Aged cars and fuel economy...

[RevJim 0]

I just finished a trip to Hartford City, Indiana, and almost couldn't believe the economy my car got. I thought cars got worse as they aged?
1995 Dodge Stratus (basically a Neon with more weight)
2.0ltr 4 cylinder 5 speed
132,000 miles
1,200 miles on this oil change, last one was at 101,000 miles (to show this car really was NOT treated well.) Also, both rear bearing/hub assemblies are shot. They grind at slow speed and howl at highway speed. I just can't afford the hundred a pop to replace them right now.

857.8 miles (about 3 or so hours of Milwaukee/Chicago/Gary stop and go driving included, so not all highway miles.)
22.137 gallons of 87 octane unleaded burned.
That's 38.75 miles per gallon.
That's not bad, considering that age range of Stratus is considered disposable (when they hit 90 to 100k miles, they pretty much just fall apart.) Oh, and the return trip was with an extra 200-250 pounds of outboard motor crammed into the trunk/backseat.

I think it's worth fixing, and keeping for awhile now, considering a good bunch of brand new cars with comfortable seating for 5 aren't rated that high in mpg.
What do some of you get with "used" cars?

It's your life, live it!
Karma
RB#684 "Corcho", ASK#60, Muff#3520, NCB#398, NHDZ#4, C-33989, DG#1

[blewaway5 0]

94 Chevy silverado, 3/4 ton, 6.5L turbocharged diesel....about 17 mpg. I'm a gas hog I guess, but if connecticut ever needs towed away I can do it

Truman Sparks for President

[jasonRose 0]

Quote

94 Chevy silverado, 3/4 ton, 6.5L turbocharged diesel....about 17 mpg. I'm a gas hog I guess, but if connecticut ever needs towed away I can do it

1982 Jeep CJ-7, Chev 454 = 7mpg

1972 Chev 3/4ton pickup, Chev 350 = 10mpg

2001 F250 crewcab, power stroke diesel = 16mpg

1992 toyota pickup, 22RE = 24mpg

1996 HD sportster, 1200 EVO = 51mpg

All my rigs suck gas!!! But if you want HP it's the price you pay otherwise buy a volkswagon.

Some day I will have the best staff in the world!!!

[gravitational 0]

2003 Ford Ranger Supercab 3.0 V6 - 20.349 MPG since new, 23.930 since I moved it from 600' MSL to 10k MSL. (maybe Bill V can explain the MPG increase)

2005 Subaru Outback 2.5i - 26.489 MPG

2005 Honda Shadow Spirit 750 - 44.142 MPG

------
Michael

[BRYANGOESBOOM 0]

69 GTO=9 miles per gallon

Not only will you look better, feel better, and fuck better; you'll have significantly increased your life expectancy. --Douva

[skydiverton 0]

Quote

All my rigs suck gas!!! But if you want HP it's the price you pay otherwise buy a volkswagon.

Correct:
VW polo 1990 740kilograms 256000kilometers. Never broke down. 15km/liter (±35miles/gallon)

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Using your droque to gain stability is a bad habit,
Especially when you are jumping a sport rig

[wingnut 0]

i have a 99' hyundia elantra with a 5 speed trany and 2.0l engine. i get about 35-40 miles a gallon depending on driving conditions,(like not doing 80 and not running the air conditioner) just hit 101k last weekend and all i've ever done to it is replace the spark plugs once and change the oil and oil and air filters...... i think it's got lots of life left in it............. and it's pretty quick for a little sub compact...

______________________________________
"i have no reader's digest version"

[RevJim 0]

Quote

i have a 99' hyundia elantra with a 5 speed trany and 2.0l engine. i get about 35-40 miles a gallon depending on driving conditions,(like not doing 80 and not running the air conditioner) just hit 101k last weekend and all i've ever done to it is replace the spark plugs once and change the oil and oil and air filters...... i think it's got lots of life left in it............. and it's pretty quick for a little sub compact...

Oh, yea, I almost forgot. That drive yesterday was mostly between 75 and 80, and I never turned off the A/C (it was hot out!)

Yea, I'm keepin it!

It's your life, live it!
Karma
RB#684 "Corcho", ASK#60, Muff#3520, NCB#398, NHDZ#4, C-33989, DG#1

[billvon 2,990]

Well:

1. Most cars get slightly better gas mileage as they age. Ring friction goes down as they wear, valves seat a little better etc. Once they start actually blowing past the rings/valves, it goes back down.

2. There are a lot of factors that affect fuel economy. Hot weather gives you better fuel economy (but cold weather gives you more power.) Wind is a suprisingly big factor. Uphill/downhill affects it too - I always get 3-4mpg better going home from Perris (at 1500 feet) than driving to Perris. Synthetic oil can get you a MPG or two.

3. Air conditioning generally gives you _better_ gas mileage compared to rolling the windows down.

[DeNReN 0]

Quote

2. There are a lot of factors that affect fuel economy. Hot weather gives you better fuel economy (but cold weather gives you more power.)

Well.....many many factors do affect fuel economy...the drivers right foot being the biggest one ...however hot or cold weather does not factor in as it once used to in the days of carburators and speed density fuel injection....most of todays cars use mass airfow sensors which in turn lets the pcm know the actual amount of air being pulled into the combustion chambers allowing the pcm to deliver a close to stociometric mixture reguardless of air density.

[billvon 2,990]

>...however hot or cold weather does not factor in as it once used to
>in the days of carburators and speed density fuel injection . . .

The reason temperature matters is not maintaining stochiometric mixtures, it's pumping loss.

Higher temperature air, when pulled into the engine, sees less increase in temperature when combusted, since the cylinder has maximum temperature limits that must not be exceeded. Since power comes from increase in pressure, which comes from increase in gas temperature (PV=nRT) hot air gives you less power. In addition, hot air is less dense, so the computer will automatically reduce the amount of fuel injected to maintain complete combustion.

All this means you have less power in hot weather. So you have to open the throttle plate wider to keep going whatever speed you want to go at (compared to driving in cold temps.)

Now, the primary reason that an Otto-cycle engine (i.e. a gas engine) is less efficient than a diesel is pumping loss. It takes a lot of energy to pull all that air past that throttle plate, which is trying to stop it. The wider you open the throttle, the less pumping loss. So hot weather, while giving you less maximum power, helps reduce pumping losses.

This effect is very apparent in high efficiency Otto-cycle engines like the one in the Honda Insight. You can see 5mpg difference between a 95F day and a -10F day. It's less apparent in larger cars, and in non-Otto cycle engines (like the Prius Atkinson-cycle engine) and isn't a factor at all in diesels.

[DeNReN 0]

Damnit Bill.....I've been sitting here thinking of how to support my claim...and everything I come up with supports your's moreso ...

Well hopefully you will agree that the biggest factor to the average driver, fuel economy wise is there right foot and how "deep" they drive in the throttle.(edited to add: thats comparing apples to apples)

And I challenge you to a duel.....front cover gasket replacement on 96 windstars with 3.8l engine at 20 paces

[ojibwe 0]

we get 33 mpg on an old mercurycapri '91 no turbo

MB 3864 Urantia Book and RUSH fan

[justinb138 0]

I usually get about 28mpg driving home from the DZ in my 2000 Grand Prix with a 3.8L V6.

If I try to stay behind the big trucks most of the way I can get as much as 35-38mpg on some days.

• Quote