reported that this story contains information that may not be accurate.6 Gas Saving Myths
money.cnn.com — Sure you want to save gas, but there's a lot of bad advice on how to do it. Some of it makes no difference, and some of it can wind up costing you.
chris1234- 1221 diggs
- digg it
- dforty3, on 05/15/2008, -51/+6HHO
http://www.hhowater4gas.com/
This works!- KSUdesigner, on 05/15/2008, -1/+15"There is no gas shortage man. It's all fake. The oil companies control everything. Like there is this guy that invented this car and it runs on water man. It's got a fiberglass air-cooled engine and it runs on water. "
- inigomntoya, on 05/15/2008, -1/+8Far out, man!
- linagee, on 05/15/2008, -6/+3And? They can still charge whatever they like! I think a majority of Americans will only happy once the govt steps in and regulates the price of this themselves. (As sick and twisted as that would be.)
- KingWilson, on 05/16/2008, -1/+1it is sick and twisted........learn economics...price ceiling create shortage which means no gas at any price
- Christ0s, on 05/15/2008, -0/+10If it runs on water I think you call it a boat
- inigomntoya, on 05/15/2008, -8/+5But then, what happens when the earth runs out of water because we have burned it all up in our cars? Will we have to rely on other planets to import our water? Or will we need to start learning how to drink oil?
- KSUdesigner, on 05/15/2008, -8/+14Burned up all the water? Wow, I don't really know what to say to the stupidity shown by your comment.
- inigomntoya, on 05/15/2008, -4/+8Why thank you! - wait a minute...
- migitalwarfare, on 05/15/2008, -4/+7they must not have sarcasm down at KSU
- inigomntoya, on 05/15/2008, -1/+4I would have put the /s at the end of the comment, but sometimes its fun to see who doesn't understand humor
- KSUdesigner, on 05/15/2008, -1/+2As they say, "Kent read, Kent write, Kent State." I had a feeling it was sarcasm, but sometimes you just never know around here.
- KSUdesigner, on 05/15/2008, -8/+14Burned up all the water? Wow, I don't really know what to say to the stupidity shown by your comment.
- halleyscomet, on 05/15/2008, -0/+10Didn't they test this device on Mythbusters and conclude it was a pile of nonsense?
- dforty3, on 05/16/2008, -0/+1I don't know about that, but the MythBusters also determined there was a single shooter in the JFK assassination. It's difficult to trust the corporate media these days.
- Bwah, on 05/15/2008, -2/+9I know i'm cheating the comments by using this reply, digg me down if you want, but filling up early in the morning does matter. Gas stations usually change the price around 10am. With prices going up everyday it does make a difference. Though I do agree that whole colder gas is better is *****.
- subliminalurge, on 05/15/2008, -0/+2Around here the prices seem to change at various times of day, depending on the station. Many of the 24 hour stations change prices in the middle of the night, since that's when they're least busy and the staff have time to do some of the "extra" chores.
- inigomntoya, on 05/15/2008, -0/+1The gas stations by my house close around 11 pm. Once the staff is done sweeping and mopping, they go out and change the signs.
- subliminalurge, on 05/15/2008, -0/+2Around here the prices seem to change at various times of day, depending on the station. Many of the 24 hour stations change prices in the middle of the night, since that's when they're least busy and the staff have time to do some of the "extra" chores.
- KSUdesigner, on 05/15/2008, -1/+15"There is no gas shortage man. It's all fake. The oil companies control everything. Like there is this guy that invented this car and it runs on water man. It's got a fiberglass air-cooled engine and it runs on water. "
- rlray216, on 05/15/2008, -17/+29Several of these myths were misconceptions that I was still under. Good article.
- lamiaconfitor, on 05/15/2008, -5/+7you are on digg and admitted you may have been wrong about something? dugg up!
- leetninja, on 05/15/2008, -5/+16#3. Use premium fuel = this is a ***** statement in many ways. first of all if you have a low power engine such as a dodge nitro or a toyota camry or a ford taurus then dont bother with high octane gas - HOWEVER is you have a high output engine such as a mustang, corvette, jaguar, toyota FJ Cruiser, or some other vehicle with a PERFORMANCE engine you WILL see a difference in not only the way the car runs and its power but also MILEAGE!!! more importantly if you do the damn math say that you had gas costing 3.55 for regular, 3.65 for midgrade, and 3.75 for premium. That means it is a .20 cent difference between regular and premium. THAT means that you would have to pump 5 gallons to save ONE dollar. Well, you would have to pump about 20 gallons of fuel to save what it costs for a single gallon of premium. (a little less im not doing the exact math here) so you get better mileage like i was saying, so is it really worth saving three bucks? would you rather have 1 extra gallon of regular or more miage and better performance?
this article SUCKED- abucada, on 05/15/2008, -8/+2Also, if you run 87 octane in a high performance car that requires 92 octane you can shut the engine off and the plugs will be so hot that the remaining gas in the cylinders will keeps igniting and makes the engine continue to run, wasting even more gas. The other tips weren't bad though.
- hays0008, on 05/15/2008, -0/+6That is completely untrue, when you shut of the engine, the fuel injectors cease to inject fuel into the cylinders.
- gurellia53, on 05/15/2008, -0/+1its called dieseling... and its not harmful... because thats how diesel engines work (basically)
- stealth210, on 05/15/2008, -2/+3Agreed, especially with any forced induction engine such as supercharged or turbocharged. You can actually cause damage to an engine with engine knock or ping by running 87 in an engine designed for 92/93. The 87 octane gasoline burns faster than 93 causing the combustion in the cylinder to happen before the exhaust valve opens causing a lot of pressure on the piston and rings which is indicated by a knocking or pinging sound.
- quantumstatejim, on 05/15/2008, -0/+3It is correct that it will do damage however it is not because it burns faster. It is due to the fuel igniting as it is compressed before the spark from the spark plug. supercharged engines run under higher pressure so they need fuel which is less likely to ignite when it is compressed. As a point of interest a diesel does not use a spark to ignite the fuel, it uses the fact that low octane fuels will ignite under compression so diesel would have a low octane number.
- jmhyer51, on 05/15/2008, -0/+4It's a crap article because you disagree with one point?
- Zera, on 05/15/2008, -1/+2"HOWEVER is you have a high output engine such as a mustang, corvette, jaguar, toyota FJ Cruiser, or some other vehicle with a PERFORMANCE engine you WILL see a difference"
Yea, because THOSE people are the people reading this article because they are so concerned about fuel economy.- leetninja, on 05/16/2008, -2/+1i own 3 of the cars i listed and i read the article ...
- Zera, on 05/16/2008, -0/+1My point was the author was making general statements that apply to the GREAT majority of car drivers, and that one minor exception, especially for cars that aren't used for long distance commuting doesn't make this point invalid.
Plus, Hotwheels don't count........ :D :P
- nurall, on 05/15/2008, -0/+1im gonna have to pull the chip out of my mustang so i can go back to using 87 :-(
- abucada, on 05/15/2008, -8/+2Also, if you run 87 octane in a high performance car that requires 92 octane you can shut the engine off and the plugs will be so hot that the remaining gas in the cylinders will keeps igniting and makes the engine continue to run, wasting even more gas. The other tips weren't bad though.
- Zera, on 05/15/2008, -1/+11#7 Buying Gasoline with Ethanol Content.
Does not save Gas, because for every 1 gallons of Corn Ethanol consumed (all current US ethanol is corn ethanol) a WHOLE ADDITIONAL THREE FOURTHS of a GALLON of petroleum products was consumed to create it. Thus, for every gallon of Ethanol you use, you are burning 1.8 gallons of hydrocarbon, and thus it doesn't matter that Ethanol "burns cleaner"
Consuming Ethanol produced from Corn is nearly TWICE AS BAD FOR THE ENVIRONMENT and Global Warming. This doesn't take into account the herbicides, pesticides, and erosion that was a result of this UNNECESSARY FARMING needed to create your Ethanol. It also doesn't take into account those who will starve because of food prices going up as a result.
DO NOT BUY ETHANOL in the US until it is made from something OTHER than corn.- Animal, on 05/15/2008, -1/+1Doesn't each gallon of regular gas consume a certain amount of gas to pump the oil and refine it and transport it? Are you accounting for that gas usage? I agree that corn ethanol isn't really the best solution and other types would be better but I'm don't buy the idea that corn ethanol is worse than actual gasoline..
- Zera, on 05/15/2008, -0/+2No doubt, but think about what you're saying. If gasoline is required to use gasoline, and Ethanol needs gasoline to be created, then Ethanol just uses MORE gasoline!!!!!
Corn Ethanol is not only NOT the best solution, its NOT a solution AT ALL. In order to create as much ethanol we would need to stop using gasoline we would need TWICE the land size of the USA to grow nothing but corn. Ethanol from corn is crazy, and it has been proven impossible.
It makes us MORE dependent on oil, because it is using up government money that COULD be used for REAL alternatives to our problems, like Wind, Nuclear, and Hydrogen infrastructures.
- Zera, on 05/15/2008, -0/+2No doubt, but think about what you're saying. If gasoline is required to use gasoline, and Ethanol needs gasoline to be created, then Ethanol just uses MORE gasoline!!!!!
- Animal, on 05/15/2008, -1/+1Doesn't each gallon of regular gas consume a certain amount of gas to pump the oil and refine it and transport it? Are you accounting for that gas usage? I agree that corn ethanol isn't really the best solution and other types would be better but I'm don't buy the idea that corn ethanol is worse than actual gasoline..
- deep582, on 05/15/2008, -1/+1I don't really trust this article because I'm not sure the author is very knowledgeable about the subject
#4 "But you should never over-inflate your tires. They'll get you slightly better fuel economy because there will be less tread touching the road, reducing friction."
Friction wouldn't be reduced because there is less tire touching the road, since weight (aka normal force) is the only thing that affects friction!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friction- Stroggoth, on 05/16/2008, -0/+2Except that tires don't grip the road with simple static friction. The rubber actually fits into the surface of the road, creating a gear-like lever system. When you over-inflate, it ruins the binding.
Physics models sometimes over-simplify.
- Stroggoth, on 05/16/2008, -0/+2Except that tires don't grip the road with simple static friction. The rubber actually fits into the surface of the road, creating a gear-like lever system. When you over-inflate, it ruins the binding.
- puttly, on 05/16/2008, -0/+1#1 the author is wrong...
even if the gas temperature varied in the tank, all gas dispensers are corrected to a certain volume anyway, so whether you fill up in a desert or a glacier you pay for X temperature.
- longchamp, on 05/15/2008, -30/+234This article is *****. My fuel economy went up ~10% when i replaced the horribly clogged air filter in my Civic.
It also went up when i inflated tires back to proper spec.
Using low octane in a high performance car which requires high octane CAN damage it. It's called detonation.
This article is very misleading.- Furkle, on 05/15/2008, -3/+77They didn't say keeping your tires inflated to spec wasn't worth it they said it was dangerous to overinflate them for the minor gain you might get in increased mileage.
- diadem2, on 05/15/2008, -12/+11The whole article sounds defeatist more than anything else.
- RadicalEdward, on 05/15/2008, -6/+45People need to keep in mind, a car that recommends premium will do fine on regular, even high end bmw's and such because they are designed to be driven all over the world including places that don't have high octane gas. but car's the REQUIRE premium can be damaged by not using it.
- wezman2, on 05/15/2008, -6/+3Gas in Europe has a higher octane than in the US. Yes, I know they measure it a little differently, but that doesn't make up the complete difference. Regular in Europe is about the same as premium in the US.
- thegreatgazoo, on 05/15/2008, -1/+7There is more to the world that Europe and the US.
For instance, in South Africa I think you get the choice of leaded and regular, or that's what I remember from 10 years ago. And there you basically have a choice of a VW citigolf or a BMW.
- thegreatgazoo, on 05/15/2008, -1/+7There is more to the world that Europe and the US.
- tomz17, on 05/15/2008, -0/+16I call *****... Your car cannot sense a pre-ignition detonation until it happens, who cares if it temporarily retards the timing afterwards... If you use octane below the recommended you are going to be knocking your engine all around town. My owners manual SPECIFICALLY says that lower octane fuel can only be used in emergency situations when premium is not available, and that the knock sensor in the car will allow the engine to continue to function on a lower octane... but from everything i've read, it is NOT a good idea for daily driving on an engine timed for high octane!!!!
- Stroggoth, on 05/16/2008, -0/+1This is quite correct, the knock must occur before the car can figure it out. Also, retarded engine time leads to carbon buildup which wrecks your injectors and plugs, and will reduce fuel efficiency over time.
Drive the right octane for your car, this is not a place to skimp.
- Stroggoth, on 05/16/2008, -0/+1This is quite correct, the knock must occur before the car can figure it out. Also, retarded engine time leads to carbon buildup which wrecks your injectors and plugs, and will reduce fuel efficiency over time.
- Rippleeffect, on 05/15/2008, -0/+2My 02 Sentra SER requires premium. The manual says something to the effect of, if you can't find a station with premium, fill a quarter tank and drive to the nearest station that does. I tried when it was brand new using regular, and I lost so much power and had horrible knocking that I switched back to premium.
- glialisback, on 05/15/2008, -0/+5Wrong, wrong, wrong. 2008 Civic Si that gets 4-5 miles per gallon less with regular unleaded. If the specs require premium, use premium. Also, a good air filter can increase mileage.
This article is mostly *****. - J3553, on 05/15/2008, -0/+3this is a pretty pointless argument anyway. let's do some math... the difference between regular and premium is about twenty cents per gallon, right? so let's say you need to put fifteen gallons in your tank. that's only an extra $3 per tank, and when you're already paying $60 to fill up your tank, that $3 extra isn't *****. get the premium.
- wezman2, on 05/15/2008, -6/+3Gas in Europe has a higher octane than in the US. Yes, I know they measure it a little differently, but that doesn't make up the complete difference. Regular in Europe is about the same as premium in the US.
- Julik, on 05/15/2008, -0/+15They actually said that over inflating your tires will save you some money on gas, but with less tread touching the road it will be more dangerous, thus not worth the saving in gas. So they are saying that having your tires properly inflated is good, and will save you money.. but be sure not to over inflate.
- notoneofus, on 05/15/2008, -1/+8To be fair, the article says you will save fuel if tires are inflated to spec.
- RealmDown, on 05/15/2008, -7/+2Mythconceptions ?
- sparsely, on 05/15/2008, -0/+1Are you making fun of people with lisps?
Rathitht!
- sparsely, on 05/15/2008, -0/+1Are you making fun of people with lisps?
- davewashere, on 05/15/2008, -0/+11The article did state that inflating tires to proper spec would increase mpg. In fact, it kind of admitted that over-inflating tires would increase fuel economy, so it really isn't a myth at all. It's just a really bad idea if you're not suicidal.
- subliminalurge, on 05/15/2008, -0/+2And even if you are suicidal, it's still a bad idea. Please don't take me and my family out with you when you decide to go.
If you're homicidal, however, it might be worth looking into.
- subliminalurge, on 05/15/2008, -0/+2And even if you are suicidal, it's still a bad idea. Please don't take me and my family out with you when you decide to go.
- gen2ux, on 05/15/2008, -9/+1This shouldn't be on the front page, however, hopefully most Diggers will be smart enough to see this is BS.
- IphtashuFitz, on 05/15/2008, -0/+24A modern day car can only compensate so much for a "horribly clogged" air filter. If it's so badly clogged that hardly any air can get into the engine then you're certain to get lousy mileage. That is, if you can even start your car in the first place.
- linagee, on 05/15/2008, -0/+3Take it out, spray or shake it off, stick it back in. $0.00
- ap44, on 05/15/2008, -0/+1No you just don't spray a PAPER air filter and then put it back in. Without a proper, functioning, air filter your car has the possibility to backfire. I would say just pay the ~$20 and replace it when it gets dirty. Not very hard and anyone can do it.
- jcaino, on 05/15/2008, -2/+9If you use regular grade fuel in a modern, computer-controlled car which requires hi-octane (92 or above), the ECU will cut back the timing in order to prevent PREdetonation. Detonation is a good thing. It's what makes the whole process work. However, using premium fuel in a car that was designed just to be used for regular-grade may actually cause problems. Some of the plastics and gaskets used in the induction systems do not play well with various cleaning agents in premium-fuel.
All said, the article is kind of a waste. Doing or not doing these things may or may not make an extremely negligible difference in your fuel consumption.- shdwtek, on 05/15/2008, -1/+4I agree, and that's what came to mind with that article. People may disregard the "recommended" and start putting in a lower octane fuel, and damage their vehical. But from what I understand detonation is a different reaction then the normal combustion process that is supposed to occur.
From superchargersonline.com: "The mixture is ignited by the spark, normally in the center of the cylinder, and a flame front moves from the spark towards the outside of the cylinder in a contolled burn. Detonation occurs when air and fuel that is ahead of the flame front ignites before the flame front arrives because it becomes overheated."- linagee, on 05/15/2008, -4/+1Damage "vehical" -> buy a new "vehical" (hopefully a more gas efficient one)
- senatorpjt, on 05/15/2008, -0/+2Lower octane gas will ignite when compressed at a lower pressure than higher octane gas. If it's a high compression engine, the lower octane gas will therefore ignite before the spark plug fires. Diesel engines in fact work on this principle - they don't have spark plugs and rely on the compression itself to ignite the gas.
- dhughes, on 05/15/2008, -0/+4 Yeah the terms tend to get confusing; pre-detonation/pre-ignition, detonation/knock/pinging.
Detonation is never a good thing, the goal is burning since you want an even fast burn but certainly not an explosion.
Pre-ignition is when the fuel ignites from the heat of pressure (or residual cylinder heat) before the spark plug can ignite it, in a gasoline engine it can cause a lot of damage, the piston is coming up to meet this wave instead of it being pushed down by it after a normal ignition. A diesel engine use that principle to ignite the air-fuel mixture but even in that situation you don't want pre-ignition although you do want controlled ignition when the heat of pressure ignite the diesel fuel at the correct time.
Detonation/knock/pinging occurs after the power stroke, some unburned gases spontaneously ignite due to the residual heat and pressure.
People should use the lowest grade of fuel they can get away with, the higher grades are meant to prevent pre-ignition, a higher octane doesn't mean it's more powerful it's just a different chemical formula that burns at a different temperature or pressure, high performance vehicles have engines with higher compression that's how you get more power you have higher pressures. Using high octane fuel in a car that doesn't need it will result in lower miles per gallon since the lower compression ratio combined with the fuel, which won't burn as well - in fact it's made NOT to burn well, result in less power. - Domdogg123, on 05/15/2008, -0/+1Detonation is not a good thing, it will eat up spark plugs and destroy pistons.
- shdwtek, on 05/15/2008, -1/+4I agree, and that's what came to mind with that article. People may disregard the "recommended" and start putting in a lower octane fuel, and damage their vehical. But from what I understand detonation is a different reaction then the normal combustion process that is supposed to occur.
- UrlorJkron, on 05/15/2008, -0/+6While #2 might technically be true (consumer reports was cited, but I haven't seen the study) drivers will typically drive with a heavier foot to make up for the loss in power and so the end result is lower mileage.
- linagee, on 05/15/2008, -2/+5Mandatory MPG gauges in all cars by 2009 FTW.
- dougmc, on 05/15/2008, -2/+3Unfortunately, MPG gauges are, in 2008, not very accurate. Probably because they try to tell your mileage NOW which is pretty much useless unless you're on a long flat road with cruise control on.
One that calculated your mileage over the last 100 miles, that might be doable (just put a flow meter on the gas inlet to the engine) and would be quite nice.- subliminalurge, on 05/15/2008, -0/+1Every vehicle I've driven that had a MPG gauge had a setting that averaged the mileage over a distance. The GMC Jimmy I currently drive will average the mileage until you manually reset it.
- bob10marley, on 05/15/2008, -0/+0I have a 1996 saab with a digital MPG gauge. Saab ftw
- dougmc, on 05/15/2008, -2/+3Unfortunately, MPG gauges are, in 2008, not very accurate. Probably because they try to tell your mileage NOW which is pretty much useless unless you're on a long flat road with cruise control on.
- executorzz, on 05/15/2008, -1/+3Use some math and you can calculate yourself using your trip mile functions on the dashboard.
- nurall, on 05/15/2008, -0/+2math is hard
- dhughes, on 05/16/2008, -0/+1 Yes I just write the odometer mileage on the receipt I get when I get gas, then I do the same for the next one and subtract the two. All the other info is on the receipt such as the amount of fuel and the price per liter or gallon.
For imperial (non-USA) mpg I use: ((1st_odometer_reading-2nd_odometer_reading)/amount_of_fuel_used)*2.821
For l/100km I use:
100 / ((1st_odometer_reading-2nd_odometer_reading) / liters_used)
- linagee, on 05/15/2008, -2/+5Mandatory MPG gauges in all cars by 2009 FTW.
- ricksite, on 05/15/2008, -0/+5Saying that replacing a horribly clogged air filter helped you is like saying you get better gas mileage since you replaced a flat tire. The article mostly addressed things people do to go above and beyond the norm (over-inflating tires, etc...).
- gl77, on 05/15/2008, -1/+3the air filter part is understood with some thinking. air is pulled into the engine and mixed with atomized fuel from the injectors. the amount of each for the mix is preset by the car's computer to get the most efficiency. if your air filter is clogged, you arent getting the proper amount of air into the engine, therefore you would be running a very rich mixture. sensors send this message to the cars computer (the mass air flow sensor to be precise) and tells the car to go lean on the fuel for the mix because the engine isnt really pulling as much air as it is supposed to. if your run a car with no air filter, the mixture is as rich as possible to balance out the massive amount of air being sucked into the engine. a clean air filter is a good balance but your car will adjust to a dirty filter. this, of course has no bearing on pre 1980 automobiles, most of which were not made with computers or sensors.
- jmkiii, on 05/15/2008, -1/+1The point is that more work is required to pull air through dirt.
- jimmies, on 05/15/2008, -0/+6Bingo, it's hotrodding 101: to make an engine more efficient (and more powerful at the same time) remove restrictions at the intake and exhaust.
- Tomchei, on 05/15/2008, -2/+5#1 is false especially for planes.
You drain the water(condensation) out of the wings in the morning and fill up in the morning if you're going on a long cross country.
Less gas evaporates in the morning compared to mid day during full up.- dougmc, on 05/15/2008, -1/+5Small planes are made for reliability rather than efficiency anyways. Everything is kept as simple as possible so the odds of an in-flight failure are reduced. But that's not what this article was about.
As for #1, the idea is that the gas is stored underground so it doesn't warm up or cool down significantly during the day. Cold gas is more dense so you'd get more energy out of a cold gallon of gas than you'd get out of a warm gallon -- but since the temperature doesn't change much, and it doesn't spend enough time in the pump to really change, it really makes no difference, plane or car.
... unless your plane is being filled from a tanker truck rather than an underground tank -- then it might make a small difference. (And yes, I know that this isn't so uncommon for planes, but is for cars.)- subliminalurge, on 05/15/2008, -0/+1Exactly. In the part of the country I live in, you only have to dig down about 5 feet before the soil temp stays constant year round. Underground tanks are deeper than this.
- dougmc, on 05/15/2008, -1/+5Small planes are made for reliability rather than efficiency anyways. Everything is kept as simple as possible so the odds of an in-flight failure are reduced. But that's not what this article was about.
- AlKo, on 05/15/2008, -0/+1Yes, definitely most cars that ask for premium can run on midgrade or regular. Depending on the vehicle, you may be able to get away with it. Specific example might be the Mercs with their 4 cyl supercharged engine. That motor actually really likes 89. It takes about a full tank for the computer to readjust and then you actually get better fuel economy with it. However, more high strung & powerful motors really like as high of an octane as possible. And you'll definitely notice a difference, I generally will not recommend anything but the highest possible octane for boosted applications. For commuter cars and luxury cars, try the midgrade. The article say just run regular but you'll generally see a drop in fuel economy because the engine is too aggressive to run regular without constant knock, it may be able to cope with slight drop to midgrade.
- saisumimen, on 05/15/2008, -0/+1The article seems to focus on "newer" cars, whatever that means. My car is a '95, and the air filter change made a noticeable difference.
- reignbow, on 05/15/2008, -9/+65More important actually:
1. Drive steady, try to keep brake/accelerate to a minimum.
2. Use the lowest gear feasible (sorry, automatic people)- inigomntoya, on 05/15/2008, -0/+2this also helps out on future maintenance costs on your brakes and transmission/clutch.
- haylel, on 05/15/2008, -0/+1psh, who needs a clutch :P
- inigomntoya, on 05/16/2008, -0/+1I know, I know - here I am shifting my own gears - like a sucker!
- haylel, on 05/16/2008, -0/+2I meant you don't need a clutch to shift gears, just good timing.
But most newer cars nowadays won't start without the clutch engaged :(
- rspeed, on 05/16/2008, -0/+1Everyone. Good luck getting into first gear without one.
- haylel, on 05/15/2008, -0/+1psh, who needs a clutch :P
- RadicalEdward, on 05/15/2008, -0/+18steady speed isn't the issue, it's steady rpm too it's better to maintain rpm up a hill and go slower, then to maintain speed and run the engine faster. Also coasting in neutral down hills and such helps.
- timsline, on 05/15/2008, -13/+2Coasting down hills in neutral isn't typically good for your breaks.
- RealmDown, on 05/15/2008, -0/+111) It is if you don't use them. Time it right, and you can just re-accelerate at the appropriate time.
2) Brake pads are now cheaper than gas. - apackofmonkeys, on 05/15/2008, -1/+13Buried for the ever-increasing incorrect spelling of "brakes"
- RealmDown, on 05/15/2008, -0/+111) It is if you don't use them. Time it right, and you can just re-accelerate at the appropriate time.
- ivantalboys, on 05/15/2008, -8/+9Coasting in neutral or with the clutch depressed in a modern car won't help. Your engine will need to idle to stop it from stalling and this uses fuel. If you keep it in gear your drive train will idle the car at no fuel cost.
- haylel, on 05/15/2008, -5/+10800 rpms uses more gas than 3000 rpms?
- joshhan, on 05/15/2008, -4/+5Depending on the case, yes!
It depends on what is making the engine run at those RPMs. If friction through the transmission is turning the crank, then coasting at 3000 rpm going downhill in gear (no fuel being pumped) will be more efficient than coasting downhill in neutral at 800 rpm (fuel being pumped). - dougmc, on 05/15/2008, -1/+2In Bizarro world!
- acknotSW, on 05/15/2008, -3/+3Sorry joshhan, but if you are costing down a hill with the engine running at 3k RPM in gear, your car will continue to provide at least enough gas to prevent engine knock. You won't use quite as much gas as you would going the same distance on a flat stretch of road at 3k RPM, but you will use more then you would if the gearbox was decoupled.
- joshhan, on 05/15/2008, -2/+4@acknotSW
There is zero fuel being delivered to the cylinders. There is zero combustion going on. Therefore, there can be no knocking as a result.
If the gearbox was decoupled, then the engine will run at idle and therefore use fuel. - MadOgre, on 05/15/2008, -1/+3If it's in gear, then you have engine dragging the car slower and slower, thus less coast distance. Put it in neutral, less drag... you are at idle and burning a little fuel, but still a lot less than cruising.
- joshhan, on 05/15/2008, -4/+5Depending on the case, yes!
- dougmc, on 05/15/2008, -0/+3The engine will still be getting enough fuel to idle. It may not need it, but it'll still be getting it. And the engine will be slowing the car down. So not only are you using the same amount of gas to idle, but the engine is sapping kinetic energy from the car.
Sorry, but coasting in neutral/with the clutch in DOES make a difference. - joshhan, on 05/16/2008, -0/+1MadOgre, we're talking about coasting downhill. You still have plenty of momentum to carry your speed.
I can't believe such a "scientific" community doesn't understand how the modern combustion engine works.
If you have one of those instant read gas mileage computers on your car, here is proof. Coasting down a hill, shift into neutral. What does your instant read computer say? Your MPG value. Your engine at this point is feeding a small amount of fuel to the combustion chamber.
Shift into gear. What does your instant read computer say? Depending on if it's capped at 99.9 mpg or just blank, it displays no fuel being consumed!
- haylel, on 05/15/2008, -5/+10800 rpms uses more gas than 3000 rpms?
- stotty, on 05/15/2008, -0/+6In the UK coasting your car in neutral while on a public road is illegal. You have less control of the vehicle while the clutch is depressed. Evidence also suggests that you aren't really saving fuel, such as the points made out above about modern engines pumping minimal/no fuel to the engine when your foot is off the accelerator.
- haylel, on 05/15/2008, -1/+2Unless I'm missing something, I don't see why anyone would ride the clutch. Neutral I do all the time, but going down hills holding your clutch in is just asking for you to burn out your clutch, why not just pop it into neutral and let go of the clutch... frees up both of your feet and you're doing less damage to your vehicle.. That should clear up the "less control of your car" issue at least, other than that, I believe that is a rather silly law...
- timsline, on 05/15/2008, -13/+2Coasting down hills in neutral isn't typically good for your breaks.
- joshhan, on 05/15/2008, -2/+7Cruise control (even over lower speeds and short distances) can improve your gas mileage as well. Just be careful that you shut it off when you approach traffic or stop sign/light.
- myrddin97, on 05/15/2008, -6/+5You mean, hit the break?
- BOFH2, on 05/15/2008, -2/+13or the brake for that matter
- apackofmonkeys, on 05/15/2008, -2/+10"Break" is what happens to your car if you don't hit the brakes in time.
- subliminalurge, on 05/15/2008, -0/+3Not sure why you're getting dug down. Maybe for the thing about turning the cruise off (which is an automatic process).
Nevertheless, cruise control will improve mileage for most drivers. Sure, there may be some extremely efficiency conscious drivers who can outperform cruise control in MPG, but for the average driver on the road, cruise will cut down on much of the small speed fluctuations that hurt mileage.
I personally observed a 4 MPG difference on a long trip when I had my girlfriend start using the cruise (something she, for whatever reason, hardly ever used before). - joshhan, on 05/16/2008, -0/+1"Just be careful that you shut it off"
With a majority of drivers being inattentive and whatnot, you may forget the CC is on so when you let your foot off the accelerator to coast to a stop towards a stop sign or red light, you will continue unabated into opposing traffic.
You don't have to hit the brakes to shut the CC off. My car has a lever that you can push slightly to disengage the CC. Push the lever as you approach a stop sign so you can coast a bit to save even more gas. I can't believe I have to explain myself. /sigh.
- myrddin97, on 05/15/2008, -6/+5You mean, hit the break?
- minorthreat, on 05/15/2008, -4/+40You think its better to run in 2nd gear at 7k rpm than 4th gear at 2k rpm?
- TheSarf, on 05/15/2008, -6/+17Lower gear in terms of ratios, not numerically.
- cdigioia, on 05/15/2008, -1/+13Maybe that's what she/he meant...even so, really bad form to phrase it like that.
- TheSarf, on 05/15/2008, -6/+17Lower gear in terms of ratios, not numerically.
- cdigioia, on 05/15/2008, -0/+64You mean highest gear feasible I think
- ricksite, on 05/15/2008, -10/+16Modern automatic transmissions are on par with manual transmissions. They may have been more efficient back in the day but today the difference is negligible.
- ricksite, on 05/15/2008, -2/+7I am being dugg down so here are some examples:
http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/byclass/Compact_Car ... - longbow486, on 05/15/2008, -1/+3my car gets better mpg with an auto then a manual in their tests
but who knows what they did in their tests and how they drove them - BossKey, on 05/15/2008, -0/+4Don't know why you're being buried.
My car is EPA-rated at higher MPG for its automatic than for its manual transmission!- jeffwmartin, on 05/15/2008, -0/+3Maybe the auto has more gears? Mine is rated the same MPG for both auto and manual because the manual has 5 speed and auto has 6.
- ricksite, on 05/15/2008, -2/+7I am being dugg down so here are some examples:
- licoricewhip, on 05/15/2008, -1/+6Road speed axle lock rules on automatics. It essentially turns off the torque converter and applies force directly to the drivetrain thus achieving same economy as a manual (in high gear, of course).
- inigomntoya, on 05/15/2008, -0/+2this also helps out on future maintenance costs on your brakes and transmission/clutch.
- taradisiac, on 05/15/2008, -54/+18Don't drive a car. By doing so you are supporting the oil industry which runs this country and kills civilians in the Middle East for profit.
Each time you fill out your tank your hands are filled with blood.- MISking, on 05/15/2008, -1/+12You're nutz
- jprater, on 05/15/2008, -2/+21You make it seem so easy for everyone to just move closer to work and ride a bike. Well I have news for you: LIFE ISN'T THAT EASY!
- taradisiac, on 05/15/2008, -11/+2Well I have news for you: I can ride over 20 miles with ease. God knows people could use the exercise.
- senatorpjt, on 05/15/2008, -0/+4Yeah, and how long does that take? I'm physically capable of it but I don't want to spend four hours of the day riding back and forth to work.
- taradisiac, on 05/15/2008, -0/+020 miles takes me about 1 hour.
- IHaveIssues, on 05/15/2008, -0/+2You work in a roomful of other sweaty people? Are you in India taking my tech support calls?
- taradisiac, on 05/15/2008, -1/+0I don't get sweaty.
- senatorpjt, on 05/15/2008, -0/+4Yeah, and how long does that take? I'm physically capable of it but I don't want to spend four hours of the day riding back and forth to work.
- taradisiac, on 05/15/2008, -11/+2Well I have news for you: I can ride over 20 miles with ease. God knows people could use the exercise.
- twiztidsinz, on 05/15/2008, -1/+2ohaidare! We r her nd we braut shovls!!
- orangefly, on 05/15/2008, -2/+19i have to drive my car....my horse is in the shop....
- JustinCase18, on 05/15/2008, -0/+5...getting a tune up to reduce its methane emissions I'm sure?
- gurudrew, on 05/15/2008, -0/+1I would ride my horse but it has been outlawed on the roads here except for parades and police.
- RadicalEdward, on 05/15/2008, -1/+10Yes, and everytime you eat food you are killing life as well. How about backing up your assertions there buddy.
- taradisiac, on 05/15/2008, -11/+5Backing them up? If you don't know the oil industries are behind the war you are very naive.
I'm a vegan btw- MidnightRealism, on 05/15/2008, -1/+8PLANTS HAVE RIGHTS TOO :[
- briantodd, on 05/15/2008, -0/+4PLANT KILLER!
- Jwoey, on 05/15/2008, -0/+7Anything else you feel undeserved superiority for?
- acknotSW, on 05/15/2008, -2/+0@Jwoey LMAO, nice!
- CynicSight, on 05/16/2008, -0/+1Yea, dude, we figured. You're a pretentious ignorant one too.
- linagee, on 05/15/2008, -0/+1You can grow more food. Just try growing more oil. (In massive quantities, none of this thermal depolymerization laboratory stuff.)
- Scrappy1850, on 05/15/2008, -0/+3everytime you masturbate you kill millions of babies.
- taradisiac, on 05/15/2008, -11/+5Backing them up? If you don't know the oil industries are behind the war you are very naive.
- ColorBlind, on 05/15/2008, -5/+7*Licks hands and runs away with a crazy insane laugh*
- inigomntoya, on 05/15/2008, -3/+8Yes - sweet, sweet puppy blood...
- RealmDown, on 05/15/2008, -3/+2You're mythtaken.
- davewashere, on 05/15/2008, -2/+8That's because the guy who was at the pump before me had just murdered his wife and didn't have time to clean up yet.
- taradisiac, on 05/15/2008, -11/+2Me again. Riding a bike isn't that hard once you get used to it. God know chubby americans could use the exercise, plus they'd be saving lots of money.
- Jwoey, on 05/15/2008, -0/+12No, its not that hard... the hard part is being sweaty and stinky all day at work. Not every workplace has a shower available (In fact, I'd say very few do).
- taradisiac, on 05/15/2008, -4/+1Depends on the distance and the weather. And how much you sweat.
- MadOgre, on 05/15/2008, -0/+4You still smell like ass. And you have bad breath. She told me.
- subliminalurge, on 05/15/2008, -0/+5"the hard part is being sweaty and stinky all day at work"
The other sucky part is trying to work with a concussion because you hit a patch of ice while rounding a curve.
Plus, I don't care how good physical condition you're in, pedaling a bicycle through 2 feet of snow is a bitch!
- taradisiac, on 05/15/2008, -4/+1Depends on the distance and the weather. And how much you sweat.
- CynicSight, on 05/16/2008, -0/+1You pretty much think your ***** doesn't stink, huh? Smug alert...
- Jwoey, on 05/15/2008, -0/+12No, its not that hard... the hard part is being sweaty and stinky all day at work. Not every workplace has a shower available (In fact, I'd say very few do).
- orangefly, on 05/15/2008, -2/+18quiet down hippie....
- ricksite, on 05/15/2008, -1/+7Wouldn't that be the blood of Canadians since that is where we get most of our oil?
- Phil13, on 05/15/2008, -0/+7A vegan hippy that doesn't like Americans and believes in conspiracies.
I really don't know where to start, but I will say that riding a bike isn't feasible for every chore, but neither is a SUV or minivan...- taradisiac, on 05/15/2008, -6/+4Conspiracies? The facts are there for all too see. Bush, Cheney, all of them have money in the oil industry and it's going up because of the war.
Riding a bike is always feasible unless your a fatass.
Also, I am an American.- cha5e, on 05/15/2008, -0/+5I agree that people should ride their bike more...but I don't think it's feasible to do so exclusively. For instance, if I want to go to the store to buy something that is large or heavy, I couldn't manage it on my bike.
Let me ask you this - when you ride your bike to work, how do you deal w/ being physically tired, or sweaty/smelly? Does your work have a shower? Does it impact your job performance for the first few hours? If not now, did it at first?
This is probably Too Much Information, but personally I don't feel that it would be very feasible for me to ride my bike to work. 2 years ago, I lived close enough to work to bike, though I didn't (see my questions above for why). Then we moved 75 miles away. I agreed to the move because it was an awesome opportunity for my wife, and figured I'd find a job in the new town soon enough, and temporarily commute 75 miles each way to the old job. Bought a house in the new city for the same price that we sold the old house for. What I'm getting at here is that I was operating under the assumption that jobs in the new city pay the same as jobs in the old city, which turned out to be a very stupid assumption. Jobs in my field in the new city pay about $20k less. So my choices were to a) commute 150 miles/day (obviously not bikeable), b) live apart from my wife, or c) take a much lower-paying job in the new city, which would necessitate selling the house I just bought in order to buy a smaller house (or, I suppose, staying in the same house but renting out a room). I fear that #c would be career suicide, in that when it's time to leave this city and I interview for a job wherever we go next, the first question they'll ask me is "how much are you making now" and obviously I want to be able to say as big a number as possible. I choose not to do #b for obvious reasons. So that leaves #a. However, I did subsequently find a job that's 55 miles from (new) home instead of 75 miles, that pays the same, and switched to that recently.
Don't know why I said all this...and I guess your answer will be that I should have chosen option #c, or should have done better research before deciding where to live in the new city.
But please do answer the questions I asked at top.
For the record, I am thinking of starting to drive partway to work, then riding my bike the rest of the way. Just looking for a place I can legally leave my car for the whole day, every day.- taradisiac, on 05/15/2008, -3/+2Well your situation is very unfortunate but not necessarily the rule.
- cha5e, on 05/15/2008, -1/+1True. One thing I forgot to mention is that the new job says I can telecommute 2-3 days a week, once I've been there for 6 months or a year.
Not to pester you, but would you mind answering my question about whether or not biking to work affects your job performance at the start of the day? I wasn't asking it in any kind of confrontational way, and I am truly curious. - taradisiac, on 05/15/2008, -0/+2I forgot to answer sorry. It really doesn't because I hit the road like at 6:30am and mornings are usually cold, so I'm fresh by the time I get there.
- johnomaz, on 05/15/2008, -0/+1I leave the house on my bike at 6:45am. I look forward to the cold morning. Once I get riding, it only takes a few minutes to warm up and by the time I get to work at 7am, I'm very awake and much more ready to get to work then if i drive.
- cha5e, on 05/15/2008, -0/+1That's awesome that you live that close to work...hope I'm in a similar situation someday, but likely won't be for a long, long time.
- pakruse, on 05/15/2008, -0/+4Riding a bike isn't feasible in all situations - I'm hardly a fatass, as you would call me; I rode a bike almost exclusively for about a year. When I started my current job, I looked into transportation options, and frankly it would be dangerous for me to ride a bike down the 12 miles of highway that I need to take to work. So no, it isn't always an option - I'm stuck with driving my car for now.
- johnomaz, on 05/15/2008, -0/+1I agree and disagree. I just gave up my car 3 weeks ago for riding a bike to work. Lucky for me I work only 3 miles from home. However even then, its not totally feesible to ride my bike to work. I at times am called to go to another school site to help another tech with a problem they are facing. Having to ride 10 miles to help an issue that takes me 15 minutes then riding 10 miles back. For the most part, I can get away with it and not have to leave my site, but if I do, i'm boned. But yes, there are many other jobs out there that don't require travel during the day that I feel most people are too lazy to consider riding a bike.
- cha5e, on 05/15/2008, -0/+5I agree that people should ride their bike more...but I don't think it's feasible to do so exclusively. For instance, if I want to go to the store to buy something that is large or heavy, I couldn't manage it on my bike.
- taradisiac, on 05/15/2008, -6/+4Conspiracies? The facts are there for all too see. Bush, Cheney, all of them have money in the oil industry and it's going up because of the war.
- apmtt, on 05/15/2008, -1/+2Someone should create a fuel cell that can run on human and animal blood.
- jakobrowning, on 05/15/2008, -0/+4yes and when i go on a service call and have to carry an extensive set of tools, multiple PCs, radio equipment, and in some cases an over-night bag, what should I do? Just go out and get a basket for my Huffy? Sorry, but life doesn't work out that way. Sometimes you have to hit the road at a moments notice and not having a car and lead to not having a career. Perhaps you can't understand that since Wholefoods rarely sends its baggers out on the road, but in the real world we have real jobs with real responsibilities. I'm all for saving the planet, and we need a new kind of eco-friendly fuel, so let me know when you come up with it and I'll be the first to switch.
- Kalimotxo, on 05/15/2008, -1/+3Gas is getting really expensive. It will hit an economic point where people will start to consider alternatives. We often forget that driving is a priviledge afforded to us through prosperity, it is not a right. We were not born with four wheels and an internal combustion engine.
If more people cared, they could lobby local governments to create safe bike trails as alternative transportation methods. When one is in fair shape on an efficient road bike, they can acheive 15mph quite easily. If everyone rides in packs, you decrease wind resistance and can pretty much coast at 20 or above. Sure it isn't 55,65,75, but it is cleaner and a lot cheaper. It is all about making the change to make it better. We resist change, until we have to change.- Stalks, on 05/15/2008, -0/+2We should take tips from the Dutch. Never seen so many bikes in my life.
- cha5e, on 05/15/2008, -1/+1Heheh...my company has an office in Amsterdam. I've never been there, but the other day they emailed out an "obituary" for the company bicycle, because it finally fell apart.
- Stalks, on 05/15/2008, -0/+2We should take tips from the Dutch. Never seen so many bikes in my life.
- endlessoul, on 05/15/2008, -0/+2Nice job on the sensationalism there, Lou.
There are people who simply cannot live without a vehicle for whatever reason. Coming off a little less crazy might help your cause.
- Aslan72, on 05/15/2008, -10/+83Buy a bike... :)
- bxblox, on 05/15/2008, -5/+7Buy a roof rack for it.
- inigomntoya, on 05/15/2008, -2/+10Yes, then you can tell all your hippie friends that, "I took my bike to work today!"
- SkippyDoorknob, on 05/15/2008, -1/+8And then stink up the office all day since it's already 80 degrees outside during the morning commute
- inigomntoya, on 05/15/2008, -2/+10Yes, then you can tell all your hippie friends that, "I took my bike to work today!"
- springboks, on 05/15/2008, -5/+16get a hook to hang it in your garage....
stare at your bike and think about riding it....
two years will go by (gas will be $12/ gallon) ....then get a bike pump to inflate the tires....ride bike in drive way for 5 mins
hang your bike again.
repeat loop.
It amazes me how the media and everyone talks about bike sales going up. This maybe true, but no one rides their bike.- lamiaconfitor, on 05/15/2008, -2/+9yeah allot of people don't ride the 7-12 miles to work that average commuters have to look forward to... not all of us work at starbucks/the local walmart. And even if you did, your commute may easily be that long. then you have to go to the grocery store... if you live in the middle of town/work in the middle of town it works, and hell yes Id do it. but if you live in the suburbs, you are screwed.
- infecticide, on 05/15/2008, -0/+6I love living in a small city, I make better time on my bike than I do in my car from house to desk. Most of this is due to the 10 minute walk from the parking space to the office. With my bike, I lock it at the front door and walk in.
- bigmrjohn, on 05/15/2008, -0/+2Well, I just bought a bike about a month ago. I was filling up my tank every 2 weeks, $40 a pop. Now that I've been riding my bike, I'm saving tons of money. I last filled up on Tuesday, May 5 and have now just hit the halfway line between Full and 3/4 tank. So I definitely think the bike was well worth it.
- aldenhg, on 05/15/2008, -1/+3You're wrong. I see literally hundreds of bikes a day here in Portland, Or. Maybe we're just smarter than the rest of the country.
- cheesycow5, on 05/15/2008, -0/+2I ride almost every day.
- nurall, on 05/15/2008, -0/+1i used to ride to work, but then they went and built a new high school on my route and it became suicidal.
- hwy9nightkid, on 05/15/2008, -0/+1tons of bikes here,
http://digg.com/world_news/Cyclists_Illegally_Use_ ... - jmkiii, on 05/15/2008, -0/+1Not in Austin
- lamiaconfitor, on 05/15/2008, -2/+9yeah allot of people don't ride the 7-12 miles to work that average commuters have to look forward to... not all of us work at starbucks/the local walmart. And even if you did, your commute may easily be that long. then you have to go to the grocery store... if you live in the middle of town/work in the middle of town it works, and hell yes Id do it. but if you live in the suburbs, you are screwed.
- BOFH2, on 05/15/2008, -2/+5Tow a boat. Carry an exterior door for your house on it.
- inigomntoya, on 05/15/2008, -4/+3Poor oil on a duck!
- infecticide, on 05/15/2008, -1/+2Get one of these to carry your stuff: http://www.xtracycle.com/
I've got a friend that carries his kayak on one.- subliminalurge, on 05/15/2008, -0/+2Just imagine the shape I'll be in when I start towing my 7000 lb boat with one of those! I imagine the hills will be kinda tough at first, though.....
- ZincSaucier, on 05/15/2008, -0/+3oh good idea.. but when I buy the bike, should I keep the tires inflated well? Should I replace the air cleaner?
- ninja0, on 05/15/2008, -0/+1And then get rear ended by a semi truck and die.
But I'm assuming you're talking about a street bike, not a pedal bike. heh.- jmkiii, on 05/15/2008, -0/+1Getting rear ended by a semi would kill you in almost any vehicle. You probably have a better chance of surviving that if there is no cage for the truck to squish around you.
- bxblox, on 05/15/2008, -5/+7Buy a roof rack for it.
- jprater, on 05/15/2008, -11/+9I always thought keeping a clean air filter was imperative to maintaining decent gas mileage. I hear commercials all the time from auto parts stores like AutoZone advertising replacing your air filter will increase fuel economy. I guess we've all been duped.
- chanop, on 05/15/2008, -0/+2They duped me pretty good then. I replace my air filter every other oil change (never really looks like it needs to be changed). I'm such a tool to the auto industry
- thegreatgazoo, on 05/15/2008, -0/+4Yes they have.
You might consider getting something like a K&N filter. You don't have to clean them for 50k-100k miles, and you don't have as much environmental waste either. Over the long haul they are cheaper too.
You could argue that they don't clean as well, but unless you live in a really dusty area it probably doesn't matter that much anyway.- AnarkeIncarnate, on 05/15/2008, -0/+3They recommend cleaning them every 12K miles and the "refresh kit" costs as much as a regular air filter
- PabloMac, on 05/15/2008, -0/+1"...the 'refresh kit' costs as much as a regular air filter."
The refresh kit also lasts for multiple refreshes. Clean & replace air filters put you money ahead and produce less waste, too.
- thegreatgazoo, on 05/15/2008, -0/+4Yes they have.
- ricksite, on 05/15/2008, -1/+2The AutoZone ad is mostly BS. Air filters are pleated so they can still pass air when they are partially clogged. If there was a decrease in airflow, it would mostly be noticed at high RPMs when the engine is sucking more air. If you are driving efficiently, hopefully you don't have your engine revved up a lot.
- SkippyDoorknob, on 05/15/2008, -0/+4That's the whole point of advertising - to get you to buy something even if you may not need it
- chanop, on 05/15/2008, -0/+2They duped me pretty good then. I replace my air filter every other oil change (never really looks like it needs to be changed). I'm such a tool to the auto industry
- arkan, on 05/15/2008, -1/+67A few weeks ago as I was filling up on $3.75/gal gasoline I decided to try an experiment. For that tank, I would make sure to shift before 2k RPM and I would always go exactly the speed limit rather then my normal 5 or so over. The result? Before that my car was getting about 30 mpg, something most of my friends are envious over. With that simple change, though, I got 34 mpg, and I have been able to maintain that over the last 2 fill-ups. It doesn't sound like a lot, but it equates to an extra day of gas for my commute to work.
- RealmDown, on 05/15/2008, -2/+40I found the same thing. As an added bonus, this *massively* increases road rage around you. Definitely a win-win.
- inigomntoya, on 05/15/2008, -10/+7passive aggressive much?
- RealmDown, on 05/15/2008, -4/+13Passive aggressive has nothing to do with it. This is revenge on the revenue generating cops and the 3 year insurance sentence imposed per fine. They want compliance, I will give them EXACTLY what they ask for and obey the law EXACTLY. If they don;t like the increased rage, incident, and injury count, then they can write THEIR congressperson. In the mean time, *I'm* saving money.
So, please don't mistake passive aggressive for furious anger-driven payback, ok ?- inigomntoya, on 05/15/2008, -1/+4Ok.... :(
- HoratioHellpop, on 05/15/2008, -6/+2He's "passive agressive" because he wants to obey speed limit laws?
Idiot much?- inigomntoya, on 05/15/2008, -0/+5he's passive aggressive because he enjoys increasing road rage around him. I thought it would be a funny comment because people get pissed so easily when people actually drive the speed limit.
- RealmDown, on 05/15/2008, -0/+1Road rage may be increasing around me, but I am not increasing it. I am obeying the law. The law is increasing it.
- thegreatgazoo, on 05/15/2008, -1/+3Yeah, I've noticed that the speed has somewhat slowed down on the interstates lately. I bet the cops and politicians are getting pissed.
- RealmDown, on 05/15/2008, -4/+13Passive aggressive has nothing to do with it. This is revenge on the revenue generating cops and the 3 year insurance sentence imposed per fine. They want compliance, I will give them EXACTLY what they ask for and obey the law EXACTLY. If they don;t like the increased rage, incident, and injury count, then they can write THEIR congressperson. In the mean time, *I'm* saving money.
- linagee, on 05/15/2008, -2/+5Because getting to work 2 minutes earlier is worth all the extra stress.
- inigomntoya, on 05/15/2008, -10/+7passive aggressive much?
- HoratioHellpop, on 05/15/2008, -5/+16Good advice, echoing what my pops told me long ago .... "Always drive like there's an egg between your foot and the accelerator, and you don't want to break it."
- whodathunk, on 05/15/2008, -8/+4What a waste of engine power, and what a way to hold up traffic. Why get the V6 and drive like that? It's more fuel efficient to get a amsll engine and drive it like you have a place to go today...
- Skizzlizzit, on 05/15/2008, -1/+10I drive a GMC Sierra and just paid $90.50 to fill up my tank. I used to do about 75 - 80 on the highway and I would get about 15 MPG. Now I take the slower route to work and back. I do between 60 - 65 and I get about 20MPG now. That's a HUGE difference when you pay as much as I do. I get an extra 50 to 75 miles out of my tank now.
- linagee, on 05/15/2008, -6/+520MPG? Gas hog!
- Herv3, on 05/15/2008, -0/+4Hey take it easy on the man. If we all did our part like Skizz, we would be better off. He's trading in his time for better fuel economy.
- KMartSheriff, on 05/15/2008, -1/+3While I'm not disagreeing with the whole slowing down thing, I just wonder if it really pays off in the long run. For example, I go either 65mph to 80mph on the freeway, and while I have no doubt I'm getting better mpg doing 65, I'm also on the road longer, whereas doing 80mph I'm getting slightly less mpg, but spending less time on the road (all this over a 6 hour period/400miles on the freeway).
It really feels like my car (VW Golf MKIV) gets better mpg doing 80 than 65. Not trying to troll; honest question. Thoughts?- thentro, on 05/15/2008, -0/+2What usually happens, is that at areas marked for lower speed there is usually more traffic and thus more slowing down and speeding up going on. While if you are going 80, it is probably quite constant. If it is a constant speed, 65 will be much more efficient simply because the car doesn't have to work as hard at moving the air out of the way, which becomes harder and harder the faster you go.
Of course, going 60 after going 80 all day feels like you could just get out and walk, but thats the trade off. - AntiMe, on 05/15/2008, -0/+2Ponder this, it's Miles per Gallon, not Gallons per Hour. Plus, air resistance is based on the cube of velocity (i.e. if you have a coefficient of drag of .6 or whatever, the total drag on the car is .6 x speed x speed x speed.). If they designed the car right, it should get its best mileage at the lowest rpm of the highest gear. But again, that depends on the gearing. You lose a huge amount of power from drag, and it's exponential.
- thentro, on 05/15/2008, -0/+2What usually happens, is that at areas marked for lower speed there is usually more traffic and thus more slowing down and speeding up going on. While if you are going 80, it is probably quite constant. If it is a constant speed, 65 will be much more efficient simply because the car doesn't have to work as hard at moving the air out of the way, which becomes harder and harder the faster you go.
- linagee, on 05/15/2008, -6/+520MPG? Gas hog!
- johnnall, on 05/15/2008, -0/+10I can believe it. I have an automatic so I can't shift early. However, I've been driving exactly the speed limit, starting off slowly, and braking easily and my mpg has gone from 30 to about 34. I just get over in the right hand lane, set the cruise, and let everyone else fly past burning up their paychecks.
- PabloMac, on 05/15/2008, -0/+8That would work for me if people here paid attention to the "Slower Traffic Keep Right" signs.
- ganus, on 05/15/2008, -0/+3I started to just set the cruise control at the speed limit and I found that I drive in a much more relaxed zen-like state. Also, you get to see all the people fly by you in anger probably cursing at you.
- LennyX, on 05/16/2008, -0/+3Yeah, I've been setting the cruise control as well. It's good to know that you're not going to get fined for speeding.
- salinemist, on 05/15/2008, -1/+7I know gas prices aren't that high because people are still driving 10-15 mph over the limit and hitting the brakes at the absolute last second.
- cha5e, on 05/15/2008, -0/+5Ditto, sort of. I used to drive 80 on the interstate to work. Now I take the 4-lane road parallel to the interstate, that the interstate was build to replace. There's less traffic, still no stoplights, it actually reduces my commute by about 2 miles, and now I drive 65 or 70. I haven't bothered to calculate my MPG difference yet, but my last tank lasted over 600 miles, whereas I usually have to fill up after 550. Amount of fuel purchased was not significantly different. (For those calling BS, I have a diesel car. MPG before the switch was 42-44 usually, and I usually put about 12.5-13 gallons in per fillup)
- cha5e, on 05/15/2008, -1/+3Er, "built", not "build".
- TBobes, on 05/15/2008, -0/+2I have an automatic, so I couldn't do that. I did however pay attention to my driving habits for a full tank. I accelerated slowly, coasted further to stops, rarely used the brakes, drover either the speed limit or up to 5 over, and always used cruse control. (took the golf clubs out of my trunk as well) It changed my gas mileage from 20 all the way up to 28. My car is only rated for 23, so this a huge improvement. Worked great for me.
- bexamous, on 05/16/2008, -0/+3I usuaully get ~300miles on a tank and ~29-31mpg. This last tank my goal has been:
1. Stay in slow lane... jump behind semi if possible or anything big.... not only less drag but also semi's rarely slam on their brakes... making it easy for me to maintain ~60mph all the way to work.
2. Basically try to really mi nimize braking... if I see light turn red even if its really far out I'll just coast... and if I think I can time it right I'll break early and coast ~15mph towards light... goal being I'm not at a dead stop when light turns green again. Plus its fun game to play.
3. Slow acceleration, automatic will shift up ... don't really need a manual to keep it outa high rpms.
So I just finished my first full tank with this game plan... I havn't filled back up so I'm not sure exact mpg... but I'm at 350miles on the tank right now... generally fillups are ~9.5-10gallsons so I'm guessing 35-36mpg.
So extra 50 miles = less than two gallons = $7 or something... not a huge deal really but why not. Plus so much more fun driving like this... its like a game :).... less road rage cause you don't get pissed at not being able to keep 85mph... and fun to piss others off as well when they try to speed by you only to slam on breaks. I'm actually pretty sure my commute the slow lane overall is faster than the fast lane.
- RealmDown, on 05/15/2008, -2/+40I found the same thing. As an added bonus, this *massively* increases road rage around you. Definitely a win-win.
- isolino, on 05/15/2008, -5/+39Not sure I agree with all of these myths.
- zeromancer, on 05/15/2008, -0/+6I'm not sure I agree with this guy's responses to the myths either.
- oxilite, on 05/15/2008, -0/+1I agree with the others here saying that most of these "myths" are bogus, especially when you consider the combined effects... Maybe changing an air filter or filling your tires doesnt make too much a difference, but doing both will make twice as much.
- culbeda, on 05/15/2008, -0/+3You mean like #4. Pump up your tires, which includes:
"According to on-the-road driving tests by both Consumer Reports and auto information site Edmunds.com, underinflated tires reduce fuel economy, so proper inflation is key."
Apparently his definition of "myth" differs from mine.
- mariecordona, on 05/15/2008, -11/+114I drive a turbo-charged WRX and you MUST put premium in it or you will ruin the engine. I know people who have tried regular gas in them and it makes them stall in first gear. This article is givng bad advice by saying that ALL cars will work fine with regular gas.
- minorthreat, on 05/15/2008, -22/+4I'll bet you that if gas stations no longer sold premium gas, you would be driving just fine.
- mariecordona, on 05/15/2008, -0/+16Google is a wonderful thing. Look it up. Turbo charged engines have different fuel requirements than a "regular" car.
- barnett25, on 05/15/2008, -0/+10Cars with compressions ratios higher that about 10 to 1 generally REQUIRE high octane fuel. If you have a power adder that provides boost pressure to the intake you may require high octane fuel even though your compression ratio may be much lower than 10 to 1. This is because there is much more fuel and air in the cylinder than there would be if there was no boost.
The danger of running too low an octane in a higher performance car that meets any of the above criteria is what is commonly called a "knock". This is caused then the fuel mixture in the cylinder detonates before the spark plug even ignites due to the extreme pressure (which lowers with ignition temperature of the mixture) in the cylinder. Modern cars have a knock sensor which literally listens for this problem, and retards the timing to attempt to correct the issue. While most all modern cars have this feature it is a bad idea to rely on this to save your engine on a day to day basis.
- halleyscomet, on 05/15/2008, -25/+8So how's that overpriced anatomical compensator working out for you stubby?
- mariecordona, on 05/15/2008, -4/+20Obviously better than your observation skills, seeing how I'm a girl. I don't need to compensate for having a small piece of anatomy.
- ExSlashdotter, on 05/15/2008, -3/+14Wow, somebody has an interest and a hobby in something, so you assume it has something to do with penis size?
So whats your hobby?- Fullvinyl, on 05/15/2008, -3/+15Inquiring about penis sizes, I think.
- saisumimen, on 05/15/2008, -1/+2... and then attempting to fellate the larger ones.
- lafan313, on 05/16/2008, -0/+1Seriously you're saying that a WRX is compensation for something? It may be turbocharged but I don't think anyone would really consider it much more than an econobox. Say that to someone driving an H2 or a Porsche Turbo you idiot. I shudder to think how crappy your ride must be to say something so retarded.
- zeromancer, on 05/15/2008, -4/+4i want your car.... but only if it's the STI. because the basic model wrx is still turbo'd but def. not as cool ;)
- Fanrir, on 05/16/2008, -0/+1The WRX is a fantastic car. It has a lot of 'sleeper' qualities, while remaining an excellent performance car. Also they come in a wagon which is invisible to cops. The STi is a fantastic car, however with that rear spoiler it screams "lookie me." If you're into modding you can remove it.
Also the WRX (02-05) is a great car for the STX class in autocross. A 2.0 turbocharged engine with AWD and you can really lay hurt on the competition.
- Fanrir, on 05/16/2008, -0/+1The WRX is a fantastic car. It has a lot of 'sleeper' qualities, while remaining an excellent performance car. Also they come in a wagon which is invisible to cops. The STi is a fantastic car, however with that rear spoiler it screams "lookie me." If you're into modding you can remove it.
- gmlongo, on 05/15/2008, -3/+16Try reading the article. It says you can use regular in cars that RECOMMEND premium. It does not say to use regular in cars that REQUIRE premium.
- Jwoey, on 05/15/2008, -1/+5Right, but that it doesn't contrast cars that recommend premium and cars that require it, it's misleading. Before coming to the comments, I thought it referred to all non-diesel cars.
- Worktruck, on 05/15/2008, -0/+5Yeah, but unlike other cars the WRX requires Premium and is not just recommended. I think most high priced luxury sedans tend to just recommend it's use.
- erikerikerik, on 05/15/2008, -0/+1He could always turn down the boost slightly? or do the WRX not have that option? "EBC" electronic boost control.
- wrestlingnrj, on 05/15/2008, -0/+1That kind of defeats the purpose of buying a performance car, if anything, turn the boost up. I don't think the WRX's come with a boost controller. My brother has an 04 STi and I know he bought a boost controller so he could put it up to 22psi.
- wrestlingnrj, on 05/15/2008, -0/+3I drive a dodge charger and if I don't run at least 91 octane is starts pinging and can destroy the engine. (Accidently started filling up with 87 for a few gallons and my car ran horribly)
- AlKo, on 05/15/2008, -0/+1I tried running 91 versus 93 and my WRX was not as smooth/powerful. No change in fuel economy.
- ap44, on 05/15/2008, -0/+2Most turbo'd engines require premium anyways but yeah the STi and Evo need Premium or else you risk damaging your engine.
- ninja0, on 05/15/2008, -0/+2I agree, you NEVER put regular gas in a turbo charged vehicle!
- minorthreat, on 05/15/2008, -22/+4I'll bet you that if gas stations no longer sold premium gas, you would be driving just fine.
- Barbarino, on 05/15/2008, -3/+25If you have a sports car that requires prem fuel and you use reg, at the top end of the tach she's not going to like it. If you use reg when you should be using prem then don't hammer her you'll be sorry. This article is wrong.
- gmlongo, on 05/15/2008, -0/+3Again, the article says you can use regular in cars that RECOMMEND premium. It does not say to use regular in cars that REQUIRE premium.
- LeRenard, on 05/15/2008, -3/+41Some of these are absurd. If a clogged filter is not a problem, why not just plug the intake up completely? And I'm impressed that they feel the economy on 87 octane will be the same in cars with high compression or forced induction, where the computer will have to roll back the timing to keep the engine from destroying itself.
- inigomntoya, on 05/15/2008, -0/+3I agree with you, but I think the article was giving you some ammo for the next time you get your oil changed and they ask if you want them to change out your air filter because it will increase your performance and gas mileage - one of the things I detest about the local Jiffy Lube...
- thegreatgazoo, on 05/15/2008, -0/+3If your filter is black and obviously dirty -- you need to change it as it will affect your mileage.
IF it is still white -- then you are being duped.
- thegreatgazoo, on 05/15/2008, -0/+3If your filter is black and obviously dirty -- you need to change it as it will affect your mileage.
- dougmc, on 05/15/2008, -0/+4`why not just plug the intake up completely?'
Think of all the gas that would save!
- inigomntoya, on 05/15/2008, -0/+3I agree with you, but I think the article was giving you some ammo for the next time you get your oil changed and they ask if you want them to change out your air filter because it will increase your performance and gas mileage - one of the things I detest about the local Jiffy Lube...
- Narcism, on 05/15/2008, -6/+33"Organizing a day to boycott petrol" surprisingly absent.
- inigomntoya, on 05/15/2008, -3/+3Ha - I love it when the local radio station tells everyone to boycott gas stations on a certain day. You wanna know what people do? They buy gas the day before, or the day after - when the gas stations have jacked their prices up because sales were down the day before. What really needs to happen, is they need to organize a day where everyone doesn't drive. And with diesel prices where they are at - I am surprised that truckers haven't done that yet...
- gurudrew, on 05/15/2008, -0/+4Boycotting gas stations will not work. They will just raise prices even higher claiming that they cannot cover their costs. Also, even if you tried, most truck drivers will not be able to join you because if they don't make the delivery on time they will not get paid. That however, will not stop the truck payments and insurance payments from being due.
- linagee, on 05/15/2008, -0/+3Bike to work day is Friday (tomorrow) in San Diego.
- dougmc, on 05/15/2008, -1/+4If you're serious about it, *every* day is bike to work day. Well, five days a week. The other two days are `bike to the store day' and `bike for fun day'.
- BossKey, on 05/15/2008, -0/+5I like to save gas but gas boycotts are bogus. They mean nothing unless they are sustained. All you're doing is making a feel-good hippie-dippie statement.
My personal goal is to not drive every day of the week. I gang up my car errands so I can have days that are car-free (I am lucky to live in a neighborhood where I can walk to some stores and there is fast transit to downtown).
By not driving approximately 45% of the year, this makes your "organize a day" boycott look lame. If you're serious about boycotting gas, educate people on how to reorganize their lives instead of making a "statement" that disappears once it's over. - funk13, on 05/15/2008, -0/+3also absent is the notion of "changing one's driving habits". 55mph , although slow and i'm pretty sure it makes you eligible for a senior citizen's discount, is the "sweet-spot" for fuel efficiency (combination of aerodynamics and engine use). as i have lowered my highway speed from 60mph to 55 mph (it is the limit on the highways around here) i have seen a measurable increase in efficiency of around 4 - 6 miles per gallon. though it is neither a huge reduction nor does have a big impact on my wallet, over the course of a year or two it could add up.
- dougmc, on 05/15/2008, -0/+2The notion of `changing one's driving habits' is missing because it's not a myth -- it does have a direct impact on your fuel efficiency. Now, is it worth it, that depends -- but the impact is certainly not a myth.
As for 55 mph being a `sweet spot', that will depend on the car and engine. At any significant, constant speed over flat terrain, most of a car's energy goes into overcoming air resistance, and air resistance is poportional to your speed -- so going twice as fast will require four times as much energy and will reduce your mpg by one half if you ignore everything but air resistance. However, at 50 mph, air resistance is certainly the biggest item, it's not the only item, and at slower speeds other losses (rolling resistance, drive train loss, A/C, electrical system, etc.) become more significant, and for each engine certain rpm and throttle settings will be more efficient than others, and so there is certainly a speed of best mileage -- but for most cars I'd guess it's less than 55 mph.
In any event, probably the most important things _in general_ are to not go too fast, accelerate gradually, avoid using the brakes whenever possible and keep your speed constant as much as possible. And if you're really serious about it, put the clutch in going down hills and let the engine idle.
- dougmc, on 05/15/2008, -0/+2The notion of `changing one's driving habits' is missing because it's not a myth -- it does have a direct impact on your fuel efficiency. Now, is it worth it, that depends -- but the impact is certainly not a myth.
- inigomntoya, on 05/15/2008, -3/+3Ha - I love it when the local radio station tells everyone to boycott gas stations on a certain day. You wanna know what people do? They buy gas the day before, or the day after - when the gas stations have jacked their prices up because sales were down the day before. What really needs to happen, is they need to organize a day where everyone doesn't drive. And with diesel prices where they are at - I am surprised that truckers haven't done that yet...
- GetShorty, on 05/15/2008, -2/+16As for "bolt-on's", a low restriction intake and high flow exhaust will most certainly improve fuel economy (and power usually). Manufacturers prefer to keep things quiet, which is why the factory equipment is so restrictive. If you can stand a little noise, you can save some money in the long run and have a more powerful vehicle.
- PingoLingo, on 05/15/2008, -1/+4LR intakes and HF exhaust can help, but there is a point of diminishing returns- ICE need a certain amount of back pressure to operate efficiently, so don't get too zany and do the required research
- Frinkiac, on 05/15/2008, -1/+3Very true but a 100$ air intake kit on ebay will add a few extra horses as well as a few extra mpg
- metalgodz, on 05/15/2008, -1/+3Absolutely not true with a 4-stroke engine.
A certain amount of intake charge VELOCITY and exhaust VELOCITY is needed to operate efficiently, which is why increasing the diameter of the pipe (and thus decreasing the speed of the gas flow) hurts, while installing "straight through" mufflers of the same diameter absolutely positively DO help.
Don't promote the backpressure myth.
- ricksite, on 05/15/2008, -0/+4Cutting off the large plastic intake tube might get you more airflow but the tube is there for a reason. It is pulling cooler air from the front of the car or wheel well area (as opposed to hot air at the engine).
- RustyJ, on 05/15/2008, -0/+6Completely agree. I have a K&N cold air intake and magnaflow exhaust on my car, and the mods have upped my average mpg's from 29 to 34 (depending on the traffic). I'd say that's a pretty satisfactory result, considering it also gave me a nice little boost in horsepower too!
- PabloMac, on 05/15/2008, -0/+4I did the exact same with my '91 305 Chevy truck, with a 3-4mpg increase.
- nurall, on 05/15/2008, -0/+2i went K&N and Borla exhaust on my mustang. i should install the under-drive pulley i ordered awhile back. there's also some computer chips that allow you to switch between fuel economy and power, unfortunately my is not switchable.
- KLowD9x, on 05/15/2008, -1/+2No.
Some vehicles are designed to have backpressure. When this backpressure is removed fuel economy and engine performance is lost.
- PingoLingo, on 05/15/2008, -1/+4LR intakes and HF exhaust can help, but there is a point of diminishing returns- ICE need a certain amount of back pressure to operate efficiently, so don't get too zany and do the required research
- MISking, on 05/15/2008, -0/+11Glad to hear the A/Cs in cars are getting more efficient, now only if I had a new car.
- gurudrew, on 05/15/2008, -1/+3As long as you have the option of turning the A/C off when you want to. On the last two vehicles I have owned, the A/C unit was controlled by the outside temperature. If it is warmer than 50F outside, my compressor is running. I can't turn it off if I want to.
- republicker, on 05/15/2008, -3/+17The writer shows his naivety in #6.
- optimuscrime, on 05/15/2008, -0/+5"Don't you think oil and car companies aren't doing everything they can to beat their competitors?"
wow...- RobotLeAwesome, on 05/15/2008, -0/+6I wouldn't be surprised if these "competitors" get together and have a good laugh about how horribly rich they are.
- ninja0, on 05/15/2008, -0/+1Thus concludes, the writer of this article is one of those "competitors" that have a good laugh about how horribly rich they are.
- RobotLeAwesome, on 05/15/2008, -0/+6I wouldn't be surprised if these "competitors" get together and have a good laugh about how horribly rich they are.
- optimuscrime, on 05/15/2008, -0/+5"Don't you think oil and car companies aren't doing everything they can to beat their competitors?"
- branndon, on 05/15/2008, -9/+5#7 Beano.... that **** gives me more gas!
- a6n28f, on 05/15/2008, -2/+1Now you're just talking out of your ass.
- vicsvenge, on 05/15/2008, -1/+12yeah i don't like this article either. like was mentioned above. I drive a turbocharged car and if I were to put regular in it I'd do a pretty good job of ruining my motor. While most naturally aspirated motors can use any mixture of fuel, for high compression motors premium is still going to better.
And with air filters, it's just common sense and good maintenance practice to replace your air filter if it's clogged so regardless of if it gives you better gas mileage or not it should still be done.- linagee, on 05/15/2008, -3/+2So you just added a $500+ turbocharger that increases the price of gas you will always have to pay for the next years of life (hopefully) left in the car? Wow... That's some smart investment there.... (/sarcasm)
- bob10marley, on 05/15/2008, -0/+1dude you forget that many companies like Saab come stock with a turbocharger. It actually helps the motor to run MORE efficiently when it is used in the right way. and please stop saying /sarcasm
- linagee, on 05/15/2008, -3/+2So you just added a $500+ turbocharger that increases the price of gas you will always have to pay for the next years of life (hopefully) left in the car? Wow... That's some smart investment there.... (/sarcasm)
- wwwdot1jesdotus, on 05/15/2008, -10/+5"Meanwhile, driving at higher speeds with the windows down greatly increases aerodynamic drag. As speed increases, drag becomes more of an issue, making A/C use the more efficient choice at high speeds."
This is not true. Mythbusters busted it. They found that having windows down does not create a noticeable amount of drag.- LeRenard, on 05/15/2008, -1/+22Were you watching the same show I did? They found that the windows open was best at low speeds, AC was better on the highway.
- linagee, on 05/15/2008, -0/+1.
- RandeKnight, on 05/15/2008, -0/+8They revisited it as they screwed up the experiment by changing more than one variable at a time.
2nd or 3rd time around they got it right and at low speeds, window down and at high speeds, aircon.- wwwdot1jesdotus, on 05/15/2008, -0/+2In the one I remember they concluded that there was not a noticeable difference. I don't remember them revisiting it but maybe I saw the other one.
- ColorBlind, on 05/15/2008, -0/+4True somewhat, It does create drag but not enough to tip the scales versus using the A/C.
I've done my own experiments in my Tacoma DoubleCab. Driving with the A/C versus windows is a dramatic difference. Using the A/C always chugs the fuel. Driving around (calmly) with the windows down, I can average 19-22mpg. My truck is rated at exactly that. - RogueMountie, on 05/15/2008, -0/+1This is not true. Mythbusters were comparing the difference in fuel economy between using A/C and having the windows down. Both tests had lowered fuel economy (A/C using electricity, and windows creating drag). The test was to see which one was worse.
- ricksite, on 05/15/2008, -2/+3Mythbusters is good entertainment but often bad science.
- apackofmonkeys, on 05/15/2008, -0/+0You, Sir, must have been watching the rip-off version, "Miss Buster", where they have an air-headed valley girl go around attempting to do experiments and failing.
In the episode of Mythbusters I saw, there was a breaking point in speed, above which it was actually better to use the AC, and below windows were better. I think the speed was around 30-40 mph, in the car they were using. - Frinkiac, on 05/15/2008, -0/+2Everyone always says, "slower speeds", but what exactly is this range? Are we talking 25-35 and after that roll em up? Pretty much wherever I go I'm at least driving 45-55 at some point on the trip, am I supposed to roll them up when I get above 45?
- subliminalurge, on 05/15/2008, -0/+2From a practical standpoint, I think it would be a perfectly reasonable rule of thumb to just go with windows down in town, and A/C on at highway speeds.
- Frinkiac, on 05/15/2008, -0/+1I mean thats pretty much how I do it but I can't help but wonder would an extra 2 seconds of work translate into change in my pocket?
- subliminalurge, on 05/15/2008, -0/+2From a practical standpoint, I think it would be a perfectly reasonable rule of thumb to just go with windows down in town, and A/C on at highway speeds.
- LeRenard, on 05/15/2008, -1/+22Were you watching the same show I did? They found that the windows open was best at low speeds, AC was better on the highway.
- HoratioHellpop, on 05/15/2008, -11/+6One that is *NOT* a myth -- if you're at all able to do so ... ride a bike. A new hybrid commuter bike, fully loaded, will cost you about 8 tanks of gas. Not to mention the health benefits.
- salinemist, on 05/15/2008, -1/+4I ride my bike about 5000 miles a season, but I'll be damned if I'm going to ride it to work when it's 5F out .
- saikyan, on 05/15/2008, -0/+4This only works if you live within a mile or two of your job. Adverse weather is the biggest problem- snow is obvious, but what about a significant thunderstorm when it's time to ride home?
The other big problem is sweat. It varies by person, but riding your bike usually makes you sweaty... being sweaty at work is bad. Deodorant and a change of clothes doesn't really work... I've seen/smelled people try it.
I'm not saying it's impossible... but for the vast majority of working people, it's just too impractical.
- Sheryldx, on 05/15/2008, -2/+17Yeah Right put regular into premium fuel required engine and it will do nothing........exept a beautiful check engine light that will come out when the sensor will detect that the detonation of the car is not right, then the computer will adjust richer or leaner the air/fuel ratio that will make the car consume more, pollute more and eventually it will broke cause the timing of the piston going down the cylinder with the spark will ***** up the engine and then guess what ? you're going to the garage with your brand new Vw passat 2008 2.0 turbo and Volkswagen tell you that your car isn't under warranty anymore cause you negligee to put the right fuel in your car.It happens just like that to my client. Great advice.....really !
- linagee, on 05/15/2008, -5/+2Maybe the "you bought the wrong kind of car" light will come on.
- minorthreat, on 05/15/2008, -2/+9i don't care what the article says, I will argue all day and go out and prove to anyone that if my windows are rolled down vs. using A/C in my 2WD 2003 tacoma, I get substantially better gas mileage.
- regeya, on 05/15/2008, -0/+4Yeah...depends on the car, too. If you've got a 4-banger economy car, your foot on the accelerator will tell you the "modern A/Cs are more efficient" argument is pure b.s.
- NYankee2003, on 05/15/2008, -0/+1yea in your tacoma you're not getting good mileage anyway. you're just screwed.
also not the most aerodynamic car to begin with.- minorthreat, on 05/16/2008, -0/+125mpg for a truck isnt bad.
- Chairboy, on 05/15/2008, -10/+99I've built a simple tow-hook arrangement that's mounted to the front bumper of my car and is spring-loaded to try and extend forward. I control it with a little cable that comes back into the cabin of my Chrysler so I can deploy it to hook the rear of a semi-truck or large SUV by letting out the tension.
Like any eco-conscious driver, I just pull up close behind my target, let unhook the cable from the clip on my driver-side door and carefully let it out. The A-frame swings up and forwards, until it almost touches the vehicle in front of me. Some experimentation and trial & error has brought me to a half-hook/cup arrangement that settles easily over large trailer hooks or commercial trailer mounts and holds itself in place quite nicely. Once down, I can pop the transmission into neutral and relax.
The key is to keep your engine running so the transmission stays lubricated, of course.
Q: Why don't you use a rope or harpoon or something?
A: Well, that's just silly, you then need to watch for braking so you can avoid ramming the back of your quarry. With this, he provides your braking too.
Q: How do you avoid debris being kicked up into your paint?
A: The only danger of this really exists during the docking maneuver. Afterwards, you're within the laminar flow and subsequently safe from most of this.
Q: Isn't this illegal?
A: The law is quite firm about following at unsafe distances, yes, but once you're connected, you fall under statutes that regulate towing. There's nothing in there about getting towed without the knowledge of the driver!
I dream of someday seeing long caravans of stealthy eco-towers drifting down the highway, attached to each other and being pulled by an unknowingly helpful Humvee. The serpentine motion of such a construct changing lanes would be beautiful to behold indeed.- RobotLeAwesome, on 05/15/2008, -1/+2+1
- teh_techie, on 05/15/2008, -1/+4I. Love. This.
- ryanmiller1982, on 05/15/2008, -1/+2+1 for Grappers/Manuipulator Arms.
- linagee, on 05/15/2008, -1/+13A humvee? Are you serious? (It would fall apart.) How about a walmart truck? (You could put a sticker on your car: "Powered by low low prices!")
- PabloMac, on 05/15/2008, -0/+16I just want to be associated with one of the best posts I have ever seen on digg.
- NYankee2003, on 05/15/2008, -0/+2not that best digg comment of all time.. but clearly top 5.
- buckygrad, on 05/15/2008, -0/+0Put a video of this on You Tube.
- djk21108, on 05/15/2008, -0/+1Excellent post my friend.
- ninja0, on 05/15/2008, -0/+2That made my lecture just THAT MUCH MORE interesting. Hilarious..
- plethorex, on 05/15/2008, -0/+4It's safe to say this is the comment of the month.
- EmitStop, on 05/15/2008, -0/+2Apparently 10 people have buried this comment.
WHY? - nolesfan247, on 05/16/2008, -0/+2Pretty much the best thing I've ever read on Digg.
- trofeo, on 05/16/2008, -0/+2Red Green? How many roles of duct tape do you need to do this?
- notoneofus, on 05/15/2008, -1/+12Actually, the title is misleading. It doesn't prove that any of these things are "myths," just that the effects are negligible.
- musntSurfatWork, on 05/15/2008, -7/+2I am convinced there are agents/ingredients in our fuel today designed to burn faster, and the ***** electronics in modern cars also contribute to burning excessive fuel. The Gas companies and Car Companies are greasing each other behind closed doors more than you'll ever know. Ride a bicycle, you'll thank yourselves.
I compared my jackrabbit leadfooted brother's driving habits to my ease on the pedal, and we came up 1 Liter different on our mileage on a full tank on our '92 Honda Preludes.- Sheryldx, on 05/15/2008, -0/+0Is a 92 Honda prelude a modern car with ***** electronics ? I bet you never heard of Fuel Stratified Injection.
Gasoline Direct injection or GDi is a variant of fuel injection employed in modern two- and four- stroke petrol engines. The gasoline is highly pressurized, and injected via a common rail fuel line directly into the combustion chamber of each cylinder, as opposed to conventional multi-point fuel injection that happens in the intake tract, or cylinder port. GDi enables stratified charge (ultra lean burn) combustion for improved fuel efficiency and emission levels at low load.
4 cylinder 2.0l Turbocharged engine with 200 h.p and 207 torque at 1800 rpm and this engine do 6.9 liter for 100 km
European car companies do care for your money. - yeti22, on 05/15/2008, -0/+1You're a paranoid looney!
- Sheryldx, on 05/15/2008, -0/+0Is a 92 Honda prelude a modern car with ***** electronics ? I bet you never heard of Fuel Stratified Injection.
- dkirkham, on 05/15/2008, -7/+12$4 a gallon?
Try ~ $10 a gallon here in the UK!- peaceninja, on 05/15/2008, -2/+15high taxes that subsidizes other costs, such as healthcare and public transportation?
Try ~ lack of public transportation and bad healthcare here in the US!- salinemist, on 05/15/2008, -5/+5Excepting overregulation by the government, US healthcare is great. Don't believe the hype from those that want to control you.
- peaceninja, on 05/15/2008, -0/+2what's so great about it? I dont like having to shop for around for doctors for my medical conditions as if i were having to buy a car, and even then I can't make an informed decision about doctors or drugs due to the backwardness of transparency in the industry.
- salinemist, on 05/15/2008, -0/+1Freedom of choice is what you got. Freedom from choice is what you want. -DEVO
- pathouston22, on 05/15/2008, -1/+4I know its a lost art...but try it sometime: RESEARCH.
And that dosn't include wikipedia.
US Healthcare is among the best in the world. It'll just cost you a few bucks.- salinemist, on 05/15/2008, -1/+3Healthcare costs money everywhere, people seem to forget that.
- subliminalurge, on 05/15/2008, -0/+2I've had no trouble with the U.S healthcare system. $20 copay for each office visit seems reasonable to me.
- peaceninja, on 05/15/2008, -0/+2what's so great about it? I dont like having to shop for around for doctors for my medical conditions as if i were having to buy a car, and even then I can't make an informed decision about doctors or drugs due to the backwardness of transparency in the industry.
- salinemist, on 05/15/2008, -5/+5Excepting overregulation by the government, US healthcare is great. Don't believe the hype from those that want to control you.
- DanBoodro, on 05/15/2008, -0/+2Just hit $4.00 here in the thumb of Michigan about a week ago.
- MadOgre, on 05/15/2008, -0/+1Ouch. My sympathy. But we will be there too in a couple more weeks.
- gl77, on 05/15/2008, -1/+7Try ~ 14 cents a gallon in Iraq!
- AnarkeIncarnate, on 05/15/2008, -0/+12Yes, and you have a densely populated small country the size of the Middle Atlantic states in the US. Your motor sizes rarely go over 1.5L. Here, 1.5L is considered a TINY motor and will likely be found on a riding lawnmower. How far do most EU/UK-ers drive to work? I go 42 miles each way
- LeRenard, on 05/15/2008, -3/+21.5 tiny? I just bought a Toyota last week with a 1.5 VVTi in it, it has absolutely no problem getting past anything I encounter. I actually drive about 45 miles each way and I'm getting about 45 mpg. My old car had a 996cc engine, and I live in New England.
- MadOgre, on 05/15/2008, -0/+2Yes, it is. My wife had a Geo Metro. That was a 1.3 liter engine with only 3 cylinders. Yes, that ***** is tiny. 1.5 is still tiny. Not saying that it can't be sporty in a car that weights the same as a Big Mac box... but it's still tiny.
- LeRenard, on 05/15/2008, -3/+21.5 tiny? I just bought a Toyota last week with a 1.5 VVTi in it, it has absolutely no problem getting past anything I encounter. I actually drive about 45 miles each way and I'm getting about 45 mpg. My old car had a 996cc engine, and I live in New England.
- regeya, on 05/15/2008, -0/+8You can drive from London to northernmost Scotland in the time it would take me to drive from Cairo, IL to Chicago, IL. The United States, despite having a smaller population, is larger than Europe.
- PabloMac, on 05/15/2008, -4/+1Larger in more than one way.
- flashingcurser, on 05/15/2008, -0/+1My dad used to live in Germany and I live in Montana. It was very hard for his friends in Germany to understand that the 4th largest state in the US (Montana) is larger than Germany.
- peaceninja, on 05/15/2008, -2/+15high taxes that subsidizes other costs, such as healthcare and public transportation?
- TeraRealm256, on 05/15/2008, -3/+17I agree with others, this article is EXTREMELY misleading! It could cause a person that isn't educated on the mechanics of vehicles to royally ***** up their cars!
- DanBoodro, on 05/15/2008, -1/+7Or you can just tail behind a semi and hope he's going where you're going.
- Pixelpaws,