What FE would make you happy? - Page 2 - Fuelly Forums

Android Users - Coming Soon! - Migrating from aCar 4.8 to 5.0

View Poll Results: What's an acceptable Mixed driving FE
25 1 2.17%
30 12 26.09%
35 4 8.70%
40+ 29 63.04%
Voters: 46. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
Old 11-12-2007, 02:56 PM   #11
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 313
Country: United States
Hrmmm, I voted 30 MPG on the assumption that the vehicle has 4 bums in it, although personally, I'm now struggling to make 20 MPG in mostly cold urban short haul drives.

"MPG per person" might be a better measure... and if you've been in Northern Mexico you'd know that full size pickup trucks there easily get 150 MPG per person.

Many would say anything less than infinity is unacceptable given that we share our breathable air with these toxic convenience boxes.
__________________

__________________
2TonJellyBean is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2007, 03:56 PM   #12
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 290
Country: United States
2TonJellyBean said it first. Ideally, I say that cars should get infinite mileage. That is the only number that I would be HAPPY with.

I would accept 40+. Why this high of a number? I think that people need to drastically change their view on how cars should be used. If people showed the interest, and car companies came through, we could all be driving around in cars that get 50-60 mpg. Sure, we may have to re-evaluate how we drive our cars presently, give up some of the features that we have grown used to, and change how cars look to achieve this. It is achievable, but as of yet, most people are unwilling to change. The old adage "if there is a will, there is a way" comes to mind.

So to sum up, I personally would not be happy until we get cars that are perfectly efficient and use no energy that is not totally renewable. I would accept an average that is somewhere above 40mpg. I think that we could do much better than that with some effort.
__________________

Erdrick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2007, 04:06 PM   #13
Registered Member
 
Danronian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 652
Country: United States
I voted 40+ since my car that was designed before 1995 gets over that with mixed driving, well actually mostly rural roads...
__________________


On the never-ending quest for better gas mileage...
Danronian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2007, 04:57 PM   #14
Registered Member
 
omgwtfbyobbq's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 1,516
Country: United States
Shoot, if the brakes weren't put on Cafe and additional loopholes added, we'd be at almost 100mpg right now.

*shakes fist*
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by FormulaTwo
I think if i could get that type of FE i would have no problem driving a dildo shaped car.
omgwtfbyobbq is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2007, 05:18 PM   #15
Supporting Member
 
OdieTurbo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 202
Country: United States
Send a message via Yahoo to OdieTurbo
I think with modern technology, advances in composites, electronics and such that the car makers should be putting out much more fuel efficient vehicles. I mean when is the last time you saw a smooth underbody on a car? Come on people, the stuff we are doing here isn't rocket science.

I see no reason why your average 4 door sedan shouldn't be pulling 40+ MPG with our current capabilities.
__________________
2005 Saturn VUE 2.2L 5-Speed FWD
OdieTurbo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2007, 06:19 PM   #16
Registered Member
 
Danronian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 652
Country: United States
Quote:
Originally Posted by OdieTurbo View Post
I think with modern technology, advances in composites, electronics and such that the car makers should be putting out much more fuel efficient vehicles. I mean when is the last time you saw a smooth underbody on a car? Come on people, the stuff we are doing here isn't rocket science.

I see no reason why your average 4 door sedan shouldn't be pulling 40+ MPG with our current capabilities.
Well stated and I 100% agree.
__________________


On the never-ending quest for better gas mileage...
Danronian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2007, 06:47 PM   #17
Registered Member
 
trebuchet03's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 812
Country: United States
Send a message via AIM to trebuchet03
I was going to hit the 40-??, but I guess 40+ was the option...

I'm really want and am trying to get 40, unassisted highway mpg I got 36.4 this weekend (480+) miles with 95% highway
__________________
Time is the best teacher. Unfortunately it kills all its students.


Bike Miles (Begin Aug. 20 - '07): ~433.2 miles

11/12
trebuchet03 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2007, 08:39 PM   #18
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 228
Country: United States
Here is my problem, it's not a specific mpg number per se:

My 1986 D-250 with a 318 carbureted 2bbl got 14mpg with my trailer, driving it really easy and without using extravagant hypermethods, that to me was acceptable, more so for the box design those older pickup trucks had.

Now take my 1995 D-2500, same truck, railed injection and all sorts of upgrades, granted the engine is bigger and so is the truck, but with a bold aerodynamic look and all this great new technology I can't get this thing much past 11mpg!

I'm not here to argue specifics that make the newer truck get worse mileage, injection itself should account for a 20% increase, even with all the extra weight and the larger engine, the aeros and the efficiency should at least compensate for the nonsense.

But no, in 9 years of technological advances they did NOTHING to improve mileage, there's not even an option or anything, all it is about is power and power and more power and so lets just dump raw fuel down the throat so that in fact things got worse.

That's what makes me so mad, and since 1995 it's just one slap in the face after another.
__________________
A FE gauge should be standard equipment in every vehicle.
8307c4 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2007, 09:26 PM   #19
Registered Member
 
Mike T's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 321
Country: United States
60+ MPG in my smart, and 34+ MPG in the B 200. The smart is already there and I am working on the B 200. I drive normally but smoothly, no radical measures like EOC etc. for me.
__________________
2008 Mercedes-Benz B 200
2006 smart fortwo BRABUS Canada 1 cdi cabriolet
2005 smart fortwo cdi pulse cabriolet
1966 Peugeot 404 Coupe Injection
Mike T is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2007, 10:27 PM   #20
Registered Member
 
GasSavers_Minger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 98
Country: United States
I put 40+ - Maybe I'm spoiled, but I get high 30's and hit 40 once or twice...and I want higher.

Man, this is just a game for me...anyways, anything sub-20 mpg is a joke - for example, I can't figure out why people want V8's in passenger cars when things such as turbos exist, but maybe thats just me.
__________________

__________________

Quote:
Originally Posted by theclencher View Post
P.S. I must be a wierdo as I think just because a guy can afford to do something, doesn't mean he should. I can afford to buy 100 gallons of gas several times a month, pour it on the ground, light it (or not)... but I don't think I should.
GasSavers_Minger is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
google+ integration? xchrislee Fuelly Web Support and Community News 3 07-15-2011 02:55 AM
1992 Honda VX cfg83 For Sale 7 03-03-2007 01:08 PM
GasSavers.org Stickers Matt Timion Fuelly Web Support and Community News 7 10-12-2006 04:48 PM
FFI GasSavers_MPGmaker Introduce Yourself - New member Welcome 39 05-30-2006 04:31 PM
Where to get parts? What parts do we need? Matt Timion Electric and Solar powered 11 09-19-2005 09:37 PM

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 11:53 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.