Is fuel economy blown way out of proportion?
Discussion
RenesisEvo said:
Twincam16 said:
I don't hold to this 'you can never be too safe' attitude. Truth is, most cars that are roadworthy are, broadly-speaking, 'safe'.
What amuses me is that a lot of people automatically assume that getting a car with more airbags/better crash rating etc means their offspring are better protected, yet they never consider learning defensive driving (or indeed, improving their driving at all) to avoid as much as possible having an accident in the first place.If you're looking for something that can really make your car safer, good quality tyres are it. They can make it handle more predictably, grip the road harder, find grip in variable weather conditions and shorten braking distances. They can also turn a pseudo off-roader into something capable of gripping more than just tarmac.
But these people who go out and buy new cars in the name of safety - how many of them buy anything other than middling no-name tyres? And how many only buy them when the MoT man has told them their existing tyres are illegally bald?
I'm amazed at the number of relatively expensive 'family safety' cars I see out there running round on cheapo Chinese remoulds. It's like trying to run a marathon in slippers.
Twincam16 said:
I think there's a balance to be drawn - I don't hold to this 'you can never be too safe' attitude. Truth is, most cars that are roadworthy are, broadly-speaking, 'safe'.
I am always concerned when I see a lot of people who wouldn't ordinarily take out large amounts of credit to buy things they don't really need, simply because regardless of whether it benefits our manufacturing sector, it's still furthering the attitudes and economic dynamics that nearly killed our economy off a few years ago. People need to get a sense of perspective and priority and realise that their first resort shouldn't always be to fish out the credit card. If this message was put out to the population at large (and enforced by strict regulation that vanquished payday loans firms and made banks only lend responsibly), people would soon have to apply more thought to buying cars.
The result would be a buoyant tertiary mechanical sector, better-maintained cars on the roads and less debt in the economy. Also, people would soon realise that mpg isn't as impactful on their wallets as depreciation and monthly interest payments on a depreciating asset.
People would still buy new cars, but they'd buy more expensive ones, keep them longer and look after them better before they got into the second-hand market. I don't see what the issue would be other than the usual headless chickens getting all flustered because their bank wouldn't let them have a new 'reg' faux-by-faux to 'impress' the Emergent Service Workers next door.
Completely agree with this. Cars are now "throw away" items to most people. - Just look at attitudes towards vehicles with over 100k miles on them. - It's almost as if they're plagued. I wouldn't mind an older car as a daily but finding well maintained and looked after examples is a nightmare (e.g. try finding an immaculate E39 530i Sport manual).I am always concerned when I see a lot of people who wouldn't ordinarily take out large amounts of credit to buy things they don't really need, simply because regardless of whether it benefits our manufacturing sector, it's still furthering the attitudes and economic dynamics that nearly killed our economy off a few years ago. People need to get a sense of perspective and priority and realise that their first resort shouldn't always be to fish out the credit card. If this message was put out to the population at large (and enforced by strict regulation that vanquished payday loans firms and made banks only lend responsibly), people would soon have to apply more thought to buying cars.
The result would be a buoyant tertiary mechanical sector, better-maintained cars on the roads and less debt in the economy. Also, people would soon realise that mpg isn't as impactful on their wallets as depreciation and monthly interest payments on a depreciating asset.
People would still buy new cars, but they'd buy more expensive ones, keep them longer and look after them better before they got into the second-hand market. I don't see what the issue would be other than the usual headless chickens getting all flustered because their bank wouldn't let them have a new 'reg' faux-by-faux to 'impress' the Emergent Service Workers next door.
Twincam16 said:
It's the tyres that really get me.
If you're looking for something that can really make your car safer, good quality tyres are it. They can make it handle more predictably, grip the road harder, find grip in variable weather conditions and shorten braking distances. They can also turn a pseudo off-roader into something capable of gripping more than just tarmac.
But these people who go out and buy new cars in the name of safety - how many of them buy anything other than middling no-name tyres? And how many only buy them when the MoT man has told them their existing tyres are illegally bald?
I'm amazed at the number of relatively expensive 'family safety' cars I see out there running round on cheapo Chinese remoulds. It's like trying to run a marathon in slippers.
It's funny you say that. I had an 'advanced' instructor preaching to me how amazing he was recently. I eventually had enough of his and pointed out his decent dunlop on the OSR and the Linglong on the NSR (insert other brand if you will). Nice one you tIf you're looking for something that can really make your car safer, good quality tyres are it. They can make it handle more predictably, grip the road harder, find grip in variable weather conditions and shorten braking distances. They can also turn a pseudo off-roader into something capable of gripping more than just tarmac.
But these people who go out and buy new cars in the name of safety - how many of them buy anything other than middling no-name tyres? And how many only buy them when the MoT man has told them their existing tyres are illegally bald?
I'm amazed at the number of relatively expensive 'family safety' cars I see out there running round on cheapo Chinese remoulds. It's like trying to run a marathon in slippers.
t.
Nicely done.Face for Radio said:
big_boz said:
Face for Radio said:
Just because someone has a fast/expensive car and they're driving at a chilled-out speed, doesn't mean they can't afford to drive more quickly if they wanted to.
What a ridiculous notion.
To Quote...your profile.....What a ridiculous notion.
Face for Radio's Profile Page said:
"We need to go to....Ludicrous speed!"
I assume this only means outside schools, in residential areas and not on motorways, the roads that are designed and built to convey you quickly to your destination?(Spaceballs, I mean, and also when people think they're scoring internet points using a quote from a movie against the poster...)
big_boz said:
1. If your average speed is 20% higher, you save 20% in time, this is simple maths. In case you have forgotten from school, Speed = Distance/time..... fairly simple maths
Quick correction. _Your average speed has to be 25% higher to save 20% in time.
Fairly simple maths ;-)
V88Dicky said:
I've just changed jobs, and with that came a shorter commute, down from 38 miles (each way) to 21.
I used this good fortune to swap an 85hp 1.3 petrol for a 230hp V6
Thanks for his thread I used this good fortune to swap an 85hp 1.3 petrol for a 230hp V6
I am currently using a similar calculation of mileage reducing from an 80 mile round trip to 60, plus the new journey will be motorway and dual carriageway rather than a cross country route so will surely be more fuel efficient
If I go from my car which currently averages 39mpg to as low as 25, then it will only cost an extra £7-8 a week
20mpg is £25 a week or just £1200'ish a year. Right I'm off to the classifieds, any recommendations for a V8 estate?
Justin Case said:
I only do about 7,000 miles per year in my car, but even then if I went from my 35mpg car to a 25mpg one it would cost another £10 per week on petrol. Just think what I else could do with another £10 per week.....
.....pass the V6/V8 adverts please.
.....pass the V6/V8 adverts please.
7000 miles @ 35mpg = 200 gallons = 900 litres @140p/l = £1260 / 52 weeks = £24.23/week
7000 miles @ 25mpg = 280 gallons = 1260 litres @140p/l = £1764 / 52 weeks = £33.92/week
(Or my equivalent, which would be quite expensive in a petrol car like that) -
20000 miles @ 62mpg = 322 gallons = 1451 litres @146p/l = £2119 / 52 weeks = £40.75/week
C
talksthetalk said:
big_boz said:
1. If your average speed is 20% higher, you save 20% in time, this is simple maths. In case you have forgotten from school, Speed = Distance/time..... fairly simple maths
Quick correction. _Your average speed has to be 25% higher to save 20% in time.
Fairly simple maths ;-)
If you cover 80 miles in one hour your speed is 80mph FFS
big_boz said:
talksthetalk said:
big_boz said:
1. If your average speed is 20% higher, you save 20% in time, this is simple maths. In case you have forgotten from school, Speed = Distance/time..... fairly simple maths
Quick correction. _Your average speed has to be 25% higher to save 20% in time.
Fairly simple maths ;-)
If you cover 80 miles in one hour your speed is 80mph FFS
Then next is also 80 miles, but you increase your speed by 25% to 100mph.
The second trip of 80 miles takes only 48 minutes. 48 minutes is 80% of 60.
So you have saved 20% of your journey time by increasing your speed by 25%.
I've just thought of a new example that might be easier to understand - you increase your speed by 100%.
Hands up everyone who thinks you save 100% of the time. Anyone?
Didn't think so.
If you double your speed you get there in half the time - this is obvious.
The percentages aren't the same though, because simple maths is sometimes not simple enough.
It's a shame because sometimes I walk to the pub and sometimes I drive. When I drive I'm going 750% faster, so I should save 112.5 minutes on my 15 minute journey. Which would mean I could drive to the pub, drink solidly for an hour and a half and still get home before having left, and therefore still be sober. And younger.
Hands up everyone who thinks you save 100% of the time. Anyone?
Didn't think so.
If you double your speed you get there in half the time - this is obvious.
The percentages aren't the same though, because simple maths is sometimes not simple enough.
It's a shame because sometimes I walk to the pub and sometimes I drive. When I drive I'm going 750% faster, so I should save 112.5 minutes on my 15 minute journey. Which would mean I could drive to the pub, drink solidly for an hour and a half and still get home before having left, and therefore still be sober. And younger.
Captain Muppet said:
It's a shame because sometimes I walk to the pub and sometimes I drive. When I drive I'm going 750% faster, so I should save 112.5 minutes on my 15 minute journey. Which would mean I could drive to the pub, drink solidly for an hour and a half and still get home before having left, and therefore still be sober. And younger.
That only works if you take the Delorean.antspants said:
20mpg is £25 a week or just £1200'ish a year. Right I'm off to the classifieds, any recommendations for a V8 estate?
MG ZTT 260 http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/2004-04-MG-ZT-T-4-6-V8-2...
Captain Muppet said:
I've just thought of a new example that might be easier to understand - you increase your speed by 100%.
Hands up everyone who thinks you save 100% of the time. Anyone?
Didn't think so.
If you double your speed you get there in half the time - this is obvious.
The percentages aren't the same though, because simple maths is sometimes not simple enough.
It's a shame because sometimes I walk to the pub and sometimes I drive. When I drive I'm going 750% faster, so I should save 112.5 minutes on my 15 minute journey. Which would mean I could drive to the pub, drink solidly for an hour and a half and still get home before having left, and therefore still be sober. And younger.
I love posts like this.Hands up everyone who thinks you save 100% of the time. Anyone?
Didn't think so.
If you double your speed you get there in half the time - this is obvious.
The percentages aren't the same though, because simple maths is sometimes not simple enough.
It's a shame because sometimes I walk to the pub and sometimes I drive. When I drive I'm going 750% faster, so I should save 112.5 minutes on my 15 minute journey. Which would mean I could drive to the pub, drink solidly for an hour and a half and still get home before having left, and therefore still be sober. And younger.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff