What is Digg?383 Comments
- adjective, on 10/11/2007, -15/+343What we should be asking ourselves, is why does Europe have normal non-hybrid cars getting 60mpg?
- sockpuppets, on 10/11/2007, -35/+287"The Corvette, with 400hp gets 28-30 on the highway."
I suspect this has a lot to do with the aerodynamic properties of the drivers mullet. - inactive, on 10/11/2007, -21/+185Because American cars are huge and European cars (not including luxury models) are tiny?
- inactive, on 10/11/2007, -18/+182The U.S. auto industry (including the auto workers union) have repeatedly and successfully fought against energy standards, which may explain why fuel efficient Toyota is now the world biggest automobile maker.
Just a thought. - BigManOnCampus, on 10/11/2007, -16/+155More importantly, look at car commercials back in the early 1980's in America, there were Japanese cars in the early 80's that got 50+. That's right, non-hybrid, 1980's technology and you got 50+ mpg's.
When I saw that I was shocked and horrified. Yes, that Japanese car was a deathtrap on any highway with more than 2 lanes, but so is the Prius. - TopherT, on 10/11/2007, -6/+115Ummm guys? My 92' geo metro is rated for 54 mpg highway and cost me 1k$. Don't tell me we can't do better with '07 tech.
- geminitojanus, on 10/11/2007, -5/+97"Toyota was cheating on their rating, big surprise, and got cauhgt"
Toyota wasn't cheating, the Feds were retarded. The way they did the tests was broken; they put the cars on a treadmill and worked them out that way. Because the Prius can turn off its gas engine and use electrical power, it got hugely inflated numbers in gas mileage (the engine wasn't running, durr).
They "fixed" this by replacing the numbers with averaged observed numbers for Hybrid vehicles. - mastercheif, on 10/11/2007, -17/+104"Buried as inaccurate. The Prius DOES NOT get 60mpg. It gets 40. See the new rating on the 2008s. Toyota was cheating on their rating, big surprise, and got cauhgt. I regularly got 40 in town when I was driving a Geo Metro. My 2003 Cavalier regularly got 28-30 in town as does my 2006 Cobalt.
@AegisGFX - Yes, the American manufacturers just want to use gas. GM makes the most cars that get over 30mpg, and they actually get that mileage. The Corvette, with 400hp gets 28-30 on the highway.
Go play with your Toyota some more."
Toyota wasn't caught cheating, they pushed for the new MPA standard to drive Hybrids on. The old numbers were misleading and Toyota knew it, and they asked the MPA to change their testing for Hybrids. - tHePeOPle, on 10/11/2007, -7/+92How about, because Americans won't do jack ***** until they start to feel it in their wallets.
- sacherjj, on 10/11/2007, -2/+64I got 50 mpg with my 1980 Diesel VW Rabbit in the 1990s. It had over 150k miles on it. Cost me $400. I wish I had that car today.
- FuzzyBunny, on 10/11/2007, -2/+50There are plenty of cars that get solid fuel mileage on market in the US. You know what... nobody buys them. If you want car companies to make more efficient cars, you have to stop buying SUV's and full size pickup trucks. It's not a difficult concept. The same thing goes for gas prices. If people want gas prices to go down, start conserving energy. This is the most basic of economic principles, why is it so hard for so many people to grasp?
- jopsen, on 10/11/2007, -13/+59Because in Europe we have a responsible energy/environmental policy... Meaning that we pay very high energy taxes on gas...
I Denmark we pay something like 11 DKK per L. gas, in US terms thats 7,50 USD per US. Gallon... Tell me what do you pay in US ??? Does it matter how far the car goes per Gallon when you buy one??? - weeeezzll, on 10/11/2007, -4/+50Q: "why does Europe have normal non-hybrid cars getting 60mpg?"
A: They are paying something like $8-$10 a gallon for gas... - mknoll1, on 10/11/2007, -14/+55THis post is absolutely ludicrous. This guy has no scientific bone in his body or else has not thought about this in any depth at all
By my rough calculations the max fuel economy of a car would be about 250 MPG with no acceleration, braking, or wind resistance. Math as follows:
http://www.nafa.org/Content/NavigationMenu/Resource_Center/Alternative_Fuels/Energy_Equivalents/Energy_Equivalents.htm
states that a gallon of gas contains 114,100 BTU's of energy.
Expressed in joules this is about 120 million joules.
http://www.google.com/search?q=114000+BTU+in+joules&start=0&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official
1 joule = 1 newton* 1 meter
According to Wikipedia the rolling resistance only from the tires for a 1000 kg (2200 lb) car is 300 Newtons.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rolling_resistance
THus to travel one meter 300 newtons are required.
If you only take into account the rolling resistance you get
120,000,000/300 or 400,000 which is 400 km or about 250 miles
If you add in wind resistance which is about 10 hp according to wikipedia at 50 mph (80 kph)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drag_(physics)#Power
One watt is one joule (the SI unit of energy) per second
1 horse power = 745 watts = 745 joules/s
10 hp * 1 hour = 7450 joules/second * 3600 seconds = 26 820 000 joules
if we take 120,000,000-26,820,000 = 93 180 000
Taking 300 newtons/meter we get
93180000/300 = 310 600 meters or 310.6 km or 192 miles
Keep in mind that these numbers represent 100% efficiency of the engine and no energy lost to acceleration or braking. Even by lowerign the wind resistance by half you are only looking at a theoretical maximum of 225 mpg or so. To post that we should be able to acheive 300 or 500 MPG is absolutely ludicrous. Before people jump all over me about using electric cars or other nonsense keep in mind that all I did was use the energy value of the fule so if that energy comes from a battery, nuclear generator, or gas engine is irrelevant. - alfernoid, on 10/11/2007, -4/+43happyscrappy, you better get your ass to europe for a weekend, and try to find a car doing less than 90+ MPH on a highway..
they may be small, but slow they are not. (Save the ¨cheap ass economical¨ Yugo type car) - cawpin, on 10/11/2007, -83/+120Buried as inaccurate. The Prius DOES NOT get 60mpg. It gets 40. See the new rating on the 2008s. Toyota was cheating on their rating, big surprise, and got cauhgt. I regularly got 40 in town when I was driving a Geo Metro. My 2003 Cavalier regularly got 28-30 in town as does my 2006 Cobalt.
@AegisGFX - Yes, the American manufacturers just want to use gas. GM makes the most cars that get over 30mpg, and they actually get that mileage. The Corvette, with 400hp gets 28-30 on the highway.
Go play with your Toyota some more. - djSyndrome, on 10/11/2007, -1/+36"Have you looked at toyota's cars? The only ones that get over 30-35mpg are the prius and yaris."
Corolla
Matrix
Camry
RAV4 (4-cyl)
All get 30 or more MPG highway. - friend18, on 10/11/2007, -2/+33SUV's tend to get less mileage than regular cars. :/
- Y0tsuya, on 10/11/2007, -5/+34"For me as a scientist, futurist, and technologist"
Guess who has an inflated self-image?
Jeff, for a web programmer, you sure talk big. - netburnr, on 10/11/2007, -11/+39The prius DOES NOT get 60 MPG no matter how hard you try. Realistically maybe 40. People who trust the numbers put on the price stickers need to understand that those tests are completely useless when it comes to real world driving.
I can't wait to see the numbers when they change the test next year - BigFloppy, on 10/11/2007, -3/+26@happyscrappy "Because in Europe those ratings are given in Imperial gallons, which are 25% larger than ours."
Er, no, other than the UK, litres are the standard unit.
If the price of gas wasn't so amazingly low in the US people might be interested in more efficient cars. But unless demand for more efficient vehicles becomes a consumer's priority, it isn't in any of the corporate interests (automotive, oil or otherwise) to devote a lot of money into developing more efficient vehicles. Everyone knows how much battery power has been hindered by 'Big Oil'. The Prius is a step forwards, but on the whole a bit of a farce when you can get better mileage out of a Volkswagen diesel in real world conditions.
Times are changing, progress is being made, but painfully slowly. I think in the end, it's not going to be big American companies or Toyota who bring the breakthrough, rather, the premium German marques such as Audi, Mercedes and BMW. As has always been the case with these manufacturers, advanced technologies are developed and brought to market in their high-end products, and slowly filter down to the mainstream. - zeeboo, on 10/11/2007, -7/+29Less fat people?
- LetsGoHawks, on 10/11/2007, -0/+21Good call on the solar panels not providing enough energy for all your driving needs.
I didn't state what I meant very clearly.
I just meant that it would provide SOME of the juice. My car sits out in the sun all day while I'm at work. How far would that take me? Even if it's only20 miles, that's half my daily commute. I'm sure there's somebody who could figure out the number.
Multiply that times a 100 million cars and we've used a lot less oil. - robotsongs, on 10/11/2007, -0/+19@merowe
About gas being in the $1 range, it wasn't even that long ago.
I remember in the Summer of 99, coming home from San Francisco to LA, I *could not believe* that gas was ****** 99 CENTS ******* at some stations, while I was bummed I was paying $1.40-1.60 up in San Francisco (thems was the good ol days)
That, my friends, was a magical summer filled with long road trips, beer and debauchery. - wolrah, on 10/11/2007, -2/+21@sockpuppets
It's because the big V8 engines used in GM's sports cars have immense power even at 1200-1500 RPM. This means that they can run a crazy overdrive on the 6 speed manual transmissions that leave the engines barely above idle at 75 MPH.
It's not hard to get good mileage when your engine is barely spinning. - FuzzyBunny, on 10/11/2007, -6/+23@amenic
That graph looks a lot different if you normalize it on a per capita basis. It may seem very shocking that the US uses 9 times as much oil per day as Canada until you take into account the fact that the US has (surprise!) 9 times the population of Canada. Granted, undeveloped countries still fall away rather quickly, but Japan, Canada, and most of Europe are right up there with the US in terms of per capita energy consumption. - brundlefly76, on 10/11/2007, -0/+16If he's such a scientist why doesn't he figure it out himself.
Go figure out how to not only create a car which will get 100MPG, but also figure out how to manufacture and market it with features and price point where Americans will actually BUY enough to cover your costs.
Getting an oversized solar powered aerodynamic one-man solar rollersled car to do 100 MPH around an MIT track is one thing - but to make it affordable, seat a minimum of 4 passengers, pass all safety tests, include heating and air conditioning, antilock brakes, airbags, headlights, defrosters, windshield wipers, power steering, brakes, traction control, attractive interior and exterior design, and travel comfortably at highway speeds at ranges of 300 miles+ in any weather, plus make it as reliable and repairable as any current car while providing a competitive price point, nationwide service technicians, 5/50 bumper to bumper warranty and below market financing.
Good luck! - rldaggie, on 10/11/2007, -4/+19One word: Horsepower. That's were the focus has been on American cars.
- merowe, on 10/11/2007, -0/+14It's not that the auto industry held things back, it's that they didn't care. Why didn't they care? Well, it's because the average consumer didn't care! Wasn't it only 10-15 years ago that gas was 1-1.20 per gallon? Why spend a ton of money researching how to save on fuel, resulting in more expensive cars, when the consumer wouldn't end up saving much? And in the end, they'd pay even more because of the price of the car! Also, the whole 'burning oil -> global warming' idea or even the 'buying oil from middle east -> money for terrorism' wasn't in people's minds yet...
Of course, things have changed (especially recently) and the auto industry is now desperately looking for ways to improve gas mileage. I guess the auto industry can be blamed slightly for lack of forsight, and some companies (companies with lower gas mileage -- US car companies) are paying for it right now.. - HappyScrappy, on 10/11/2007, -30/+44Because in Europe those ratings are given in Imperial gallons, which are 25% larger than ours.
They're getting 48mpg (US). Which is still good.
For the other part of the puzzle, go to Europe and see how tiny and slow the average car is. - scabbers, on 10/11/2007, -1/+15It's not the auto makers, it's the customers. If they want to buy big, heavy cars that drink lots of gas, let them suck it up when they get reamed at the pumps.
- gordholio, on 10/11/2007, -2/+16My first car was a 1988 Dodge Colt (made by Mitsubishi). Well, it got about 45 mpg.
It simply had a 68 hp engine and weighed about 1,900 lbs.
It's hard to believe that fuel mileage hasn't gone up really in 20 years and it seems like higher mileage is being held back by the auto industry and oil companies perhaps.
You could have a car that is hybrid and has about an 0.8 L (800 cc) engine and probably get about 100 mpg.
I don't care if the car takes 10 seconds to get to 50 mph. - inactive, on 10/11/2007, -4/+16If you haven't see the documentary WHO KILLED THE ELECTRIC CAR it pertains to all of these things.
- johnn11238, on 10/11/2007, -1/+13Better include a source with this one, buddy. Otherwise you risk sounding like a TOTAL FRIGGIN CRACKPOT.
- Cougaboy, on 10/11/2007, -2/+14@swisscamel
You do realize what frictionless tires would do for a car, right? - jake8689, on 10/11/2007, -0/+11@ robotsongs
now its a gift from god if gas is 2.75 - howitzeral, on 10/11/2007, -0/+11My understanding is that the under-the-hood improvements made over the decades have leaned towards making the cars more powerful. Most US car buyers want good acceleration, so the car makers have focused on that aspect.
Cars have gotten a lot more efficient, it's just that those gains have been applied to power/acceleration rather than mpg. - inactive, on 10/11/2007, -15/+26The notion that US cars use more fuel because you need to drive further is absolutely ridiculous. It stems from the fact that you're all absolutely set in your ways and will not change because you believe that it is your right to use as much petrol as you like. Heck, if petrol has always been there, why would it ever run out?
As someone pointed out on here in a different topic, there's a limit to how far you're going to drive regularly. Just like how I wouldn't take on a job that was 2 hours away, you wouldn't either. And actually, following the logic that you lot claim to do more "highway" driving, why are Diesel engines not much more popular?
It's actually laughable that the only manufacturers that are making an effort to produce vehicles which make a serious impact on fuel economy are not American. What happened to the US being the home of research and the most "developed" country in the world?
Disclosure: I drive a two seater roadster which gets 55mpg. - cawpin, on 10/11/2007, -11/+22@keyboardduder - Yes, because a modified car is what we're talking about. Get over it. The Prius does not performed as advertised.
"There will never be an electric car as long as oil companies run the world"
Who was the first major manufacturer to have a publicly available electric car? Oh yeah, GM with the EV1. - motley130, on 10/11/2007, -2/+12Very interesting post/comments but there is one major factor that no one mentioned: emissions. Though fuel economy hasn't improved much recently, emissions have been drastically reduced and will continuously be reduced. Adding a catalytic converter to the exhaust system increases the back pressure a lot. The result is much lower mpgs. So we should cut them (the Big 3) a little slack. Just a little.
One form of emissions, NOx, is slowing the comeback of the diesel in the US even though they get great fuel economy. So everyone that cites their 1993 VW that got 50 MPG, they wouldn't be able to purchase the same vehicle today. It would fail the US and EURO emission standards.
The technology difference between the US and Europe and Japan isn't very big. The main difference is higher gas prices so that people buy smaller cars with smaller engines. The result is much higher mpgs. Usually in the mid 40s.
As for the US car companies, I think that they should be able to sell gas hogging SUVs if they want but be prepared to lose sales when gas prices shoot up. A good compromise (which I think is on the way) is to offer everything from gas-sipping mini cars to big SUVs and pick-ups. Let customers decide what they really want/need based on the price of gas.
The guilt of buying oil/gas from the middle east is a whole other topic. - bl8tn, on 10/11/2007, -2/+12My last car in the UK was getting minimum 55 MPG (UK) without any trouble, over 60 if driven more carefully. It was a 1998 turbo diesel.
- whitey2001, on 10/11/2007, -1/+10For the first 5000 miles, I got 45.3 mpg with my Prius. So far, over the past 1000 since, I've gotten 48.6 mpg. Once you go over 60 mph, the gas mileage goes to crap. I'm planning out my conversion of my Prius to a PHEV (Plug-in Electric Hybrid Vehicle). That will minimize my use of gasoline, but increase my use of electricity. I am also planning (mostly just considering) converting my '88 Jeep YJ to all electric. It has a 4" suspension lift with 33" MTRs. It should kill plenty of batteries!
- wrenchone, on 10/11/2007, -0/+9Here's the problem that no one here has hit upon yet (That I've seen).
Yes, older cars got the same or better mileage. They got that MPG because the cars weighed HALF of what they do today and the engines were smaller and simpler as a result. Weight is the primary factor in determining automotive performance, and auto makers would LOVE to cut weight out of cars, but they can't. Cars today weigh what they because of increased safety equipment and passenger luxuries consumers want. Any of those cars that got 40+ MPG 20 years ago would be considered a death trap today. For the past 20 years, people were pushing for safer cars, not more efficient cars, so companies focused in that direction. Now the focus is on Economy, so the focus shifts again. You can't have your cake and eat it too. - j4son, on 10/11/2007, -3/+12@Friend81
Nothing escapes your veracious observation. - weeeezzll, on 10/11/2007, -2/+11@LetsGoHawks "it would still. take at least 10 years before the money I save in gas equals the money I spent on the car."
I think your missing the point. It's not about saving money, although that would be nice, it's about saving the environment and making the planet a better place for our children and grandchildren to live. It's not about saving a few bucks - technobabble042, on 10/11/2007, -1/+9Light11 - wrong - nuclear waste can be turned into more energy, and more energy, and more energy, until there's barely anything left. Honestly, the world needs to get over itself and start using nuclear energy more often.
- amenic, on 10/11/2007, -4/+12It's very laughable when you look at the dependency that American's have on Oil and the problems it creates. I mean look at these figures. One word comes to mind. Ridiculous.
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/ene_oil_con-energy-oil-consumption - fastsix, on 10/11/2007, -0/+8@meldroc
Yeah, unlike Americans those Germans aren't in love with their cars. Porsche, BMW, Audi, Mercedes all econo boxes made for people more worried about getting from point A to point B than anything else. That's also why they have the autobahn because the most energy efficient way to get somewhere in a car is as fast as possible. - rnelsonee, on 10/11/2007, -2/+10Yup. Engine technology is a very mature one. Aside from electronic fuel injection and automatic transmissions, there's been very little advancements made in what goes on under the hood of a car. Lots of safety and convenience features have been developed, sure, but cars work pretty much the same way they did 100 years ago.
Besides, cars do a lot more than they did in 1904. They now power air conditioners, transmissions, power steering (hell, power *anything* - listening to your radio louder uses more gas), so engines are doing much more than they were before.
Not saying we can do better, but there's a lot to deal with here. If people (well, Americans) really cared about fuel efficiency, we would buy more efficient cars, but we don't. If you drive an SUV, then you lose your right to bitch about paying $50 at the pump. And although I drive a Mini, I'm paying $50 to fill up because I have a supercharger and drive like an asshat. But you won't see me bitching about gas prices, because if I was willing to give up my fun driving to pay less for gas, I'd be driving a Civic. - inactive, on 10/11/2007, -0/+7@cawpin: "Who was the first major manufacturer to have a publicly available electric car? Oh yeah, GM with the EV1"
So very, very wrong.
The Baker Motor Vehicle Company made mass market electric cars from 1899 to 1914.
http://www.popularmechanics.com/automotive/jay_leno_garage/1302886.html -
Show 51 - 100 of 379 discussions
Check out the new & improved 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is