What a joke (fuel efficiency)

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5

Index »
Community »
Debate and Serious Talk »
What a joke (fuel efficiency)

2009-03-01 22:35:37

DrunkFace: Germans did 911; +427|6673|Disaster Free Zone

FatherTed wrote:
Diesel_dyk wrote:
ghettoperson wrote:

They deserve to go bust. They're miles behind European or Japanese manufacturers.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/02/ … sBySection
17 city, 26 highway from an "eco engine"
That's BS my friend has a 2004 Mustang Mach 1 it supposed to get epa 17 city 26 highway. He swears he gets 29 or 30 on the highway and that's a high performance sports car.

Ford is touting its new eco engine that about the same or maybe even worse than a mustang mach 1, what's wrong with this picture. Why can't they build a more efficient engine. Hell all they would have to do is bring over some of the European diesel engines and their cars would be getting mileage in the high 30s or 40s. Ecoboost my a$$.
The fuel point is interesting, i'd never considered that.

Is our fuel generally better quality?

'Cause that gives more power, cleaner etc etc.

I believe so. I read somewhere on these forums the average octane in US fuels is like 90. Compared to Europe's 95 or 98.

Australian fuels used to be bad with an standard of 92-95, but our major killer was a high sulfur content which meant we couldn't import some of the higher performance jap and euro cars because our fuel was too 'dirty'. But over the past 2 decades or so we have started to sell premium 98 and even 100 octane fuels needed for more sophisticated engines and even though they are more expensive per litre usually work out cheaper because of the fuel efficiency gains.

2009-03-01 22:48:59

SgtHeihn: Should have ducked; +394|6478|Ham Lake, MN (Fucking Cold)

You guys seem to miss one of the points of this engine, it is not just fuel economy, it is reduced CO2. Its better then for the environment them a comparable competitors car.

But yes this is a bit of a marketing gimmick. Kinda like the "Flex Fuel" in GMC models.

Edit: Dieseldk, your friend is full of shit. That car ether has a 4.6l or a 5.0l engine in it and with out modification is impossible, or he is driving at 20mph

Last edited by SgtHeihn (2009-03-01 22:54:36)

2009-03-01 22:53:54

The#1Spot: Member; +105|6531|byah

usmarine wrote:
hybrid escalade gets better mpg in the city than a certain mini cooper model.

so, who is behind who exactly?

pimp car gets better millage then gay car.

You will never be considered a pimp driving a hybrid.

2009-03-01 23:04:13

Kmar: Truth is my Bitch; +5,695|6592|132 and Bush

“EcoBoost is meaningful because it can be applied across a wide variety of engine types in a range of vehicles, from small cars to large trucks – and it’s affordable,” said Derrick Kuzak, Ford’s group vice president of Global Product Development.

In 2009, Ford first will introduce EcoBoost on the Lincoln MKS featuring a 3.5-liter twin-turbocharged V-6. It will produce the power and torque of a V-8 engine with the fuel efficiency of a V-6. In fact, with an estimated 340-horsepower and more than 340 lb.-ft. of torque, the Lincoln MKS will be the most powerful and fuel-efficient all-wheel-drive luxury sedan in the market.

“Compared with the current cost of diesel and hybrid technologies, customers in North America can expect to recoup their initial investment in a 4-cylinder EcoBoost engine through fuel savings in approximately 30 months. A diesel in North America will take an average of seven and one-half years, while the cost of a hybrid will take nearly 12 years to recoup – given equivalent miles driven per year and fuel costs,” he said.

Xbone Stormsurgezz

2009-03-01 23:05:10

The#1Spot: Member; +105|6531|byah

[TUF]Catbox wrote:
Hurricane2k9 wrote:
ATG wrote:
Any one those Jap cars got a V6, slick?

Seems to be the key point.
have fun making any use of that V6 in the DC area
I'm not sure if you are old enough to drive(and i dont mean that as a slight)
but 4 adults and the AC on in the summer... a V6 is a nice thing to have...

Also Ford is not asking for any bailout money as far as i've heard... They are ahead of the curve on making
efficient... good quality cars...

If they were not over weight, they would not need an AC where cracking the window would suffice now would they. Hybrid anything is just a band aid. Quality is coming from Volvo and styling is from Mazda.

2009-03-01 23:05:42

Catbox: forgiveness; +505|6708

xBlackPantherx wrote:
Hurricane2k9 wrote:
ATG wrote:
Any one those Jap cars got a V6, slick?

Seems to be the key point.
have fun making any use of that V6 in the DC area
^^^

No one truly needs a V6 unless you do the following:

- Pull/own a trailer, heavy cargo, etc
- Actually offroad regularly
- Things like that general category of and necessities of needing a powerful engine

Otherwise, you don't. It's only Americas obsession with the big and powerful to make up for your small dick and insecurities. You. Don't. Need (generally). A. V6. My parents Nissan Muranos get, on average, 17-20 city and 20-28 highway. That engine is already more than almost everybody needs. Hell, my GMC Safari Van is plenty fine.

"It's only Americas obsession with the big and powerful to make up for your small dick and insecurities
So you are saying your Dad with the Murano is insecure and has a small dick?
He might think otherwise... lol

Last edited by [TUF]Catbox (2009-03-01 23:06:31)

Love is the answer

2009-03-01 23:12:20

DrunkFace: Germans did 911; +427|6673|Disaster Free Zone

ATG wrote:
Any one those Jap cars got a V6, slick?

Seems to be the key point.

BMW 5 series 3.0L V6
272 BHP
36.7 combined mpg

Toyota Aurion 3.5L V6
200 KW ~ 264 BHP
9.9L 100Km ~ 29 combined mpg

No, not really.

2009-03-01 23:17:57

destruktion_6143: Was ist Loos?; +154|6618|Canada

when will ppl learn that fuel efficiency is all about HOW u drive, not WHAT u drive.

2009-03-01 23:19:24

DrunkFace: Germans did 911; +427|6673|Disaster Free Zone

destruktion_6143 wrote:
when will ppl learn that fuel efficiency is all about HOW u drive, not WHAT u drive.

No, its HOW you drive WHAT you drive.

2009-03-01 23:39:11

Kmar: Truth is my Bitch; +5,695|6592|132 and Bush

“EcoBoost is meaningful because it can be applied across a wide variety of engine types in a range of vehicles, from small cars to large trucks – and it’s affordable,” said Derrick Kuzak, Ford’s group vice president of Global Product Development.

Since ppl still aren't understanding. This is just a component of an engine. Not an entire rebuild. It is only PART of a movement toward more energy efficient vehicles. Annnnnd it's cost efficient.

Some people are so narrow minded. This is in no way the end of the line for Ford.
http://media.ford.com/article_display.c … e_id=29683
http://media.ford.com/mini_sites/10031/2009NAIAS/

Xbone Stormsurgezz

2009-03-01 23:52:34

Varegg: Support fanatic :-); +2,206|6802|Nårvei

Kmarion wrote:
“EcoBoost is meaningful because it can be applied across a wide variety of engine types in a range of vehicles, from small cars to large trucks – and it’s affordable,” said Derrick Kuzak, Ford’s group vice president of Global Product Development.
Since ppl still aren't understanding. This is just a component of an engine. Not an entire rebuild. It is only PART of a movement toward more energy efficient vehicles. Annnnnd it's cost efficient.

Seems like someone is making excuses for why they can't make a real fuel efficient engine ... eco boost, lean burn and other concepts of remaking gasolin and older diesel engines demands that the driver learns a specific driving pattern he soon will give up because he will be driving his car like an old lady ... several Japanese manufactors have already tried that, failed and moved on ...

New diesel tech, smaller gasolin engines and hybrids are the way to go right now ... if you want less pollution and higher mpg that is ... what US citizens need to come to terms with is that they really don't need a 3,5 liter V6 engine for their everyday needs ... most people don't ...

Wait behind the line ..............................................................

2009-03-02 00:01:59

Kmar: Truth is my Bitch; +5,695|6592|132 and Bush

Varegg wrote:
Kmarion wrote:
“EcoBoost is meaningful because it can be applied across a wide variety of engine types in a range of vehicles, from small cars to large trucks – and it’s affordable,” said Derrick Kuzak, Ford’s group vice president of Global Product Development.
Since ppl still aren't understanding. This is just a component of an engine. Not an entire rebuild. It is only PART of a movement toward more energy efficient vehicles. Annnnnd it's cost efficient.
Seems like someone is making excuses for why they can't make a real fuel efficient engine ... eco boost, lean burn and other concepts of remaking gasolin and older diesel engines demands that the driver learns a specific driving pattern he soon will give up because he will be driving his car like an old lady ... several Japanese manufactors have already tried that, failed and moved on ...

New diesel tech, smaller gasolin engines and hybrids are the way to go right now ... if you want less pollution and higher mpg that is ... what US citizens need to come to terms with is that they really don't need a 3,5 liter V6 engine for their everyday needs ... most people don't ...

See the above added links. They are making more fuel efficient vehicles. Some of which are completely gas/petrol free.

What it seems like to me is that people can't wait to complain about something they don't fully understand. This is only part of what they are going to be offering as alternatives. These additions are not going to run the current cost up on vehicles. They can be added at relatively low cost to meet A RANGE of demand.

We have PLENTY of vehicles that need that power. Granted most of them are commercial.

Xbone Stormsurgezz

2009-03-02 00:07:35

Varegg: Support fanatic :-); +2,206|6802|Nårvei

Was just thinking that if the US manufactorers hadn't blocked tech like this 20 years ago they would have had the most efficient cars on the marked today thus would have been the most solid companies exporting good reliable, fuel efficient cars all over the world

Someone lobbied their own death ... what they do now is grasping straws when they should redo their entire production line as soon as possible, the few feeble attempts of making efficient cars is actually the laughing stock of European and Japanese manufactorers ...

They have 20 years of research to catch up ...

Kmarion wrote:
We have PLENTY of vehicles that need that power. Granted most of them are commercial.

Yes you do ... problem is you really don't need those vehicles ...

Wait behind the line ..............................................................

2009-03-02 00:11:04

Kmar: Truth is my Bitch; +5,695|6592|132 and Bush

Varegg wrote:
Was just thinking that if the US manufactorers hadn't blocked tech like this 20 years ago they would have had the most efficient cars on the marked today thus would have been the most solid companies exporting good reliable, fuel efficient cars all over the world

Someone lobbied their own death ...

Which bit of legislation are you talking about specifically?

Xbone Stormsurgezz

2009-03-02 00:12:26

Kmar: Truth is my Bitch; +5,695|6592|132 and Bush

Varegg wrote:
They have 20 years of research to catch up ...

"The new electric vehicle will have a range of up to 100 miles on a single charge, without using a single drop of gasoline."
>2 years.

The four-cylinder Ford Fusion S is now certified at 34 mpg highway and 23 mpg in the city, topping the Toyota Camry and Honda Accord
The new Ford Fusion Hybrid and Mercury Milan Hybrids deliver up to 41 miles per gallon in the city – eight miles per gallon better than the Toyota Camry Hybrid. In addition, the base Fusion with its 4-cylinder engine and six-speed transmission is EPA certified with best-in-class fuel economy of 34 mpg on the highway
The Ford Focus with its 2.0-liter 4-cylinder engine and manual transmission delivers 35 mpg on the highway, 5 mpg better than Toyota Corolla’s 2.4-liter 4-cylinder engine and 2 mpg better than Honda Fit’s 1.5-liter 4-cylinder, both also with manual transmissions
The all-new 2009 Ford F-150 – which is Motor Trend magazine’s Truck of the Year – achieves 3 mpg more than the Toyota Tundra pickup on the highway and 1 mpg better in the city with its 4.6-liter V-8 engine, compared to Toyota’s 4.7-liter V-8. The F-150’s larger 5.4-liter V-8 achieves 2 mpg better on the highway than the facing Tundra engine
The 2009 Ford Escape with its new 2.5-liter 4-cylinder engine and six-speed transmission achieves 28 mpg on the highway, the same as Toyota’s RAV4 and 1 mpg better than the Honda CR-V, both with 4-cylinder engines, too
The Ford Expedition achieves 20 mpg on the highway, beating both of the Toyota Sequoia’s V-8 engines by as much as 3 mpg on the highway
The Ford Flex is the most fuel-efficient standard seven-passenger vehicle on the market

Xbone Stormsurgezz

2009-03-02 00:27:23

Varegg: Support fanatic :-); +2,206|6802|Nårvei

Kmarion wrote:
Varegg wrote:
Was just thinking that if the US manufactorers hadn't blocked tech like this 20 years ago they would have had the most efficient cars on the marked today thus would have been the most solid companies exporting good reliable, fuel efficient cars all over the world

Someone lobbied their own death ...
Which bit of legislation are you talking about specifically?

Term of expression ... wasn't thinking of any specific legislation ...

Wait behind the line ..............................................................

2009-03-02 00:31:12

Varegg: Support fanatic :-); +2,206|6802|Nårvei

Kmarion wrote:
Varegg wrote:
They have 20 years of research to catch up ...
"The new electric vehicle will have a range of up to 100 miles on a single charge, without using a single drop of gasoline."
>2 years.

The four-cylinder Ford Fusion S is now certified at 34 mpg highway and 23 mpg in the city, topping the Toyota Camry and Honda Accord
The new Ford Fusion Hybrid and Mercury Milan Hybrids deliver up to 41 miles per gallon in the city – eight miles per gallon better than the Toyota Camry Hybrid. In addition, the base Fusion with its 4-cylinder engine and six-speed transmission is EPA certified with best-in-class fuel economy of 34 mpg on the highway
The Ford Focus with its 2.0-liter 4-cylinder engine and manual transmission delivers 35 mpg on the highway, 5 mpg better than Toyota Corolla’s 2.4-liter 4-cylinder engine and 2 mpg better than Honda Fit’s 1.5-liter 4-cylinder, both also with manual transmissions
The all-new 2009 Ford F-150 – which is Motor Trend magazine’s Truck of the Year – achieves 3 mpg more than the Toyota Tundra pickup on the highway and 1 mpg better in the city with its 4.6-liter V-8 engine, compared to Toyota’s 4.7-liter V-8. The F-150’s larger 5.4-liter V-8 achieves 2 mpg better on the highway than the facing Tundra engine
The 2009 Ford Escape with its new 2.5-liter 4-cylinder engine and six-speed transmission achieves 28 mpg on the highway, the same as Toyota’s RAV4 and 1 mpg better than the Honda CR-V, both with 4-cylinder engines, too
The Ford Expedition achieves 20 mpg on the highway, beating both of the Toyota Sequoia’s V-8 engines by as much as 3 mpg on the highway
The Ford Flex is the most fuel-efficient standard seven-passenger vehicle on the market

You have one thing going for you Kmar and that is nuclear power, prolly the only country in the world that can utilize the full potential of pure electric cars, but still only as car number two ...

The tech I'm talking about is hybrid tech, not redoing petrol or diesels ... and the engines sold in US japanese cars is not the engines we use in Europe, they are smaller and more efficient ... you can't sell a 1,4 liter petrol or diesel engine to an American ...

Wait behind the line ..............................................................

2009-03-02 00:58:35

Kmar: Truth is my Bitch; +5,695|6592|132 and Bush

Varegg wrote:
Kmarion wrote:
Varegg wrote:
Was just thinking that if the US manufactorers hadn't blocked tech like this 20 years ago they would have had the most efficient cars on the marked today thus would have been the most solid companies exporting good reliable, fuel efficient cars all over the world

Someone lobbied their own death ...
Which bit of legislation are you talking about specifically?
Term of expression ... wasn't thinking of any specific legislation ...

The customers blocked it by not demanding it. If there is a market there will be a supply. I guarantee it. $$

Varegg wrote:
Kmarion wrote:
Varegg wrote:
They have 20 years of research to catch up ...
"The new electric vehicle will have a range of up to 100 miles on a single charge, without using a single drop of gasoline."
>2 years.

The four-cylinder Ford Fusion S is now certified at 34 mpg highway and 23 mpg in the city, topping the Toyota Camry and Honda Accord
The new Ford Fusion Hybrid and Mercury Milan Hybrids deliver up to 41 miles per gallon in the city – eight miles per gallon better than the Toyota Camry Hybrid. In addition, the base Fusion with its 4-cylinder engine and six-speed transmission is EPA certified with best-in-class fuel economy of 34 mpg on the highway
The Ford Focus with its 2.0-liter 4-cylinder engine and manual transmission delivers 35 mpg on the highway, 5 mpg better than Toyota Corolla’s 2.4-liter 4-cylinder engine and 2 mpg better than Honda Fit’s 1.5-liter 4-cylinder, both also with manual transmissions
The all-new 2009 Ford F-150 – which is Motor Trend magazine’s Truck of the Year – achieves 3 mpg more than the Toyota Tundra pickup on the highway and 1 mpg better in the city with its 4.6-liter V-8 engine, compared to Toyota’s 4.7-liter V-8. The F-150’s larger 5.4-liter V-8 achieves 2 mpg better on the highway than the facing Tundra engine
The 2009 Ford Escape with its new 2.5-liter 4-cylinder engine and six-speed transmission achieves 28 mpg on the highway, the same as Toyota’s RAV4 and 1 mpg better than the Honda CR-V, both with 4-cylinder engines, too
The Ford Expedition achieves 20 mpg on the highway, beating both of the Toyota Sequoia’s V-8 engines by as much as 3 mpg on the highway
The Ford Flex is the most fuel-efficient standard seven-passenger vehicle on the market
You have one thing going for you Kmar and that is nuclear power, prolly the only country in the world that can utilize the full potential of pure electric cars, but still only as car number two ...

The tech I'm talking about is hybrid tech, not redoing petrol or diesels ... and the engines sold in US japanese cars is not the engines we use in Europe, they are smaller and more efficient ... you can't sell a 1,4 liter petrol or diesel engine to an American ...

We generally spend more time in our vehicles so yes we want them to perform. I have driven very small engined vehicles before, and aside from nearly killing myself as I attempted to enter traffic, I nearly shat myself laughing trying to comprehend how anyone could call it either auto or mobile.

I know you are talking about hybrid tech. Ford and the others are highly invested in that technology as well. I'm just going to stop quoting the previously provided link now. .. seems kinda pointless.

My friend and his family own a fire equipment/installation company. They've got massive amounts of equipment to bring with them from site to site. Please tell me which 1.4 litre engine will be able to take care of what he needs. This is not at all a rare case. If they can get there trucks powered with the extra boost of mpg (inexpensive initial investment) how is this at all a bad thing? Show my the viable hybrid option for them. Or do they just shut down? The NEED for petrol is not going to just all of a sudden disappear overnight. This technology can be applied in the interim. Expand your horizon's. Consider all applications. There are millions of scenarios like my friends.

Again, you guys are thinking this is the end all be all. It is not... at all.

Xbone Stormsurgezz

2009-03-02 01:12:24

Varegg: Support fanatic :-); +2,206|6802|Nårvei

First you like GM, Ford etc etc must accept that most people don't use their car for work related transport, the biggest category is and will still be leisure ...

That you can make a case of one friends needs while he is working doesn't change that fact ...

When hybrid tech is good enough for commercial vehicles it will be implemented there also but leisure usage is the biggest category hence why they concentrate on that ...

And I'm not thinking small Kmar, petrol and diesels will be around for a long time but there are ways to make them more efficient but then you need to totally redo them not add a new feature to the existing ones ... that has been done and it failed ... if US manufacturers want to do the same mistakes go ahead ... they are after all the most conservative car companies in the world ...

Wait behind the line ..............................................................

2009-03-02 01:31:54

Spark: liquid fluoride thorium reactor; +874|6666|Canberra, AUS

You don't need a hybrid to get excellent mileage. In fact, in many cases (unless you need something bigger) you're better off with the technologically simpler, cheaper option.

The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
^{~ Richard Feynman}

2009-03-02 01:32:43

Kmar: Truth is my Bitch; +5,695|6592|132 and Bush

Varegg wrote:
First you like GM, Ford etc etc must accept that most people don't use their car for work related transport, the biggest category is and will still be leisure ...

I have no idea where you got that idea from, but most commercial trucks I see have F-something or GM on it. We are talking millions of vehicles. Shouldn't anyone who claims to be a friend of the environment be excited about upping the mpg on this incredibly large category of vehicles? We use an extraordinary amount of fuel just getting food from one side of the country to the other. As an ex employee of one of the countries largest fleet of commercial vehicles I can tell you that they were almost all one of the big 3.
Edit: http://www.automotive-fleet.com/Statist … p;channel=
It's a huge market for them.

Varegg wrote:
That you can make a case of one friends needs while he is working doesn't change that fact ...

Not a fact but go on..lol

Varegg wrote:
When hybrid tech is good enough for commercial vehicles it will be implemented there also but leisure usage is the biggest category hence why they concentrate on that ...

And I'm not thinking small Kmar, petrol and diesels will be around for a long time but there are ways to make them more efficient but then you need to totally redo them not add a new feature to the existing ones ... that has been done and it failed ... if US manufacturers want to do the same mistakes go ahead ... they are after all the most conservative car companies in the world ...

WHEN is the keyword. You have zero solutions for that scenario. Just complaints about one (interim) option.

Xbone Stormsurgezz

2009-03-02 01:39:47

Catbox: forgiveness; +505|6708

hey Varegg... we have bicycles also... "a 1,4 liter petrol "
but when we need to do work... we have big trucks and cars...lol

Love is the answer

2009-03-02 01:40:46

Spark: liquid fluoride thorium reactor; +874|6666|Canberra, AUS

Kmarion wrote:
Varegg wrote:
First you like GM, Ford etc etc must accept that most people don't use their car for work related transport, the biggest category is and will still be leisure ...
I have no idea where you got that idea from, but most commercial trucks I see have F-something on it. We are talking millions of vehicles. Shouldn't anyone who claims to be a friend of the environment be excited about upping the mpg on this incredibly large category of vehicles? We use an extraordinary amount of fuel just getting food from one side of the country to the other. As an ex employee of one of the countries largest fleet of commercial vehicles I can tell you that they were almost all one of the big 3.

Varegg wrote:
That you can make a case of one friends needs while he is working doesn't change that fact ...
Not a fact but go on..lol

Varegg wrote:
When hybrid tech is good enough for commercial vehicles it will be implemented there also but leisure usage is the biggest category hence why they concentrate on that ...

And I'm not thinking small Kmar, petrol and diesels will be around for a long time but there are ways to make them more efficient but then you need to totally redo them not add a new feature to the existing ones ... that has been done and it failed ... if US manufacturers want to do the same mistakes go ahead ... they are after all the most conservative car companies in the world ...
WHEN is the keyword. You have zero solutions. Just complaints about one (interim) option.

I still like the 'feebates' system based either on MPG, engine size or an 'efficiency rating' incorporating both.

The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
^{~ Richard Feynman}

2009-03-02 01:55:24

Kmar: Truth is my Bitch; +5,695|6592|132 and Bush

Spark wrote:
I still like the 'feebates' system based either on MPG, engine size or an 'efficiency rating' incorporating both.

Would that be like the guzzler tax?
http://www.epa.gov/fueleconomy/guzzler/index.htm

Xbone Stormsurgezz

2009-03-02 01:56:46

Spark: liquid fluoride thorium reactor; +874|6666|Canberra, AUS

Yes and no. You can't build a long-term scheme based purely on taxing people. You have to reward people for buying more efficent vehicles, that's a true price signal.

The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
^{~ Richard Feynman}

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5

Index »
Community »
Debate and Serious Talk »
What a joke (fuel efficiency)

Board footer

Jump to

BF2S Forums What a joke (fuel efficiency)

FatherTed wrote:

Diesel_dyk wrote:

ghettoperson wrote:

usmarine wrote:

[TUF]Catbox wrote:

Hurricane2k9 wrote:

ATG wrote:

xBlackPantherx wrote:

Hurricane2k9 wrote:

ATG wrote:

ATG wrote:

destruktion_6143 wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

Varegg wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

Varegg wrote:

Varegg wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

Varegg wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

Varegg wrote:

Varegg wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

Varegg wrote:

Varegg wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

Varegg wrote:

Varegg wrote:

Varegg wrote:

Varegg wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

Varegg wrote:

Varegg wrote:

Varegg wrote:

Spark wrote:

Board footer