 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Ford / Ford Cars / June 2007Misleading TV Campaign: All Fords 25mpg or Better
CEO Alan Mulally must have got the idea from his airliner background, but it won't work with cars. The ad says all these Fords are good for 25 mpg or more HIGHWAY mileage. Well, I have news for Mr. Mulally. Highway mileage doesn't even come close to the way cars operate in the real world. Most driving is commuting to and from work in stop & go city streets and on congested freeways. An airliner's fuel consumption is typically measured in kgs or gallons burned per hour at cruising speed at cruising atltitude, usually at 75% engine power. Highway mileage of cars is the closest thing to this kind of spec., though Ford cars seldom operate at anything close to 75% continuously because they'd blow up if they did. But a car that gets 25 mpg in the highway test gets 0 mpg when it's stopped in traffic. When it accelerates to speed, it might get 4, 5 or 6 mpg. When it coasts or brakes, it might get 70 mpg, but the average in stop and go driving might be as low as 8, 10, 12 to 15 mpg. And that figure is when the car is lightly loaded. Load it with fat, car pooling passengers and their extra stuff and your mileage will probably drop below 10 mpg no matter which model Ford you were stupid enough to lease. That is why this t.v. campaign is so phoney it borders on revolting and makes me puke my bananas. Now cars COULD get 25 mpg city mileage, but you'd have to get the lead out. A car under 500 kg, with a wind cheating alloy monocock body might get 25 miles per gallon when loaded with passengers and stuff. P.S. Don't do a Google search for "Explorer rollover" or "Pathfinder rollover." It'll scare you shitless. Both those SUVs are tipsy like a frickin' 1925 Model T and it doesn't make any different whether they're made by Detroit rednecks or slant eyed Nips. > CEO Alan Mulally must have got the idea from his airliner background, but > it won't work with cars. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > to the way cars operate in the real world. Most driving is commuting to > and from work in stop & go city streets and on congested freeways. I think it he got the idea from the ads that GM has, also talking about highway mileage. > An airliner's fuel consumption is typically measured in kgs or gallons > burned per hour at cruising speed at cruising atltitude, usually at 75% > engine power. Highway mileage of cars is the closest thing to this kind of > spec., though Ford cars seldom operate at anything close to 75% > continuously because they'd blow up if they did. Actually, jet engines don't go at 75% engine power when cruising, either. Most four engine jets go around 50% power. Jet engines have a lot more wear and tear when they go near full power for prolonged periods. (When a plane loses one of its 4 engines, pilot will often land and switch planes, not because the plane can't safely get to its destination, but because airlines then have to fix 4 engines, three of which are worn out because of the added stress of flying closer to full power). > But a car that gets 25 mpg in the highway test gets 0 mpg when it's stopped > in traffic. When it accelerates to speed, it might get 4, 5 or 6 mpg. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > t.v. campaign is so phoney it borders on revolting and makes me puke my > bananas. You're full of crap. > Now cars COULD get 25 mpg city mileage, but you'd have to get the lead out. > A car under 500 kg, with a wind cheating alloy monocock body might get 25 > miles per gallon when loaded with passengers and stuff. Funny, my Ford Contour gets about 30 mpg highway, when loaded with kids and their stuff. > P.S. Don't do a Google search for "Explorer rollover" or "Pathfinder > rollover." It'll scare you shitless. Both those SUVs are tipsy like a > frickin' 1925 Model T and it doesn't make any different whether they're > made by Detroit rednecks or slant eyed Nips. Geez, you just need to insult people of color, and you've covered everyone. Jeff >> CEO Alan Mulally must have got the idea from his airliner background, but >> it won't work with cars. [quoted text clipped - 56 lines] > > Jeff Jeff, Sometimes your replies leave me scratching my head, but in this case you're right on the money. Most folks know that MPG goes down greatly in stop and go or low speed traffic. That's been the drawback of internal combustion engines since day one. I checked your jet engine analogy, and you're close enough to right that any rebuttal is somantics. Good one! My 84 Lincoln Mark VII, 302ci, TBI gets a constant 25mpg on the highway. In town it plummets to 15mpg or so. Your Contour, loaded, at 30mpg highway isn't unheard of. I don't expect you see much more that 19-22 for city driving, though. This guy's a frequent troll. His posts are designed to get someone's dander up, and they usually do. Just ignore him. I won't even get into his Explorer rollovers. Talk about media hype!! They tried to murder that vehicle. It survived, by the way ;) Actually many cars can operate on even less than that on the highway. GM and Chrysler currently offer V8 engines that run on only 4cy at under 2,000 RPMs at highway speeds. That is why they can get up to 30 MPG, better than some V6 engines, driven under the same conditions My 2007 Mustang GT convertible running on all eight cylinders, turns only 1,700 RPMs at 60 MPH, with a five speed OD tranny. Because of the V8s high torque it can stay in fifth gear on lesser grades as well.. Many 4 cy cars must run nearer to 3,000 RPMs to maintain 60 MPH on a flat road and even higher RPMs to maintain speed on grades. The six speed tranny, used in several V6 Fords, are double OD that allows them to run at lower RPMs on flat ground. My Lincoln V6 attains 34 MPG, at 70 MPH, using CC on flat roads. mike >> CEO Alan Mulally must have got the idea from his airliner background, but >> it won't work with cars. [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > Actually, jet engines don't go at 75% engine power when cruising, either. > Most four engine jets go around 50% power. > Jeff <<snip>> Did you just post the Ford commercial article, or did you also blast Chevy, Toyota, Honda, etc., for their outrageous claims? Few cars get what the window sticker says (although my Escape comes within 1MPG for in-town driving, and exceeds the stated mileage for highway driving), and I like to think that the average consumer realizes that. Even reading the ad's small print doesn't really justify their claims. To trash one car company for "ad exagerration" really isn't fair since they've ALL been doing it since ads were invented. Have fun, enjoy life! To quote a wise person, "If it isn't fun, why do it? SC Tom I remember reading (maybe CNN or consumerreports.org) a while back when they first came up with the new MPG standard that Toyota's sticker MPG numbers got hit the hardest while the Detroit 3's numbers did not decrease as much. Of course I am speaking generally and not targeting a particular model > <<snip>> > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > SC Tom That is true, the newest MPG figures will have a greater effect on many Japanese cars because of how they attain their HP, vis a v domestics. Japanese manufacture have a propensity to spin their engines higher, to gain HP for advertising purposes. That's fine but it results in a less desirable torque curve. By separating the ratio between the torque and HP curves the tranny must make up for the lack of torque, at the proper RPM, to get the vehicle moving and more importantly to keep it moving on grades. The result is, the new test criteria for the CAFE figures will show more of a drop on a particular Japanese vehicle than a particular domestic because the Japanese cars will be operating in lower gears more often during the tests. mike >I remember reading (maybe CNN or consumerreports.org) a while back when >they first came up with the new MPG standard that Toyota's sticker MPG >numbers got hit the hardest while the Detroit 3's numbers did not decrease >as much. Of course I am speaking generally and not targeting a particular >model yea, i think it is a bunch of bull also. when i bought my 99 crown vic, it said i would get 24 mpg highway. but i can tell you, it has never ever in the 8 years i have had it gotten 24 mpg. but it does regularly average 28-32 mpg on the highway, and 18-22 around town > CEO Alan Mulally must have got the idea from his airliner background, but > it won't work with cars. [quoted text clipped - 33 lines] > frickin' 1925 Model T and it doesn't make any different whether they're > made by Detroit rednecks or slant eyed Nips. The sticker never said you would get any miles per gallon... the sticker said it had an EPA RATING of "X" miles per gallon highway.... These EPA ratings are gathered under very controlled conditions and are useful only in comparing one car to another.... They are not to be used in some misbegotten attempt to judge actual fuel consumption.... It would be wise for some to read ALL of the print instead of just the words in BOLD.... > CEO Alan Mulally must have got the idea from his airliner background, > but it won't work with cars. [quoted text clipped - 30 lines] > like a frickin' 1925 Model T and it doesn't make any different > whether they're made by Detroit rednecks or slant eyed Nips. Eat cheese you putz. What you are saying may be basicly true but MISLEADING. For one thing the Ford ad you are referencing does not say "all Fords," only those particular Fords is the ad. You opinion on where one drives applies to ALL brands, that is why the CAFE label says for "comparison purposed only, your mileage my differ," since they are all subject to the same mileage test criteria. Obviously a 4 cy Camry, for instance, will not get 30 MPG or more, running down a gear or two, to maintain speed when driven in mountainous parts of the country. My 2007 Mustang GT convertible had a CAFE sticker that indicated 24 MPG on the highway but will easily attain 27 MPG, on a flat interstate, with the CC set at 70 MPG. ;) mike > CEO Alan Mulally must have got the idea from his airliner background, but > it won't work with cars. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > to the way cars operate in the real world. Most driving is commuting to > and from work in stop & go city streets and on congested freeways. >>on a flat interstate, with the CC > set at 70 MPG. ;) > > mike Wow, I wish I could set MY cruise control at 70 MPG!! I'd never turn it off LOL!! We know what you meant, though (at least I do). Take care, SC Tom > CEO Alan Mulally must have got the idea from his airliner background, but > it won't work with cars. Let's see... Toyota's doing it. Honda's doing it. Hyundai's doing it. GM's doing it. Dodge is doing it. Think they've all got airliner background CEOs? |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.