Measuring cars by hours.
Measuring cars by hours.
Author
Discussion

benjj

Original Poster:

6,787 posts

193 months

Tuesday 12th February 2013
quotequote all
I've been thinking about this a lot recently:

Why don't we record cars hourly running as well as mileage?

They do it with planes and boats for the obvious reason that it is very difficult to accurately measure distance travelled due to the environments in which they operate.

However, surely this would be very easy to add to a car's ECU. I appreciate that many modern motors already can do this but it's not exactly accessible unless you have the right piece of electronic kit. Why don't manufacturers add this feature as standard?

When buying a used car this would be really interesting information to have. For example:

Car 1) 56,000miles, 2947 hours running. This would equal an average of 19mph which would be representative of a car mainly used for pottering. May well have prematurely aged with a large number of slow/short journeys. Interesting to know.

Car 2: 69,000miles, 1642 hours running. This equals an average 42mph, clearly a car used on longer, faster runs.

I would really love to know this information. I'm not suggesting one of the above two options is 'better' than the other, but it is representative of how the car has been used and allows a buyer to make a more informed decision to buy or walk away.

It would also highlight the 'bargain' of picking up 82 year old Doris's Micra with only 13,000 miles but 450,000 hours. Doesn't look like such a good deal when you look at it in that way...

The last point would be it could make a useful cross reference for whether a car has been clocked or not.

What do you think?


AndyNetwork

1,849 posts

224 months

Tuesday 12th February 2013
quotequote all
benjj said:
The last point would be it could make a useful cross reference for whether a car has been clocked or not.

What do you think?
They would just clock the running time as well.

Risotto

3,933 posts

242 months

Tuesday 12th February 2013
quotequote all
Bristol used to, although I suspect it was largely to maintain the tenuous aircraft link. Don't know of any others who have adopted it.

mini1380cc

2,949 posts

201 months

Tuesday 12th February 2013
quotequote all
It seems to me that the engine is rarely the first area to show proper wear compared to the chassis itself. I've had many a banger that has shown obvious neglect in its exterior/interior yet the engine is still sweet.

I'd imagine high "hourage" will be shown in its appearance long before the engine shows any signs.

Also if you think about the general mentality of today's majority, I don't think most would care. The car is more of a disposable tool than ever before for most.

Edited by mini1380cc on Tuesday 12th February 12:57

trashbat

6,314 posts

183 months

Tuesday 12th February 2013
quotequote all
Plenty probably do, either in the main ECU or in the control unit of something else that is factory fit.

Lots of consumer electronics kit does, e.g. LCD monitors. Add to that there is a bunch of info hidden from the ordinary owner (like how the ECU mileage is different from the odometer on my car) and there's a good chance it exists.

new_bloke

453 posts

314 months

Tuesday 12th February 2013
quotequote all
From 1953 to 1959, the corvette had a cumulative rev counter! Not sure how useful, but certainly cool...

JREwing

17,551 posts

209 months

Tuesday 12th February 2013
quotequote all
new_bloke said:
From 1953 to 1959, the corvette had a cumulative rev counter! Not sure how useful, but certainly cool...
Surely you'd just end up with enormous 53x10^6 standard form figures. You'd need a mathematician to decipher it laugh

MX7

7,902 posts

204 months

Tuesday 12th February 2013
quotequote all
Good idea. thumbup

RB Will

10,877 posts

270 months

Tuesday 12th February 2013
quotequote all
In my last car, a Subaru legacy the trip computer told you how far you had been and how long it had taken but you could reset it by resetting the trip computer.
Think farm machinery uses hours too, probably because they only do 100 miles in 1000 hours

Dr Jekyll

23,820 posts

291 months

Tuesday 12th February 2013
quotequote all
Number of starts could be an interesting one.