Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.
Super mileage competition nets 7,148 MPG
ecomodder.com — The team that accomplished the 7,148 MPG will be competing in upcoming Shell Eco-Marathon competitions, should be exciting to see what crazy numbers the winners come up with.
SVOboy- 975 diggs
- digg it
- BuzzDiggity, on 03/16/2008, -7/+39"vrooom vroom," says the eco-friendly car. "why don't more people use me?"
- coreyb, on 03/16/2008, -12/+15"Bump, bump," says the giant SUV, "was that a lady bug?" As it runs over one of these...
I am all for eco-friendly, and want desperately to drive one. But realistically, I don't want to get hit while in one. :|- sarixe, on 03/16/2008, -2/+7maybe most people shouldn't be driving SUV's then.
- cowsgonemadd3, on 03/16/2008, -2/+2yep
- Godlike, on 03/17/2008, -1/+1yep
- cowsgonemadd3, on 03/16/2008, -2/+2yep
- sarixe, on 03/16/2008, -2/+7maybe most people shouldn't be driving SUV's then.
- malchihi, on 03/16/2008, -1/+7These will be used when they are cheap enough to manufacture on a large scale. Now these auto's are impractical.
- killer63, on 03/16/2008, -0/+6http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PAC-Car_II
12,645 MPG at 30km/h or 18.6mph- Dustmuffins, on 03/17/2008, -0/+2Might as well jog.
- cowsgonemadd3, on 03/16/2008, -1/+3Because they only go like 20 or less miles per hour.
- ChefGroovy, on 03/17/2008, -0/+1What a pita it would be to pick one of those little things out of the grill of my 1971 Impala
- ophello, on 03/17/2008, -1/+4A car that gets 7148 MPG is useless: the car would have hardly any torque, takes several minutes to get up to speed, and likely cant haul anything heavier than a few pounds, and probably cant climb a hill at 1% grade.
100 MPG is a more feasable goal for most vehicles.- Godlike, on 03/17/2008, -1/+1Everyone knows that, this is like how the special Olympics exists to raise money to cure retardos, it doesn't really mean anything.
HEEEY RETARDOS
WHY DONT CHA WALK OVER HERE
YOU BEEN OUT MENDIN FENCES
PROBABLY CANT EVEN WALK NOW
- Godlike, on 03/17/2008, -1/+1Everyone knows that, this is like how the special Olympics exists to raise money to cure retardos, it doesn't really mean anything.
- coreyb, on 03/16/2008, -12/+15"Bump, bump," says the giant SUV, "was that a lady bug?" As it runs over one of these...
- DeadFox1, on 03/16/2008, -2/+56when the US hits $4/gallon, i hope more people WILL!
- brianbb98, on 03/16/2008, -3/+15and i hope people will use the reply button.
- Dave1337, on 03/16/2008, -4/+6consider yourself lucky here in the UK we are about to hit the £5 mark for a gallon on unleaded fuel which is only $2.50 for you. i would KILL for fuel to be at that price iv put £30 in my Motorbike already this week!
- treed, on 03/16/2008, -3/+4It's $10 for us.
- krazyfiend, on 03/16/2008, -1/+43.59 in Indianapolis IN .... also , last time I checked we aren't entitled to state or gov funded universal health care on this side of the pond
- BrokenCircle, on 03/16/2008, -2/+6US Average Gas Price: 3.28usd,
US Current Minimum Wage: 5.85usd
UK Average Gas Price: 5.58usd
UK Current Minimum Wage: 5.52gbp (11.19usd)
The US has it worse when it comes to gas prices.- turquoisefish, on 03/16/2008, -0/+3In the UK is is more like $9 a gallon - not sure what figures you are using
- danthek54, on 03/17/2008, -0/+1uh wtf...you're talking about gas prices vs minimum wage? umm how many people making minimum wage are even on this site?
- foofightrs777, on 03/16/2008, -2/+6Gas IS just about $4.00 in california. http://www.californiagasprices.com/
- subterfuge, on 03/16/2008, -0/+1california is also the only place where honda is leasing its FCX Clarity hydrogen car
- Pixelpaws, on 03/16/2008, -0/+4Diesel is practically there now; it's $3.989 according to the AAA. I feel sorry for the guys who have to pay for fill up their big rigs.
http://www.fuelgaugereport.com/index.asp - mrhedges, on 03/17/2008, -0/+1Quit whining. Look at fuel prices elsewhere in the world and then come back and complain.
- brad3378, on 03/16/2008, -20/+3Note that there's no gay wing on the back of that car to cut down on wind drag.......yet they put those things on practically everything with a small engine.
- rbflurry01, on 03/16/2008, -2/+12did it ever occur to you that most cars with "wings" only have them for show?
- dlkjsdf, on 03/16/2008, -5/+1Not to mention that the entire point of them is to *increase* drag.
- feliks2, on 03/16/2008, -0/+2No it isn't. The entire point is too increase downforce, of which drag is an unwanted byproduct. Although rbflurry01 is right, in most cases they are just for show.
- brad3378, on 03/17/2008, -0/+1That was my point - they're for show .........but at the expense of increased wind drag.
- dlkjsdf, on 03/16/2008, -5/+1Not to mention that the entire point of them is to *increase* drag.
- hoopjones, on 03/16/2008, -2/+15Wings have nothing to do with reducing wind drag, in fact they do the exact opposite.
- kiduk, on 03/16/2008, -1/+8WIngs are for keeping the tires against the road.
- rbflurry01, on 03/16/2008, -2/+12did it ever occur to you that most cars with "wings" only have them for show?
- dtele, on 03/16/2008, -3/+5Cool science and cool article.
More after the break! - eyloni, on 03/16/2008, -4/+417,148 MPG !?!??! Wow.
- xyzunit, on 03/16/2008, -6/+25Vegeta, what does the scanner say?
ITS OVER SEVEN THOUSAND!!!!!- JcbAzPx, on 03/16/2008, -1/+10It's just not the same.
- almightyzam, on 03/17/2008, -0/+2Too bad they used the OTHER gallon...
- carrera594, on 03/17/2008, -0/+1My 1999 Lexus GS300 would probably break before I finish 1/2 a gallon.
- xyzunit, on 03/16/2008, -6/+25Vegeta, what does the scanner say?
- vsujohn2, on 03/16/2008, -2/+19What the article fails to mention, is how fast these cars can actually go accomplishing that kind of fuel efficiency. 7000+ MPG is great, but if you can only go 20 miles an hour doing it, its impractical. Though it is a great step in the right direction!
- Elliuotatar, on 03/16/2008, -14/+17Forget how fast you can go. Look at how small they are. They're like coffins on bicycle wheels.
What a pointless contest. Ooh, "Let's hope thesr guys get hired!" yeah because everyone wants a 1 seater car you have to lie down in, has no trunk space, no airbags, and no ability to handle any kind of a rough surface. Why are they wasting their time on this crap? What they should be doing is requiring the contestants to take a real car and making it more fuel efficient or areodynamic. Not build these stupud useless motorized bicyles they've been building since the 1980's like they're in some stupid kiddy robotics competition.- Scaryclouds, on 03/16/2008, -1/+19Idiot, it's about finding more efficient ways to move cars. Yea obviously *these* cars will never been seen on the road. But what is learned from building them could hope make 50+ mpg in a normal car common.
This is almost like saying since ENIAC required a whole room to operate to scrap this whole "computer" thing.- Zephik, on 03/17/2008, -1/+2We should already have the technology and ingenuity to make cars that do 50+ mpg by now. In fact, I bet you anything that we do have at least that. I mean c'mon, we had Volkswagens in the '80s that were in the 40 mpg range. So someone is going to tell me that in the _thirty years_ since that VW vehicle that did at least 40 mpg, we have not only NOT figured out how to get more than 30 mpg out of our "fuel efficient" vehicles, but we have actually gone backwards from 40 mpg to "30 mpg and below"? Especially as our technology, ingenuity's and designs advances?
Yea right. I'm calling ***** BS right there.
We have everything that we need to make cars do at least 50+ mpg, the only thing that is preventing that from happening is the crooks in the oil industry. If anyone thinks that money doesn't corrupt people, even the once good people, your just kidding yourself. - Brian48216, on 03/17/2008, -1/+1The original VW Bug didn't have air conditioner, no power steering, no airbags, no crumple zone, no radio- hell, you were lucky to have seatbelts.
While I do agree we should be able to hit 50+ mpg and it's perpetuated by the American culture of bigger=better.
Take your tin foil hat off. It doesn't help your argument at all. - Elliuotatar, on 03/17/2008, -0/+1And what is that that we could learn from them? There are car companies with billion dollar air tunnels and supercomputers computing what makes an areodynamic shape. So I don't think these kids are gonna invent some new super efficient shape. And cars don't run on bicycle wheels, so no matter how they modify those light wheels to be super flimsy, that won't make it into a car either. And how are they powering them? With some teeny little motor, any modifications to which they make will have no bearing on a real engine, or with some tiny underpowered electric motor. And how do they save fuel? By not running the engine most of the time and driving at low speeds, which again is something not practical for a big car. Well, the low speeds anyway. The not running the engine unless you need it is obvious and hybrids probably do that already.
So what are they discovering? Name ONE discovery these teams have made which has made it into production cars since they started doing these competitions. ONE.
And your Eniac example is a fallacy. I am not saying we should not try to make efficient cars. I'm saying this contest is the wrong way of going about making those discoveries and is just a way to keep college students busy and make them feel good about themselves. - WATYF, on 03/17/2008, -1/+1The ENIAC analogy is inaccurate. We're not talking about the natural progression of technology (from cumbersome and bulky to sleek and compact). We're talking about taking an existing technology, and regressing it into a useless and archaic state as part of some contest...
A better analogy would be: This is like holding a contest for who can make a faster computer by giving people an ENIAC and telling them to make it run faster. Well sure... they'll be able to make it run faster... but since it's bulky and impractical, the results will still be an bulky and impractical device that won't translate to the real world.
If they're just doing this for kicks then more power to them... whatever... but if they think they're "changing the world" by building a completely impractical machine that gets amazing MPG's, then they're just wasting a whole bunch of time and brain power that could be used on something that might actually do some good.
I agree with Elliuotatar... a more challenging AND more useful contest would be to give them all the same exact existing production model car (or even better... an SUV), and see which one can get the most MPG's out of it without diminishing the feature-set of the car.
- Zephik, on 03/17/2008, -1/+2We should already have the technology and ingenuity to make cars that do 50+ mpg by now. In fact, I bet you anything that we do have at least that. I mean c'mon, we had Volkswagens in the '80s that were in the 40 mpg range. So someone is going to tell me that in the _thirty years_ since that VW vehicle that did at least 40 mpg, we have not only NOT figured out how to get more than 30 mpg out of our "fuel efficient" vehicles, but we have actually gone backwards from 40 mpg to "30 mpg and below"? Especially as our technology, ingenuity's and designs advances?
- HolemCross, on 03/16/2008, -0/+5Reminds me of Zoolander.
"Idiots! How are the children suppose to fit in the building!??"
- Scaryclouds, on 03/16/2008, -1/+19Idiot, it's about finding more efficient ways to move cars. Yea obviously *these* cars will never been seen on the road. But what is learned from building them could hope make 50+ mpg in a normal car common.
- Zephik, on 03/16/2008, -3/+3How fast does it actually go? I haven't read the article yet.
I mean *****, if it goes 20 miles per hour, but gets 7000+ MPG? Don't you think you could tweak it up to make it go faster? Even at the cost of 6800 MPG, it would still be worth it. You won't win any contests, but who cares? You have a car that gets over 300 MPG! That beats any car that I've ever been in by 270 MPG at least.- ophello, on 03/17/2008, -0/+2it cant go up hills, and probably has a hell of a time steering.
- Zephik, on 03/17/2008, -1/+1Still, you would think they would be able to take even a hundredth (70 mpg) of that and transfer it over to a modern car. It just seems so... idk. Its really weird that we can create a car that, in prime conditions and using current tech, can get 7000+ mpg, but we can't get past this 30 mpg mark with current cars. Its such bs...
Systems corrupt to the core unless you build it yourself I guess.
- Zephik, on 03/17/2008, -1/+1Still, you would think they would be able to take even a hundredth (70 mpg) of that and transfer it over to a modern car. It just seems so... idk. Its really weird that we can create a car that, in prime conditions and using current tech, can get 7000+ mpg, but we can't get past this 30 mpg mark with current cars. Its such bs...
- ophello, on 03/17/2008, -0/+2it cant go up hills, and probably has a hell of a time steering.
- Elliuotatar, on 03/16/2008, -14/+17Forget how fast you can go. Look at how small they are. They're like coffins on bicycle wheels.
- silentphoenix, on 03/16/2008, -3/+38lol, at 7,148 mpg, you'll be filling up once every year
- pianomahnn, on 03/16/2008, -7/+33I'll still be filling up zero times per year.
/me humps his bicycle- MasterGrief, on 03/16/2008, -0/+10That doesn't sound like a healthy thing to do.
- minorthreat, on 03/16/2008, -10/+6107,220 is a little more than I travel every year, I would probably fill up every 3-4 years
- cowsgonemadd3, on 03/16/2008, -2/+2It was 7,128mpg....Please read at least the title BEFORE replying...
- minorthreat, on 04/03/2008, -0/+1no ***** *****... I have about a 15 gallon tank..
- Innominate227, on 03/17/2008, -0/+1Yes but most cars these days hold more than one gallon of gas, on average they hold about 15 which is what minorthreat used to calculate that #.
- cowsgonemadd3, on 03/16/2008, -2/+2It was 7,128mpg....Please read at least the title BEFORE replying...
- schnikies79, on 03/16/2008, -0/+4I drive that ever 3.5 months.
- schnikies79, on 03/16/2008, -0/+2^^ That made no sense. Nevermind,
- cowsgonemadd3, on 03/16/2008, -0/+1Are you a trucker?
- almightyzam, on 03/17/2008, -0/+1can't be, he knows decimals...
- rodrigorules, on 03/16/2008, -1/+2who said the tank only holds 1 gallon
- frazw, on 03/16/2008, -0/+4who said the tank EVEN holds one gallon.
- pianomahnn, on 03/16/2008, -7/+33I'll still be filling up zero times per year.
- spyd3rweb, on 03/16/2008, -5/+82Contest sponsored by Shell so they can buyout the design that wins?
- dougbarrett, on 03/16/2008, -6/+4It'd be in their best interest to sponsor the development of fuel efficient cars. As long as the cars are using fuel that they sell, then they will be in business.
- SonicRush, on 03/16/2008, -1/+2Exactly. Even if oil usage was cut in half in the next month, Shell's US rigs would still be selling everything they could pull out of the ground, it's the foreign oil we would need less of. Plus, Shell's oil would still be going into the plastics that make up those cars anyway.
- minorthreat, on 03/16/2008, -3/+8buy out the design and lock it away in a bombproof safe and throw away the combination. Lord knows what would happen to shell if they stopped having to sell so much gas.
- EvilFerret, on 03/16/2008, -0/+71. Design Fuel efficient car
2. Act like you are serious about development of such cars
3. ??????????
4. PROFIT.
- EvilFerret, on 03/16/2008, -0/+71. Design Fuel efficient car
- PorkFat, on 03/16/2008, -0/+1Well, yes. Buy them out until the oil runs out and guess who holds rights to all the alternative fuel sources? That's right! The same damn company who always had control of the fuel sources.
- Harbinger67, on 03/16/2008, -2/+2I share you sentiments. I read the first line of the article as "Every year Shell sponsors something they call the “Eco-Marathon,” which allows Shell to appear like they give a ***** about the energy crisis in a time when they are raking in cash hand over fist"
- HeroicLife, on 03/17/2008, -0/+2Maybe Shell just wants to make money from alternative fuels? If high MPG was easy, every Jack and Jill would have a design. Shell can't buy out everyone.
- dougbarrett, on 03/16/2008, -6/+4It'd be in their best interest to sponsor the development of fuel efficient cars. As long as the cars are using fuel that they sell, then they will be in business.
- sourceholder, on 03/16/2008, -25/+47,148 MPG. Sure. If you know any physics, you'll know it's not possible.
Article doesn't explain: what it does, how it works, what technology is used...
Buried as inaccurate.- KRNpro, on 03/16/2008, -2/+8They also use solar power?
FTA: "... as well as alternative fuels such as solar, electric, hydrogen and biomass can power the vehicles" - kendawg, on 03/16/2008, -2/+6I'm sure it's because it uses solar energy or some other electricity. It also probably uses fuel RARELY, so they can claim that it gets 7148 MPG while it's really using OTHER fuel.
- santaliqueur, on 03/16/2008, -2/+9They don't explain how it works, so it's automatically a lie?
- frazw, on 03/16/2008, -0/+1According to the eminent Dr Sourceholder.
- foofightrs777, on 03/16/2008, -0/+5They simulate pushing the car off Mount Everest for the car's initial velocity ;)
- Scaryclouds, on 03/16/2008, -0/+7And the car is in a vacuum and driving on extremely smooth ice.
- Zephik, on 03/16/2008, -1/+2Its a competition isn't it? What kind of dumbass goes around telling everyone their secrets?
- ophello, on 03/17/2008, -1/+1youre an idiot.
- KRNpro, on 03/16/2008, -2/+8They also use solar power?
- BradMajors, on 03/16/2008, -5/+3There are solar car competitions where only solar power is used. These cars get an infinite number of miles per gallon. I guess it would be considered cheating to put a PV array on top of these gasoline powered cars.
- sourceholder, on 03/16/2008, -2/+1You're absolutely right.
Classic apples & oranges comparison.- razrielle, on 03/16/2008, -0/+1theoretically, you could get better gas mileage in the day if you put a PV array on top of a car in a way to make drag as minimal as possible. it would make the alternator work less, therefore make it use less engine power. the problem is the difference would be negligible
- mOdQuArK, on 03/16/2008, -1/+1Actually, I'm kind of wondering whether a combination of wind & solar could get you around the country for very little? Some of those wind runners on the beach can pick up quite a bit of speed too, and if you can power up a generator with both solar & wind, you might be able to get a vehicle that can travel quite far w/little external energy input.
- sourceholder, on 03/16/2008, -2/+1You're absolutely right.
- SirNoobius, on 03/16/2008, -6/+3it's stupid i went to one of the team's meetings. what they do is turn the engine off and coast and then turn it on go a little and turn it back off. and the car is very very light.
- Mrdudeperson, on 03/16/2008, -13/+4Nobody tell Bush about this.
- c0baltfish, on 03/16/2008, -0/+1um, why not?
- krahzee, on 03/16/2008, -1/+1Why does everything on digg have to go back to politics?
- CYR1X, on 03/16/2008, -4/+36Instead of 7000mpg on some crazy car lets work on getting atleast 100mpg on consumer cars.
- c0baltfish, on 03/16/2008, -4/+4Why don't you read the article first? The main reason for the better gas mileage is because of the difference in design.
- CYR1X, on 03/16/2008, -1/+10And that can't be implemented into consumer cars to some degree?
- rand0mm0nkey, on 03/16/2008, -1/+1And how do you think we get there (and better) from here?
- bmunichman, on 03/17/2008, -0/+2http://www.aptera.com/
- Hockey13, on 03/16/2008, -4/+5It's too bad Shell doesn't actually produce cars or something like this might actually get off the ground quickly. If I were a venture capitalist at a time when oil prices are approaching $4/gal and threatening to not come back down, I'd find the most efficient version of these vehicles and try to mass produce the living ***** out of it a la Henry Ford. I'd be willing to bet that if I managed to sell something for $40,000-$50,000 that got 500 MPG, they'd be flying off the shelves, regardless of how retarded they look. Eventually the economies of scale would bring the price down to a more affordable level and we'd be entering a new age of automobile manufacturing with my rich ass at the helm. It's too bad I don't actually have any capital.
One of the positives of a recession is that it forces people to think outside the box in order to save a buck.- SilverBlade2k, on 03/16/2008, -4/+2Shell probably buys out the rights, technology, design, everything so that they can lock it down, forcing people to constantly use fuel-inefficient vehicles just to make their shareholders happy.
- Egoist, on 03/16/2008, -0/+3Do you have any evidence of this or are you speaking from your own paranoid delusions again?
- skipdog172, on 03/16/2008, -0/+1hhooooray for delusions !!!!
- whatever01, on 03/16/2008, -1/+0No need. Enough Americans get a woody at the thought of a 600 hp car to worry about something like this catching on. Oh Noes!! where will I put the soccer team!!! Where will i put the pile of rocks the car companies always show trucks need to carry!!! We don't need a corporation to help us --- we are self screwing.
- c0baltfish, on 03/16/2008, -0/+2They fail to mention the speed, which probably means it goes too slow for use. Also if a drunk guy in an SUV hits you you're done.
- SilverBlade2k, on 03/16/2008, -4/+2Shell probably buys out the rights, technology, design, everything so that they can lock it down, forcing people to constantly use fuel-inefficient vehicles just to make their shareholders happy.
- NeoCortex, on 03/16/2008, -4/+6I had to read it twice to make sure that wasn't a decimal point. At first, I wasn't all that impressed. Now I am.
- dustout, on 03/16/2008, -9/+3it must also use electricity and as the simpsons put it
Electric Car: "Hello, i'm an electric car. I don't drive very fast or go very far. And if you drive me, people will think you're GAAAY."- c0baltfish, on 03/16/2008, -0/+1......no.
- SquishyMon, on 03/16/2008, -0/+2One of us! One of us!
- rand0mm0nkey, on 03/16/2008, -0/+1soooooooooooooooo why worry what others think? Do you let others define who you are?
- frazw, on 03/16/2008, -0/+1Damn I'd buy a Tesla or a Lightning, if that makes me gay then hello boys!
- GhengisKhan, on 03/16/2008, -6/+15Anyone else think it's incredibly ironic that Shell Oil is sponsoring this?
- GoldYoshi, on 03/16/2008, -2/+5Yeah, the fact that most oil companies buy copyrights for these kinds of things just to keep MPG down (More oil needed=more money for them) would make you think Shell would try to bomb the competition. (Literally)
- kh99, on 03/16/2008, -0/+0Because they know it's not going to be practical for a long time, meanwhile it's good PR.
- jwiesenborn, on 03/16/2008, -0/+1It's good PR, then they can buy out the winners and choose not to develop the technology.
- ophello, on 03/17/2008, -0/+1how is it ironic for shell to show consumers they're not living in the stone age?
- rugabug, on 03/17/2008, -0/+2Shell is actually one of the leaders in photovoltaic technology.
- hydrosalpinx, on 03/16/2008, -7/+2Hell yeah, that's awesome.
Ride a bike, your gas is free.- Tahiri, on 03/16/2008, -0/+3Where do you get free food?
- cornelje, on 03/16/2008, -0/+2I ride my bike to the local soup kitchen to fill up.
- cowsgonemadd3, on 03/16/2008, -1/+1That is a place to get free food sorta as someone had to pay for it.
- cornelje, on 03/16/2008, -0/+2I ride my bike to the local soup kitchen to fill up.
- diggerpleez, on 03/16/2008, -1/+2It's not like anyone ever travels beyond 10 from home anyway right?
- Munkym, on 03/16/2008, -0/+1I have gas.
- Tahiri, on 03/16/2008, -0/+3Where do you get free food?
- jubilee123, on 03/16/2008, -4/+4and I thought 32 was good.
- michael43, on 03/16/2008, -0/+3It is compared to my 19.
- fuckinhell, on 03/17/2008, -1/+0You did?
- bigbill780, on 03/16/2008, -13/+3Its European people... it means meters per gallon. Stupid Americans.
- SirNoobius, on 03/16/2008, -0/+10only americans use gallons
you = idiot^2 - jeffchuck, on 03/16/2008, -1/+5"Bill (bigbill780)
A male from Boston (US) [...]"
Stupid Americans indeed. - jubilee123, on 03/16/2008, -0/+2lol asshat
- SirNoobius, on 03/16/2008, -0/+10only americans use gallons
- diggerpleez, on 03/16/2008, -1/+2I just picked up an old beater diesel Mercedes that gets 35mpg this week to offset my 65 mile round trip commute. I thought I was cool until I read this craziness.
- michael43, on 03/16/2008, -0/+2I feel your pain, my round trip commute is 75 miles. At least we're starting 4 ten hour days next week, that'll save me some money over the 5 eights.
- diggerpleez, on 03/16/2008, -0/+3Somehow I went from five 8 hour days to five 10 hour days. I am doing it wrong.
- michael43, on 03/17/2008, -0/+1Oh well, think about all that overtime. If your payscale is like the average American worker, you can probably buy half a tank of gas after taxes. :(
- diggerpleez, on 03/16/2008, -0/+3Somehow I went from five 8 hour days to five 10 hour days. I am doing it wrong.
- razrielle, on 03/16/2008, -1/+2see if the compression is normal for the car, lighten it up, take the ac belt off(if it has it), change oil, inflate tires to car recommended pressure, I bet that car can atleast get 40 if you fix it up
- diggerpleez, on 03/16/2008, -1/+2Not bad tips raz, thx. I am parking my bit V8 that gets 11mpg, so 35mpg is putting a perpetual smile on my face. If I hit 40 I am going to start looking like the guy on the Enzyte commercials.
- greenlight2001, on 03/17/2008, -1/+2Like a retard with a small penis?
- michael43, on 03/17/2008, -1/+1What's the deal? You looking for a retard with a big penis?
- greenlight2001, on 03/17/2008, -1/+2Like a retard with a small penis?
- michael43, on 03/16/2008, -0/+2I feel your pain, my round trip commute is 75 miles. At least we're starting 4 ten hour days next week, that'll save me some money over the 5 eights.
- Coestar, on 03/16/2008, -2/+5Shell's sponsorship in this is for nothing more than good PR. Try looking up the atrocities that they have perpetrated against the environment and human rights in Ecuador, Nigeria and elsewhere, then ask yourself if you think they really give a ***** about eco-friendly vehicles.
- Egoist, on 03/16/2008, -0/+3So if they don't sponsor events like this, they're evil corporations that don't care about the environment.
If they *do* spondor events like this, they're evil corporations that don't care about the environment.
Perhaps the real problem isn't companies that produce a product that we use in nearly every aspect of our lives, but instead it's the whiny Diggers who never produce anything in their lives other than a lot of hot air.
- Egoist, on 03/16/2008, -0/+3So if they don't sponsor events like this, they're evil corporations that don't care about the environment.
- michael43, on 03/16/2008, -1/+6You'd think that with concept cars breaking the 7000 MPG mark , a realistic production car that got a couple hundred mpg wouldn't be too much to ask.
- tms8707056, on 03/16/2008, -0/+11"Besides being extremely small, they have an extremely low coefficient of drag, which is key to reducing fuel economy."
Do they mean "reducing fuel consumption" or "increasing fuel economy"? - evanconklin, on 03/16/2008, -1/+1Here's the winner of the Eco-Marathon Americas last year.
http://calpolynews.calpoly.edu/update/2007/May/mil ...
If a 1,902 MPG car is the best we can do, we're seriously behind the rest of the world.
P.S. Go Poly!!! - dfective, on 03/16/2008, -1/+2I would love to actually read the article... but im too busy being distracted by the 'stop stare flirt bannerS' on the right (wtf digg?!)
- iPirate, on 03/16/2008, -0/+1In 2003, team Microjoule from France achieved 10,705 miles per gallon.
- nesibus, on 03/16/2008, -0/+4Now throw in kids....groceries.....anything practical.....and pot holes in the road....and you won't see many things this size on the road, ever.
- Frankli, on 03/16/2008, -0/+17,148 MPG looks nice on paper, but what about the trade-off?
1)Have to drive- graemee, on 03/16/2008, -0/+222 mpg city
- HighRisk, on 03/16/2008, -0/+1http://www.supermileage.ca/
- Ninnux, on 03/16/2008, -2/+3Shell sponsoring a fuel efficiency competition is like Phillip Morris sponsoring the New York marathon.
"Please use less of our product." - 0crabby0, on 03/16/2008, -0/+1Here's a man who gets over 100 mpg(when he uses gasoline)
Yet no one seems to care about the story because he uses waste hardwood(and you can't really buy something you can get for almost free).
http://tinyurl.com/2m8zk9 - samfishercell, on 03/16/2008, -2/+51. Shell Sponsors Eco-Marathon
2. Shell owns/buys/steals rights to vehicles entered.
3. Shell scuttles plans for said vehicles.
4. Shell continues to sell us gas and ensure that no hi-mpg vehicles make it to the market.
5. Dare I say.....Profit? - Defcon1, on 03/16/2008, -0/+0http://www.calpolysae.org/supermileage/index.html
http://www.shell.com/home/Framework?siteId=us-en&F ... - p51d007, on 03/16/2008, -0/+3The problem with crap like this is that it won't "scale up".
Hell, a squirrel running into the side of it would tear it up. - torontoliam, on 03/16/2008, -0/+1Dugg for poor use of the word "net". Net implies that some taxation is reducing the gross. "Net" could apply if the car actually traveled 8000 miles on a gallon but was parked on a hill at night and rolled backwards, thus only traveling 7,148 miles for start to finish.
- Zoltair, on 03/17/2008, -0/+2Whats the big deal, make the car smaller, lighter more aerodynamic, and yes you will get a totally useless car that gets crazy mileage. But what good in mileage in a vehicle that doesn't do anything for anybody..... Now if they get get my old Nova over 50 mpg, then they would be doing something.
- MattDamoy, on 03/17/2008, -2/+07,148 MPG
- TrevorBelmont, on 03/17/2008, -0/+1Fuggoff spammer.
- bicyclethief, on 03/17/2008, -0/+1I bet Fred Flintstone could win it all.
- Deathrideshorse, on 03/17/2008, -1/+0Petition:
We, the undersigned, call on the Governments of the world to use some common sense when distributing Energy subsidies.
Why must the taxpayer subsidise the largest cause of man-made Global Warming(Fossil Fuel electricity generation) whilst alternative energy solutions such as Solar Thermal are forced to struggle?
Why must the consumer be asked to pay extra for "Green" Energy when his/her taxes are subsidising the very antithesis?
We, the undersigned, are not impressed with such hypocrisy.
http://www.gopetition.com/online/17583.html
*pass it on!* - futbball09, on 03/17/2008, -0/+1Buried for duplicate...
http://digg.com/autos/Eco_Marathon_2008_Can_Anyone ... - gkiltz, on 03/17/2008, -0/+0There is a HUGE difference between a mileage competition, and ready-for-the-real-world products!
Remember, the clockwise-rotating internal combustion engine has worked in the lab, but 20 years later, it's no closer to being ready for the real world! - bigbill780, on 03/18/2008, -0/+1Sarcasm... apparently your version of firefox does not support it.
- lolo2007, on 06/20/2008, -0/+0Whats the big deal, make the car smaller, lighter more aerodynamic, and yes you will get a totally useless car that gets crazy mileage. But what good in mileage in a vehicle that doesn't do anything for anybody..... Now if they get get my old Nova over 50 mpg, then they would be doing something.
http://download.paramegsoft.com/
http://vb.paramegsoft.com/
http://ladies.paramegsoft.com/
http://game.paramegsoft.com/
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2008 —
Content posted by