|
eyebeem posted:Trip computer. You're right that it's not the most accurate of means. Except is using the amount of fuel dispensed from a gas pump for measuring fuel economy anymore accurate? Especially considering the nature of the cutoff device unless you can consistently top off the tank without overfilling. I wouldn't know because I'm from New Jersey and the gas jockies tend to just fill up to the nearest dollar after the cutoff kicks in. I tend to find that a half gallon difference can result in a 1 mpg difference.
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 21:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 13:44 |
|
|
Unless you fill up at literally the exact same pump every time and do not top after the automatic shutoff, I would expect a modern fuel consumption calculation from the car to be more accurate than the old (gallons filled at the pump / miles driven on the trip odometer) method.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 21:33
|
|
|
Keep in mind the EPA highway portion of the test tops out at 60 mph and averages 48 mph. Aerodynamic drag increases with the square of velocity, 75 vs 48 is huge.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 21:34
|
|
|
I love how ford is putting proper over drives in some of the cars. The mustang with the 2.7something rear end and a 6 speed on the v6 gets pretty awesome mpg at 70-80. Not the fastest car around but coming from a 2.3 accord and a Miata it feels reasonably quick.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 22:13
|
|
|
MonkeyNutZ posted:Keep in mind the EPA highway portion of the test tops out at 60 mph and averages 48 mph. Aerodynamic drag increases with the square of velocity, 75 vs 48 is huge. I believe they do corrections for increased speed and acceleration to make it more realistic. How they actually do that correction and how it compares to driving at 70-75 mph, I couldn't say.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 22:29
|
|
|
The odd part is, they have a test which is higher speed, with a large portion of the test between 60 and 70 mph. It's in the same link skipdogg posted, click the "High Speed" tab: http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/fe_test_schedules.shtml edit: Ah, that's the adjustment mentioned. They adjust the highway and city results using that test, as well as one with air conditioning running and one in cold weather.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2014 00:50
|
|
|
My Escape with the 2.0 will do 30mpg on a flat highway, if you never go above 70. Otherwise, 23-27 no matter what, including towing.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2014 01:39
|
|
|
Here's the gory details justifying the updated EPA test cycles. Also for whatever faults the EPA test cycles have, they're much more realistic than what's used in the EU. The extra urban driving cycle takes over 70 seconds of acceleration to reach 100 km/h and manufacturers take full advantage of that fact.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2014 02:17
|
|
|
New FIAT ad pokes fun at well known unreliability of Honda Civics. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W4MUcjBv7PA
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2014 02:46
|
|
|
Overall the EPA test do a fair job of representing real world MPG, I just think they could be better. My car is rated at 17/25 and 20mpg overall, which is pretty close to what I get even romping on it in the city. My main issue is to maximize those numbers car manufacturers optimize the gearing of the drive train to hit max MPG number. If they want Max MPG @ 60MPH, well that's what they're going to gear for. The newer 8,9,10 speed transmissions get me excited as they allow for multiple overdrive gears. My car has a .742 6th gear, throw in an extra gear between 2-3 for maximum acceleration, and another steeper OD gear, say a 0.6 that would let it spin around 1600 RPM @ 80MPH. I don't know enough about aerodynamics though to know if that would actually save fuel or not as the engine might require more fuel at 1600RPM to overcome all the aero stuff. I just checked the Dodge ZF 9 speed transmission, and gears 7,8,9 are .7 .58 and .48 respectively.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2014 02:50
|
|
|
FIAT posted:Hey look! We fixed the sedan! Now it's a crossover which stops really well because it has AWD! I don't think they get how this works.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2014 03:15
|
|
|
Disgruntled Bovine posted:I don't think they get how this works. It's alright, neither do the customers.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2014 03:26
|
|
|
Throatwarbler posted:New FIAT ad pokes fun at well known unreliability of Honda Civics. So is this a lifted 500? Because it looks like they took a 500 and lifted it. EDIT Growing up in Michgan you bet your rear end everyone thought 4WD/AWD meant they could stop faster, until they ended up in a ditch.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2014 03:27
|
|
|
KakerMix posted:So is this a lifted 500? Because it looks like they took a 500 and lifted it. It has twice as many doors as the 500? It's based on the underpinnings of the Jeep Renegade.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2014 03:33
|
|
|
Golf SportWagen coming to the US with AWD and maybe a diesel option?  http://blog.caranddriver.com/look-out-subaru-vw-golf-sportwagen-confirmed-to-offer-awd-in-u-s/ While cool and all, I don't think I'd get one as I've heard nothing but trouble with VWs. Just last month, my co-worker had to take the day off because his 2011 GTI had knocking and coilpack issues. In any case, Subaru needs to get their poo poo together and come out with a hotter hatchback or wagon lest VW, Ford, or Mazda steal the AWD hothatch crown.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2014 03:36
|
|
|
VW, Ford, and Mazda don't have proper all-wheel drive and longitudinal drive trains.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2014 03:46
|
|
|
Wheeee posted:VW, Ford, and Mazda don't have proper all-wheel drive and longitudinal drive trains. Ugh. What do longitudinal drivetrains have to do with anything? Evos don't have longitudinal drivetrains.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2014 03:51
|
|
|
Are there any FWD platform vehicles that have 50/50 power distribution front/rear, or a rearward bias? I know it's possible, I'm wondering if any are actually built; Audi's Quattro for example is a longitudinal layout, the "Quattro" in the A3 built on the MQB platform is just a Haldex system. So yes, it does matter.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2014 04:15
|
|
|
Wheeee posted:Are there any FWD platform vehicles that have 50/50 power distribution front/rear, or a rearward bias? I know it's possible, I'm wondering if any are actually built; Audi's Quattro for example is a longitudinal layout, the "Quattro" in the A3 built on the MQB platform is just a Haldex system. The taurus SHO can send 100% of the power to the rear. Gen V haldex systems can have all the fancy stuff quattro/subarus can have, but it's really up to the manufacturer to implement everything like eLSD diffs, and full power distribution. Most of the time it's limited by the strength of the components in the rear which are much lighter due to weight/drag/packaging concerns.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2014 04:35
|
|
|
Wheeee posted:Are there any FWD platform vehicles that have 50/50 power distribution front/rear, or a rearward bias? I know it's possible, I'm wondering if any are actually built; Audi's Quattro for example is a longitudinal layout, the "Quattro" in the A3 built on the MQB platform is just a Haldex system. You mean a 50/50 torque split under normal no-slip circumstances with amechanical center differential? Virtually everything built in the 90s, Evos, DSMs and their derivatives, 3000GT, Toyota Celica GT4 and all its derivatives, Nissan Pulsar GTiR, all Toyota minivans including the current Sienna, all transverse Alfas, the list is endless? Mostly they don't use such a system anymore because people don't need it and it sucks up fuel. Most Subarus do not have center differentials, only clutchpacks, and most Audis sold globally are FWD.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2014 05:08
|
|
|
Wheeee posted:Audi's Quattro for example is a longitudinal layout, the "Quattro" in the A3 built on the MQB platform is just a Haldex system. There's nothing wrong with the Haldex system. The current generation system is entirely computer controlled and has near instantaneous response. Part of the reason that haldex systems have a bad reputation was because the early generations were completely mechanical, so they were slow to react. Since the new units are electronic, they can work in conjunction with the cars other sensors to predict which wheels will require power and respond before a wheel spin occurs. The thing is, the system can be installed as a simple electronic transfer case capable of only transferring power rearward. Without proper LSDs on each axle, you don't get as much control, but that's true of any AWD system. BorgWarner provides electronically controlled front and rear LSDs for vehicles that need to control the amount of power that goes to each individual wheel. oRenj9 fucked around with this message at 07:38 on Nov 25, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2014 07:34
|
|
|
Wheeee posted:VW, Ford, and Mazda don't have proper all-wheel drive and longitudinal drive trains. Subaru doesn't have a hot hatch at all, now.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2014 07:55
|
|
|
2016 Explorer pricing announced. Platinum starts at $54k. Maybe mrs.skipdogg could consider something cheaper like a Land Rover Disco? http://wot.motortrend.com/1411_2016_ford_explorer_starts_at_31595_new_platinum_53495.html
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2014 08:06
|
|
|
Hahaha! I tried to get her into a Honda Odyssey Touring, but she's one of those women that refuses to drive a Minivan no matter what. She hasn't complained about wanting something new yet, so we may buy our current car out after the lease it up (depends on what it's worth). I just know that dealers won't be discounting the Platinum Explorers at all, odds of getting a decent lease are slim and none. I think we snagged around 4500 off MSRP on the Sport with rebates and dealer discount. I'm hoping she ditches a 3 row vehicle next time around, as the kids are older now and we don't really need the 3rd row anymore. We could 'downsize' to something like a Edge Sport. We'll see. 2 years left on this lease.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2014 17:05
|
|
|
Wheeee posted:Are there any FWD platform vehicles that have 50/50 power distribution front/rear, or a rearward bias? I know it's possible, I'm wondering if any are actually built; Audi's Quattro for example is a longitudinal layout, the "Quattro" in the A3 built on the MQB platform is just a Haldex system. At least Delta Integrale and Alfa's Q4s (155 Q4, 156 Q4, 156 Crosswagon, 159 Q4, Brera Q4...) are FWD based transverse engined cars with permanent rear-biased 4WD.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2014 17:59
|
|
|
oRenj9 posted:There's nothing wrong with the Haldex system. The current generation system is entirely computer controlled and has near instantaneous response. Part of the reason that haldex systems have a bad reputation was because the early generations were completely mechanical, so they were slow to react. Since the new units are electronic, they can work in conjunction with the cars other sensors to predict which wheels will require power and respond before a wheel spin occurs. While I find the technology behind the Haldex system interesting and clever, I'm a little wary of its reliability and longevity since it uses a clutch to transfer and vary power to the normally-not-powered wheels. Since you usually don't want to lock the front and rear axles (particularly on dry pavement), the clutch will typically be slipping and wearing out whenever it's engaged. When the clutch does wear out, the wheels it's coupled it can no longer be driven. Compared to the traditional three differential configuration, the more typically worn out components are the diff locking mechanism or limited slip system. Even if they wear out or fail, all four wheels can still be driven albeit with compromised power distribution if an ABS-based traction control system can't compensate. Then again, maybe I'm underestimating the durability of the clutch pack, overestimating the strength and durability of bevel gear differentials, and overestimating the amount of wear and stress an AWD system in a road car will typically encounter. And then there is the question of if 2WD or 4WD with open diffs is better for failure mode operation.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2014 22:53
|
|
|
Awww yis the 6 speed manual Chevy SS is coming.  So since this is a GM vehicle that is finally done right, it's definitely going to be discontinued next year.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2014 09:33
|
|
|
According to the site, if you order the optional mud guards, they have the Holden logo on them 
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2014 09:54
|
|
|
That looks like the bastard son of a Ford Mondeo and a Saab 95.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2014 10:13
|
|
|
Throatwarbler posted:So since this is a GM vehicle that is finally done right, it's definitely going to be discontinued next year. So the only GM option is China as they make the Buick/Holden statesman there I think. But I don't expect USA buyers to go crazy about China made Chevs just yet. Fo3 fucked around with this message at 10:30 on Nov 26, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2014 10:20
|
|
|
Fo3 posted:You already know GMH is closing in Australia. I can't see them tooling up a new factory elsewhere, it won't sell enough compared to existing cadillac cts/camaro/corvette to build them over there. They stopped the Chinese statesman a few years ago, and it was only assembled via CKD kits there anyway. I think they could restart production in Oshawa if they wanted but they probably don't.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2014 11:11
|
|
|
The Commodore last had a major redesign in 2006 so it's overdue to die anyway.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2014 11:14
|
|
|
For us, yes. For Americans a domestic brand 4 dr sedan with RWD V8 performance seems to be a novel thing. They only have the 300c and import BMW/Mercs (though they get the German stuff so cheap why bother with domestics?)
Fo3 fucked around with this message at 11:20 on Nov 26, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2014 11:17
|
|
|
Fo3 posted:(though they get the German stuff so cheap why bother with domestics?) The SS is $50k. (Which is really a lot for what it is.) An equivalent BMW would probably be closer to $70k.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2014 13:53
|
|
|
I hate to say it but I think the Impala interior looks better aside from the wheel. And 50 grand is a lot of coin. Still want to drive one, though.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2014 15:11
|
|
|
The SS would be fine if it was a little more than an Impala. But its a lot more. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2014 15:52
|
|
|
Am I just spoiled by Corvette aerodynamics or is 21mpg highway kind of garbage even for a 4k lbs sedan? Edit: Nope, a regular v8 Charger weighs more, has way more power and is still getting 23mpg hwy. davebo fucked around with this message at 16:07 on Nov 26, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2014 16:01
|
|
|
6 vs 8 speed auto is probably the difference. The SS should really have an 8 speed, probably not worth it for them at this stage though. No direct injection or cylinder deactivation either.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2014 16:12
|
|
|
The old 5 speed 6.4l Charger gets 23, the 8 speed gets 25. Hellcat gets 22.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2014 16:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 13:44 |
|
|
My BMW F10 535 4,180 lb battle cruiser gets nearly 30mpg hwy chilling at 70......I only have 6 (manually activated) gears, too. It gets its rear end kicked in town though (around 17mpg) and the 1st gear is really short and useless on a car this heavy. Meh...today in stop and go TurkeyRage getaway day - couldn't get my 70 mph avg. 
Keyser_Soze fucked around with this message at 03:53 on Nov 27, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2014 19:50
|
|
