Daily Kos

View Story | 223 comments

  •  Why do you think that is accurate? (none / 0)

    If you are in the same gear, your statement is ludicrous.  So since it flies in the face of Newtonian physics, look for error in your measurement system.  Drag on any car is greatly increased since it is proportional to velocity squared.

    drag is proportional to velocity squared, and:

    55 x 55 = 3,025

    70 x 70 = 4,900

    So you claim "Better" fuel mileage with 62% more drag?  Unbelievable.

    Look to your driving habits, accelerator on and off, braking, the wind direction, temperature, etc. to explain the difference IF your on-board computer is working properly.

    Then if you really want to save gas, buy a Prius. My computer shows 61.1 mpg for the last 150 miles, and it checks out pretty closely when I record the gas at each fill up.

    •  Like I said (none / 0)

       can't even guess at the physics, but perhaps there's something other than wind drag involved?  For example, maybe the air/fuel ratio is better or something at 70 than 55, or maybe the 187,000 mi catalytic converter is doing weird things.  I really, don't know, but, UM, the fact that I need to fill up the tank less seems to give credence to the improved mileage my car claims to have since I've started experimenting.

      How much energy does the manufacture and transport of a new Prius use vs the extra gas I'm using at an average 27.4 MPG instead of 50ish that a Prius might provide (I live in the mountains and word has it that hybrids don't do as well here, so perhaps 45 is closer)?  This isn't snark, it's a serious question.

      What's the energy use break-even point if I cause the manufacture of a whole new car instead of using the car I already have more efficiently?  If I'm even going to consider shelling out mucho dinero for a new car, I need to know whether that switch is actually going to do what it's supposed to do.

View Story | 223 comments