|
Any of you actually seen the proposed tier 4 multipollutant regulations from the EPA? 13% YoY fleet reduction in CO2 (which includes BEVs) with the assumption of something like 50-60% BEV sales by 2030. So if you think that's likely then okay, but if not then there's going to be huge downward pressure on CO2 emissions from ICE. You're much more likely to get a fun vehicle out of hybridized cars that can give you that torque via electric motors than a big beefy engine. Downsizing and turbocharging have been a trend for years and it is definitely not reversing course. totalnewbie fucked around with this message at 11:58 on Feb 11, 2024 |
#
?
Feb 11, 2024 11:50
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 06:39 |
|
|
A TBI 5.7l from 1992 will also get over 20mpg if you can keep it under 70, but only 200hp. GM somehow separated displacement from fuel economy in the 80s to a degree where going from a 4cyl in a Wrangler to a 5.3 V8 gets you from 16mpg into the low 20s by going up in displacement. For efficiency reasons we should all be driving cars powered by supercharged 3800s.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2024 14:57
|
|
|
20mpg is terrible fuel efficiency though, for the average american to drive around in. My coworker drives a big ugly BMW SUV and says it gets 6l/100km which comes to 39mpg. My old Saab 900 turbo gets 29-32mpg and I bet I could get 35+ once I've swapped the primary gear.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2024 17:21
|
|
|
Powershift posted:I guess the 7.3 liter v8 is probably the odd one but it’s smaller than the engine in my other car So you’ve got a Cadillac 500 or one of the many Ford 460s? I’m trying to imagine what you’d have where a 445 in a sedan/coupe is your smaller engine
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2024 17:38
|
|
|
His Divine Shadow posted:My coworker drives a big ugly BMW SUV and says it gets 6l/100km which comes to 39mpg. I highly doubt this. How old of an SUV? I would be shocked if it got more than 25 mpg. My mom’s old Mercedes ML350 SUV from 2007 with a V6 got like 16-19. The incoming Tacoma with a turbocharged four cylinder hybrid tops out at like 26-29 mpg and people are thrilled.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2024 17:43
|
|
|
Dr. Lunchables posted:So you’ve got a Cadillac 500 or one of the many Ford 460s? 73 Mark IV with the 460. the 7.3 is the powerstroke in my truck. The two combined are 14.8 liters and nearly 450hp. Raluek posted:i think this is backwards. the 80s and 90s artificially shifted the window towards the small displacement end, but now we're back closer to where we started. On the other hand, displacement in trucks is going down. The F-150 offers a 165 ci 6 cylinder, Smaller than the 170ci i6 in the first mustang. The two engines offered in the 2025 Ram 1500 are 220ci and 183 ci GM is rumored to be coming out with an 8.3 liter Duramax Powershift fucked around with this message at 17:49 on Feb 11, 2024 |
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2024 17:46
|
|
|
Ahhh, ok, power stroke. I was wondering who/when someone make a 445 My engine portfolio goes from 460 ci down to 1.6l, both making similar horsepower
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2024 17:50
|
|
|
Raluek posted:i think this is backwards. the 80s and 90s artificially shifted the window towards the small displacement end, but now we're back closer to where we started. Big V8 sedans were only normal mainstream cars in the US in that timeframe. The rest of the world leaned in hard on smaller-size, smaller-displacement cars with things like taxation on engine displacement providing additional incentive to do so. SpeedFreek posted:going from a 4cyl in a Wrangler to a 5.3 V8 gets you from 16mpg into the low 20s by going up in displacement. For efficiency reasons we should all be driving cars powered by supercharged 3800s. While this is true, it's more to do with how godawful the AMC motors are. The 2.5 and 4.0 never got a real friction reduction diet - they went to a lower friction piston and all that seemed to get them was more piston skirt failures. Non-crossflow heads that flow like poo poo. Non-crossflow heads that mean your intake and exhaust manifolds also flow like poo poo, and are bolted to each other to get that intake charge nice and toasty. Flat tappet cams. It was all minimal-possible-changes applied to an engine that was designed in the 1960s to be as cheap as possible. The LS will get you a lot more performance and an improvement in fuel economy, but if you target "a little" more performance instead of "a lot", VW TDIs and the Cummins R2.8 will get you even better mileage than the LS.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2024 17:53
|
|
|
Powershift posted:73 Mark IV with the 460. the 7.3 is the powerstroke in my truck. The two combined are 14.8 liters and nearly 450hp. It sounds like the jetsons spaceship, but not going to lie, it seems to be a great engine. Better than adequate power and if I'm gentle on the accelerator it gives very good fuel economy for a full size pick up. I have some curiosity with longevity. So far, 30,000K in, so good. If I needed to buy a truck with my own money for ~reasons~ I'd absolutely consider a Gm/Chev truck with the engine.... but gently caress me, the GM infotainment is so awful it would probably be the dealbreaker over anything else.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2024 18:20
|
|
|
Dr. Lunchables posted:My engine portfolio goes from 460 ci down to 1.6l, both making similar horsepower Triple 4 down to 57.4 cubic inches. Both make the same hp at the crank. One makes vastly more torque. I mostly don't care about mpg when selecting a vehicle. What it can do as a tool matters more. The truck that mostly sits gets 9-15mpg. moto will do 20-40mpg. I've had econoshitcans that'd do nearly 50mpg but I wouldn't want to be in when hit by a mouthbreather in a humv-e or a cybertruck. A 250cc moto would be more maneuverable in the situation. It hurts around the 3-5mpg area when all it does is make noise. Nevermind that out west you'd need 50+ gal to make it to the next station...
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2024 18:25
|
|
|
Mileage is one of the most important factors because it absolutely matters to how much the vehicle will cost me and if I can even drive it as much as I want or if i have to decide to stay home or not.trilobite terror posted:I highly doubt this. How old of an SUV? I would be shocked if it got more than 25 mpg. My mom’s old Mercedes ML350 SUV from 2007 with a V6 got like 16-19. Looks newish, 2015 maybe. But maybe cars geared at this market are more fuel efficient because fuel is a lot more expensive here.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2024 18:36
|
|
|
The 20mpg was in a C2500, so a full size pickup. There are few good reasons cars today should get less than 30mpg highway if a 4200lb Buick from 1999 can. IOwnCalculus posted:Big V8 sedans were only normal mainstream cars in the US in that timeframe. The rest of the world leaned in hard on smaller-size, smaller-displacement cars with things like taxation on engine displacement providing additional incentive to do so. Yeah the AMC motors suck but the GM engines seem to get far better fuel economy than smaller displacement similar motors. If I replace the AJ8 (4.0L) with a LS1 or LS2 the I'm seeing claimed 5mpg mileage improvement with 1.7 to 2L more of displacement and 50-100 more horsepower.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2024 18:46
|
|
|
I did get 7l/100km or 33mpg from the one american car I owned, which had a L98 TPI engine (5.7l V8), that was doing 300km one way basically on cruise control at 90kph the whole way during the night. Not bad at all for a 91 Trans Am. I don't think whoever owns it now drives it much. Fuel cost was a big reason I sold it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2024 18:55
|
|
|
His Divine Shadow posted:Mileage is one of the most important factors because it absolutely matters to how much the vehicle will cost me and if I can even drive it as much as I want or if i have to decide to stay home or not. I mean, is his SUV diesel?
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2024 18:58
|
|
|
Hers and don't know, need to ask and find out.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2024 19:06
|
|
|
My displacements range from 660cc to 3.4 liters and the absolute worst economy of the lot is the AWD 2.5 turbo Volvo, which gets 23-ish on the low end in my time with it. My daily is the FiST and my worst tank ever in that was 34mpg. I couldn’t handle driving a sub-20mpg vehicle daily just for the image of driving an SUV or truck, especially since I’m alone in the car 99% of the time. Not calling anyone out in this thread, more the general American public.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2024 19:31
|
|
|
His Divine Shadow posted:Mileage is one of the most important factors because it absolutely matters to how much the vehicle will cost me and if I can even drive it as much as I want or if i have to decide to stay home or not. My Nissan Fuga V8 (Infiniti M45) is listed on fueleconomy.gov as 18mpg combined, my lifetime average according to my Road Trip app is 15mpg, but with a lot of short trips I get as little as 12mpg. I'm unemployed and premium fuel here is currently US$7/gallon. You better believe I stay home a lot  I do get half price transit fares, I should start taking that more.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2024 20:30
|
|
|
slidebite posted:My company issued Silverado has a Turbo 2.7 4cyl (164 c.i.). 310HP - 430lb/ft My work truck at site has this same engine, and good lords it feels horrendously weak/gutless. Maybe a different transmission ratio. Also gets butt-assed horrid mileage. Might be a lemon, but no way in hell I'd touch it. Ecoboost F150 gets way better mileage, and my Powerboost absolutely wrecks it. And, yes, the infotainment is...so bad.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2024 21:58
|
|
|
Olympic Mathlete posted:Modern life is incredibly dumb. When I was commuting, for a job that could have been done +90% remote, the TDI did a good job getting 48+ mpg consistently. For the year of transitioning from on site to remote the i3 was great if boring. Now I drive for errands and appointments which I try to combine and for fun. Meanwhile wife is doing her <7 mile commute getting less than 18mpg.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2024 23:37
|
|
|
Siochain posted:My work truck at site has this same engine, and good lords it feels horrendously weak/gutless. Maybe a different transmission ratio. Also gets butt-assed horrid mileage. Might be a lemon, but no way in hell I'd touch it. Ecoboost F150 gets way better mileage, and my Powerboost absolutely wrecks it. And, yes, the infotainment is...so bad. I'm able to get mid 20s MPG fairly easily often high 20s long as I'm not pushing a hell of a headwind. I think my record was 6L/100KM but that's certainly not the norm. I find the motivate factor is generally pretty good but if you mat it at a not great place on the curve it indeed feel gutless but I find getting into the boostu from lower end instead of already up high seems to work well, presumably because of the gearing at that point as well.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2024 00:29
|
|
|
totalnewbie posted:You're much more likely to get a fun vehicle out of hybridized cars that can give you that torque via electric motors than a big beefy engine. Downsizing and turbocharging have been a trend for years and it is definitely not reversing course. im much more likely to just not buy a new car, tbh. maybe a full electric will be enticing someday, but i just cannot imagine any hybrid being as much fun as a V8 4-speed. IOwnCalculus posted:Big V8 sedans were only normal mainstream cars in the US in that timeframe. The rest of the world leaned in hard on smaller-size, smaller-displacement cars with things like taxation on engine displacement providing additional incentive to do so. sure, but the post i was originally responding to was about the overton window in the US specifically. i realize the rest of the world doesn't really get any fun toys. His Divine Shadow posted:Mileage is one of the most important factors because it absolutely matters to how much the vehicle will cost me and if I can even drive it as much as I want or if i have to decide to stay home or not. i take the opposite view. fuel economy is the last consideration. it's ok to spend money on your hobbies, and who cares how much an activity costs if it's unenjoyable? the value proposition of "how much do i like this" per "how much does this cost" still goes to zero if it's no fun, no matter how small you make the denominator. sure, if i could triple my economy and get 20s around town for free i would, but not if it means cutting into the reasons i really like the car. that reminds me, i just got a vacuum advance distributor for it a couple weeks ago, so i should be able to bump up my cruising mpg a little bit without any penalty. that's worth doing.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2024 00:36
|
|
|
slidebite posted:Really? Is yours the first gen 19-21 or 22+? There is a pretty major difference in torque between them. The one I drive is a 23. Something like ~90lb/ft difference for the newer ones.... it's pretty big. And I think there were 2 versions of the same engine up until 2024. The WT and LT had the detuned version. 2024 eliminated the detuned version.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2024 00:37
|
|
|
slidebite posted:Really? Is yours the first gen 19-21 or 22+? There is a pretty major difference in torque between them. The one I drive is a 23. Something like ~90lb/ft difference for the newer ones.... it's pretty big. It's a 22 or a 23 (I'll check this week when I get in to site.) Driving it on the highway the best I hit was about 22, doing 80 no wind. 6l/100km is drat good - I've almost hit that on the Powerboost doing a solid 90 between T-Bay and Winnipeg. My average is about 25-30 depending on how heavy I am on the pedal.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2024 00:48
|
|
|
If my Fit ever dies it will get replaced with a BEV*, but until then I'll keep buying ~10 gallons of gas every 2-3 months. Work from home has made fuel efficiency a bit irrelevant to me. *Probably buying a Ridgeline soon which would mean I no longer need the carrying capacity of the Fit and could replace it with a Miata instead.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2024 01:22
|
|
|
Raluek posted:
Check your economic privilege. It's absolutely zero fun to have limited funds and just burn them on fuel. His Divine Shadow fucked around with this message at 07:47 on Feb 12, 2024 |
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2024 07:42
|
|
|
you have to be at least somewhat resourceful to play with the toys, its true
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2024 08:20
|
|
|
Why was will.i.am dressed up like tron
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2024 13:53
|
|
|
I've driven a car that got 5 miles to the gallon with a ~25 gallon tank as my primary mode of transportation. It sucks. Don't do it. It's not worth it Or maybe do, for your health. After I bought my first Civic in 2012 and more than quintupled my fuel efficiency, I permanently stayed in the comfort and safety of my car after a bike shop quoted me an outrageous price to fix my front brakes E: seeing more than an entire day's pay get pumped into a gas tank is loving heartbreaking The Door Frame fucked around with this message at 17:26 on Feb 12, 2024 |
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2024 17:19
|
|
|
His Divine Shadow posted:20mpg is terrible fuel efficiency though, for the average american to drive around in. My coworker drives a big ugly BMW SUV and says it gets 6l/100km which comes to 39mpg. My old Saab 900 turbo gets 29-32mpg and I bet I could get 35+ once I've swapped the primary gear. That’s what my 4 cylinder Mazda 3 gets. I highly doubt that’s what they’re getting.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2024 17:31
|
|
|
Q7 TDI averages 25-28 on the highway, pretty good for a 5500 lb SUV. I can get 30-32 if I drive it gently Wifes TDI gets 45-50 with the DSG CommieGIR fucked around with this message at 17:47 on Feb 12, 2024 |
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2024 17:35
|
|
|
blindjoe posted:4AGE was in the AE86, Corolla GTS. Yeah, that's what everything I've read says. Powershift posted:I'm doing the timing belt in my AE86 GTS and the cost and rarity of of the "while you're in there" stuff, is a pain in the rear end. an 4.8/5.3 LS is probably cheaper if you don't have the engine yet. An LS is a really tight fit, but people have done it. If I'm going to do something like that, it won't be on this car. My RX-7s are my love, and I have a bunch of those for spare parts, not to mention a network already established. I'd agree that a 4.8/5.3 would probably be cheaper for the engine itself. quote:Even once you get past the fact that there were basically 3 different corollas in 87, there are a whole bunch of different accessory belts based on A/C, power steering, and build date. What my car actually had on it, Rock auto s for the FX16 which is the FWD hatch. I've also got A/C, Power steering and a final month build date I love having to sort out just *which* Corolla the parts are for, yeah. At least on mine, a lot of the engine bits for the FWD fit mine because they're both 4AC. quote:Speaking of my truck, someone broke into my truck outside Home Depot today, completely hosed up the door lock to the point where it doesn't even lock anymore. They tried to start it with something plastic, stole my 4xl winter jacket and a bag of stuff from princess auto that had the receipt in it. They dropped a small backpack of drugs and phone chargers in the truck so they're probably about as pissed off as i am. Good God, What is it about an old F250 that attracts asshats to yours? Dr. Lunchables posted:That’s fuckin dumb as hell Welcome to capitalism, where literally the only people who are important are "the shareholders", as opposed to employees, customers, etc. Powershift posted:Still, someone found my bag of stuff in a parking lot and drove out of their way to bring it back to the store. The good people far outnumber the bad, but one rear end in a top hat can do so much damage. This, so much especially if that one rear end in a top hat is the billionaire owner of a social media cum Nazi clubhouse. Or any billionaire, really. SpeedFreek posted:A TBI 5.7l from 1992 will also get over 20mpg if you can keep it under 70, but only 200hp. GM somehow separated displacement from fuel economy in the 80s to a degree where going from a 4cyl in a Wrangler to a 5.3 V8 gets you from 16mpg into the low 20s by going up in displacement. For efficiency reasons we should all be driving cars powered by supercharged 3800s. To be fair in this case, that loving POS tractor motor was so terrible that the 4.0L six made 80HP more and 1MPG worse. The 2.5L was a pointless option. Had all the fuel usage of the 6 with half the power and torque - and that was *up* in the Chrysler EFI from the AMC version. I would say it was at least indestructible, except my friend that bought my Cherokee manage to hole a piston when he popped a rad hose and somehow didn't notice. IOwnCalculus posted:While this is true, it's more to do with how godawful the AMC motors are. The 2.5 and 4.0 never got a real friction reduction diet - they went to a lower friction piston and all that seemed to get them was more piston skirt failures. Non-crossflow heads that flow like poo poo. Non-crossflow heads that mean your intake and exhaust manifolds also flow like poo poo, and are bolted to each other to get that intake charge nice and toasty. Flat tappet cams. It was all minimal-possible-changes applied to an engine that was designed in the 1960s to be as cheap as possible. Yeah, that. The 2.5 was especially gutless while still being a thirsty bitch. slidebite posted:My company issued Silverado has a Turbo 2.7 4cyl (164 c.i.). 310HP - 430lb/ft See, now that I would love to shove into some small and '70s/80s RWD. I'm interested in better fuel mileage with equivalent performance. Currently, I don't drive a lot - my commute is 12 miles each way, and my wife's is about 3 miles, so we can get away with driving stuff that gets 16 MPG. My Crown Vic at least has the excuse of being a big V8 sedan. I have no idea how our Outback only gets that, despite being a 3.0L with 50 less HP and slightly lighter than the Crown Vic and the OB wants Premium fuel. I will probably never buy a new vehicle - I don't like where they are going in terms of nannies and integrated bullshit that makes repairs expensive, subscriptions, and not to mention how loving much they cost now. I'm probably going to be herding used junk for the rest of my life. Looking like my wife will be buying my mother-in-law's 2010 Insight when she moves to Costa Rica, so that will be replacing the Outback with something that gets 40+ MPG, and a known service history. I need a truck-like thing, at least occasionally. I'd love to grab a Maverick with the Ecoboost.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2024 18:13
|
|
|
I’m right at 3.4 miles per kilowatt hour in the Leaf. Hit 130,000 miles on Friday and at an average of around $0.08 per kWh that’s $3,060 in electricity over a decade. The first time I was filling up the FJ62 in SLC the gas station attendant came over with a baited question: “So…What do you think about electric cars?” “How do you think I can afford to drive this thing?!”
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2024 18:16
|
|
|
IIRC RCR got like 32/33 MPG on the highway somewhat recently in an early 2000s Z06 (it was one of their giveaway cars) obvi we should all be driving Corvettes, especially since we’re all middle aged as gently caress here
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2024 18:21
|
|
|
trilobite terror posted:IIRC RCR got like 32/33 MPG on the highway somewhat recently in an early 2000s Z06 (it was one of their giveaway cars) I'd easily, easily get over 30mpg in my C5. It was geared so drat tall it felt barely above idle at highway speeds.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2024 18:44
|
|
|
I still want to make a turbodiesel-electric plugin hybrid. Just a diesel and a generatoe and an EV drivetrain. Dreams.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2024 19:25
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:I still want to make a turbodiesel-electric plugin hybrid. Just a diesel and a generatoe and an EV drivetrain. Neil Young's electric Lincoln Continental uses a 30 kW microturbine generator.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2024 19:32
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:I still want to make a turbodiesel-electric plugin hybrid. Just a diesel and a generatoe and an EV drivetrain. After starting out looking at propane catalyst heaters the one night, I got deep into looking at propane fuel cells. Unfortunately they're not designed for intermittent use. You would still need a lot of batteries as a buffer.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2024 19:35
|
|
|
Darchangel posted:See, now that I would love to shove into some small and '70s/80s RWD. If I haven't already made myself obvious, my dream engine choices for the TJ are either some form of small diesel (Cummins 2.8, Duramax 2.8, Duramax 3.0), the Atlas 4200, or the GM 2.7T. Annoyingly, the only engine choice that's a known easy way through AZ emissions on a TJ, is the LS. The 2.7T will probably join it by virtue of having a modern GM ECM, and technically the Atlas 4200 is in the same category as the LS as long as I get an 08 or 09 engine.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2024 19:35
|
|
|
Powershift posted:After starting out looking at propane catalyst heaters the one night, I got deep into looking at propane fuel cells. Yeah which is why Diesel-Electric makes more sense - diesel fuel can be stored for long periods and it would vastly extend the range, and using it just to drive a generator lets you keep emissions in check since you can just run it at peak efficiency to top off the battery pack or directly drive the motors. Like Edison Motors did with their diesel-electric semi: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9XKb4psc0vY
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2024 19:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 06:39 |
|
|
trilobite terror posted:IIRC RCR got like 32/33 MPG on the highway somewhat recently in an early 2000s Z06 (it was one of their giveaway cars)
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2024 19:58
|
|