SickBeast's Fuel Economy Guide

[mwmorph]

Originally posted by: jhu

Originally posted by: mwmorph

Originally posted by: SparkyJJO
All I can say is I'm glad that fleabag isn't a car designer. Although, he wouldn't make it very far as one anyway, as who really wants a car with no AC, that rides like crap, is loud inside, hard to work on (aerodynamic underside means covering everything up), and is super anemic with a small engine trying to drive tall gears while still having to carry the weight of the required zillion airbag and safety systems?

All to save 150 gallons of gas per year over 15k miles.

That's not an insignificant amount of fuel saved, although those savings can be achieved without resorting to building the hyperbole of a car that was mentioned.

Originally posted by: mwmorph
It's a case of cutting off the nose to spite the face. You're still screwing yourself in the end, especially with the whole neutral coasting thing could really get you in trouble.

Neutral coasting will only get you into trouble if you don't know what you're doing. It's like trying to drive manual when you're accustomed to automatics. Despite advocates extolling the virtues of manual transmissions, there are still people (most people actually) who have not interest to learn how to drive one. Neutral coasting has definitive fuel saving benefits. Whether or not it's worth the effort is a personal choice.

150 gallons is an insignificant amount for the amount of work you have to do, driving something the size of a years on pulse and glide, hypermiling every second of every day just to save a few bucks in a huge deal.

Also neutral coasting is NOT a personal choice if it's illegal just like texting while driving or driving without a license is not a personal choice.

 

[jlee]

Originally posted by: fleabag

Originally posted by: LTC8K6

Really? Well it's too bad that you don't know what you're talking about because Honda did in fact make a car just as I described... It was called the Honda Civic VX, from 1992-1995. The CRX HF was just like the VX except it got slightly better mileage due to it weighing only 1800lbs. Another car? The Geo Metro XFI.... And then you could claim the Insight though that did come with A/C and all the cars I mentioned above had the option of A/C.

All those vehicles save the Insight belched obscene amounts of NOX...they couldn't come anywhere near today's emissions standards, which is why they quit making them.

Not entirely true, those cars would've met the EPA and CARB standards all the way until 2003 and they had a lean burn engine with the Insight all the way till the stopped production. There are tricks to dealing with the NOX, for example on the Insight they have a mini reservoir or collection area for the exhaust and when enough NOX collects, an extra bit of fuel is injected in order to enrich the exhaust stream and let the Catalytic Converter do its job.

Heyguesswhat: It's not 2003 anymore, either.

 

[JulesMaximus]

Originally posted by: PhoKingGuy
I noticed today, using the mpg gauge on my VW:

"Hypermiling" I got about 27 mpg combined

Driving like I normally do 25.6

Driving like I stole it.......22.4 mpg combined

DSG transmissions rock

I hate flappy paddle gearboxes. Give me a traditional manual any day.

 

[JulesMaximus]

Originally posted by: fleabag

Originally posted by: alphatarget1
You're throwing money away if you replace your air filter ever 13k miles.

Not sure a lot of the stuff you do is necessarily safe, especially the coasting in neutral stuff.

You could wash it, vacuum it, blow on it or do something to clean it up. I have what I think is a cotton air filter in my LS400.

What do you set the tire pressures at on your LS400? 100psi?

 

[Bignate603]

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus

Originally posted by: fleabag

Originally posted by: alphatarget1
You're throwing money away if you replace your air filter ever 13k miles.

Not sure a lot of the stuff you do is necessarily safe, especially the coasting in neutral stuff.

You could wash it, vacuum it, blow on it or do something to clean it up. I have what I think is a cotton air filter in my LS400.

What do you set the tire pressures at on your LS400? 100psi?

I'm wondering what cars are really his...

Originally posted by: fleabag
On the Volvo S60, I keep the tires at 55psi cold

Originally posted by: fleabag
I have what I think is a cotton air filter in my LS400.

While he apparently has these cars he's looking at cars like this:
96 honda with 300k on it
Thread about it

Getting grumpy about a craigslist listing for another similar Honda

Considering suing a seller on craigslist for false advertising about a car

The cars he says he has and the cars he's looking at buying are quite different. I'm wondering if he's going and over inflating his parents tires.

 

[jhu]

Originally posted by: mwmorph
150 gallons is an insignificant amount for the amount of work you have to do, driving something the size of a years on pulse and glide, hypermiling every second of every day just to save a few bucks in a huge deal.

It's a huge deal to you. To others it's a pretty significant amount that's worth the effort. That's why it's a personal choice.

Originally posted by: mwmorph
Also neutral coasting is NOT a personal choice if it's illegal just like texting while driving or driving without a license is not a personal choice.

And I suppose you never drive more than the speed limit or jaywalk? Those are also illegal, and by your definition, not personal choices.

 

[JulesMaximus]

Originally posted by: Bignate603

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus

Originally posted by: fleabag

Originally posted by: alphatarget1
You're throwing money away if you replace your air filter ever 13k miles.

Not sure a lot of the stuff you do is necessarily safe, especially the coasting in neutral stuff.

You could wash it, vacuum it, blow on it or do something to clean it up. I have what I think is a cotton air filter in my LS400.

What do you set the tire pressures at on your LS400? 100psi?

I'm wondering what cars are really his...

Originally posted by: fleabag
On the Volvo S60, I keep the tires at 55psi cold

Originally posted by: fleabag
I have what I think is a cotton air filter in my LS400.

While he apparently has these cars he's looking at cars like this:
96 honda with 300k on it
Thread about it

Getting grumpy about a craigslist listing for another similar Honda

Considering suing a seller on craigslist for false advertising about a car

The cars he says he has and the cars he's looking at buying are quite different. I'm wondering if he's going and over inflating his parents tires.

Agreed. Something doesn't add up here. He's full of brown, foul-smelling, waste material if you ask me.

 

[PhoKingGuy]

Originally posted by: fleabag

Originally posted by: SparkyJJO

Originally posted by: fleabag

Originally posted by: SparkyJJO
All I can say is I'm glad that fleabag isn't a car designer. Although, he wouldn't make it very far as one anyway, as who really wants a car with no AC, that rides like crap, is loud inside, hard to work on (aerodynamic underside means covering everything up), and is super anemic with a small engine trying to drive tall gears while still having to carry the weight of the required zillion airbag and safety systems?

Really? Well it's too bad that you don't know what you're talking about because Honda did in fact make a car just as I described... It was called the Honda Civic VX, from 1992-1995. The CRX HF was just like the VX except it got slightly better mileage due to it weighing only 1800lbs. Another car? The Geo Metro XFI.... And then you could claim the Insight though that did come with A/C and all the cars I mentioned above had the option of A/C.

Excuse me but I DO know what I'm talking about. Sure, they tried making them. They didn't sell that well, and they no longer make them anymore

Besides, as PhoKingGuy said, they won't pass modern safety standards, and to make them do so would add that much more weight to lug around.

And what standards are those exactly? I don't think you have a clue as to what the standards are and are just make generalizations. FYI, the Side impact tests that the NHTSA created its tests were done on the...you guessed it '92-'95 Civic Honda Civics. Go read some FMVSS and tell me what exactly they would have to do to those older models in order to make them meet "the safety standards" of today... You people SERIOUSLY over estimate how much safety has come since the 80s. Take a hint, the Civic of '92-'95 is about the same size as the Yaris and weighs the same as well despite the added features, so again, stop assuming because you clearly don't know what you're talking about. Yeah, "it'll take 300lbs of reinforcement in order to meet these new stricter safety standards", HA! Give me a break!

You do realize that just passing doesn't cut it anymore for safety standards. If you dont have a best pick, 5 star rating, its pretty much considered failing. I seriously doubt that tin box (ive driven it before), can get a such a rating.

 

[fleabag]

Originally posted by: LTC8K6

Not entirely true

Your non-grasp on reality is stunning.

Ok Facts > your perception of reality. Just because you see something on a car today, it doesn't mean that it's REQUIRED. That means your little POS doesn't HAVE TO BE a PZEV, it doesn't HAVE TO HAVE SIDE AIRBAGS, it doesn't HAVE TO HAVE acceleration from 0-60 at less than 10 seconds... Etcetera.

Originally posted by: JLee

Originally posted by: fleabag

Originally posted by: LTC8K6

Really? Well it's too bad that you don't know what you're talking about because Honda did in fact make a car just as I described... It was called the Honda Civic VX, from 1992-1995. The CRX HF was just like the VX except it got slightly better mileage due to it weighing only 1800lbs. Another car? The Geo Metro XFI.... And then you could claim the Insight though that did come with A/C and all the cars I mentioned above had the option of A/C.

All those vehicles save the Insight belched obscene amounts of NOX...they couldn't come anywhere near today's emissions standards, which is why they quit making them.

Not entirely true, those cars would've met the EPA and CARB standards all the way until 2003 and they had a lean burn engine with the Insight all the way till the stopped production. There are tricks to dealing with the NOX, for example on the Insight they have a mini reservoir or collection area for the exhaust and when enough NOX collects, an extra bit of fuel is injected in order to enrich the exhaust stream and let the Catalytic Converter do its job.

Heyguesswhat: It's not 2003 anymore, either.

Heyguesswhat? Shut the fuck up! The point was, we're talking about things you can do to improve fuel economy. Why get hung up on ONE feature? You incorrectly assume that because there is no more lean burn that all of a sudden, 20mpg-30mpg is the only normal fuel economy and that everything else that could be done to make a car get better mileage is already being done and I'm saying, you're wrong. There are people who would like a car that gets good mileage and doesn't have all those bullshit amenities so saying that "nobody" would want it is incorrect.

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus

Originally posted by: fleabag

Originally posted by: alphatarget1
You're throwing money away if you replace your air filter ever 13k miles.

Not sure a lot of the stuff you do is necessarily safe, especially the coasting in neutral stuff.

You could wash it, vacuum it, blow on it or do something to clean it up. I have what I think is a cotton air filter in my LS400.

What do you set the tire pressures at on your LS400? 100psi?

I set them at sidewall, 44psi, car rides just fine. There is really no benefit to running Double the sidewall pressure unless you plan on driving on two wheels. I was just illustrating the point that you could run at those tire pressures and that the tires wouldn't explode like you guys think they would.

Originally posted by: PhoKingGuy

Originally posted by: fleabag

Originally posted by: SparkyJJO

Originally posted by: fleabag

Originally posted by: SparkyJJO
All I can say is I'm glad that fleabag isn't a car designer. Although, he wouldn't make it very far as one anyway, as who really wants a car with no AC, that rides like crap, is loud inside, hard to work on (aerodynamic underside means covering everything up), and is super anemic with a small engine trying to drive tall gears while still having to carry the weight of the required zillion airbag and safety systems?

Really? Well it's too bad that you don't know what you're talking about because Honda did in fact make a car just as I described... It was called the Honda Civic VX, from 1992-1995. The CRX HF was just like the VX except it got slightly better mileage due to it weighing only 1800lbs. Another car? The Geo Metro XFI.... And then you could claim the Insight though that did come with A/C and all the cars I mentioned above had the option of A/C.

Excuse me but I DO know what I'm talking about. Sure, they tried making them. They didn't sell that well, and they no longer make them anymore

Besides, as PhoKingGuy said, they won't pass modern safety standards, and to make them do so would add that much more weight to lug around.

And what standards are those exactly? I don't think you have a clue as to what the standards are and are just make generalizations. FYI, the Side impact tests that the NHTSA created its tests were done on the...you guessed it '92-'95 Civic Honda Civics. Go read some FMVSS and tell me what exactly they would have to do to those older models in order to make them meet "the safety standards" of today... You people SERIOUSLY over estimate how much safety has come since the 80s. Take a hint, the Civic of '92-'95 is about the same size as the Yaris and weighs the same as well despite the added features, so again, stop assuming because you clearly don't know what you're talking about. Yeah, "it'll take 300lbs of reinforcement in order to meet these new stricter safety standards", HA! Give me a break!

You do realize that just passing doesn't cut it anymore for safety standards. If you dont have a best pick, 5 star rating, its pretty much considered failing. I seriously doubt that tin box (ive driven it before), can get a such a rating.

You STILL don't need 50 different airbags to achieve such ratings. Whether the car comes with 50 airbags or ZERO airbags, fact is, those systems aren't that heavy and all they do is add to the cost of the car. You're probably one of those people who too believe that the only way to achieve a 5 star rating is to add 1000lbs worth of equipment and that is in fact, WRONG. I just think the most of you people in this thread are just a bunch of whiners who like to think that there is nothing that can be done about fuel economy, that everything that has been done is already being done and therefore additional effort into saving fuel is just splitting hairs. I on the other hand, completely disagree with that assertion and know that there are things that can be done to improve fuel economy, it's just that you people don't care make any sacrifices and continue to use the wrong tool for the job (SUV to commute into the City for example..).

 

[SparkyJJO]

fleabag, one of the REQUIREMENTS for 2012 safety standards (just around the corner) is roof bracing that can hold up to 3x the car's weight. That bracing isn't light (and also one reason why current car A and D pillars are so thick now). Another is side curtain airbags. Front airbags are already required equipment.

And no, most people don't really want to give up their AC (especially in a hotter climate), nor their comfortable seats, nor their radio, etc... if you want to, go right ahead. I'll take a semi-comfortable car (though my AC doesn't really work that well anymore, the compressor is just about shot after 11 years). I just recently got 29mpg on the highway from my Camaro though, so I'm doing just fine

 

[RichUK]

Lol, this thread is not worth a sticky. :laugh:

 

[fleabag]

Originally posted by: SparkyJJO
fleabag, one of the REQUIREMENTS for 2012 safety standards (just around the corner) is roof bracing that can hold up to 3x the car's weight. That bracing isn't light (and also one reason why current car A and D pillars are so thick now). Another is side curtain airbags. Front airbags are already required equipment.

And no, most people don't really want to give up their AC (especially in a hotter climate), nor their comfortable seats, nor their radio, etc... if you want to, go right ahead. I'll take a semi-comfortable car (though my AC doesn't really work that well anymore, the compressor is just about shot after 11 years). I just recently got 29mpg on the highway from my Camaro though, so I'm doing just fine

Yes I'm aware of the newer regulations just around the corner but the argument was mostly about requirements of today or just a few years ago. There could have been more cars 5-10 years ago with a lot better fuel economy than they had but they didn't because they were focused on other things.. But in response to the newer regulations which are needlessly being added, the roof bracing won't have to weigh that much the lighter the vehicle is and will probably be a fixed percentage of the vehicle's weight. I don't know where the NHTSA comes up with their numbers but adding side airbags to a car and only costing $34 per car seems far too cheap..

 

[PhoKingGuy]

Originally posted by: fleabag

Originally posted by: SparkyJJO
fleabag, one of the REQUIREMENTS for 2012 safety standards (just around the corner) is roof bracing that can hold up to 3x the car's weight. That bracing isn't light (and also one reason why current car A and D pillars are so thick now). Another is side curtain airbags. Front airbags are already required equipment.

And no, most people don't really want to give up their AC (especially in a hotter climate), nor their comfortable seats, nor their radio, etc... if you want to, go right ahead. I'll take a semi-comfortable car (though my AC doesn't really work that well anymore, the compressor is just about shot after 11 years). I just recently got 29mpg on the highway from my Camaro though, so I'm doing just fine

Yes I'm aware of the newer regulations just around the corner but the argument was mostly about requirements of today or just a few years ago. There could have been more cars 5-10 years ago with a lot better fuel economy than they had but they didn't because they were focused on other things.. But in response to the newer regulations which are needlessly being added, the roof bracing won't have to weigh that much the lighter the vehicle is and will probably be a fixed percentage of the vehicle's weight. I don't know where the NHTSA comes up with their numbers but adding side airbags to a car and only costing $34 per car seems far too cheap..

What happens when your 1996 civic gets hit by a small suv/wagon/CUV/full size sedan, thats why we need better standards. You'll be hard pressed to find anyone whose going to forgo all of this to buy a cheap light car with nothing in it besides a steering wheel, seats and an engine.

 

[SparkyJJO]

Originally posted by: PhoKingGuy

Originally posted by: fleabag

Originally posted by: SparkyJJO
fleabag, one of the REQUIREMENTS for 2012 safety standards (just around the corner) is roof bracing that can hold up to 3x the car's weight. That bracing isn't light (and also one reason why current car A and D pillars are so thick now). Another is side curtain airbags. Front airbags are already required equipment.

And no, most people don't really want to give up their AC (especially in a hotter climate), nor their comfortable seats, nor their radio, etc... if you want to, go right ahead. I'll take a semi-comfortable car (though my AC doesn't really work that well anymore, the compressor is just about shot after 11 years). I just recently got 29mpg on the highway from my Camaro though, so I'm doing just fine

Yes I'm aware of the newer regulations just around the corner but the argument was mostly about requirements of today or just a few years ago. There could have been more cars 5-10 years ago with a lot better fuel economy than they had but they didn't because they were focused on other things.. But in response to the newer regulations which are needlessly being added, the roof bracing won't have to weigh that much the lighter the vehicle is and will probably be a fixed percentage of the vehicle's weight. I don't know where the NHTSA comes up with their numbers but adding side airbags to a car and only costing $34 per car seems far too cheap..

What happens when your 1996 civic gets hit by a small suv/wagon/CUV/full size sedan, thats why we need better standards. You'll be hard pressed to find anyone whose going to forgo all of this to buy a cheap light car with nothing in it besides a steering wheel, seats and an engine.

go-kart!

 

[fleabag]

Originally posted by: PhoKingGuy

Originally posted by: fleabag

Originally posted by: SparkyJJO
fleabag, one of the REQUIREMENTS for 2012 safety standards (just around the corner) is roof bracing that can hold up to 3x the car's weight. That bracing isn't light (and also one reason why current car A and D pillars are so thick now). Another is side curtain airbags. Front airbags are already required equipment.

And no, most people don't really want to give up their AC (especially in a hotter climate), nor their comfortable seats, nor their radio, etc... if you want to, go right ahead. I'll take a semi-comfortable car (though my AC doesn't really work that well anymore, the compressor is just about shot after 11 years). I just recently got 29mpg on the highway from my Camaro though, so I'm doing just fine

Yes I'm aware of the newer regulations just around the corner but the argument was mostly about requirements of today or just a few years ago. There could have been more cars 5-10 years ago with a lot better fuel economy than they had but they didn't because they were focused on other things.. But in response to the newer regulations which are needlessly being added, the roof bracing won't have to weigh that much the lighter the vehicle is and will probably be a fixed percentage of the vehicle's weight. I don't know where the NHTSA comes up with their numbers but adding side airbags to a car and only costing $34 per car seems far too cheap..

What happens when your 1996 civic gets hit by a small suv/wagon/CUV/full size sedan, thats why we need better standards. You'll be hard pressed to find anyone whose going to forgo all of this to buy a cheap light car with nothing in it besides a steering wheel, seats and an engine.

What happens when your full size sedan, suv, wagon, etc. gets hit by a semi truck? We need a lot lighter vehicles on the road and unfortunately people have been playing the "mines bigger" game thinking they're getting a safer vehicle. The '96 Civic gets a 4 star rating in a frontal collision and an "acceptable" in the offset crash. So if more vehicles were like the '96 Civic sedan, then the roads would be safer because then effectively everyone that crashes would get the full benefit of that rating instead of a degraded one because they crashed into a larger vehicle. Heavy vehicles waste gas, wear out the roads and make the roads less safe. So unless it's a work vehicle doing ACTUAL work, there is no need for them. You don't need a 5000lb car to haul 4 people in it comfortably.

The '95 civic gets 3 stars for the driver and the '96 civic gets 4 stars for the driver, yet the '96 does a lot better in offset crashes (of the ones that have been conducted) and weighs EXACTLY the same! So despite the two vehicles weighing nearly the same, the '96 does better in a crash test. So no, you don't need extra weight for a vehicle to do better in a crash test with a vehicle of its own weight.

 

[Bignate603]

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus

Originally posted by: Bignate603

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus

Originally posted by: fleabag

Originally posted by: alphatarget1
You're throwing money away if you replace your air filter ever 13k miles.

Not sure a lot of the stuff you do is necessarily safe, especially the coasting in neutral stuff.

You could wash it, vacuum it, blow on it or do something to clean it up. I have what I think is a cotton air filter in my LS400.

What do you set the tire pressures at on your LS400? 100psi?

I'm wondering what cars are really his...

Originally posted by: fleabag
On the Volvo S60, I keep the tires at 55psi cold

Originally posted by: fleabag
I have what I think is a cotton air filter in my LS400.

While he apparently has these cars he's looking at cars like this:
96 honda with 300k on it
Thread about it

Getting grumpy about a craigslist listing for another similar Honda

Considering suing a seller on craigslist for false advertising about a car

The cars he says he has and the cars he's looking at buying are quite different. I'm wondering if he's going and over inflating his parents tires.

Agreed. Something doesn't add up here. He's full of brown, foul-smelling, waste material if you ask me.

Interestingly he hasn't responded to this post, just like every single post that asks him how old he is. I wonder why that is...

 

[JulesMaximus]

Originally posted by: Bignate603

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus

Originally posted by: Bignate603

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus

Originally posted by: fleabag

Originally posted by: alphatarget1
You're throwing money away if you replace your air filter ever 13k miles.

Not sure a lot of the stuff you do is necessarily safe, especially the coasting in neutral stuff.

You could wash it, vacuum it, blow on it or do something to clean it up. I have what I think is a cotton air filter in my LS400.

What do you set the tire pressures at on your LS400? 100psi?

I'm wondering what cars are really his...

Originally posted by: fleabag
On the Volvo S60, I keep the tires at 55psi cold

Originally posted by: fleabag
I have what I think is a cotton air filter in my LS400.

While he apparently has these cars he's looking at cars like this:
96 honda with 300k on it
Thread about it

Getting grumpy about a craigslist listing for another similar Honda

Considering suing a seller on craigslist for false advertising about a car

The cars he says he has and the cars he's looking at buying are quite different. I'm wondering if he's going and over inflating his parents tires.

Agreed. Something doesn't add up here. He's full of brown, foul-smelling, waste material if you ask me.

Interestingly he hasn't responded to this post, just like every single post that asks him how old he is. I wonder why that is...

Because he's 15 and doesn't have the faintest idea what the hell he's talking about.

 

[fleabag]

Originally posted by: Bignate603

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus

Originally posted by: Bignate603

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus

Originally posted by: fleabag

Originally posted by: alphatarget1
You're throwing money away if you replace your air filter ever 13k miles.

Not sure a lot of the stuff you do is necessarily safe, especially the coasting in neutral stuff.

You could wash it, vacuum it, blow on it or do something to clean it up. I have what I think is a cotton air filter in my LS400.

What do you set the tire pressures at on your LS400? 100psi?

I'm wondering what cars are really his...

Originally posted by: fleabag
On the Volvo S60, I keep the tires at 55psi cold

Originally posted by: fleabag
I have what I think is a cotton air filter in my LS400.

While he apparently has these cars he's looking at cars like this:
96 honda with 300k on it
Thread about it

Getting grumpy about a craigslist listing for another similar Honda

Considering suing a seller on craigslist for false advertising about a car

The cars he says he has and the cars he's looking at buying are quite different. I'm wondering if he's going and over inflating his parents tires.

Agreed. Something doesn't add up here. He's full of brown, foul-smelling, waste material if you ask me.

Interestingly he hasn't responded to this post, just like every single post that asks him how old he is. I wonder why that is...

Because it's trolling and irrelevant. Stop attacking me and stick with attacking my ideas or simply agree with me because you've realized that I'm right. I don't ask about what your religious affiliation is so why should you ask about equally private information?

 

[Bignate603]

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
Because he's 15 and doesn't have the faintest idea what the hell he's talking about.

I think he might be 16. With all those threads about cheap Hondas I'm thinking he's looking for his first car.

Originally posted by: Fleabag
You STILL don't need 50 different airbags to achieve such ratings. Whether the car comes with 50 airbags or ZERO airbags, fact is, those systems aren't that heavy and all they do is add to the cost of the car. You're probably one of those people who too believe that the only way to achieve a 5 star rating is to add 1000lbs worth of equipment and that is in fact, WRONG. I just think the most of you people in this thread are just a bunch of whiners who like to think that there is nothing that can be done about fuel economy, that everything that has been done is already being done and therefore additional effort into saving fuel is just splitting hairs. I on the other hand, completely disagree with that assertion and know that there are things that can be done to improve fuel economy, it's just that you people don't care make any sacrifices and continue to use the wrong tool for the job (SUV to commute into the City for example..).

'09 Volvo S60 23 mpg combined (didn't know the year so I just picked a very current one)
'99 Lexus LS400 19 mpg combined (last year sold)

Speaking of wrong tools for the job, if you were serious about getting better mileage you'd get a vehicle that gets better mileage from the start. Sure you can over inflate the tires and try to hypermile to get better gas mileage but starting with a more efficient car would be a no brainer if you're trying to save fuel.

Of course, if your parents are buying the cars you don't really get to have much control over the kinds of cars they pick, do you?

 

[Bignate603]

Originally posted by: fleabag
Because it's trolling and irrelevant. Stop attacking me and stick with attacking my ideas or simply agree with me because you've realized that I'm right. I don't ask about what your religious affiliation is so why should you ask about equally private information?

It's quite relevant. The opinion of a highly experienced driver carries more weight when it comes to driving techniques, as would someone with experience designing, testing or working on cars.

 

[JulesMaximus]

Originally posted by: Bignate603

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
Because he's 15 and doesn't have the faintest idea what the hell he's talking about.

I think he might be 16. With all those threads about cheap Hondas I'm thinking he's looking for his first car.

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
You STILL don't need 50 different airbags to achieve such ratings. Whether the car comes with 50 airbags or ZERO airbags, fact is, those systems aren't that heavy and all they do is add to the cost of the car. You're probably one of those people who too believe that the only way to achieve a 5 star rating is to add 1000lbs worth of equipment and that is in fact, WRONG. I just think the most of you people in this thread are just a bunch of whiners who like to think that there is nothing that can be done about fuel economy, that everything that has been done is already being done and therefore additional effort into saving fuel is just splitting hairs. I on the other hand, completely disagree with that assertion and know that there are things that can be done to improve fuel economy, it's just that you people don't care make any sacrifices and continue to use the wrong tool for the job (SUV to commute into the City for example..).

'09 Volvo S60 23 mpg combined (didn't know the year so I just picked a very current one)
'99 Lexus LS400 19 mpg combined (last year sold)

Speaking of wrong tools for the job, if you were serious about getting better mileage you'd get a vehicle that gets better mileage from the start. Sure you can over inflate the tires and try to hypermile to get better gas mileage but starting with a more efficient car would be a no brainer if you're trying to save fuel.

Of course, if your parents are buying the cars you don't really get to have much control over the kinds of cars they pick, do you?

Dude, you got the quoting all wrong in that.

 

[Bignate603]

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus

Originally posted by: Bignate603

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
Because he's 15 and doesn't have the faintest idea what the hell he's talking about.

I think he might be 16. With all those threads about cheap Hondas I'm thinking he's looking for his first car.

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
You STILL don't need 50 different airbags to achieve such ratings. Whether the car comes with 50 airbags or ZERO airbags, fact is, those systems aren't that heavy and all they do is add to the cost of the car. You're probably one of those people who too believe that the only way to achieve a 5 star rating is to add 1000lbs worth of equipment and that is in fact, WRONG. I just think the most of you people in this thread are just a bunch of whiners who like to think that there is nothing that can be done about fuel economy, that everything that has been done is already being done and therefore additional effort into saving fuel is just splitting hairs. I on the other hand, completely disagree with that assertion and know that there are things that can be done to improve fuel economy, it's just that you people don't care make any sacrifices and continue to use the wrong tool for the job (SUV to commute into the City for example..).

'09 Volvo S60 23 mpg combined (didn't know the year so I just picked a very current one)
'99 Lexus LS400 19 mpg combined (last year sold)

Speaking of wrong tools for the job, if you were serious about getting better mileage you'd get a vehicle that gets better mileage from the start. Sure you can over inflate the tires and try to hypermile to get better gas mileage but starting with a more efficient car would be a no brainer if you're trying to save fuel.

Of course, if your parents are buying the cars you don't really get to have much control over the kinds of cars they pick, do you?

Dude, you got the quoting all wrong in that.

What? You didn't want that attributed to you?

Thanks for pointing that out, I went back and fixed it.

 

[JulesMaximus]

Originally posted by: fleabag

Originally posted by: Bignate603

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus

Originally posted by: Bignate603

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus

Originally posted by: fleabag

Originally posted by: alphatarget1
You're throwing money away if you replace your air filter ever 13k miles.

Not sure a lot of the stuff you do is necessarily safe, especially the coasting in neutral stuff.

You could wash it, vacuum it, blow on it or do something to clean it up. I have what I think is a cotton air filter in my LS400.

What do you set the tire pressures at on your LS400? 100psi?

I'm wondering what cars are really his...

Originally posted by: fleabag
On the Volvo S60, I keep the tires at 55psi cold

Originally posted by: fleabag
I have what I think is a cotton air filter in my LS400.

While he apparently has these cars he's looking at cars like this:
96 honda with 300k on it
Thread about it

Getting grumpy about a craigslist listing for another similar Honda

Considering suing a seller on craigslist for false advertising about a car

The cars he says he has and the cars he's looking at buying are quite different. I'm wondering if he's going and over inflating his parents tires.

Agreed. Something doesn't add up here. He's full of brown, foul-smelling, waste material if you ask me.

Interestingly he hasn't responded to this post, just like every single post that asks him how old he is. I wonder why that is...

Because it's trolling and irrelevant. Stop attacking me and stick with attacking my ideas or simply agree with me because you've realized that I'm right. I don't ask about what your religious affiliation is so why should you ask about equally private information?

I started driving in the mid 1980s and I have easily a half a million miles of driving experience in every kind of weather from blizzards to blazing hot desert trails. I've wrenched on many different cars and bikes over the years and I've driven more cars than you can imagine...probably well over 100 different makes and models. I also have a motorcycle endorsement on my license and about ten thousand miles of experience on motorcycles.

Your background and experience is most definitely relevant. Would you take financial or tax advice from the guy who mows your lawn?

I'm just going to assume that you are under 20 years old and have very little driving experience until you man up and prove otherwise. Seriously, your posts have led us to these conclusions. The ball is in your court skippy.

 

[AdamK47]

Stay tuned to this forum for my fuel economy guide. It'll be a hoot!

 

[fleabag]

Originally posted by: Bignate603
Speaking of wrong tools for the job, if you were serious about getting better mileage you'd get a vehicle that gets better mileage from the start. Sure you can over inflate the tires and try to hypermile to get better gas mileage but starting with a more efficient car would be a no brainer if you're trying to save fuel.

This I can completely agree with. Obviously if you want to make SUBSTANTIAL gains in the reduction of fuel usage, you'll need to change vehicles. However most people don't have the money, the will or the circumstances to change vehicles to improve their fuel economy, such as myself (until recently, and now I'm looking to buy that very vehicle). It's like swimming, what these people are doing is dipping their toes into the pool, then slowly easing themselves in before they finally decide to swim altogether. Improving your fuel economy from 20mpg to 26mpg just from technique, tire pressure, keeping your car maintained, etc. may seem like a small gain but when you're already dealing with lots of fuel, it's a major reduction in gallons of fuel used. It's pretty doubtful that I'd buy a new vehicle to improve my fuel economy two to three years ago when I first got interested in this stuff but now it doesn't seem so unreasonable. Just remember that buying a new vehicle to improve your fuel economy and potentially sacrifice on other things is a pretty large commitment which is why most people suggest the things in the OP before suggesting buying another vehicle.

Originally posted by: Bignate603

Originally posted by: fleabag
Because it's trolling and irrelevant. Stop attacking me and stick with attacking my ideas or simply agree with me because you have realized that I am right. I don't ask about what your religious affiliation is so why should you ask about equally private information?

It's quite relevant. The opinion of a highly experienced driver carries more weight when it comes to driving techniques, as would someone with experience designing, testing or working on cars.

We're not talking about driving techniques and even if I was, I'd cite various sources and testimonials of people who are agreeing with my assertion with the OP included, so case closed.