By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our
Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our
Visitor Agreement.
Comments
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
Key word in your statement is 'if' and since everything I have seen, read and had explained to me would say that you would get less mileage at 80 then at 75 the issue is moot.
Again I seriously doubt he is getting those numbers at 85MPH.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
It's all about how much fuel you use to increase your speed. If I'm only using 3 % more fuel to get 6 % more speed, then I'm going to get better mileage at that higher speed (which I did).
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
Now my 03 SI that I just sold, that's another issue. It wouldn't break 30 mpg. And the Mazda Protege was a dog past 80. The engine was tuned for low rpm torque and the gearbox was too short.
Yes, I do drive like a bat-out-of-he** at times. But when that's not possible due to conditions, it's much easier to sustain an 95 mph cruise. As many others will attest.
I actually wished I had taken another car, a 2003 VW Jetta TDI. It (seems) is particularly well suited to longer distance driving and at higher speed ranges. With those same speeds, I swag an mpg of between 48/50 mpg. A steady 85 mph will yield 50 mpg.
On the way home today I am on a four lane road (two lanes in each direction) coming up to a stop light where there is a left turn lane. Sitting on the white line separating the left turn lane from the left lane waiting on a red light is a bicyclist, not a motorcycle or a scooter just a bicycle rider. When the light turns green he pedals his bike to the middle of the intersection and stops to make a left turn. :confuse:
I don't know but maybe he is related to your scooter guy.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
Perhaps that is the good news and the bad news of anecdotal data. So for example, I am sure SnakeWeasel gets not more than 34 mpg with his Elantra at 65 mph or whatever he has claimed or posted. It is more than obvious the Elantra is optimized for 65 mph and BELOW. So it might be unconceiveable to him that other cars are "BETTER" optimized. I.E. get better fuel mileage at higher speeds. There are real reasons why Honda year after year wins a lot of different awards.
I'm just amazed the guy was taking his life in his hands by blithely riding so slowly in the left lane. I'm also glad there was no other traffic around besides the scooter, tow truck, and me or things could have gotten dicey very quickly.
And I don't believe those mileage claims of 35 mpg and over at 85+ mph. (Ok, maybe the diesel VWs.) Just the exponentially greater air resistance would severely cut into your fuel economy, no matter the gearing. Plus your revs are higher, because you've got 5 or 6 gears max.
High revs don't necessarily mean worse economy. If the engine isn't working as hard. Once up to speed, it really doesn't take much power to cruise.
I get 35+ in my '04 Camry 4-cylinder 4A, but generally going no faster than 65 mph, which is the top speed limit in VA, MD, PA, and NJ.
The lowest mpg I get is still a dismal 12mpg crawling in th
e city. I rather use my small scooter in those cases
The answer is in car-sharing and public transport for commuting, but nobody want such policy, so the problem remain the same. I am in favor of driving less but in better conditions, but who wants to take part into the effort?
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
if I wanted to lie about something, why would I do it about mileage? On an anonymous internet forum?
Can't answer about mileage, but for the anonymous internet forum is because there is no way to confirm nor deny it. One can say just about anything on an anonymous forum. Heck anyone of us can be just about anything, maybe one of us is even a 12 year old Amish kid sneaking onto the internet at the local library.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
the only problem with that is that it is only workable on a limited scale. Granted in cities such as Chicago (where I live) commuting within the city and nearby burbs can easily be done using public transportation.
Commuting from the burbs further out can be done with little more difficulty by trains. The problem with that is that you still have to drive to the trains and if your not working in the down town area you can't us it.
Then there is suburb to suburb commuting which is either impossible or very time consuming to do using public transportation. And it is very hard to find people who live near you that work near where you work that work the same hours, so car pooling is difficult.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
If the engine's powerband is such that it is working harder to sustain a 55 mph cruise than a 85 mph one, it's entirely possible to get better MPG at that higher speed. Like I'd be willing to bet my Accord gets better MPG at 55 than 35 since the engine is almost lugging in 5th at that speed. It may get better than 35 MPG at a 55 mpg cruise too. I'm just not gonna be the one to try that out cause that's entirely too slow.
What I do know is that there are no real absolutes. And I do know 55 could not be that "magic" speed where ALL cars get the best mpg. There are too many variables.
Additionally, my original point was why should I be compelled to the same speed limit as cars that can't even dream to approach the level of efficiency of my car.
I understand that it is suspect (40 MPG), and I only chieved those figures once - EVER. Otherwise, I have consistently gotten 35-36 MPG at around 75-80 MPH, no stops except to pee at a rest stop. The EPA gets its numbers, and then reduces them by ten percent to account for "real-world" conditions (A/C on, acceleration, varying speed, etc...). I had the A/C off, kept a consistent speed, and drove to the coast (coastal plain of AL is fairly flat). So, if the EPA got 38 MPG (which deductive reasoning said they did, with that 10 % redux), they would've lowered it to 34 MPG by reducing it ten percent (it would be 34.2, but, well, you know.)
On top of that, they don't drive over 60MPH, which is not the maligned "optimum speed" for this car, because of tall gearing in overdrive. I think that if I had gone at that "60MPH" threshold, I would've gotten the 37-38 MPG, because my conditions were similar to those of the EPA (moderate temp, no a/c or windows down, constant speed). With the higher speed (75-80ish), I got even better mileage. If I had gone 85-90, it would have diminished.
This is the best explanation I can, or will give, to back up my 39.96 MPG that I got earlier this year. Hope it makes sense to y'all.
However, that's a poor definition for "optimum speed." It ignores the huge dilation of time that I would suffer from my travels taking 50% longer than traveling at 75 mph. If everybody around the country should have to slow down an average of 33% from their current highway speeds for the sake of "optimum speed," our economic output, leisure time and mental health would all take a severe beating.
Not necessarily, As for economic output why would slowing down reduce your work load? Leisure time, maybe you could reduce some of the low quality leisure time like vegetating in front of a TV set. A slower pace might improve mental health (why do we have to be in such a rush?).
Not to mention that if everyone slows down 33% more people will survive to enjoy leisure time and mental health.
Mind you I am not advocating reducing speed, just playing devils advocate.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
The safest way for him to get where he wanted to be would be to use the crosswalks. But then he would have to wait through a couple of light cycles to get to the same point as using the left turn lane...
No using the crosswalks he would have gotten there faster. He was at a red light south bound turning left to go east bound. If he would have used the east-west green light to cross the north-south road then when the light turned green he could have crossed the east-west road instead of waiting in the middle of the intersection waiting for traffic to clear.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
james
For example, if a vehicle at 65mph returns 32 mpg in one hour and at 70mph returns 31 mpg, then that 7.7% increase in speed results in a 3.1% reduction in fuel economy, so 70 is more efficient than 65. At 75 mph, the fuel economy is 29 mpg. So, the 15.4% increase in speed over 65 results in 9.3% reduction in economy... 75 is still more efficient. At 80 though, the drop is to 24 mpg: 23.1% increase in speed and 25% reduction in economy from 65. Oops... if you want to leverage your time against your fuel economy, then stick with 75! Are you using more fuel than if you were to drive 55 or less? Maybe, but again, you'd have to test it (and, like gee35 put it, who wants or has time to do that?) to know for sure. If it is just about conserving one resource, then max out fuel economy and forget about anything else. In the end, I say time is far more valuable than fuel. Plus, there are all those other mitigating factors that must be considered in a real world instance, so it becomes a moot point to even consider it at all. :P
Your logic is a bit off using your example while you are driving 7.7% faster you are using fuel 11.2% faster (2.26 gallons/hour as opposed to 2.03 gallons/hour). 70 is less efficient.
At 75 mph, the fuel economy is 29 mpg. So, the 15.4% increase in speed over 65 results in 9.3% reduction in economy... 75 is still more efficient.
again your logic is off while you are going 15.4% faster you are using fuel 27.3% faster (2.59 gallons/hour as opposed to 2.03 gallons/hour). 75 is less efficient.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
Let us say my 740 runs at 2000 RPM at 62mph, my fuel consumption at 80/2500 RPM won't be much much higher because the engine will be revving in a more fuel efficient manner than when at 2000 RPM.
In other words, the increase in wind resistance and necessary HP is partially offset by the increase in fuel efficiency of the Engine.
Smaller engined cars can be very efficient at 50 MPH because their tallest gear makes this speed match the Engine sweetspot (around 3000 RPM for Gas Engines)
I am not claiming to use less fuel at 85 than at 70 or 50, but only that the curve vary from models to models, although it is safe to say 50 MPH is the speed most cars will hit higher MPG
Of course, we can't apply, say, the japanese model where billions are crammed on an area in japan wherease only thousands would live in a similar size area in the US
I am not an Ecofreak and believe the car can complement public transportation. Railway stations should have enough accomodations for cars. Germany use light rail/tramway to cope with suburbs needs, so this could be an alternative.
True we can't demand a tramway station to be next door, but It should be at most within 10 minutes drive in any populated suburb. Can't request drivers to take public transport if is inexistent.
Try to get public transport to go downtown in LA. Car is the only alternative to cars and traffic jams are being sponsored by our friends in the ME
We have a great commuter train system here in Chicago, one of the best there is. The main issue is parking at many of the stations, perminant spaces have a three year waiting list at some stations and daily pay spots go real fast.
My problem is that I travel from one burb to another, taking public transportation would take 6 times as long as driving.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
Why taking more time doing one same thing would reduce the work load?
Answer : let all materialistic guys understand the true meaning of life.
If I spend 10 hours on a plane to Asia, why not slowing down to 300 mph instead of 600 and save our resources? It will save me another 10 hours of stupid TV watching ( or children caring).
Why not slowing down computers? The Internet is too speedy. Let people spend more time at their desk so that they reallocate their time resource thoughfully.
>Not to mention that if everyone slows down 33% more people will survive to enjoy leisure time and mental health.
I could well say that spending 33% more time on the road is likely to yield 33% more deaths. Can't expect drivers to give additional attention to the road in this conditions. Yawning should be prosecuted as it is likely to become the first accident cause (it is maybe already).
>Mind you I am not advocating reducing speed, just playing devils advocate.
I am also playing another devil's advocate and support some SL increases, but we were forced to agree to disagree anyway. Let us not enter this debate or we are going to get slammed.