 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Ford / Ford Cars / June 2009How you can save fuel and the environment
winter days is needed. Anything more simply wastes fuel and increases emissions.- Aggressive driving (speeding, rapid acceleration, and hard braking) wastes gas. It can lower your highway gas mileage 33% and city mileage 5%. Drive at lowest and constant rpms; 2000 rpm are enough; you can save up to 30%. Even a Porsche can be driven at the 4th gear at 20 mph and at the 6th gear at 50 mph with 2.5 times less fuel consumption.- Avoid high speeds. Driving 75 mph, rather than 65 mph, could cut your fuel economy by 15%.- When you use overdrive gearing, your cars engine speed goes down. This saves gas and reduces wear.- Use air conditioning only when necessary.- Clear out your car; extra weight decreases gas mileage. Each 60 pounds increases fuel consumption by 10%. - Reduce drag by placing items inside the car or trunk rather than on roof racks. A roof rack or carrier provides additional cargo space and may allow you to buy a smaller car. However, a loaded roof rack can decrease your fuel economy by 5%.- Check into carpooling and public transit to cut mileage and car maintenance costs. Car Maintenance Tips:- Use the grade of motor oil recommended by your cars manufacturer. Using a different motor oil can lower your gasoline mileage by 1% to 2%.- Keep tires properly inflated and aligned to improve your gasoline mileage by around 3.3%.- Get regular engine tune- ups and car maintenance checks to avoid fuel economy problems due to worn spark plugs, dragging brakes, low transmission fluid, or transmission problems.- Replace clogged air filters to improve gas mileage by as much as 10% and protect your engine.- Combine errands into one trip. Several short trips, each one taken from a cold start, can use twice as much fuel as one trip covering the same distance when the engine is warm. Do not forget that in the first mile your car uses 8 times more fuel, in the second mile 4 times and only after the fourth mile it becomes normal.Long-Term Savings Tip- Consider buying a highly fuel-efficient vehicle. A fuelefficient vehicle, a hybrid vehicle, or an alternative fuel vehicle could save you a lot at the gas pump and help the environment.See the Fuel Economy Guide (www.fueleconomy.gov) for more on buying a new fuel-efficient car or truck. Source: www.eere.energy.gov and http://www.vcd.org/155.html your sources are wrong. my crown vic gets 21 mpg at 65 mpg. it gets 26 mpg at 75-80mph. and my 02 diesel gets 16mpg at 65mph, and 19mpg at 75-80mph. > winter days is needed. Anything more simply wastes fuel and increases > emissions.- Aggressive driving (speeding, rapid acceleration, and [quoted text clipped - 43 lines] > www.eere.energy.gov and > http://www.vcd.org/155.html > your sources are wrong. my crown vic gets 21 mpg at 65 mpg. it gets 26 mpg > at 75-80mph. > and my 02 diesel gets 16mpg at 65mph, and 19mpg at 75-80mph. I suspect the manufacturers would like to get your vehicles back for study. It is pretty much unheard of for the mileage to increase with speed above 65 mph for the simple reason that wind resistance increases greatly, reducing mileage, but your wonder vehicles must be something very special. Really? I have two vehicles that have fuel computers, one a 2009 V8 the other a 2010 V6. BOTH indicate the best fuel mileage occurs at around 75 MPH. Of course the top indicated fuel mileage is while going down a mountain, off the throttle, at 100 MPG ;) >> your sources are wrong. my crown vic gets 21 mpg at 65 mpg. it gets 26 >> mpg at 75-80mph. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > increases greatly, reducing mileage, but your wonder vehicles must > be something very special. > Really? I have two vehicles that have fuel computers, one a 2009 V8 the > other a 2010 V6. BOTH indicate the best fuel mileage occurs at around > 75 MPH. Of course the top indicated fuel mileage is while going down a > mountain, off the throttle, at 100 MPG ;) Yes, really, ask any knowledgeable engineer. It is just not possible that you get better mileage at 75 than 65. >> Really? I have two vehicles that have fuel computers, one a 2009 V8 the >> other a 2010 V6. BOTH indicate the best fuel mileage occurs at around [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >Yes, really, ask any knowledgeable engineer. It is just not possible >that you get better mileage at 75 than 65. Again - not true. Depends on the car. I've driven several vehicles that would give me a speeding ticket anywhere in Canada to acheive best fuel mileage. Most were 4 cyl cars. 1975 Celica GT was the most flagrant disregarder of this "law" - better than 50MPG at 80MPH and about 25-28 at 60MPH. Then there is my current PT Cruiser. Not strictly speed related - but the best mileage I have gotten with it was at an average of around 130kph in some serious hill country, where I manually downshifted to go up hills, to keep the engine RPM from dropping as far as it would on an automatic shift and allow the vehicle to take the hill with less throttle. 34MPG on tat section of the trip vs 25MPG steady Highway 401 driving at 95-100kph. I am a retired automotive engineer who worked for 30 years at GM, VW, and Ford. Do a bit of research on the effects of torque and RPM on efficiency, WBMA >> Really? I have two vehicles that have fuel computers, one a 2009 V8 the >> other a 2010 V6. BOTH indicate the best fuel mileage occurs at around [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Yes, really, ask any knowledgeable engineer. It is just not possible > that you get better mileage at 75 than 65. >> your sources are wrong. my crown vic gets 21 mpg at 65 mpg. it gets 26 mpg >> at 75-80mph. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >increases greatly, reducing mileage, but your wonder vehicles must >be something very special. It is definitely not unheard of - particularly if the higher speed is straight open-road driving, while the lower speed driving encounters traffic. I got my best mileage on my PT Cruiser on last summer's trip to the maritimes on the high speed legs of the trip. The harder I drove it the better it liked it (sensible hard driving - not jackrabbit starts and full-bore accel). At 90-100kph I cannot average any better than 25mpg. On the 120-130kph section of the trip I did 34. That's a 2.4 Liter twincam with automatic overdrive. It appears the engine is not "on the cam" at 100kph in 4th. Definitely is at 135! > your sources are wrong. my crown vic gets 21 mpg at 65 mpg. it gets 26 mpg > at 75-80mph. > and my 02 diesel gets 16mpg at 65mph, and 19mpg at 75-80mph. When this happens it's usually an indication of something seriously out of adjustment or a sensor way off. In the mandated 55mph CAFE days, you'd see a peak of mileage right at 55 with a 'brick wall' of reduced efficiency above that. I'm not sure how the new rules are set up, but they have moved the ratings 'up' in speed for mileage, more real world, but I doubt they went up to above 70mph. If you get the vehicle serviced, you'd probably see an even better mileage at about 65 than you do at 75, and overall a better mileage per tank. you should really really stop smoking crack. it is making your internet posts make you look realy stupid. you want me to "get my car serviced" so it will loose gas mileage?? >> your sources are wrong. my crown vic gets 21 mpg at 65 mpg. it gets 26 >> mpg at 75-80mph. [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > If you get the vehicle serviced, you'd probably see an even better mileage > at about 65 than you do at 75, and overall a better mileage per tank. No, I would like you to take your head out of that dark space so you can see, and actually read what I posted. > you should really really stop smoking crack. it is making your internet > posts make you look realy stupid. [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] >> mileage at about 65 than you do at 75, and overall a better mileage per >> tank. >> your sources are wrong. my crown vic gets 21 mpg at 65 mpg. it gets 26 mpg >> at 75-80mph. [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] >If you get the vehicle serviced, you'd probably see an even better mileage >at about 65 than you do at 75, and overall a better mileage per tank. Not necessarily true. Poop on that ... go salt water biodiesel farms. One acre pond of saltwater will make 300,000 miles of biodiesel energy that is a premium fuel at $1 a gallon delivered as you grow is on the surface. Australia will be a saltwater biodiesel exporter. USA can replenish it's depleted oil fields, sequester carbon underground in the same fell swoop ... AND ... AND ... take a 80 per cent reduction in green house gas. Bangaladesh can grow it's own biodiesel ... can grow it on soil that will not support crops .. and use saltwater or make the Salton Sea a biodiesel pond. Think outside the box dood ... seriously ... sumbuddie wear blind sea :? > winter days is needed. Anything more simply wastes fuel and increases > emissions.- Aggressive driving (speeding, rapid acceleration, and > hard > braking) wastes > Poop on that ... go salt water biodiesel farms. > [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] >> hard >> braking) wastes Cold Fusion is the only way :-)  SignatureCivis Romanus Sum Would to modify some of your generalities and be a little more specific. Burning the tires (low speeds) on a regular basis wil not only radically reduce tire life, you may actually see the fuel indicator go towards empty literally. If you spend alot or most of your car time in heavy traffic at low speeds, you need to find an open highway to open up the engine once a month. Especially if you own an older car. For the older car its a matter of carbon buildup and oil contamination. A newer car, the oil contamination that develops over a few short trips in a long period of time. Use of the highest gear is usually advisable. If the vehicle can't maintain even minimum speed up a grade, a lower gear should be selected. Not only for obvious operation of the car, but also for safety consideration of all traffic. Use of the highest gear possible for engiine braking is okay. Downshifting to lower speed eats gas. Use of AC as far as gas economy varies from vehicle to vehicle. It primarily depends on engine torque in relation to vehicle weight, and wind resistance at highway speeds. At idle in stop/go traffic, its primarily the engine torque vs the AC compressor load. A comparison at idle of a subcompact with a wimpy engine vs say a Ford Expedition, the Expedition will suffer much less percentage-wise loss of gas mileage Weight (IE: mass) is only a factor for acceleration and deceleration. A 60 lb. additional passenger does NOT decrease mileage by 10% in any vehicle that I know of. This is also less of a factor in and adequately powered vehicle. The only factor that warm-up time is around the first 10 seconds to 2 minutes, depending on the ambient temperature. This for the fuel system adjustment. Current multiple viscosity oils serve purpose of providing adequate lubrication over the remainder of time that it takes for the oil to come to full temperature. The other thing warming during this time is the engine coolant which keeps the engine cooler than normal until its up to normal temperature. This time varies highly from vehicle to vehicle and ambient temperature, driving speed, driving conditions. Regardless, terms in miles should not be used for warm-up time. This implies a known speed and known ambient temperature, known traffic conditions etc. even if you know the specific vehicle. You fell off the wagon at that point with the government overgeneralized guidelines. SignatureDave > winter days is needed. Anything more simply wastes fuel and increases > emissions.- Aggressive driving (speeding, rapid acceleration, and [quoted text clipped - 43 lines] > www.eere.energy.gov and > http://www.vcd.org/155.html Low speeds on a regular basis..... I am in slow traffic.... trapped in slow traffic.... on a regular basis. Please tell me what I am going to change? You will have to demonstrate some empirical evidence to indicate that low speeds are detrimental to tire life. Every engine has a "sweet spot". Modern engines use intake manifold tuning devices, variable camshaft timing devices and, of course, computer controlled fuel and ignition curves in an attempt expand the "sweet spot" over a broader RPM range. As technology advances, we can adjust basic operating parameters to make more efficient use of our fuels. During a closed throttle coast down on any recent EFI engine, the fuel injectors are turned off.... at the same time, the idle control device moves to full open in preparation (manual trasns) for a dashpot effect. the PCM can turn the injectors back on in a heartbeat.... Poor engine braking is the result of high gear selection - premature synchronizer or friction (auto trans) wear is the result of downshifting - this is a personal choice BUT - last I checked, a brake job was much cheaper than a trans overhaul. Air conditioning uses more gas - period.... If you want better gas mileage.... do not select air conditioning nor select any heater position where the heater blows on glass. The AC is used to dehumidify the discharge air - very few HEATER mode selections will NOT turn on the AC compressor... Let's add that the electrical system has the modern auto utilizing alternators way in excess of 100 amps. Not too many years ago, a 30 amp alternator was adequate. Horsepower can also be measured in watts. Increased weight increases frictional losses... I can't see 10% but increased weight increases frictional losses.... Cold starts are engine killers.... where I live, -40 can be considered "normal" at various times of the year... multiviscosity oils are no guarranty of adequate lubrication in the first few minutes of wintertime engine operation. I can watch the oil pressure gauge finally start to come up after 30 or 40 seconds of engine operation. If it takes that long for oil to reach the oil pressure switch, imagine how long it takes to get to the end of the lubrication system.. Lastly... what is "the engine coolant which keeps the engine cooler than normal until its up to normal temperature"? The coolant is part of the package... without it, you wont go far. Or did you take your thermostat out at some point? > Would to modify some of your generalities and be a little more specific. > [quoted text clipped - 87 lines] >> www.eere.energy.gov and >> http://www.vcd.org/155.html > Low speeds on a regular basis..... I am in slow traffic.... trapped in > slow traffic.... on a regular basis. Please tell me what I am going to > change? You will have to demonstrate some empirical evidence to indicate > that low speeds are detrimental to tire life. Read again what I said... > Every engine has a "sweet spot". Modern engines use intake manifold tuning > devices, variable camshaft timing devices and, of course, computer > controlled fuel and ignition curves in an attempt expand the "sweet spot" > over a broader RPM range. As technology advances, we can adjust basic > operating parameters to make more efficient use of our fuels. Yes, the engine's max torque vs. gasoline use at a given engine rpm. Most economical rpms, if you will. Another factor in the equation. > During a closed throttle coast down on any recent EFI engine, the fuel > injectors are turned off.... at the same time, the idle control device [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > personal choice BUT - last I checked, a brake job was much cheaper than a > trans overhaul. Read again, I implied not to downshift. Rather remain in the highest gear possible for engine braking. It is assumed (at least by most people), that you will be driving normally in the highest gear possble to begin with. The time varies but the engine will drop to normal idle rpms or attempt to after around 10 seconds. Anticipation factor is needed in this equation for engine braking. Synchronizer wear is not a factor if you're not changing gears. > Air conditioning uses more gas - period.... If you want better gas No one said otherwise. Percentage-wise in gasoline use, the smaller car with the wimpy engine will suffer more in gasoline mileage that a much larger vehicle with a suitably larger engine while using the AC. Don't color my statement otherwise. > mileage.... do not select air conditioning nor select any heater position > where the heater blows on glass. The AC is used to dehumidify the > discharge air - very few HEATER mode selections will NOT turn on the AC > compressor... Let's add that the electrical system has the modern auto > utilizing alternators way in excess of 100 amps. Not too many years ago, a > 30 amp alternator was adequate. Horsepower can also be measured in watts. Alternator load on the engine is not a constant as you seem to be under the impression of. Its a matter of load vs. need by the electrical system at any given time. > Increased weight increases frictional losses... I can't see 10% but > increased weight increases frictional losses.... Its not a frictional loss. Never was. Its a matter of inertia and increased mass. Simple physics. Increased mass is only factor in acceleration and deceleration. When fighting gravity, up a slope while attempting to maintain speed, weight is a factor. And inversely, while attempting to maintain speed down a slope, weight is a factor. http://physics.about.com/od/glossary/g/mass.htm http://physics.about.com/od/classicalmechanics/a/lawsofmotion_3.htm > Cold starts are engine killers.... where I live, -40 can be considered > "normal" at various times of the year... multiviscosity oils are no [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > package... without it, you wont go far. Or did you take your thermostat > out at some point? No, that's not what I said. Its one of the things that has to heat up as part of the overall engine warm-up. This takes longest to heat up. That's all I meant. To expand further on that, engine vs. engine, some have more than adequate coolant capacity vs. the engine heat made. These take longer to warm-up at the same ambient temperature. Its not all the same across the board. Dash temperature gauge is quantifiying coolant temperature. My original response was to denounce the over-generalities provided by the government for gas mileage increases. >> Would to modify some of your generalities and be a little more specific. >> [quoted text clipped - 88 lines] >>> www.eere.energy.gov and >>> http://www.vcd.org/155.html >Low speeds on a regular basis..... I am in slow traffic.... trapped in slow >traffic.... on a regular basis. Please tell me what I am going to change? [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] >trans) wear is the result of downshifting - this is a personal choice BUT - >last I checked, a brake job was much cheaper than a trans overhaul. True - BUT. PROPERLY downshifting the engine for engine braking does no more damage/wear to the trans than automatic downshifting to pass ot take a hill. >Air conditioning uses more gas - period.... If you want better gas >mileage.... do not select air conditioning nor select any heater position >where the heater blows on glass. The AC is used to dehumidify the discharge >air - very few HEATER mode selections will NOT turn on the AC compressor... GENERALLY - and that is a generalization, AC only comes on when defrost is selected or AC is manually called for on a manual system. On my PT the AC comes on on full dfrost and the mix position just before full defrost.. And at somewhere above 80kph (50mph) depending on the aerodynamics of the car, it becomes more economical to turn on the AC than to drive with the windows open on MOST cars. >Let's add that the electrical system has the modern auto utilizing >alternators way in excess of 100 amps. Not too many years ago, a 30 amp >alternator was adequate. Horsepower can also be measured in watts. But the 100 amp alternator is producing less than 50 most of the time. In many cases less than 30. 50 amps at 13.2 volts is 660 watts. That's 0.88HP and requires about 1.0 to 1.4 HP to produce with today's average alternator. Double that for full output of 100 amps, except at 100 amps the voltage is extremely unlikely to be much over 12.6 - so power required is closer to 2HP than 2.8. >Increased weight increases frictional losses... I can't see 10% but >increased weight increases frictional losses.... [quoted text clipped - 103 lines] >>> www.eere.energy.gov and >>> http://www.vcd.org/155.html Perhapswe should add that downshifting for additional engine braking can also be considered as 'unecessary' downshifting if we are driving correctly. With a manual transmission, I assume that a "correct" downshift would include increasing engine rpm momentarily to reduce rpm differences in the intended gear selection - thereby reducing the wear on manual transmission synchronizers? Blipping the throttle saves gas by????? With an automatic, there is no "driveline disconnect" (read that as clutch) and a shift is going to be a shift..... In either case, is the shift a necessary shift or is it an unecessary shift... In either case, you guys are going to bitch aboiut the cost of repairs or the need for them... Air conditioning.. once again... any time air can blow on glass, the AC will run is pretty much the industry standard. I am happy for your Dodge... but I recall the sign on the door said something about Ford.... And on every Ford I have noted, any time air BLOWS ON GLASS... Going for a "Sunday drive" and worrying about gas mileage while you're doing it... now there is an oxymoron.... >Perhapswe should add that downshifting for additional engine braking can >also be considered as 'unecessary' downshifting if we are driving correctly. [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] >Going for a "Sunday drive" and worrying about gas mileage while you're doing >it... now there is an oxymoron.... LONG downhill run with full rated weight capacity is one place where engine braking is highly recommended - and in a lower gear. Proper way to downshift is to accelerate as you downshift so the engine rpms come up of their own accord rather than being "dragged" up by the tranny through the clutches. This takes the shock load off the clutches and gears and allows a smooth, controlled downshift into the next lower gear to take advantage of engine compression braking. Try rolling down the coquihalla in BC with either a fully loaded sedan or a minivan with a big trailer. Without engine braking you can have every brake on the combination of axles smoking - and end up with SERIOUS brake fade. Lots of other places with the same conditions - Independence Pass comes to mind. Also parts of the BlueRidge, and a few highways through the coal country of PA, VA, WVA etc. Parts of the northeast states too. I wouldn't run Smugglers notch in (over)drive in a small sedan with 4 adults and luggage. Not likely in third either. Rolling down the Coquihalla... wow.... how many of us do that every day? Of all the vehicles in North America, how many at any given time will be involvedin negotiating anything similar? Trying to present a minority situation as "run of the mill" is a limp dick way of trying to back out of something better left unsaid. Downshifting at the summit and beginning the decent in an appropriate gear is the sane thing to do. Yes, I have driven heavy trucks in the mountains.... 84,000 pounds on 5 axles was the usual scenario... but there were a few occasions on 7 axles... Accelerate as you downshift.... silly me, I thought the topic included saving fuel. >>Perhapswe should add that downshifting for additional engine braking can >>also be considered as 'unecessary' downshifting if we are driving [quoted text clipped - 42 lines] > (over)drive in a small sedan with 4 adults and luggage. Not likely in > third either. >Rolling down the Coquihalla... wow.... how many of us do that every day? Of >all the vehicles in North America, how many at any given time will be [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > >Jim. you are smart enough to know what I mean - you]ve driven truck and know what double clutching is and what it accomplishes. The same principal applies to force downshifting an automatic. Pull the lever back and accellerate to initiate the shift, then back out of it to instigate engine braking. > Would to modify some of your generalities and be a little more specific. > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > If you spend alot or most of your car time in heavy traffic at low speeds, > you need to find an open highway to open up the engine once a month. Why? How do you open it up? Do you mean take the valve covers off? Check the oil? > Especially if you own an older car. For the older car its a matter of > carbon buildup and oil contamination. A newer car, the oil contamination > that develops over a few short trips in a long period of time. Evidence to support this crap, please. > Use of the highest gear is usually advisable. If the vehicle can't maintain > even minimum speed up a grade, a lower gear should be selected. Not only > for obvious operation of the car, but also for safety consideration of all > traffic. Really? So if I am going too slowly up a hill in New York, how does that affect the safety of traffic in Hawaii? > Use of the highest gear possible for engiine braking is okay. Downshifting > to lower speed eats gas. Actually, that's wrong in fuel injected cars. > Use of AC as far as gas economy varies from vehicle to vehicle. It > primarily depends on engine torque in relation to vehicle weight, and wind > resistance at highway speeds. At idle in stop/go traffic, its primarily the > engine torque vs the AC compressor load. A comparison at idle of a > subcompact with a wimpy engine vs say a Ford Expedition, the Expedition will > suffer much less percentage-wise loss of gas mileage Yet, the Expeidition may use more fuel to run the A/C than a Civic. > Weight (IE: mass) is only a factor for acceleration and deceleration. Weight and mass are two different things. > A 60 > lb. additional passenger does NOT decrease mileage by 10% in any vehicle > that I know of. This is also less of a factor in and adequately powered > vehicle. Not true. If you add a sixty pount pasenger to my little scooter, it will decrease mileage by about 10%. > The only factor that warm-up time is around the first 10 seconds to 2 > minutes, depending on the ambient temperature. This for the fuel system [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > know the specific vehicle. You fell off the wagon at that point with the > government overgeneralized guidelines. Incorrect. He fell off the wagon when he wrote the stupid spam message. That's all it is. Spam. Jeff > -- > [quoted text clipped - 45 lines] > >www.eere.energy.gov and > >http://www.vcd.org/155.html >Would to modify some of your generalities and be a little more specific. > [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] >Use of the highest gear possible for engiine braking is okay. Downshifting >to lower speed eats gas. You don't GET any significant engine braking in high gear - and with the throttle closed and the engine in over-run you use NO GAS as the injection turns off - at least on most current engines. >Use of AC as far as gas economy varies from vehicle to vehicle. It >primarily depends on engine torque in relation to vehicle weight, and wind [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > >Weight (IE: mass) is only a factor for acceleration and deceleration. And climbing hills. > A 60 >lb. additional passenger does NOT decrease mileage by 10% in any vehicle [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] >know the specific vehicle. You fell off the wagon at that point with the >government overgeneralized guidelines. And the engine warms up faster under light load than when idling. Start the car, brush the snow off the windows, put it in gear and gently drive away. This warms up the tranny and final drive, as well as the wheel bearings etc along with the engine. ALL cold moving parts require more power than warmed moving parts. |
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.