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
how about paying the property taxes on this 'house'?
i am sure there would be plenty of room for your cars.
fiddy's house
we could be neighbors.
Even better, consider that the chlorine in the water supply becomes null after about 20 days, and bacteria can start to grow. So if any of those toilets, sinks, and showers aren't getting used at least once every 20 days, all sorts of fun stuff can start growing somewhere!
in general, the house has a notorious reputation.
the owner won't be worried about $4 per gallon for gas, it has a helicopter pad.
i will see if i can find out how much the taxes are, just for grins.
I did the same test with our CRV a few months ago and got 30mpg by going the speed limit but only 23mpg by going 72mph which is like saving 70 cents a gallon! Wow.
So all those people that were flying by me going 75-80 have no right to complain about gas prices.
Just to keep on topic, the wife said Union 76 reg unleaded is $3.47 a gallon in Gig Hbr. WA. So, I'm not going to drive again until the 27th of May.
That leadership needs to concentrate on what's good for the entire country today and tomorrow! However, most are more concerned how if will effect their financial support.
To get back on track of what would I do when gas hits $4 a gallon... I've already turned my 13 mile daily commute and 700 mile monthly business trip into 0 miles by working from home. I've been doing this for about 3 months and it's not as easy as many people think and it's certainly not fun. If you have the opportunity, I'd recommend working from home two or three days per week, but not full time. There are some people that shouldn't do it at all.
It takes drive to stay focused on business and ignore everything in your house that you wouldn't have access to at the office. It also takes balance to know when to "close shop" and "go home" each day. You have a problem when your spouse begins asking when will you be home and you're sitting in your own den.
It's been tried before and it didn't work then, why would it work now? I drive in an area where the interstate speed limit ranges from 55 mph to 70 mph. You sure wouldn't know what the posted limit was by the speed of traffic. It is pretty much 75 everywhere. Most people will simply not comply and the few that do will be creating a hazard. If you think that the police can crack down and force compliance then, IMO, that's not realistic.
Anyway advances in transportation involve several factors. One of them being reducing the time it takes to reach your destination. Even if you could get people to drive slower it would represent a step backwards. While fuel is a limited resource a person's time is also a limited resource. I've heard the argument that relatively little time is saved going from 65 to 75. That same rational can be applied to going from 55 to 65 or 45 to 55. It comes down to arriving at a consensus on what is reasonable. Our highways were designed for speeds in excess of 65 mph. My personal opinion is 75-80 represents a reasonable speed. But that is just one point of view that should be considered amongst all the others when determining what the speed limits should be.
My Sprinter diesel conversion RV weighed about 8,000 lbs and averaged 22 MPG for the 5500 miles I owned it. The new owner has put 7,000 miles in two months and got as high as 26 MPG. He and his daughters love it.
It is possible to cut our consumption.
PS
I saved that fellow over 400 gallons of fuel in the last two months. The other camper he was looking at was a Ford conversion with a big V8 that may get 10 MPG.
For a real good laugh, I get 30mpg with my S2000. That's because I am a pretty leisurely driver (unless I find a good straightaway to VTEC her in
My Passat wagon (with a Tip transmission) reliably gets 32 to 34 mpg on the Interstate, at 70 mph. That's with the 1.8T engine.
I am hoping to hold out on replacing our 1997 Accord until the Japanese diesels get to market. My dream car would be for Honda to bring back their station wagon and stuff a turbodiesel under the hood.
me: you are correct in that many vehicles would save but it is really vehicle dependent. Any vehicle that is not aerodynamic - vans, SUV's blocky cars will suffer more from increased speed. The 2nd major factor is the engine efficiency at any given speed and the gearing. A small engine revving high may get better mpg at 65 than at 75mph. But some engines - many V-8's and such would actually operate more efficiently at 75mph than at 65mph. I believe an engine is most efficient operating at the rpm's where torque is the highest.
So what is true for an auto Kia Rio is not true for a 6-speed Corvette. I have a 4-spd auto 5.7L Firebird and the best mpg I get is cruising at 2,300 rpm at 75mph. My car is aerodynamic enough that the increased wind resistance at 75mph does not offset, my engine operating more efficiently.
My Seville STS gets about 25 MPG on the highway, but isn't so hot in the city. Fortunately, my job is very close to home. Heck, I can walk the distance in 45 minutes or take the bus in. My Park Avenue gets a respectable 29 MPG on the highway and is pretty decent in town.
Doesn't seem like THAT "small gas engine" has a torque problem at hwy speeds......:)
Every "rule" has it's exceptions.
I remember a cross country test drive of the HCH vs non hybrid Civic. That was a major complaint. The HCH ran out of power up long hills. Running out across a flat highway at 70 MPH you can get some great mileage in many vehicles. It is maintaining that same speed up the long hills without significant drop in MPG that would be of interest to me. I am not taking away from the HCH as it is a good car for mileage. It is too small for most families to consider. It is an econo box with a high price tag.
How is the public transportation in Phili? Here in Boston, the "T" is pretty reliable and safe (I unfortunately work in NH
But if it is correct that some engine/vehicle combos are more efficient at 75 than at 65, would that factor be offset by the increase in air resistance and increase in tread heat/friction. Doesn't aerodynamic drag increase with speed as an exponential function?
Maybe some group such as CR will do mpg tests at various speeds in a variety of vehicles and publish results. This would be useful for general driving public.
Think that if gas gets to around $4, then might see big suvs going slower on interstates to try to soften displeasure of $100 fillups.
Ditto my '79 New Yorker. It seems like it WANTS to cruise at 70+, and if you try to hold it down to about 55-60, it just doesn't seem happy.
I have noticed that with my '85 Silverado, if I keep it right around 60-65, it usually loafs along with the slightest bit of pedal pressure, and seems okay. Get above that though, and I think that's when the 4-bbl really starts to open up. And with the wind resistance on something that big and brick-like, it seems like pedal pressure goes up considerably. Meaning fuel economy, already marginal to begin with, probably plummets.
I tried going 60-65 mph yesterday on highway 80 out of Sacramento and I was passed by a city bus with a "not in service" sign on it--LOL! It's possible, but it wasn't fun trying to do that speed. You had to stay in the right lane and duke it out with heavy trucks and violent ramp entries from drivers coming in.
The second lane was truly impossible at 65 mph. I think I'd have gotten rammed. :mad:
Here's one possibility, although it may be a bit far-fetched. Depending on gearing, maybe some engines are revving so slow at 65 mph at top gear that they're really not putting out much power and can't really loaf along, so they occasionally require more pedal pressure or downshifting, which is going to use more fuel. But at 75 mph, the engine's revving fast enough in that top gear to get it to a useable torque range, so it doesn't have to downshift?
Also, terrain may play a role. If you're going slower, you'll save fuel on the flat stretches, but you might not pick up as much speed on the downhill slopes, and my have to stomp it harder to get up the hills. When you're going faster, the car will coast further on downhill grades, and make it further up a hill before requiring you to hit the gas to maintain speed. In some cases, at a higher speed, you might be able to just coast up a hill without hitting the gas at all, if you're willing to let your speed drop off.
"With half the trip under our belt, some opinions are beginning to crystallize. First, the Civic EX might get better fuel economy if it had a deeper overdrive gear. At 80 mph, and 4000 rpm, the 1.7-liter Four is buzzing like a swarm of killer bees. The Hybrid's tach shows just under 3000 rpm at the same speed. And its engine is much happier. However, acceleration up to and beyond that speed is a bit better in the EX."
And:
"Another reality of the Hybrid is that sometimes, just when you need it most, the electric motor's nickel-metal-hydride battery pack runs out of juice and you're left running strictly on internal combustion. The Hybrid relies on deceleration and regenerative braking to recharge the pack. Nine times out of 10, you draw the full assistance of the electric motor by simply flooring the gas pedal. But when the grades are long, without any downhill sections, the battery can't recharge."
No one is going to say that a Civic running on a tiny gas engine is going to climb mountainous hills as well as a TDI.
But most (almost all) long hwy trips involve long stretches of straight, flat interstates, and in those instances, the torque of the HCH is more than comparable and adequate.
That was my biggest complaint with the Sprinter RV. Our trip across AZ & TX was during high winds. I tried to keep it under 65 MPH as it was a bit scary at higher speeds. Trucks passed us one after another buffeting the van all over the road. You cannot drive that Interstate 10 corridor comfortably under 75 MPH. You will get run off the road or at least tailgated by a line of semi trucks.
As a commuter its a fine car with HOV access, as a road car you can have it. I did notice you got rid of your HCH while it was still virtually new. They are too small for the majority of families. Maybe when gas stabilizes above $4 a gallon, folks will rethink their priorities on car size. I just cannot imagine myself buying a cramped little car like that. I did talk my pastor into a new Civic as he does a lot driving around town. I have ridden in the back seat and hated it. I think downsizing to a Tahoe size is as far as I will go, even if gas is 10 bucks a gallon.
I think a good compromise for many jobs is to work at home one day a week. That helps the commuting traffic and saves a bit of that $4 a gallon gas.
They are not "a cramped little car" at all, and might be "too small for the majority of families" but that sure does not affect their sales numbers:
European sales 2006: Sales of the Civic range increased 33.4% to 105,313 cars in 2006.
Canadian sales 2006: The Honda Civic remained Canada's top-selling passenger car for calendar year 2006 with record annual sales of 70,028 units
Worldwide sales: the Civic, with annual sales of more than 500000 units worldwide.
I guess a lot of people who do not need bigger cars think the Civic is plenty big enough. And fast enough. And has enough torque on the hwy.
Back on Topic: In short, a Civic is a good car to buy to insulate yourself against $4 gas.
- ambient temp in the 60s
- not using AC
- little traffic
- steady speed 60-70 mph
- had just down an oil change
- just done a transmission service
- only me in the car plus some luggage
- tires maxed out at 44 psi
I used synthetic oil in that car for the engine not the transmission.
The Civic I rode in the back seat of is a 2007 EX. It is too small for the average 6 foot 190 lb person. I like the way you spin the figures. Why didn't you include US sales of the Civic? Maybe because they are bleeding here. The numbers are off from last year even with the high price of gas. The new Civic is getting its butt whipped by the 7 year old Corolla. My pastor likes driving his 1996 Nissan 200SX better than the Civic. It is probably a big car by EU standards?
IMO at least, the current Civic is more comfortable inside than the current Corolla.
I don't know why I bothered posting this since the guy apparently didn't say anything. Edmunds was hard pressed to write a paragraph about the punditizing.
Maybe the driver had his seatback reclined as well? That can definitely cut into your legroom in back.
PS
I did not see any change in traffic or the speed during these times of higher priced gas. I don't think it means much to most people. Just the cost of living.
me: yes, that is why I said they are both factors. Depending on the vehicle Cd (coefficient of drag, and frontal area), and the engine, and the gearing, each vehicle will have a different "sweet-spot" for maximum mpg. Maybe I'm missing some other small factors, but that is the basis.
It would be silly to think that every vehicle despite the different shapes, engine sizes and rpms, and coefficient of drag, would all have maximum mpg at 1 speed! It would also be silly to think that the slower you go the better, as you want to get the vehicle into the highest gear possible and not lug the engine.
you: Think that if gas gets to around $4, then might see big suvs going slower on interstates to try to soften displeasure of $100 fillups.
me: yes if you solved the mathematical model for an SUV - a squarish-front one in particular - like a Toyota FJ Cruiser, the coefficient of drag would be a large negattive, and I would gguess going 75mph instead of 65mph would be detrimental to mpg.
Well, I didn't include US Sales because they did not come up in the top hits on my Google search.
gary says, "The new Civic is getting its butt whipped by the 7 year old Corolla."
Well, the Civic is on pace to sell 291,885 cars in the USA this year based on Jan-April sales numbers.
The Corolla is on pace to sell 320,688. A difference of about 28,803 cars, or about 78 more cars a day.
I don't know if that qualifies as a "butt whippin" but it is definitely odd if you ask me.
Of course, Honda has about 1,270 dealerships in the USA and Toyota has around 1,400 total, so Toyota has more places to buy.
Back on Topic: Either car is a good choice for combating $4 gas.