 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Volvo Cars / January 2008Wow
I did a little experiment the last few days since I was doing a lot of highway driving. Tried to keep the speed at 65 or below, and focussed on staying out of boost entirely and keeping the boost guage as far into the black as I could. Managed almost 31 mpg from my '87 740 Turbo, wow, I was amazed, the highest I'd *ever* gotten before was a hair under 27, with 25 being more typical highway mileage. It took some concentration but I didn't really have to go much slower overall than I normally drive. > I did a little experiment the last few days since I was doing a lot of > highway driving. Tried to keep the speed at 65 or below, and focussed on [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > being more typical highway mileage. It took some concentration but I didn't > really have to go much slower overall than I normally drive. I've been trying to keep my foot out of my 91 740 wagon, which seems to get 22mpg (last time I checked a couple of years ago). I'll see what happens in the -80mph category. Just started tracking on Saturday. >> I did a little experiment the last few days since I was doing a lot of >> highway driving. Tried to keep the speed at 65 or below, and focussed on [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > get 22mpg (last time I checked a couple of years ago). I'll see what > happens in the -80mph category. Just started tracking on Saturday. I find I get around 24 mpg at 80, the mileage falls off rapidly as the speed increases beyond 65 or so. This is with a manual transmission, automatic will get significantly lower. >>> I did a little experiment the last few days since I was doing a lot of >>> highway driving. Tried to keep the speed at 65 or below, and focussed on [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > increases beyond 65 or so. This is with a manual transmission, automatic > will get significantly lower. I've got an automatic, on a wagon. I think its against the law to have a stick on a wagon. I've wondered how much it would cost me to put a manual in that baby. >>>> I did a little experiment the last few days since I was doing a lot of >>>> highway driving. Tried to keep the speed at 65 or below, and focussed on [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] >a stick on a wagon. I've wondered how much it would cost me to put a >manual in that baby. Back in the '80s, I did a change from auto to manual but I'm not sure it could be done with a car as they are today (all interlinked through the computer system). > I've got an automatic, on a wagon. I think its against the law to have a > stick on a wagon. I've wondered how much it would cost me to put a manual > in that baby. When I did it on another 740, it cost about $300. We found a manual 740 at the wrecker, pulled the gearbox, front half of the driveshaft, clutch/brake pedal assembly, flywheel, and interior trim then bought a new clutch. Conversion took a weekend and everything just came together. Manual wagons are around, they're just not as common. >> I did a little experiment the last few days since I was doing a lot of >> highway driving. Tried to keep the speed at 65 or below, and focussed [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > get 22mpg (last time I checked a couple of years ago). I'll see what > happens in the -80mph category. Just started tracking on Saturday. Just logged 26.7mpg on my wagon. And that was keeping it under 70. Looks like I've got a bit of catching up to do with you. I'm also about to buy another vehicle which will get infinite mpg, a recumbent bike. So, as my mileage goes down, my mpg will go up. > Just logged 26.7mpg on my wagon. And that was keeping it under 70. > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > So, as my mileage goes down, my mpg will go up. I've been eyeing those recumbant bikes for a while now, wish I knew someone who had one so I could try it out. I also wish this area was better laid out for bicycle commuting but at least we do have one excellent bike trail which is convenient for anything that happens to be along it. >>Just logged 26.7mpg on my wagon. And that was keeping it under 70. >> [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > for bicycle commuting but at least we do have one excellent bike trail which > is convenient for anything that happens to be along it. Check out bentrideronline.com. Lots of resources there, places to ask questions. I'm only just venturing into this. I was toying with the idea about a year ago. I just couldn't see spending a few hundred dollars for half-way measures again, trying to get a regular bike to not kill my wrists, etc, so I'm seriously searching right now. Someone on bentrideronline.com might be able to point you to a dealer somewhat close to you. They can be a little scary in traffic at first. Getting them rolling from a stop takes some experience, particularly if you're distracted (read "IN TRAFFIC"). I did a 30 mile trip on Sunday, NO PAIN. I did the same trip a couple of weeks before that, on my regular bike, and I was hurting somewhat. Thought my butt was going to fall off. Had to keep getting off the bike to work out a cramp in my glutes/hamstring area. Hill climbing on them is more problematic, as you're using a different set of muscles, so I'm told. I have a hard time believing that, but I am sore in some new places after test riding this thing. Joe Bob says check it out. <snip> > Just logged 26.7mpg on my wagon. And that was keeping it under 70. > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > So, as my mileage goes down, my mpg will go up. Nah, you'll use water. In the summer, I used to use about 40-60mpg. Tastes much better than gasoline, though. JRE > <snip> > [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > JRE More expensive too. Unless you use free-range water. >I did a little experiment the last few days since I was doing a lot of >highway driving. Tried to keep the speed at 65 or below, and focussed on [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >being more typical highway mileage. It took some concentration but I didn't >really have to go much slower overall than I normally drive. If you have cruise control, use it on the highway. I did a test about a week ago with a Mercury; mileage at 70 was 23, at 65 it was 27, and at 60 it was 30. This was on flat Interstate using cruise control; the car is a Grand Marquis with a 4.6L V8. I suspect you'll find similar differences in your 740, particularly if you stay out of the boost while accelerating. Gary  SignatureGary Heston gheston@hiwaay.net http://www.thebreastcancersite.com/ Yoko Onos' former driver tried to extort $2M from her, threating to "release embarassing recordings...". What, he has a copy of her album? > If you have cruise control, use it on the highway. > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > suspect you'll find similar differences in your 740, particularly if > you stay out of the boost while accelerating. I have cruise control, but my experiment proved I can do substantially better manually. With the cruise control engaged, whenever the highway goes uphill the boost pegs. Driving manually I can be much more gentle on the throttle and as I found, that's worth several mpg. I have tried that in my 89' 780 also, but probably didn't do it long enough to see a difference. I was just low on gas that day... It seems like they had a "fuel economy" gauge in GM cars, maybe Oldsmobile in the late 70's that was basically a vacuum gauge. You kept the accelation below the yellow and red areas for better fuel economy as I remember. Come to think of it, isn't the boost gauge just a form of vacuum gauge also? >I did a little experiment the last few days since I was doing a lot of >highway driving. Tried to keep the speed at 65 or below, and focussed on [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >being more typical highway mileage. It took some concentration but I didn't >really have to go much slower overall than I normally drive. > I have tried that in my 89' 780 also, but probably didn't do it long > enough to see a difference. I was just low on gas that day... [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > Come to think of it, isn't the boost gauge just a form of vacuum gauge > also? That's exactly what it is, except it's a compound gauge that also can measure positive pressure. Volvo offered a fuel economy gauge for the 200 series, it's just a vacuum gauge, several other cars had them available as well as aftermarket units. 31 MPG is what I get most times but as thats imperial gallons it means you did very well for american gallons which is much smaller .I enjoyed saying that ;) > I have tried that in my 89' 780 also, but probably didn't do it long > enough to see a difference. I was just low on gas that day... [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] >>didn't >>really have to go much slower overall than I normally drive. > 31 MPG is what I get most times but as thats imperial gallons it means you > did very well for american gallons which is much smaller .I enjoyed saying [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] >>> didn't >>> really have to go much slower overall than I normally drive. I drive from New York City ot Philadelphia on the Jersey Turnpike every few months. One time last year, I was in nor rush so I decided to drive a little slower than I usually did. It turned out to be more difficult than when I did my usual- just kept up with the flow of traffic. I was constantly dodging cars that bore down on me from behind. And I wasn't in the passing lane. I really dislike tailgaters. |
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
|
©2008 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.