How Fuel efficient is your car?

All things outside of Burning Man.

What is your gas mileage"

Under 5 mpg (I funded 9/11)
3
1%
5-10 mpg (Dicked by Cheney)
5
2%
10-20 mpg (quasi-militant Green Peacer)
64
30%
20-30 mpg (I Dicked Cheney)
45
21%
30-40 mpg (I don't need no stinken war)
51
24%
40-60 mpg (Everyone Love's Me)
28
13%
60+ mpg (Only the Gods do better)
8
4%
I only use human powered vehicles!
11
5%
 
Total votes : 215

How Fuel efficient is your car?

Postby Apollonaris Zeus » Tue Mar 07, 2006 9:27 pm

I've just doubled my mileage with a new car that gets 45mpg on the highway.

Saving lives, fighting terrorists working for the little guy.

Talk is cheap, what MPG are you getting?

AIIZ
User avatar
Apollonaris Zeus
 
Posts: 3716
Joined: Sun Sep 14, 2003 11:17 am

Postby Tiahaar » Tue Mar 07, 2006 11:26 pm

Excellent AZ.

Let's see...for 50 weeks of the year I bicycle it, 84 miles/week to work and errands for 4200 miles.

Then I do a 1300 mile round trip to the playa @ 8mpg or 162.5 gallons of diesel.

So my yearly mpg index is 5500 miles per 162.5 gallons = 33.8

Not too bad :)
Burning Man 2003-13; Desert Carillon, Ulaume's Chimes, Iron Native, Black Rock Solar, Portal Collective, Center Camp Café Stage Tech
RING THE COCK Caravansy Peenerweight Boutique
User avatar
Tiahaar
 
Posts: 1042
Joined: Sat Sep 20, 2003 9:13 pm
Location: Goleta, CA (also Forever via Pandora)
Burning Since: 2003
Camp Name: Starship Palomino

Postby Dork » Tue Mar 07, 2006 11:38 pm

I get 31, but more importantly I just bought a small, well insulated house less than a mile from work so I'll hardly have to use the thing.
User avatar
Dork
 
Posts: 2066
Joined: Tue Jan 06, 2004 7:01 pm
Location: Las Vegas

Postby Apollonaris Zeus » Wed Mar 08, 2006 9:16 am

Tiahaar wrote:Excellent AZ.

Let's see...for 50 weeks of the year I bicycle it, 84 miles/week to work and errands for 4200 miles.

Then I do a 1300 mile round trip to the playa @ 8mpg or 162.5 gallons of diesel.

So my yearly mpg index is 5500 miles per 162.5 gallons = 33.8

Not too bad :)


That's fantastic, TH

I should have made a note that trucking or RV'ing to BM or for work should be left out of the equation- you gotta carry shit then maybe you should factor it by the pound!

I live downtown so I walk or use a bike, so I almost never use a vehicle in town unless the roads are iced up or the payloads are too great for my bike- walking to clubs help against the DWI's too!


AIIZ
User avatar
Apollonaris Zeus
 
Posts: 3716
Joined: Sun Sep 14, 2003 11:17 am

Postby AntiM » Wed Mar 08, 2006 12:39 pm

I don't even have a driver's license. I stay home a lot.
These are not my fuckos.
User avatar
AntiM
Moderator
 
Posts: 16387
Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2004 6:23 am
Location: Top O' the World, Ma!
Burning Since: 2001
Camp Name: Anti M's Home for Wayward Art

Re: How Fuel efficient is your car?

Postby HughMungus » Thu Mar 09, 2006 11:25 am

Apollonaris Zeus wrote:Talk is cheap, what MPG are you getting?

AIIZ


An even more important question is: why do you drive so far to work? I drive an SUV but I'd bet I use less gas in a year than anyone else here who drives to work daily.
It's what you make it.
User avatar
HughMungus
 
Posts: 1823
Joined: Thu Sep 09, 2004 10:17 am
Location: Dallas, TX

Postby mojo » Thu Mar 09, 2006 11:43 am

I was really surprised - the giant SUV that I have to use occasionally gets better mileage than my little 2 seater hobby car. I have a Japanese gas saver for my long daily commute. It averages about 45mpg.
Cum catapulte proscripte erunt tum soli proscripti catapultus haebunt.
User avatar
mojo
 
Posts: 1583
Joined: Tue Apr 12, 2005 9:47 am
Location: Santa Barbara, CA

Postby Kinetic IV » Thu Mar 09, 2006 3:31 pm

18 city, 21 highway. But in 3 months my commute is going to triple to 90 miles round trip. I may buy a hybrid by then.
K-IV
~~~~
Thank you for over 7 years of eplaya memories. I have asked Emily Sparkle to delete my account and I am gone. Goodbye and Goodluck to all of you! I will miss you!
Kinetic IV
 
Posts: 2984
Joined: Sun Apr 03, 2005 7:34 pm
Location: Kyiv, Ukraine as of 10/27/06

Postby freakersedge » Thu Mar 09, 2006 8:19 pm

I drive an american made Jeep with a truck top on it, got rid of the box appearance because those big side windows created quite a drag and I got tired of being pushed all over the freeway by our breezes. Its a 4cyl. but I only get 17 miles a gallon and am researching what I can do to improve that. My average trip is 700 miles unless we count the 8 miles to the mailbox every few days and we needn't count that do we?

freaker
just your basic hippy
freakersedge
 
Posts: 61
Joined: Mon Mar 06, 2006 11:42 am
Location: Reno, Nevada

Postby philosopher » Fri Mar 10, 2006 2:16 am

About improving the Jeep mileage: I can tell you about my experience of the reverse. My V8 Firebird Formula used to get 26-27 mpg in summer highway driving at 70+ mph, hills included. I put a wider, but lighter weight wheel and tire combination of identical total diameter on it and got much better handling at a surprising penalty of 4 mpg. Unless I have to travel for work, it scarcely matters, as I only fill up about once a month. (bike+walk)

But getting back to the Jeep...Those typical Jeep wheels and tires are heavy and have a high rolling resistance. If you don't need the extreme off-road capability, I think that's the place to start. But it would look weird if you aren't real careful.
User avatar
philosopher
 
Posts: 138
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2003 12:35 am
Location: Chico, CA

Postby Rob the Wop » Fri Mar 10, 2006 11:01 am

Fully electric. Moot point. Ha! Ha ha!

Image
The other, other white meat.
User avatar
Rob the Wop
 
Posts: 1814
Joined: Mon Sep 01, 2003 4:06 pm
Location: Furbackistan, OR

Postby Kinetic IV » Fri Mar 10, 2006 2:38 pm

Rob the Wop wrote:Fully electric. Moot point. Ha! Ha ha!

Image


Awww, that's cute.
Now playing devil's advocate for a bit....
How many tons of coal did it take to provide power for that electric car? How much mercury was released into the environment by those coal fired plants to generate the electricty pushed into those batteries? How many gallons of diesel fuel did it take either BNSF or the UP to haul that coal in to the local powerplant? Oh, the local powerplant is nuclear? Are they properly storing those spent fuel rods or do they have a silent problem with tritium leaking into the groundwater like ComEd does outside Chicago? And back to those lead batteries, how many children suffer with lead poisoning from the smelters that are required to make the internal plates for those batteries?

Rob, all of the above is NOT an attack on you, it's the whole electric car thing in general. I'm shooting at the idea, not the messenger.
K-IV
~~~~
Thank you for over 7 years of eplaya memories. I have asked Emily Sparkle to delete my account and I am gone. Goodbye and Goodluck to all of you! I will miss you!
Kinetic IV
 
Posts: 2984
Joined: Sun Apr 03, 2005 7:34 pm
Location: Kyiv, Ukraine as of 10/27/06

Postby AntiM » Fri Mar 10, 2006 3:05 pm

And then there's the towing ability vs. fuel efficiency issue. Larry and I knew we needed something which could tow 5k or better. We did not need a commuter vehicle. It is a trade-off, if you want to pull a load, mpgs suffer. And we do go off road, need the heavier tires and the high clearance. There wasn't a single vehicle in our price range which got better than 22 mpg and could pull more than a thousand pounds.

Talk about wasteful, his big rig gets 7 mpg (deisel) and that's quite good; but then it weighs 80,000 lbs. fully loaded. I'm willing to bet that buying local produce and goods would save more fuel than buying a fuel-efficient vehicle for personal use. I haven't done the figures on that, just a hunch which may be wrong. I just know that hauling organic lettuce from Salinas CA to upstate ny wallys can't be the best use of diesel. What reallly got me was hauling christmas trees from the northwest to South Carolina! Thery grow trees there, lots of them.
These are not my fuckos.
User avatar
AntiM
Moderator
 
Posts: 16387
Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2004 6:23 am
Location: Top O' the World, Ma!
Burning Since: 2001
Camp Name: Anti M's Home for Wayward Art

Postby diane o'thirst » Fri Mar 10, 2006 4:46 pm

Well, with hydrogen-fueled cars available but costing more than a brand-new Range Rover and needing to be imported from Japan, that's unfortunately beyond my means. Besides, that $94,000 will only buy you a little econo-putt-putt. It wouldn't survive a day with me.

So's getting a double-tank diesel truck, running around $25,000, for biodiesel. And unfortunately, commercial enterprises are catching on so biodiesel isn't free/cheap like it used to be anymore.

But...I recently learnt that you can go to any mechanic, get your rig retrofitted with a flex-fuel pump for $100. So I'm currently in a personal quest to get a groundswell/grassroots campaign to lean on our legislators to lean on the big petrol companies to develop more E85. Heck, I might get the pump anyway, ahead of the groundswell. If enough of us do that and start demanding our rights as consumers, the companies might listen and move into that market niche. If I can swing a $100 fix and a few hours in my local mechanic shop, anyone can. In fact, I'll bet half the people reading this are looking into doing it themselves on their own rigs.

In this country, 99 million acres of farmland lie fallow, at the behest of and paid by the government to do so. That can grow a LOT of biodiesel/ethanol crops, methinks. Let's put the farmers to work and when Iran does something like say "Alright...let me tell you heathen Infidels something...We'll just withhold our oil stocks! So there!" we can say, "Pffft! Knock yourself out, buddy."
ImageImageImage
User avatar
diane o'thirst
 
Posts: 2095
Joined: Tue Sep 09, 2003 5:04 pm
Location: Eugene, OR

Postby Kinetic IV » Fri Mar 10, 2006 5:58 pm

Living out here in the Midwest one might think I'd be jumping on the E85 bandwagon. But I'm not...and a key reason is the crops used to make this stuff are very thirsty. Groundwater is at a premium and parts of the Midwest and other areas are in drought or extreme drought conditions. Just South of Kansas City wells that were drilled to 350 ft depths are running dry, 450, ft is now a standard depth and in the case of commercial users more than a few 900 ft depth wells have been drilled just this year. I know of one drilled to 1130 ft myself.

Moving Northwest 300 miles Nebraska farmers are turning on the irrigation pumps earlier than they ever have this year. The Ogallala Aquifer is seeing serious drops in water levels in that area that are causing many with knowledge about the drops to have deep concerns. If the US was to place many of those 99 Million fallow acres into production it would most likely be planted with corn which is not the thirstiest crop out there, but just planting the volumes needed would be a major tax on our freshwater resources. For that reason alone I'm very hesitant to jump on the E85 bandwagon...out of all the things that are important water is without question the one thing we can't live without. Resolve the water issue and I'll bite...until then No, I don't think so.
K-IV
~~~~
Thank you for over 7 years of eplaya memories. I have asked Emily Sparkle to delete my account and I am gone. Goodbye and Goodluck to all of you! I will miss you!
Kinetic IV
 
Posts: 2984
Joined: Sun Apr 03, 2005 7:34 pm
Location: Kyiv, Ukraine as of 10/27/06

Postby diane o'thirst » Fri Mar 10, 2006 9:18 pm

There's some talk about E85 being produced from weeds and wood scrap, too. And around here, before the biodiesel boom, the main biodiesel oil was peanut oil from Chinese restaurants. People were going around to restaurants, saying, "I'll take your used oil off your hands for free" and since the restaurants were paying to have it hauled off, they went for it...until they figured out they could sell it for biodiesel...

Anyway, how much water does the peanut crop require? And the fallow farmlands are no doubt being recolonized by native plant life, which can be converted into ethanol — another quandary. Wildlife habitat versus independent energy?

Expansion/follow-through the above thought...
The nation is starting to wake up to decentralized production of goods, and I'll have to check and see if there's a map that shows where the fallow farmlands are distributed. If they're scattered throughout the country, the argument of "thirsty energy crops" may become moot, at least in some parts of the country (I'm glancing around out my window).
I'm living about ten minutes south of Linn County, the self-proclaimed Grass Seed Capitol of the World. What if some of that were harvested to make ethanol and thus, E85? The interest around here is high: the "Live Green/Think Yellow" GMC's are starting to show up on the roads so there's going to be a big call for flex-fuel capable machinery in the next year or so. And of course in Oregon, "Buy Local" isn't just a tagline, it's a socio-political statement...
So. Given that ethanol refining and biodiesel mixing can be set up as cottage industries virtually on the very farm the crops are grown on, the market for E85 and biodiesel will vary according to the local economy. You're right, it simply doesn't make sense to grow the crops in Sector A, transport it to Sector B for refining, and on to Sector C for distribution into the network out to local consumption.

Regarding the battery car and the whereases and howtofores in its operation and production...hauling capability aside, that's my biggest reason for throwing that aside in favour of biodiesel, E85 and hydrogen cells, and also why I'm kind of balky about even solar energy. Solar energy is primarily using solar power to juice up batteries which are HORRENDOUS. Grant you, NiMH is better than lead-acid; this is partly why I backed off on using a battery array to power my camp and just started a feed off my own car's battery with an inverter to run the lights a few hours until I'm done gallyvanting around. But that's an entirely different topic...
ImageImageImage
User avatar
diane o'thirst
 
Posts: 2095
Joined: Tue Sep 09, 2003 5:04 pm
Location: Eugene, OR

Postby Lassen Forge » Fri Mar 10, 2006 9:34 pm

Along the same lines...

While gasoline is far more polluting, directly, than most other forms of energy, all the alternates, from pure electric to e85 to Hydrogen technology to, hell, even nuclear, cause in themselves more pollutiuon that gasoline to produce the same amount of "work". It may seem nice and cozy to say "I drive a nuclear sub" (Hmmm, they say, must be an apokiliptikan...) which doesn't dump hydrocarbons into the air, the resulting pollution is *much* more deadly, and *muc* harder to get rid of.

Think of the controersial Sempra coal plant - how many of those would it take to convert the nations transportation infrastructure to "pure electric", or to process hydrogen out of water, or whatever. And then there's te other rub - If you start cooking water for the hydrogen, what'cha gonna do when the water runs out? Can't drink dust... and people once said we'd never run out of oil, too...

Face it - we've overgrown our resources multifold. We've become a planet of non-sustainability, and we're looking for the next easy "fix" to satisfy the urge for the "easy and simple" life. What happens when you've used up all yor "fixes" at the expense of necessary elements for basic sustainability of life?

(BTW - - to stay on topic - my various vehicles get between 11 MPG (the P/U I use to get to and from BRC when it's fully loaded) and 45 MPG (the 91 year old Ford that's been handed down the family for years), my daily driver is between 15 and 26, and I have no idea on some of them as they haven't been run in quite a while...)

bb
User avatar
Lassen Forge
Moderator
 
Posts: 5322
Joined: Tue Feb 22, 2005 10:35 pm
Location: Where it's always... Wednesday. Don't lose your head over it.

Postby Rob the Wop » Sat Mar 11, 2006 3:24 am

Kinetic IV wrote:
Rob the Wop wrote:Fully electric. Moot point. Ha! Ha ha!

Image


Awww, that's cute.
Now playing devil's advocate for a bit....
How many tons of coal did it take to provide power for that electric car? How much mercury was released into the environment by those coal fired plants to generate the electricty pushed into those batteries? How many gallons of diesel fuel did it take either BNSF or the UP to haul that coal in to the local powerplant? Oh, the local powerplant is nuclear? Are they properly storing those spent fuel rods or do they have a silent problem with tritium leaking into the groundwater like ComEd does outside Chicago? And back to those lead batteries, how many children suffer with lead poisoning from the smelters that are required to make the internal plates for those batteries?

Rob, all of the above is NOT an attack on you, it's the whole electric car thing in general. I'm shooting at the idea, not the messenger.


Is there more or less toxins produced with a car?

As to the coal for the car- very little. Most (75% in 2003) of our power is from hydroelectric in Northern Oregon, and I am signed up for the electric plan where my power bill money goes strictly to alternative sources. Lead acid batteries are extremely recyclable. So- yes the components required for initial creation are bad. Less so than for a standard car as it is smaller, has less steel components, and does not require a constant influx of petroleum products to continue running (oil changes, gas, power fluids, etc.). The less complex an engine is- the less waste.

Also here is a concept a lot of people don't get. The majority of car driving is with one person in the car. If that car is made mostly of metal, and is big enough for four people- you are paying mostly to move all that steel around. Your weight in negligible in reference to the vehicle. But most people are worried about horsepower and having room/convienence/ etc. My primary vehicle is only around 650lbs, has room for groceries, and fits only one person. The motor is only 7 hpw, doesn't go above 40 mph, and is extremely power efficient. I only take another vehicle if the distance is too great for the limited range, the electric lightrail doesn't travel there, I am carpooling, or I need to carry very large items. So- less damage initially, far far less damage over time, and ridiculously less damage when you compare the ratio of fuel usage versus miles traveled.

By your logic EVERYTHING is evil. Your shoes. Your clothes. The roads you use. Everything in the US of A kills or pollutes something. Even if you eat only organic things, weave your own cloth, and don't travel- you will use something that directly or indirectly damages. The difference is in scale. My vehicle does less damage and provides a method for covered daily travel with cargo allowance.

Also with electric cars in general, there is a large variety of ways to create electricity (and many extremely clean ones). So once the car is developed, you just have to charge it. Can the same claim be made for any petroleum based system? Any other method (hydrogen/biodeisel/etc) has only ONE method of fuel. And usually with the greater number of moving parts- you need more petroleum products to keep things well lubed. And the majority of the alternative methods required more steel (and subsequently a poorer fuel usage per mile ratio).
The other, other white meat.
User avatar
Rob the Wop
 
Posts: 1814
Joined: Mon Sep 01, 2003 4:06 pm
Location: Furbackistan, OR

Postby freakersedge » Sat Mar 11, 2006 1:22 pm

well, your right, I do have monster wheels, and do I want to buy a full set of five wheels and tires to save 4 miles a gallon? Perhaps when I am down to slicks. I really didn't want the monster tires to begin with but it does feel nice to be above the crowd, until somebody higher comes along and you know they always do, oddly that its a frat boy with mommys rig...(I know its mommys, the license plate reads 'stephys', or some other girly blather). By the way, I just got back from towing a trailer that weighed 2500 lbs loaded, and had no loss of power on the hills. Even tho the manufacturer recommends no towing...brings to mind, can we really trust those reccomendations?

freaker

freaker
just your basic hippy
freakersedge
 
Posts: 61
Joined: Mon Mar 06, 2006 11:42 am
Location: Reno, Nevada

Postby Kinetic IV » Sat Mar 11, 2006 1:30 pm

You can ignore those recommendations...but you do so at your own risk. If the vehicle is rated for a certain weight exceeding it can tax the brakes and other drivetrain components to failure. I learned that lesson the hard way right after I turned 16 and thought I knew everything...I put my pickup and trailer into a tree and the ditch when the brakes failed due to the overload. I had a second incident where at 3 am I couldn't stop for a quick changing light in Lincoln, NE and I got shoved out into the intersection by the trailer....thankfully the two other cars at the light saw what was going on and stayed put or I would have taken them out. After that I look at those little stickers and the manual and if it says all it will do is a certain weight, I will take the time and scale it to make sure I don't exceed it. I wish others would do the same...I don't want to have another experience like I had on I-80 where someone didn't properly balance their tongue weight and the trailer came uncoupled and decided it wanted to take the express lane. I about shit a brick over that one....I didn't get hit but I was bracing for impact....

Or in other words if you do it don't think about suing the manufacturer when something screws up...which if you tow a lot it's not a matter of if it's only a matter of when and how bad.
K-IV
~~~~
Thank you for over 7 years of eplaya memories. I have asked Emily Sparkle to delete my account and I am gone. Goodbye and Goodluck to all of you! I will miss you!
Kinetic IV
 
Posts: 2984
Joined: Sun Apr 03, 2005 7:34 pm
Location: Kyiv, Ukraine as of 10/27/06

Postby freakersedge » Sat Mar 11, 2006 2:08 pm

kinet,

So here I am driving this overloaded trailer thru some town South of a military instalation, polulated by those guys because everywhere are barbershops with Marine haircut advertisements and as I drive over a cement drainage where my ball is lower than the trailer and they pop apart, so I make a u-turn as soon as possible and pull off the road. As I am rehooking the trailer because I have crossed the chains and the tongue did not hit the ground, a geredarm goes shooting by in the opposite direction that I am facing sirens wailing... After I get situated again I pull into this housing area to turn around and my CB comes alive with some guy saying," its some jeep looking to turn around" and I glimpse some really scared looking guys. Then the radio says, "the mission is not aborted, I repeat not aborted," so I said, "um, yep, all is copecetic" as I drive away. Well, what I learned is that you can adjust the bolt that holds the clamp on the ball to tighten its grip but it takes three hands, something I found in the next town. So you may hate us who do not follow reccomendations, but would you ever learn how you can help the next idiot you come accross?

Freaker
just your basic hippy
freakersedge
 
Posts: 61
Joined: Mon Mar 06, 2006 11:42 am
Location: Reno, Nevada

Postby Ranger Genius » Sat Mar 11, 2006 10:24 pm

Rob the Wop wrote:
Kinetic IV wrote:
Rob the Wop wrote:Fully electric. Moot point. Ha! Ha ha!

Image

As to the coal for the car- very little. Most (75% in 2003) of our power is from hydroelectric in Northern Oregon, and I am signed up for the electric plan where my power bill money goes strictly to alternative sources. Lead acid batteries are extremely recyclable. So- yes the components required for initial creation are bad. Less so than for a standard car as it is smaller, has less steel components, and does not require a constant influx of petroleum products to continue running (oil changes, gas, power fluids, etc.). The less complex an engine is- the less waste.

Also here is a concept a lot of people don't get. The majority of car driving is with one person in the car. If that car is made mostly of metal, and is big enough for four people- you are paying mostly to move all that steel around. Your weight in negligible in reference to the vehicle. But most people are worried about horsepower and having room/convienence/ etc. My primary vehicle is only around 650lbs, has room for groceries, and fits only one person. The motor is only 7 hpw, doesn't go above 40 mph, and is extremely power efficient. I only take another vehicle if the distance is too great for the limited range, the electric lightrail doesn't travel there, I am carpooling, or I need to carry very large items. So- less damage initially, far far less damage over time, and ridiculously less damage when you compare the ratio of fuel usage versus miles traveled.

By your logic EVERYTHING is evil. Your shoes. Your clothes. The roads you use. Everything in the US of A kills or pollutes something. Even if you eat only organic things, weave your own cloth, and don't travel- you will use something that directly or indirectly damages. The difference is in scale. My vehicle does less damage and provides a method for covered daily travel with cargo allowance.

Also with electric cars in general, there is a large variety of ways to create electricity (and many extremely clean ones). So once the car is developed, you just have to charge it. Can the same claim be made for any petroleum based system? Any other method (hydrogen/biodeisel/etc) has only ONE method of fuel. And usually with the greater number of moving parts- you need more petroleum products to keep things well lubed. And the majority of the alternative methods required more steel (and subsequently a poorer fuel usage per mile ratio).


In an area like yours, an electric car makes sense. Where the electricity is being harnessed in environmentally sound ways (fuck the migratory fishes). Here in UT and most of the real west, our electricity is generated 95% plus by coal-fired plants. And while western coal is much lower in Sulfur et cetera than, say, WV coal, it's still a much dirtier method of moving a car than gasoline or diesel. I think KIV was pointing out the irony which exists in the cases of MOST electric car users (which, as I said, doesn't apply to you) that the owner bought it to be environmentally conscientious, but is actually causing more harm than good by effectively buying a coal-powered car. There are also extra steps involved in the process of harnessing the energy (chemical-heat-motion-electricity-motion, as opposed to chemical-motion), and every step reduces efficiency. (Of course, for you, it looks more like motion-electricity-motion).

Edited for BBcode syntax and to add:

As for myself, about 33mpg (Saturn Station Wagon..you wouldn't believe how much shit I can stuff in that thing, especially with a roof rack (which reduces my mileage to about 21-27 for the trip to the playa, depending on the hilliness of the terrain at each stretch). But my work is literally a stone's throw away, so I average fractions of a gallon a week.
“We cross our bridges when we come to them and burn them behind us, with nothing to show for our progress except a memory of the smell of smoke, and a presumption that once our eyes watered.”
User avatar
Ranger Genius
 
Posts: 2418
Joined: Thu Mar 25, 2004 8:07 am
Location: Behind the Zion Curtain

Postby Tiahaar » Sat Mar 11, 2006 11:08 pm

Image
so this is my bike with an Xtracycle mod on it and a lockable scooter box on top for rain/securing stuff. The side bags easily hold 3 grocery bags each & adjust for hauling boxes to 2x4's. Works great! (ps that electric minicar truly is really really cute!)
Burning Man 2003-13; Desert Carillon, Ulaume's Chimes, Iron Native, Black Rock Solar, Portal Collective, Center Camp Café Stage Tech
RING THE COCK Caravansy Peenerweight Boutique
User avatar
Tiahaar
 
Posts: 1042
Joined: Sat Sep 20, 2003 9:13 pm
Location: Goleta, CA (also Forever via Pandora)
Burning Since: 2003
Camp Name: Starship Palomino

Postby Rob the Wop » Mon Mar 13, 2006 10:58 am

Ranger Genius wrote:I think KIV was pointing out the irony which exists in the cases of MOST electric car users (which, as I said, doesn't apply to you) that the owner bought it to be environmentally conscientious, but is actually causing more harm than good by effectively buying a coal-powered car. There are also extra steps involved in the process of harnessing the energy (chemical-heat-motion-electricity-motion, as opposed to chemical-motion), and every step reduces efficiency. (Of course, for you, it looks more like motion-electricity-motion).


Well, it's actually not all that simple.

If it was far more inefficient to convert gasoline to electricity and use it for motive power, hybrids could not use less gasoline than regular cars. They would use more.

Electric motors work best from standstill, and gasoline motors are better at higher speeds. That has to be worked into the equation. Hybrids use electric for around town, and switch to gas for sustained distances (generalization, but fairly accurate). The most efficient modifications for hybrids generally involve a gas motor powering a generator, which in turn powers an electric motor, which moves the car. Here is an example. And even then we haven't gotten into the role of fuel cells for powering the electric motor.

Pure electric off of a coal plant is evil, agreed. But the electric motor itself is more efficient than a gasoline powered engine. Also, whatever choice you have for non-electric motors- you are pretty much stuck with. Not so if you hook up work producing method x onto a generator. So saying that electric cars are evil due to them being powered by a coal plant is similiar to shooting the messanger of bad news. It's the electricity production method that is a bad thing, not the electric car itself.

Edited to add: I think one of the reasons I am somewhat defensive about electric cars is the perceived notion that they can't solve any environmental issues. The company that made my electric car went out of business, as do most of them. If the idea of an electric car is shot down, then research into making them more feasible for standard usage does also. The concept of an electric car is very environemtally sound, as well as very efficient. The problem lies in the source of electricity. The good thing is that once you have the electric car- you can freely change the source of electricity and the car never needs to be modified.
The other, other white meat.
User avatar
Rob the Wop
 
Posts: 1814
Joined: Mon Sep 01, 2003 4:06 pm
Location: Furbackistan, OR

Postby Chai Guy » Mon Mar 13, 2006 11:33 am

Image

50 mpg.


After a long absence from motorcycling I've rediscovered the joys of riding. I can ride from Lake Tahoe to S.F. on less than $20 worth of gas. Traffic? What traffic? and you can park this bike anywhere. How many times do you see a vehicle driving down the road with only one passenger? I can count the times I've had more than one passenger in the last 10 years on one hand.

Obviously motorcycles aren't for everyone, and they require the proper skill, training and equipment to ride one safely. However, they are much more affordable than buying a similarly fuel efficent car, I picked mine up for $1200 and I've ridden it all year, almost every day, just replacing the tires, and changing the oil.
User avatar
Chai Guy
 
Posts: 1824
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 1:37 am
Location: Los Angeles

Racing is life, everything else is waiting

Postby gyre » Mon Mar 13, 2006 12:20 pm

Be sure to check your mileage after you load for burning man! My Volvo dropped to 23 mpg with a full load. That's with a five speed. Aero tweaks can help a lot. Pay special attention to the underside especially with trucks.
A big engine can be more efficient with a lot of weight. Gearing is very important with the big stuff.
Nothing is more efficient by weight than a tractor trailer. We should combine loads to the desert when possible.
My big ford has 4-500 lbs of torque, 3.25 gear, very low drag, top speed of 175 mph and gets 25 mpg at 75 mph. This is a very well tuned high compression engine (premium) with the right gearing. I do not get the same mileage in town, but it is better than you would expect.
If you're carrying weight, a large engine may be better for you.
There are a lot of mileage tweaks possible. Ignition advance helps when possible. My Volvo would benefit from a newer engine computer. It's an '86. Be sure your brakes don't drag.
I have a 1973 LTD Ford wagon with a factory 400 low compression engine, all stock except an electronic ignition. It gets 15 mpg on the road with or without a load. With high compression, who knows?
The best mileage I ever got was in a 74 Fiat coupe with a 1.3 ltr and a stock carb. The ignition was advanced by hand to the peak. It required premium to run. I got 45 mpg at 85 mph in the mountains.
I had a Dodge van with a 318 and a 4 speed overdrive. I got 26 mpg in the hills once.
Cleaning or updating mass air sensors can help, esp. with a Ford.
Ford Explorers and maybe all Fords default as the mass air ages.
Do your research before you spend money.
Aero and friction drag can be tested in a coast down test by anyone.
Check your mileage with premium and regular on the road. Break it down by cost per mile for fuel. A lot of cars are cheaper on premium, contrary to what's being put out for consumer use. A slight increase in mileage can be a bigger savings than you would think. As gas costs more the benefit is easier to justify, as the differential to premium is less.
Don't go by in town mileage, unless it is averaged over a lot of tanks. You have to do the math to find out what works.
"Everything is more wonderful when you do it with a car, don't you think?"
-girl by the fire, watching a tree moved by car bumper in the bonfire

It would be a shame if I had to resort to self-deception to preserve my faith in objective reality.
User avatar
gyre
 
Posts: 15346
Joined: Sun Aug 07, 2005 6:01 pm
Location: ΦάÏ

Postby freakersedge » Tue Mar 14, 2006 3:26 am

Rob,
I brougt a Miata one year because I head they were just the right size for those special batteries, At the time my commute was five miles. Then it changed to eight miles, but still within decent electric comute, however without the nickle cadium batteries they were too light. By the way, a couple of years, I drove a motorcycle all year in Salt LaKe City. Driving in snow wasn't bad, except if you fell over, then you had to use the curb to put it back up on its wheels. That happened to me going over a railroad bridge, Thankfully, no cars could even get up the bridge, so I was able to right it. What I disliked about bikes was the bees just flying from one field to the next....

freakersedge

By the way, have you read K4s blog on the weather they are experiencing? Pretty awesome if what he says is half true. Which I have no reason to doubt. That the movie, "the day after tomorrow" was based on a book called "Super Storm", and wind is always a precurser to climataric changes. I have been through some interesting storm cells myself. Storm celars were never beneath the house a long time ago, too bad we didn't keep that technology isn't it? I love living in a rounded house.
just your basic hippy
freakersedge
 
Posts: 61
Joined: Mon Mar 06, 2006 11:42 am
Location: Reno, Nevada

Postby Rob the Wop » Mon Mar 20, 2006 12:25 am

The other, other white meat.
User avatar
Rob the Wop
 
Posts: 1814
Joined: Mon Sep 01, 2003 4:06 pm
Location: Furbackistan, OR

Postby gyre » Mon Mar 20, 2006 1:31 pm

Anybody out there know the record currently for mileage with a special vehicle at steady high speed? Usually it's with diesel and higher speeds than most people guess. If there's curiousity I can find out, but I'm sure it's over 2,000.
For a little different trivia, what's the record for steady high speed on a public road?
How about the year?
hint-Most burners weren't born yet.

Has anyone done a jet powered art car with afterburner yet?
I'm thinking 50 feet long with a deflector plate of inconel to throw the plume straight up if I ever want to slow down.

THERE'S ALWAYS MORE POWER.
THAT'S WHAT MORE MEANS!
"Everything is more wonderful when you do it with a car, don't you think?"
-girl by the fire, watching a tree moved by car bumper in the bonfire

It would be a shame if I had to resort to self-deception to preserve my faith in objective reality.
User avatar
gyre
 
Posts: 15346
Joined: Sun Aug 07, 2005 6:01 pm
Location: ΦάÏ

Postby Desert Duck » Mon Mar 27, 2006 8:09 pm

Obviously, this (tallbike) is one of my means of transport, and had ridden it 7 miles one day, to work, to a show, to a bar. Currently I walk, the last 2 years I rode my chopper bicycle 4 miles each way for work, my car gets 30-35 per, I run super when I'm not dead broke. I've also been an avid motorcyclist for many years and two of my bikes got over 70 mpg. Most of them, however, only get 35-40 mpg.
What I really want is still under development, and once theyre being built, and I can afford one, I'll set up my own biodiesel plant, and use the waste oil from the fryer I don't have yet. You can find what I'm talking about on the canyonchasers site. It's an awesomely fast 3 cyl 1200 cc turbodiesel motorcycle that gets about 100 mpg at 150 mph. NO SHIT!!!
I actually found it by randomly searching "biodiesel sexmachine".
I like pudding.

I like tea.

I like chocolate.

Do you like me?
User avatar
Desert Duck
 
Posts: 2030
Joined: Mon Jan 19, 2004 11:53 pm
Location: Oregon foothills near Silver Falls...wait, no...San Francisco...umm North bay?...The Playa!!!!

Next

Return to Open Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Adri, tatonka and 2 guests