Well, my initial response is "that's terrible!" But my second response, after a sudden & vivid flashback to my one really bad body shop experience, is that at least it sounds like they're trying to be honest about the delay with you, rather than optimistically telling you "two weeks" and keeping it a good five weeks instead ...
wdb- Keeping the revs above 2500 leads to better gas mileage??? Yeeeh haaahhhh!!! Jack rabbit starts here I come! And here I thought the key to good gas mileage was to go slow and shift early! :-)
I think he means on the highway. Rolling resistance from the tires decreases with higher speeds. Being in overdrive also gives you the best gearing efficiency.
The catch is that aerodynamic drag increases with the square of speed. There is an ideal speed for fuel efficiency, though it varies for each model because of shape, weight, gearing, tires, and engine.
To get 26mpg I tend to shift around 3000rpm. When I drive harder mileage goes down a bit.
Looks like that accelerator pedal is doing exactly what I tell it to do!
I know, it sounds counterintuitive. But I'd swear that my car gets better gas mileage if I drive around in 4th up to about 55mph, and save 5th for speeds above that; same logic with the 3-4 shift too. Better to the tune of 2mpg or more; I'd love for someone else to try it on a tankful or two and tell me if I'm crazy.
No, if you lug the engine below 2500 RPM you could most certainly get worse gas mileage than being in the proper gear. This assumes a manual transmission, of course... the sloppy torque converter assures that an automatic won't bog.
The best gas mileage at 30MPH would not be attained in 5th gear, for example.
Okay so while were on the topic let's revisit and perhaps expound upon the available methods for gauging fuel efficiency. Way back in the olden days before EFI a vacuum gauge could give you some sort of indication. But I remember in a previous discussion someone here said that vacuum is not a good indicator with an EFI engine.
For the person who suggested it -- if you listen to rap music and love thump thump thump it's okay. For normal music, the powered subwoofer throws the bass balance completely off, to the point that I'm disconnecting mine. If I wanted to go thump thump thump I'd listen to ICE-T rather than to The Offspring :-).
When I had a Mitsubishi GB Galant Station Wagon in the late 1970's the engine service manual gave the optimal fuel efficiency curves in each gear. I forget the details but peak fuel efficiency in 4th (top) gear was about 95kmh or about 59mph.
Cheers
Graham
I would love to know what the peak efficiency is for my Outback as the fuel efficiency seems to vary unexpectedly. I do know that limiting speed to 100kmh results in about 5% gain over 110kmh on cruise.
Hey, Paisan - send me the bill to SOA, Attn: Patti Mickel, Subaru of America, Inc., P.O. Box 6000, Cherry Hill, NJ 08034. We'll see if we can set you up!
I don't use rental while Forester's in the shop. I used Forester only for weekend/vacation driving anyway. My old workhorse is Subaru Loyale'92 which I'm using now 100%. During 8+ years of ownership, the seats in Loyale got so nicely shaped around my, uh, tailgate, that it's hard to give up. Also, I don't think either insurance (mine or his) would've approved renting MB or Corvette or something exciting. And choosing between Dodge Neon and Pontiac Grand Ma, I'd rather be in old Loyale.
But you gave me an idea... Do you know if there is a rental agency that rents Impreza RS out? May be I could try that one meantime?
I'm no thumper (he says, reminded of Bambi). I thump neither my music nor my throttle. I remember seeing pictures of cars at Jackie Stewart's driving school. They had shallow bowls mounted on the hood, and a ball was placed in the bowl; the object was to get around the course as quickly as possible whilst still keeping the ball in the bowl. The lesson was, in a word, smoothness of motion. Oops, that's 3 words :-)
Eric, try turning the bass setting to -1 or -2. You should still get the positive effect of a fuller range bass without the thumping. Remember also that the lower frequencies require more amplifier power and speaker motion to produce; by relegating the lowest frequencies to the subwoofer/amp you are freeing up both your built-in amplifier and your midrange speakers to deliver the sounds across the more audible range in a cleaner fashion. I also find that I have to set the bass (and treble and volume for that matter) quite differently depending on the source: CD,tape,radio.
Juice, I maintain that shifting at 3000 RPMs is too low for optimum fuel efficiency. My throttle pedal and gas bills are telling me to keep the revs above 2500 - and my desire for engine longevity compels me to keep the vast majority of my shifts below 4500. I suppose it could be engine breakin or perhaps technical differences between your car's engine and mine, but 2500 RPMs is where my engine starts to breathe. An absolutely wonderful side effect of keeping the RPMs in that zone is that the GT's 5-speed gear ratios seem to be designed for it; 2-3-4 are all right there and waiting when you need them, and together they provide a very pleasing power band across the entire range of speeds I normally encounter. (This is one of those great things about the GT that no statistics seem to clearly show, most of all 0-60 times; they are the bane of all AWD cars and should be all but ignored, in my not so humble opinion.)
As for steady state highway driving: during my cross country jaunt I got essentially identical gas mileage at approx. 80 mph average speeds as I did at approx. 70 mph average speeds. (I'm into smoothness so I used the cruise control as much as possible.) Again this is very likely to be different for different vehicles; I especially can see it being different for a Legacy sedan vs. a Forester, given the very different profiles the two vehicles present to the wind.
The 3000rpm wasn't really my idea. I tried the shift points the Forester owner's manual recommended, and that's roughly what they work out to be.
When I mellowed my driving style a bit to try this, my mileage went way up. Though Soob engine typically improve as they break-in so this may have been a coincidence.
After doing any of several mods, you'll note a dip in my mileage chart. Likely because I'm pushing it a bit more to test out that new sway bar.
Another interesting note: my wife gets better mileage than I do, probably due to lower speeds. I go 10 over, or 75mph on the NJ turnpike. She barely reaches the speed limit at times.
Your last paragraph says it all, though. The Forester is not nearly as svelte as your GT, so higher speeds mean much more aerodynamic drag.
With my Brick Wall, I found that in bumper to bumper traffic moving around 55mph, I got much better gas than my usuall crusie control @ 10mph over the limit (75 in the Northeast).
I saw this come across the news service a little while ago and figured to post it for those who have the 2001 Legacy and Outback: "CHERRY HILL, N.J., Dec. 8 /PRNewswire/ -- Subaru of America, Inc. (SOA) today announced voluntary recall campaigns of certain 2001 model year Subaru Legacy vehicles, including Legacy L, GT and Outback models. The campaigns were launched as a result of problems found during scheduled quality assurance testing. The recall campaigns involve inspection/replacement of fuel hoses, rear center seat belts and right front bearing housings on some 2001 model year Legacy models. There have been no reported accidents or injuries. Due to a potential separation of fuel hose layers, there is the possibility of fuel leakage from the hose under very cold temperatures. The fuel hose recall affects 1,456 vehicles. Subaru will inspect 1,977 Legacy vehicles to check for a possible casting flaw in the right front bearing housing. This casting flaw could cause possible loss of vehicle control due to tie-rod end separation. Additionally, Subaru will inspect 368 Legacy sedan vehicles with beige color interiors to replace rear center lap/shoulder belt webbing, as the seat belt may not fully extend to its full length. All registered owners of vehicles potentially affected by the voluntary recall campaigns will be notified by first class mail. Repairs will be made at an authorized Subaru dealer at no charge to owners."
hehe Mark, you beat me. I posted this in Subaru Crew - General Maintenance & Repair II a few minutes ago. I thought since this is related to Maintenance & Repair, we might post comments in that topic (vs. here, Meet the Members) for the benefit of future readers. Thanks.
wdb- I'm going to have to respectfully disagree with you on this gas mileage issue. I've always done better than the EPA avg on my various autos and I accomplished it by trying to avoid exceeding 3000 rpm. Sure you get better engine performance (I.e. acceleration) at higher rpms but at the expense of fuel consumption.
Colin- It's a rare occasion that anybody beats me at a light or to 60 mph. ;-) I've certainly never held anybody up (in fact my wife is always at me to slow down). For the most part, you can shift at 3000 rpm and still easily keep up with traffic. I'm not saying that I keep my revs below 3k all the time, just that when I don't, the gas mileage suffers.
I'll post some info. under general maintenance and repairs. Kate - I don't think we have any of the major rental agencies using the RS. Mostly Legacy's and some Outbacks. Once, in my travels to Boston, I rented a car from Hertz. Because they were out of "mid-range" cars, the put me in a Legacy L wagon. They told me that I'd love my upgrade. I assured them I would. Snicker, snicker.
Frank, with moderate to heavy throttle input I definitely give the nod to wdb's method over yours.
The interesting thing is that my gas mileage doesn't vary much if I really hammer it for a week versus my usual routine of only hammering it every 3rd stoplight or so. ;-)
Thankfully we're managing to remain "respectful", and I'll do my best to keep that up ;-)
Gas mileage is not directly tied to RPM. It is directly tied to engine efficiency. An engine running in its optimum efficiency band can deliver more power with a smaller throttle opening and hence can, at least in theory, deliver better fuel economy.
In my specific case, it very well could have something to do with terrain. I live in an area with a fair number of hills. Not mountains, but 200 to 1000 foot hills, moderate to steep grades, lots of them. This means that I'm not often in a situation where I can drive steadily on other-than freeway roads with a small throttle opening AND low RPMs and still make it over the next hill without slowing down; I generally need to have a bit more power available to me than I get below 3000 RPM.
My highway mileage figures show little difference in gas mileage between 65 and 75+ MPH average speeds. 28 MPG, by the way, nothing to sneeze at, with a loaded trunk and back seat full of stuff besides. Most of those comparison numbers were obtained as I crossed states like Nebraska on I-80 - flat as a pancake, cruise control, steady state driving if ever there was. But it got me thinking about engine performance and throttle opening and where this car was happiest.
Yep, I'm an enthusiastic driver, but I also like to get good gas mileage - and I think I do. In my last car the way to do that was to keep the RPMs down. But that car had better low end torque, plus it had a turbocharger that boosted power from 2000 to 3500 RPM. There was no point in revving that car above 4500 RPM, ever; all it did was get louder and slower. In my GT, my gas mileage will be roughly 22 MPG if I drive it sedately and shift at 3000 RPM - if I drive as though I'm trying to save gas. If I keep the RPMs higher as a general rule, I'll get 24 MPG.
I'd be really interested in hearing from other GT owners on the topic.
I've heard that if you drive the car aggressively during breakin, you will obtain higher gas milage after breakin if you usually drive aggressively. If you are too gently during breakin, and change back to your normally agressive driving afterward, you will notice a drastic drop in milage. Any thoughts on that logic?
Interesting concept, Mike. I was getting 23-25 MPG during breakin (mixed highway and back road driving). After breakin, it dropped as low as 21 MPG (I do drive it aggressively - 85MPH on the highway and accelerations that are probably quicker than they should be), but now it's up in the 23-24MPG again (at 4000+ miles).
So, I DID notice a semi-dramatic drop in MPG after breakin, when I started being more aggressive (mostly in the accelerations). Hmmm.
I guess I have become biased, but why are there no Subaru's on the list of vehicles up for North American Car and Truck of the Year? If it is supposed to be based upon crash test results, price, owner satisfaction, why no Subes? Maybe being an owner has made me biased, but I think it is one of the better vehicles out there. I know that since I started driving my 00 OB, whenever a friend talks about a new car I heartily recommend a Subaru. So much so that my friends are getting a little sick of hearing from me. Maybe next year? Mark
"Supposedly" $ does not count. They are supposed to be an unbiased group of judges. Yet they include the Pontiac Aztek and Ford Escape! I am truly baffled.
your state of mind affect your fuel consumption. i believe there would be a very high correlation. e.g you're uptight foot is downright (or should that be right down) think about it.
speaking of poor fuel consumption ( which we were not but i am going to ) my son borrowed my forester for the first time a couple of sundays back. it had 0km on meter A and a full tank. it returned with 87km on A and only 3/4 of a tank of fuel. i mildly inquired as to whether or not he had "put it through its paces" (meaning "did you drive the cra* out of it or not?") to which he mildly replied "nah" (not only is he hard on fuel he is also extremely eloquent, as you may have noticed). seeing that this consumption was about 40% of what i normally get and he had'nt "put it through its paces" i can only surmise that he syphoned off a couple of gallons and sold them to his mates!!!!
Wow, even with your fuel-saving gizmo? Hmm, I seem to recall a similar conversation with my father in the beloved mint green 73 Chevrolet Impala wagon (with clam-shell rear gate, anyone remember?), 400 cu.in., 2 barrel, 3-speed automatic. So then I got smart and refuled before handing back the keys. Turns out he was smarter (being my dad and all); he just looked at the tires. "Son, I see the sidewalls are scuffed." D'oh!
Those of you with Speedvision, the Rally of Britain is on right now (5pm PST) and will be re-running again later tonight (9pm PST). Also try to can the Speedvision GT and Touring Car year in review footage starting at 10pm PST.
Colin: but if you're trying to save money, whatever you save on fuel has to pay for speeding tickets!
Besides, remember Frank and I have the less-than-svelte Forester, which doesn't exactly slice through the air. Plus each engine behaves differently, so we could all be correct.
Mark: I think the vehicles need to be "new", so even then only the H6s would qualify. Forester was a finalist (top 3) when it came out, BTW.
One more thought - we all have a 2.5l engine and a 4.11 final drive ratio, plus the same gear box ratios. The big difference is the tires.
Frank's tires have a diameter of 26.2", while mine are 26.6" with a speedo at least a few % off. WDB's are only 24.9", same as yours (even the wider tires you swapped out for), so effectively both of you have higher gearing.
That also means that in order to travel the same speed, let's say 70mph, both of your engines are revving higher (7% higher than mine).
Which makes this discussion even more interesting. That means we get better mileage at low revs, while yours does better at higher speeds, and at even higher revs.
Perhaps at 4000rpm (torque peak), your engine is at its best efficiency in working to overcome aerodynamic drag and rolling resistance.
Ours, on the other hand, have much more aerodynamic drag, and remember that it increase with the SQUARE of speed, not linearly. Rolling resistance decreases linearly (i.e. not as quickly).
So even with the engine operating below its torque peak, that efficiency loss is less than the aerodynamic loss at higher speeds. Hence we get better mileage at 65mph than we do at 75.
Juice-- I've gotten only one speeding ticket in my life and it was in 1994. I find that doing 5-10 MPH over you won't ever get pulled over. If I'm doing more than 10 MPH over I'm very cautious, particularly around hills and overpasses.
Colin, I agree with you, I set my cruise on 76 in 65mph zones and cops sneak up on me and don't even bat an eye... Usually if I'm doing more than 10 over it's cautiously and/or in an area where I know where the federales will be. Although I've been pulled over 28x and only got 2 tickets, of which one counted.
I can't help but wonder if the photo's were taken at a place in S. Jersey called Little Mill. I took my '83 hatchback there once and stunned everyone. It looks very familiar!
Comments
Dennis
-Frank P.
The catch is that aerodynamic drag increases with the square of speed. There is an ideal speed for fuel efficiency, though it varies for each model because of shape, weight, gearing, tires, and engine.
To get 26mpg I tend to shift around 3000rpm. When I drive harder mileage goes down a bit.
Looks like that accelerator pedal is doing exactly what I tell it to do!
-juice
Cheers,
-wdb
The best gas mileage at 30MPH would not be attained in 5th gear, for example.
-Colin
-juice
Could I get that explanation one more time?
Thanks!
bit
-Eric
When I had a Mitsubishi GB Galant Station Wagon in the late 1970's the engine service manual gave the optimal fuel efficiency curves in each gear. I forget the details but peak fuel efficiency in 4th (top) gear was about 95kmh or about 59mph.
Cheers
Graham
I would love to know what the peak efficiency is for my Outback as the fuel efficiency seems to vary unexpectedly. I do know that limiting speed to 100kmh results in about 5% gain over 110kmh on cruise.
I'll take my 10% commission! Although I'm sure when bit mails the bill, it will get filed in the circular filing cabinet next to your desk! Hee Hee!
-mike
Eric: if you weren't so far, I'd take that sub off your hands for you. I'm sure "Sesame Street" would sound great with a deep thump-thump.
The Forester and Hummer have more in common than you would think. 4 wheel independent suspension, for one. 4 driven wheels. And, uh, I'm thinking...
-juice
But you gave me an idea... Do you know if there is a rental agency that rents Impreza RS out? May be I could try that one meantime?
Nice to see you still have your ascerbic wit.
-juice
Dennis
-juice
Eric, try turning the bass setting to -1 or -2. You should still get the positive effect of a fuller range bass without the thumping. Remember also that the lower frequencies require more amplifier power and speaker motion to produce; by relegating the lowest frequencies to the subwoofer/amp you are freeing up both your built-in amplifier and your midrange speakers to deliver the sounds across the more audible range in a cleaner fashion. I also find that I have to set the bass (and treble and volume for that matter) quite differently depending on the source: CD,tape,radio.
Juice, I maintain that shifting at 3000 RPMs is too low for optimum fuel efficiency. My throttle pedal and gas bills are telling me to keep the revs above 2500 - and my desire for engine longevity compels me to keep the vast majority of my shifts below 4500. I suppose it could be engine breakin or perhaps technical differences between your car's engine and mine, but 2500 RPMs is where my engine starts to breathe. An absolutely wonderful side effect of keeping the RPMs in that zone is that the GT's 5-speed gear ratios seem to be designed for it; 2-3-4 are all right there and waiting when you need them, and together they provide a very pleasing power band across the entire range of speeds I normally encounter. (This is one of those great things about the GT that no statistics seem to clearly show, most of all 0-60 times; they are the bane of all AWD cars and should be all but ignored, in my not so humble opinion.)
As for steady state highway driving: during my cross country jaunt I got essentially identical gas mileage at approx. 80 mph average speeds as I did at approx. 70 mph average speeds. (I'm into smoothness so I used the cruise control as much as possible.) Again this is very likely to be different for different vehicles; I especially can see it being different for a Legacy sedan vs. a Forester, given the very different profiles the two vehicles present to the wind.
Regards,
-wdb
When I mellowed my driving style a bit to try this, my mileage went way up. Though Soob engine typically improve as they break-in so this may have been a coincidence.
After doing any of several mods, you'll note a dip in my mileage chart. Likely because I'm pushing it a bit more to test out that new sway bar.
Another interesting note: my wife gets better mileage than I do, probably due to lower speeds. I go 10 over, or 75mph on the NJ turnpike. She barely reaches the speed limit at times.
Your last paragraph says it all, though. The Forester is not nearly as svelte as your GT, so higher speeds mean much more aerodynamic drag.
-juice
-mike
"CHERRY HILL, N.J., Dec. 8 /PRNewswire/ -- Subaru of America, Inc. (SOA)
today announced voluntary recall campaigns of certain 2001 model year Subaru
Legacy vehicles, including Legacy L, GT and Outback models. The campaigns
were launched as a result of problems found during scheduled quality assurance
testing. The recall campaigns involve inspection/replacement of fuel hoses,
rear center seat belts and right front bearing housings on some 2001 model
year Legacy models. There have been no reported accidents or injuries.
Due to a potential separation of fuel hose layers, there is the
possibility of fuel leakage from the hose under very cold temperatures. The
fuel hose recall affects 1,456 vehicles. Subaru will inspect 1,977 Legacy
vehicles to check for a possible casting flaw in the right front bearing
housing. This casting flaw could cause possible loss of vehicle control due
to tie-rod end separation. Additionally, Subaru will inspect 368 Legacy sedan
vehicles with beige color interiors to replace rear center lap/shoulder belt
webbing, as the seat belt may not fully extend to its full length.
All registered owners of vehicles potentially affected by the voluntary
recall campaigns will be notified by first class mail. Repairs will be made
at an authorized Subaru dealer at no charge to owners."
..Mike
..Mike
-Frank P.
In some areas of the country you'll be honked at or even run over if you accelerate that slowly.
If you're using more than light throttle and shifting below 3000, I think wdb is right.
-Colin
-Frank
The interesting thing is that my gas mileage doesn't vary much if I really hammer it for a week versus my usual routine of only hammering it every 3rd stoplight or so. ;-)
-Colin
Gas mileage is not directly tied to RPM. It is directly tied to engine efficiency. An engine running in its optimum efficiency band can deliver more power with a smaller throttle opening and hence can, at least in theory, deliver better fuel economy.
In my specific case, it very well could have something to do with terrain. I live in an area with a fair number of hills. Not mountains, but 200 to 1000 foot hills, moderate to steep grades, lots of them. This means that I'm not often in a situation where I can drive steadily on other-than freeway roads with a small throttle opening AND low RPMs and still make it over the next hill without slowing down; I generally need to have a bit more power available to me than I get below 3000 RPM.
My highway mileage figures show little difference in gas mileage between 65 and 75+ MPH average speeds. 28 MPG, by the way, nothing to sneeze at, with a loaded trunk and back seat full of stuff besides. Most of those comparison numbers were obtained as I crossed states like Nebraska on I-80 - flat as a pancake, cruise control, steady state driving if ever there was. But it got me thinking about engine performance and throttle opening and where this car was happiest.
Yep, I'm an enthusiastic driver, but I also like to get good gas mileage - and I think I do. In my last car the way to do that was to keep the RPMs down. But that car had better low end torque, plus it had a turbocharger that boosted power from 2000 to 3500 RPM. There was no point in revving that car above 4500 RPM, ever; all it did was get louder and slower. In my GT, my gas mileage will be roughly 22 MPG if I drive it sedately and shift at 3000 RPM - if I drive as though I'm trying to save gas. If I keep the RPMs higher as a general rule, I'll get 24 MPG.
I'd be really interested in hearing from other GT owners on the topic.
Cheers,
-wdb
-mike
So, I DID notice a semi-dramatic drop in MPG after breakin, when I started being more aggressive (mostly in the accelerations). Hmmm.
Mark
-mike
i believe there would be a very high correlation.
e.g you're uptight foot is downright (or should that be right down) think about it.
speaking of poor fuel consumption ( which we were not but i am going to ) my son borrowed my forester for the first time a couple of sundays back. it had 0km on meter A and a full tank. it returned with 87km on A and only 3/4 of a tank of fuel. i mildly inquired as to whether or not he had "put it through its paces" (meaning "did you drive the cra* out of it or not?") to which he mildly replied "nah" (not only is he hard on fuel he is also extremely eloquent, as you may have noticed). seeing that this consumption was about 40% of what i normally get and he had'nt "put it through its paces" i can only surmise that he syphoned off a couple of gallons and sold them to his mates!!!!
cheers
gus
..Mike, whose sons will be reciprocating
..Mike
Enjoy!
Drew/aling
Edmunds.com Townhall host
If you believe that, i've got a bridge to sell you and some swamp land in florida! hee hee
-mike
Besides, remember Frank and I have the less-than-svelte Forester, which doesn't exactly slice through the air. Plus each engine behaves differently, so we could all be correct.
Mark: I think the vehicles need to be "new", so even then only the H6s would qualify. Forester was a finalist (top 3) when it came out, BTW.
-juice
Frank's tires have a diameter of 26.2", while mine are 26.6" with a speedo at least a few % off. WDB's are only 24.9", same as yours (even the wider tires you swapped out for), so effectively both of you have higher gearing.
That also means that in order to travel the same speed, let's say 70mph, both of your engines are revving higher (7% higher than mine).
Which makes this discussion even more interesting. That means we get better mileage at low revs, while yours does better at higher speeds, and at even higher revs.
Perhaps at 4000rpm (torque peak), your engine is at its best efficiency in working to overcome aerodynamic drag and rolling resistance.
Ours, on the other hand, have much more aerodynamic drag, and remember that it increase with the SQUARE of speed, not linearly. Rolling resistance decreases linearly (i.e. not as quickly).
So even with the engine operating below its torque peak, that efficiency loss is less than the aerodynamic loss at higher speeds. Hence we get better mileage at 65mph than we do at 75.
-juice
Dennis
-juice
-Colin
I agree with you, I set my cruise on 76 in 65mph zones and cops sneak up on me and don't even bat an eye... Usually if I'm doing more than 10 over it's cautiously and/or in an area where I know where the federales will be. Although I've been pulled over 28x and only got 2 tickets, of which one counted.
-mike
'97 Legacy L = 5
'74 Olds 98 = 6
'86 K-car = 4
'97 Rodeo = 1
'91 Escort = 4
'88 XT6 = 2
'83 Ramcharger = 6
-mike