Pets.ca - Pet forum for dogs cats and humans 

-->

How are you planning to cope with rising gas prices?

Prin
September 22nd, 2005, 11:50 PM
Poll of the night... :D
I'm wondering because for a really long time, my wish has been that littler and littler cars would become more and more popular here (like in Europe) as a result of higher gas prices and it's starting to become a reality. Toyota is replacing the Echo with the Yaris, the nicer European model. Yey! Now I just need to convince them that a Matrix is not the same as a Corolla hatchback.... :fingerscr

But we also got the Audi A3, and then the Mazda 5 to replace minivans... It's coming, slowly. (Hopefully, they'll bring over some good diesels eventually...)

So what do you see yourself doing to accomodate the rising gas prices in the future, if indeed they do continue to rise?

Rick C
September 23rd, 2005, 12:33 AM
Sorry . . . . but I'm right in the middle of trying to figure out which new SUV I'll be getting.

Something large enough that will allow me to survive a collision with a deer, elk or a moose preferably instead of those critters going through my wind shield and bumping me off. I've had three near misses in the last week and a half with my current Durango . . . . . and that's not unusual for early Fall and Spring especially.

Its scary driving around here in the early morning darkness of winter in a regular car. . . . that's when the animals are in transit.

And big, fat tires hooked up to four wheel drive is the only thing getting us out of here on occasion in the winter.

If it helps, if I were in Calgary, there isn't any way I'd be looking for an SUV. I'd find something suitably ostentatious and preferably gaudy . . . but with some mileage advantages.

Also, I can't let the terrorists win!!! :sorry: :highfive:

Rick C
www.goldentales.ca

Prin
September 23rd, 2005, 12:54 AM
LOL Rick, I'm not judging here... Just hoping the little car market will get a boost so I have more selection. It's all quite selfish, really. :evil: :D

BMDLuver
September 23rd, 2005, 08:38 AM
hmmm, my choice is not there at all. I have greatly reduced the amount of driving I do... viewing gas as liquid gold to only be consumed sparingly. I can't downgrade vehicles as everyone would not fit in anything smaller than my mini van. As it is we are looking at adding a box on the top for our luggage for the cottage. :eek:

Joey.E.CockersMommy
September 23rd, 2005, 08:39 AM
My Chauffeur actually drives me to my low wage job everyday so its really not a concern for me.

No seriously the first thing I want to do is get a job in town so i dont have to commute everyday. We may have to think of getting some new vehicles we have a mini van and an SUV (xterra) and they are both gas gulpers.

Puppyluv
September 23rd, 2005, 09:19 AM
I'm already a slave to public transport :D
when I left calgary, i left my cars, so now I walk and metro-it everywhere. This will continue now that gas prices are high

Writing4Fun
September 23rd, 2005, 09:25 AM
Telecommuting and a home-based business, using my vehicle only when absolutely necessary. Hubby, who commutes 75km one way, drives the smallest car we could afford. When we can afford to get him a new car, it'll either be a hybrid or a Smart Car or a diesel that we can convert to accept cooking oil (so he'll be the one with the munchies every day, not me :D ). As for the home, we're saving up for a windmill and solar panels.

heidiho
September 23rd, 2005, 10:42 AM
Nothing i can do,i filled up this morning gas is still 2.89 here,got it while i could,,,maybe i will live by candle light,so i can afford gas..I cant cut much more from my life to live and eat

Schwinn
September 23rd, 2005, 11:11 AM
I'm thinking about looking at a smaller car when the lease for the RED RANGER comes up. Unfortunately, I don't trust North American four cylinders, and I might be stuck with Ford if I want to skip paying for over kms. Otherwise, I'm thinking of looking at the new Civic with 200 hp. I've also replaced my air filter with a K&N for better power, but they also supposedly give better mileage, too. Cheryl drives the Mazda5, and I'm trying to locate the filter for that, too.

Oh, and I'll buy a hybrid when I'll save enough on gas in a year to justify paying $10 000 more for a car that will potentially have more expensive repairs, and more things that could go wrong with it.

raingirl
September 23rd, 2005, 11:14 AM
personally, I welcome the high gas prices. I spend $20 a week on gas, which isn't so bad. I don't drive anywhere but to and from work, and BF and I carpool halfway, and he gets free transit from there (from his work). It's actually cheaper then both us taking Go Transit each day, plus TTC.

The reason I welcome the high prices, is because I hope it will start to make people think about gas consumption, the evnironment and such. I wouldn't care if it jumped a whole bunch still...as long as it changes some people's minds and turns people to alternatives.

People keep complaining about the gas task and BS like that. Well, you know what, I think they should RAISE The gas tax, so that all the rich people who refuse to give up their gas guzzlers can pay for it, by supplying tax dollars to help our ailing transit. Besides, gas tax is a fixed rate, it's not like a percent like GST...it's 14 cents per litre, and that's it. How much would it really make a difference if they changed that? not much! It's not like the government is asking for 8% of your gas bill each time. Chill out! I for one would rather pay 14 cents a litre in gas tax then be gouged at tax time with it at the end of the year (which is where they would put it if they lowered it anyway!)

heidiho
September 23rd, 2005, 12:17 PM
I drive a nissan sentr it still cost me 23.00 to get half a tank,that is alot in my world////// You welcome it, i think it sucks if i could AFFORD a hybrid car i would get one,but i cant so what would u suggest i do..

raingirl
September 23rd, 2005, 12:47 PM
I live very frugally, so $40 to fill a tank doesn't seem expensive to me at all. I spent about that on groceries every two weeks. I don't eat out. I make a lot of my own food from scratch (I make my own bread, pasta, sauces). I buy food cheap from local growers. I bring a lunch and snacks to work each day. I haven't bought any new clothes (except a brides maid dress) in the last 18 months (and I really need clothes...but can't afford them right now).

I find a lot of people complaining about gas prices, then they go and spent $40 on a steak dinner! Come on people! Or go buy $80 jeans. To me I see that as outrageous, and not the gas prices! I guess it's all where people's priorities lie right? I'm still young, so these gas prices don't seam all that bad to me. In the late 90's they were about 60cents a litre, when I started driving, so it's not really much of a difference. I just see gas as an expense you have to moniter, and not take advantage of. I think a lot of people who had been driving for a long time who have seen low gas prices probably took filling up their car and driving for granted. I see driving and owning a car as an unfortunate necessity, and somewhat of a luxury. If those people who took driving for granted start getting off the road, off their butts, and walk to the stores that are up the street instead of driving because gas is expensive, then I feel that a small battle has been won.

gdamadg
September 23rd, 2005, 12:51 PM
I drive a gas guzzling SUV and have a cheaper running car. I can afford the gas, as most of my driving is minimal, including to work.

Raingirl,

It is fine for you to say that they should raise the gas tax to improve the transit system. How ever, the majority of Canadians live in a rural setting and do not have that option. And for a lot of those rural Canadians, they live near or below the poverty line.

AliSam
September 23rd, 2005, 12:56 PM
There isn't alot I can do. I have both a compact car & an SUV. We keep the SUV in the garage until we absolutely need it and rely on the little car. Since I commute 50kms 1 way, with no public transit close by, I am unable to just stop driving. I just try to conserve the best I can.

Schwinn
September 23rd, 2005, 01:09 PM
personally, I welcome the high gas prices. I spend $20 a week on gas, which isn't so bad. I don't drive anywhere but to and from work, and BF and I carpool halfway, and he gets free transit from there (from his work). It's actually cheaper then both us taking Go Transit each day, plus TTC.

The reason I welcome the high prices, is because I hope it will start to make people think about gas consumption, the evnironment and such. I wouldn't care if it jumped a whole bunch still...as long as it changes some people's minds and turns people to alternatives.

People keep complaining about the gas task and BS like that. Well, you know what, I think they should RAISE The gas tax, so that all the rich people who refuse to give up their gas guzzlers can pay for it, by supplying tax dollars to help our ailing transit. Besides, gas tax is a fixed rate, it's not like a percent like GST...it's 14 cents per litre, and that's it. How much would it really make a difference if they changed that? not much! It's not like the government is asking for 8% of your gas bill each time. Chill out! I for one would rather pay 14 cents a litre in gas tax then be gouged at tax time with it at the end of the year (which is where they would put it if they lowered it anyway!)

Acutally, part of the tax is a percentage. That is one of the reasons that the opposition is crying foul that the government is making a big winfall off of high gas prices. And they do also charge GST and PST on top of taxes.

As for raising gas prices to get the "rich people out of thier cars", what about the not so rich people?? What about the ones who already bought cars cheap on gas because they can't afford gas prices? What do they do when they can't afford those, either? Or what if the Smart car won't carry them and thier two kids, plus the things that go with having kids? And another thing is that most of the people driving the gas guzzlers aren't hurting as much as those in the cheaper cars. I was talking with a co-worker the other day, and we noticed two things as we were walking down town to work. First, there are a lot more bicycles being ridden to work, and secondly, there were less cars, but more specifically, there were less small cars, but the number of large cars and SUVs haven't decreased in numbers. When I missed my GO train (and since it stops running after that train, I had to drive), I noticed on my way in that I was surrounded by more SUV's than normal.

And since it has already been pointed out that the majority of Canadians don't have the option of public transit, I won't mention that, but I will ask one thing--what do you think the buses and GO trains run on? I've already seen my GO pass go up twice in the past year. What do you think will happen when gas gets even more ridiculous?

And don't forget, that price of gas doesn't affect just those who drive. It affects anyone who purchases goods that are manufactured, grown or produced in the same spot they buy it from. They need to pay for the gas that goes in the trucks that deliver the goods, and it's those goods that will rise in cost to cover the transportation. And one more example. I have a buddy who just graduated with a skilled trade. He's now terrified of gas prices rising and throwing us into a recession (a very real danger, and a high probability if this continues). If that happens, it is very likely work will dry up in his industry. So, unless you have a recession proof job, chances are you will be affected too.

love my dogs
September 23rd, 2005, 01:18 PM
I agree with raingirl to an extent. It would definately be better for the environment if everyone downsized to smaller cars, or used public transportation and car pooled, and higher gas prices will probably encourage that direction.

Also, there is no excuse for the new XL pick ups with hemi's, and people who drive great big expensive trucks just for show.

However, I am like many others and need to drive to get around. My car is already only a 4 cyl., but it has to fit a family. I've thought about maybe having 1 smart car for daily scooting around when it's just me, and then a bigger car for the family....probelm is my hubby still needs to drive, so one of us would still have to be driving the bigger car everyday....you just can't win.

Schwinn
September 23rd, 2005, 01:25 PM
I just found out that our new Mazda just got recalled, so we have a choice--a minivan or an SUV for the next month. Oh, and since they're both 6 cylinders, they both get roughly the same mileage. We figure we'll spend a few hundred extra on gas because of it.

heidiho
September 23rd, 2005, 01:27 PM
Well let me just say,i see what u are saying,but i cant remember the last time i had a dinner out at a nice place.I eat cereal or chef boy r dee for dinner,that is it...I cannot cut out anything else of my life,i sit home weekend after weekend because i dont have money,wow how depressing actually :cool: :cool:

BMDLuver
September 23rd, 2005, 01:32 PM
lol heidiho, the same happens when you have kids and it's a choice of nice dinner or a package of diapers... darn diapers win every time! :D

Roxy's_MA
September 23rd, 2005, 01:41 PM
I will just have to fork out the dollars for gas. I cummute to the city everyday. right now my gas cost me about $300 a month. If I rented a house like mine in the city it would probably cost about $250-$300 more than where I rent now.

Luckily I have a gas card with Petro-pass, and I get my gas at a contract price. I have not spent over a dollar a litre as of yet. The highest I have had to pay was $0.98 a litre. I would like to buy a new car next year, I am hoping for a Volkswagon diesel or maybe the toyota hybrid. Until then I'm waiting. Just waiting

ange7371
September 23rd, 2005, 01:51 PM
I live in small town Alberta and if I lived in a city my opinion would change, but sometimes what you drive is a way of life. I have a minivan for in town trips, which I only fill every two to three weeks. We also own a SUV. The reason for that is highway trips. I couldn't imagine driving some cars on the highway. I think the smart cars are a neat idea in a city where running into anything bigger than a gopher wouldn't destroy it.

I find it surprising that few people have mentioned not letting their cars idle, or warming them up for half an hour in the winter, or not driving 120 or more on highways when 90 is supposed to be the optimum speed for gas consumption. All these pictures on CTV in Ontario with the massive line-ups at the gas stations yesterday, most of the vehicles were idling while waiting for the car in front to move forward. Not people who can complain about gas prices in my opinion. (Not picking on Ontario, but it's where the news was yesterday.)

heidiho
September 23rd, 2005, 02:02 PM
To funny,i could not imagine affording a child unless you have a two income home,or child support.....I need a sugar daddy.... :eek: :eek:

mafiaprincess
September 23rd, 2005, 02:06 PM
My parents walk to work daily.. and since I'm still dawdling on what I'm doing next, I try to combine my trips out for errands, and limit them when I can.

But I drive a 4 cylinder.. and replaced my air filter for an Accel, and just did an oil change.. So she's running a lot better anyhow.

I think I've used half a tank of gas in like 3 weeks.. and I've still had to go out and do stuff.

For the rising cost of goods due to gas.. I'd like to see some stuff taken off tractor trailers and put back on trains for the long haul.

Writing4Fun
September 23rd, 2005, 02:40 PM
To funny,i could not imagine affording a child unless you have a two income home,or child support.....
You'd be surprised at how much you can do with one income. My sister is a single mom of two kids with no child support/alimony. She's living off her one income with a mortgage, car loan, credit cards, utilities, etc... OK, so she's not getting rich, but she's making ends meet and is very, very happy without a sugar daddy. ;)

Writing4Fun
September 23rd, 2005, 02:42 PM
lol heidiho, the same happens when you have kids and it's a choice of nice dinner or a package of diapers... darn diapers win every time! :D
You've been given the choice??? :eek: Since we've had children, our idea of a "nice dinner" is when we go to my sister's house, she does the cooking and her son does the dishes!

BMDLuver
September 23rd, 2005, 03:14 PM
You've been given the choice??? :eek: Since we've had children, our idea of a "nice dinner" is when we go to my sister's house, she does the cooking and her son does the dishes!
lol, at 2.5 and 3.5 years old, going to someone's house is a high stress endeavour as no one is every baby proofed so you spend all your time saying "don't touch", "put that down", "don't eat that", "let go of the tablecloth".. etc.. gimme kd n hotdogs any night over trying a visiting dinner. ;)

Rottielover
September 23rd, 2005, 03:36 PM
LOL, boy do I know that one BMD, I have a 18 month old, she is into everything. I am a single mom, no alimony or anything. I make ends meet, I mean barely, but I do. But with this gas crap, I will be putting a sled unto Harley, and he can pull kayla to daycare, while i walk to work. LOL

heidiho
September 23rd, 2005, 04:35 PM
I was kidding believe me i work with about 1500 guys here,plenty of offers not my thing,.I stretch my $ pretty far,it is very hard,it takes 2 of my four paychecks just to pay rent,the htird goes to car payment,and the 4 th for every other bill.so there is nothing left after that for anything.

chico2
September 23rd, 2005, 05:03 PM
Raingirl,your comment about loving higher gas-prices was rather selfish,like Schwinn said,it will affect everyone,even if you drive an ugly,inpractical Smart-Car.
Anything that is being transported will end up costing us more in the end,even you.
There actually are families who NEED a bigger car to get around..
Luckily my husband just retired,but he had NO way of getting from Oakville to Woodbridge via Transit,he had to drive..he also worked nights,because that's when newspapers are printed,no transit.
Like someone mentioned,people who can afford to drive expensive gas-guzzlers are bothered about being screwed royally,by oilcompanies making billions in profit,as well as our government...but sure,we have no choice but paying.
In the end,it is the little guy again,who will suffer,people living from paycheck to paycheck.
I drove my son in to Toronto this morning for an appointment at the hospital,he takes a streetcar,the subway and the GO-train to get back to his house and it cost him $10 at least and don't say you could live in the city,because every time I get out of Toronto and come home to my little house in Oakville I breath a sigh of relief :thumbs up
Also,we drive a midsized car in the summer or on snowfree winterdays,our V8 SUV is resting :D but sure we are keeping it,for those stormy winterdays,nothing equals an SUV in the winter and we are paying for the gas,nobody else :D

Prin
September 23rd, 2005, 05:04 PM
Schwinn- the Civic Si only has 160hp... The Acura RSX has 210. That's where my dilemma lies for my next car (provided my current car lasts long enough for me to be able to afford one or the other... :rolleyes: )

Puppyluv
September 23rd, 2005, 05:10 PM
Raingirl,your comment about loving higher gas-prices was rather selfish,like Schwinn said,it will affect everyone,even if you drive an ugly,inpractical Smart-Car.
:eek: Be nice! I love my dad's smart car!!! they're not ugly! and theyre not impractical!!!

But, i agree, its unfair to wish high taxes upon others. I don't drive, but I still don't want to see gas prices high. It affects my family, who drive a wide range of cars (from a smart car to a gas guzzling jeep to premium-using luxury cars) and it affects me, because public transport prices increase, taxis cost more, and flights cost more.

Prin
September 23rd, 2005, 05:13 PM
Impractical is a relative term. My little 1.6EL would be impractical to a great many people, but if you choose to drive a behemouth, you shouldn't complain about gas more than the rest of us. It is after all a luxury- both driving and choosing the car, no matter how essential you think it might be. I mean we lived millions of years without cars just fine. We just didn't travel as far.

BMDLuver
September 23rd, 2005, 05:20 PM
Schwinn- the Civic Si only has 160hp... The Acura RSX has 210. That's where my dilemma lies for my next car (provided my current car lasts long enough for me to be able to afford one or the other... :rolleyes: )
ummmm, where in dog's name are you ever going to be able to use 210 hp when even using 160hp is next to impossible? lol, my vote is for a car that gets from point A to point B, with everyone fitting in and not breaking down! :D

I would however love to test drive a Hummer2! :p

chico2
September 23rd, 2005, 05:25 PM
Well,we are actually not complaing,we just pay,really have no choice...but short trips to the store to pick up something have now been eliminated,we walk.
It is not only gas at the pumps that will affect us,homeheating is going to sky-rocket,someone said by 70%.
We've never kept our furnace high,or ran the airconditioner ALL summer like some people.. but a 70% hike for Natural Gas,will affect a lot of people,I know of a few who will just have to freeze in the winter.
I actually think the Smart car is kind of cute,but you would never catch me driving one..I would get claustrophobic :D

Prin
September 23rd, 2005, 05:25 PM
Heh heh, BMD, If I tell you where exactly, they'll be waiting... And yes, I will use it every day. I'm not the type who stops on the highway and waits for a hole to weasel into or for somebody to be courteous enough to let me in. I go get my hole. And you need power for that. And the 6th gear saves on consumption too. ;)

Prin
September 23rd, 2005, 05:28 PM
By the way, if a car is too underpowered (most cars made by Saturn come to mind), they become guzzlers too. Like the new Aereo (Suzuki). People think, oh, it's small and Japanese, so it will be economical. It is actually one of the worst. If the engine is too small, you end up revving the motor at like 5000rpm while cruising on the highway and that is a huge waste. If you can cruise at 2000rpm in a car on the highway, then you're saving gas.

Puppyluv
September 23rd, 2005, 05:30 PM
I actually think the Smart car is kind of cute,but you would never catch me driving one..I would get claustrophobic :D
I REALLY want to get a picture of my bro driving it, because he's a 6'3 gym rat (ie BUFF, and RIPPED) and when he's in it he looks like he's in a clown car. Deffinately good for a laugh

melanie
September 23rd, 2005, 05:32 PM
i own an incredibly fuel effecient car, 5ltrs gets you 100km, and now with gas prices high and im looking to sell (no room for baby and dog), well im going to get a really good price due to fuel costs, so keep em high, hey it will get me an extra $1000 :D

honestly the value of my fuel eff car has jsut gone through the roof and im goung to take full advantage of the situation :D hey i dont feel bad, its helping the environemtn so i dont care how much ppl pay :D

but am in the proces of looking for the most effecient slighly bigger car, and i think we found it, with modifications of course.

but ppl please remember the higher octane fuel you buy the more grunt for your dollar thus saving plenty of money and getting good value for distance, so although it may look a few cents more expensive, it really is worht it for your wallet, the car and the environment.

Puppyluv
September 23rd, 2005, 05:48 PM
but ppl please remember the higher octane fuel you buy the more grunt for your dollar thus saving plenty of money and getting good value for distance, so although it may look a few cents more expensive, it really is worht it for your wallet, the car and the environment.

This actually isn't true. But the gasoline companies are glad you think so. Yes there are some advantages to high octane fuel, and some cars "require" it, it can be "nicer" to your engine, but it's not necessarily nicer to the environment. High octane fuels need less processing than lower octane fuels, and are thus cheaper to produce. gas companies make the most money off of these because they have the largest profit margins.
I'm not saying don't use them (if i did, i would be somewhat hypocritical, as two of my parents cars "require" it, and they do use it for them) but don't use them blindly, thinking that it's better.

jjgeonerd
September 23rd, 2005, 05:57 PM
but ppl please remember the higher octane fuel you buy the more grunt for your dollar thus saving plenty of money and getting good value for distance, so although it may look a few cents more expensive, it really is worht it for your wallet, the car and the environment.

Not true. From the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) website. http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/conline/pubs/alerts/fuelalrt.htm

At the Pump: Use the Octane Level You Need

Your owner’s manual recommends the most effective octane level for your car. For most cars, the recommended gasoline is regular octane. In most cases, using a higher octane gas than the manufacturer recommends offers no benefit. Unless your engine is knocking, buying higher octane gasoline is a waste of money.

I have personally tried this. Used 91 octane for a few tanks, then 87 for a few in the motorcycle. About 45mpg for each. Octane just relates to how easily the fuel burns, not how much power (and thus mileage) you receive from it.

As far as the topic goes. I'm upside down in an mid-size SUV, so I can't sell it or trade it in for something more economical. :( We just ride the motorcycles more and try to limit needless trips.

melanie
September 23rd, 2005, 06:02 PM
sorry but reduced particulate pollution how can that not be nice to the environment and human health?? how is such a reduction bad for the environment?? particulate pollution is a hell of a problem, it even effects global warming so why not reduce it??


tests have shown that higher octane fuels burn cleaner, releasing less particulate matter, and also burning longer so to speak for that extra leg for your dollar....

quote 'High octane fuels need less processing than lower octane fuels, and are thus cheaper to produce.' and you think less processi s a bad thing, sorry but that is beneficial too in relation to many things such as the power it needs to operate higher procesed materials, sorry but less processing means less resources needed to make the frigging product.....

quote ' But the gasoline companies are glad you think so. Yes there are some advantages to high octane fuel, and some cars "require" it, it can be "nicer" to your engine, but it's not necessarily nicer to the environment'

actually im sure the gas companies think your great for touting their nasty dirty products, hey they sell a hell of alot more of that than they do the stuff i buy, and when the majority buys dirty fuels and have higher particulate pollutant output well thats not necessarily nicer for the environment either....

sorry but that is a dangerous thing to say especially for the environment, so for the sake of complete discussion, can you please tell me-

-how does it increase particulate matter to use higher octane?

-what environmental damage is done using higher octane fuels compared to lesser octane fuels??

-can you tell me how less processing is bad for the environment and greater processing considered good in terms of all resource consumption such as power etc??

im jsut a bit over these bland anti environmental/green statement i find all over with little detail and background? hey i dont jsut believe because i am told, but many ppl out there do and that is very very dangerous.

thanks

jjgeonerd
September 23rd, 2005, 06:06 PM
Here's another link to actual data. Using a higher octane fuel than what your car is designed for can actually put more stress on a vehicle's emmissions systems, causing them to run "dirtier".

http://chemistry.about.com/library/weekly/aabyb100401.htm

Particulate matter is actually not as environmentally unfriendly as greenhouse gas emmissions. Diesel engines emit much more particulate matter than gasoline engines, but much less greenhouse gases. That is the reason many environmentally friendly cars are diesel (i.e. Smart Cars).

melanie
September 23rd, 2005, 06:07 PM
Quote 'I have personally tried this. Used 91 octane for a few tanks, then 87 for a few in the motorcycle. About 45mpg for each. Octane just relates to how easily the fuel burns, not how much power (and thus mileage) you receive from it.'

wow 91, sorry when i talk low octane it is around 96, high is 98, you dont get less than that here due to the direct efforts to reduce particulate pollution, and we have doen this quite well by OMG :eek: you guessed it, using higher octane fuels and thus burning cleaner and lowered particulate levels, see im not spouting crap, you jsut supported that argument..

more grunt for the dollar- actualyl if you burn fuel cleanly that is where the better value for dollar comes in, its not that high octan is stronger, jsut cleaner, so if you car runs clean and effecient, it does give you the max fuel consumption for the dollar, burning dirty fuels you car will ahve to struggle with taht adn cope accordingly, often you will burn more fuel as your car has to work harder to do its thing due to the dirty fuel, that is what i mean by more value for dollar. should have been clearer..

jjgeonerd
September 23rd, 2005, 06:12 PM
Well, I seroisly doubt that Australia has that much higher quality gasoline than North America. The octane rating is dependent upon the method used in determining the rating. In the US we use an average method. Gasolines in Europe (and I would guess Australia) show a higher octane rating than in the US because of the method used in its determination. Our 91 is probably comparable to your 97.

A link explaining this: http://www.ozebook.com/compendium/suzi/octane.pdf

jjgeonerd
September 23rd, 2005, 06:18 PM
more grunt for the dollar- actualyl if you burn fuel cleanly that is where the better value for dollar comes in, its not that high octan is stronger, jsut cleaner, so if you car runs clean and effecient, it does give you the max fuel consumption for the dollar, burning dirty fuels you car will ahve to struggle with taht adn cope accordingly, often you will burn more fuel as your car has to work harder to do its thing due to the dirty fuel, that is what i mean by more value for dollar. should have been clearer..
The chemistry link above explains that if your car is not designed for the higher octane fuels it will actually burn LESS of the fuel, discharging the excess to the catalytic converter to finish off the job. This is less efficient and worse for the environment.

From: http://www.answers.com/topic/petrol

The most important characteristic of gasoline is its Research Octane Number (RON) or octane rating, which is a measure of how resistant gasoline is to premature detonation (knocking). It is measured relative to a mixture of 2,2,4-trimethylpentane (an octane) and n-heptane. So an 87-octane gasoline has the same knock resistance as a mixture of 87% isooctane and 13% n-heptane.

There is another type of Octane, called "Motor Octane Number" (MON), which is a better measure of how the fuel behaves when under load. Its definition is also based on the mixture of isooctane and n-heptane that has the same performance. Depending on the composition of the fuel, the MON of a modern gasoline will be about 10 points lower than the RON. Normally fuel specifications require both a minimum RON and a minimum MON.

In most countries (including all of Europe and Australia) the 'headline' octane that would be shown on the pump is the RON: but in the United States and some other countries the headline number is the average of the RON and the MON, sometimes called the "roaD Octane Number" or DON, or (R+M)/2. Because of the 10 point difference noted above this means that the octane in the United States will be about 5 points lower than the same fuel elsewhere: 87 octane fuel, the "normal" gasoline in the US and Canada, would be 92 in Europe.
Romania is a supplier of "light-sweet" crude oil, which, when distilled, resulted in a gasoline with an 87 rating (DON).

It is possible for a fuel to have a RON greater than 100, because isooctane is not the most knock-resistant substance available. Racing fuels, Avgas and LPG typically have octane ratings of 110 or significantly higher.

It might seem odd that fuels with higher octane ratings burn less easily, yet are popularly thought of as more powerful. Using a fuel with a higher octane lets an engine be run at a higher compression ratio without having problems with knock. Compression is directly related to power, so engines that require higher octane usually deliver more power. Some high-performance engines are designed to operate with a compression ratio associated with high octane numbers, and thus demand high-octane gasoline. It should be noted that the power output of an engine also depends on the energy content of its fuel, which bears no simple relationship to the octane rating. Some people believe that adding a higher octane fuel to their engine will increase its performance or lessen its fuel consumption; this is false - engines perform best when using fuel with the octane rating they were designed for.
The octane rating was developed by the chemist Russell Marker. The selection of n-heptane as the zero point of the scale was due to the availability of very high purity n-heptane, not mixed with other isomers of heptane or octane, distilled from the resin of Jeffrey Pine. Other sources of heptane produced from crude oil contain a mixture of different isomers with greatly differing ratings, which would not give a precise zero point.

Puppyluv
September 23rd, 2005, 06:52 PM
Ok these are all quotes from websites, because it seems like if I don't use direct quotes I'm going to get shot down.

Many drivers believe that using a premium grade fuel is better for their vehicle and produces more power. Not true. As long as the fuel does not pre-ignite, any grade of fuel will produce the same amount of power
http://www.canadiandriver.com/articles/jk/040728.htm

since the middle to late 80’s, engines are designed to use fuel injectors with computers to accurately control the air/fuel mix under all types of temperature and environment concerns. However the accuracy of the fuel injectors and computers is based on using the recommended gasoline for that engine.
Most cars are designed to burn regular unleaded fuels with an octane rating of 87. If the vehicle needs a higher octane rating of 89-93, there is documentation in the owner’s manual, as well as possibly under the fuel gauge and by the fuel fill hole. Usually you will see this rating for high performance engines only.
When you use a fuel with a higher octane rating than your vehicle requires, you can send this unburned fuel into the emissions system. It can also collect in the catalytic converter. When you over stress any system, it can malfunction or not do what it was designed to do properly.
http://theserviceadvisor.com/octane.htm

One common misconception is that higher octane gasoline contains more cleaning additives than lower octane gas. All octane grades of all brands of gasoline contain engine cleaning detergent additives to protect against engine deposit build-up. In fact, using a gasoline with too high of an octane rating may cause damage to the emissions system.

Unless your engine is knocking, buying higher octane gasoline is a waste of money, too. Premium gas costs .15 to .20 cents per gallon more than regular. That can add up to $100.00 or more a year in extra costs.
http://chemistry.about.com/library/weekly/aabyb100401.htm

the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency requires that all octane grades of all brands of gasoline contain engine cleaning detergent additives to protect against the build-up of harmful levels of engine deposits during the expected life of your car
http://autorepair.about.com/od/enginefuelgasolines/a/highoctanegas.htm

raingirl
September 23rd, 2005, 07:50 PM
All I was trying to say is that the people who abuse gas will hopefully get a wake up call. That's all. I know it costs more for other people in the long run, trust me, I know that (being that I'm not even going to pay all my bills this month most likely because I'm getting screwed at work...but that's aside from the point). I guess because I grew up without a car, I don't see how a family needs one. My mom took her 5 kids on the bus each saturday morning, and we got all our groceries, etc, all at once. That was how it always was. We walked to school, doctors appointments, everything that there was no bus for. We didn't even take taxis! (I never took a taxi once till I was in University!). My mother used to haul us in the winter in a sled (no joke) because pushing a stroller was too hard! I have taken public transit for my entire life, up until last february because my new job had a clause in the contract saying I had to have a car (had no choice). I know that some rural areas don't have transit as an option, but if you live in a rural area, wouldn't you live closer to work then, and wouldn't it be cheaper in the long run than gas? And I guess that's my other beef. People who live REALLY far outside the city and commute. If you live so far, get a job close to where you live, or move closer to where you work! I know people who commute to Toronto from Barrie. I just don't get that... Some friends of mine when we first met thought I was really weird because I didn't agree with owning a car, spending money on pre-made food, wasting electricity, wasting water. I was so conservative that they thought I was Amish!! I mean, I look at the people I know and their families. It practically drives me BATTY at the waste they incur. My sister leaves her AC on while she is at work, leaves lights on a night, runs the dishwasher daily, runs the washer for small loads, and all because she has the money to pay the associated bills. I just wish people didn't think that way anymore. People shouldn't think about what their hard earned money pays for, they should think about conservation first. I spend most of my time at home turning off lights that my BF left on, because I HATE it when people leave lights on in a room they are not in. I am so anal about energy conservation that I unplug modems, stereos, anything that "passivly" drains energy each night.

Sorry for the rant...I didn't mean to sound selfish, I just really want to teach the wasters a lesson.

gdamadg
September 23rd, 2005, 09:08 PM
but if you live in a rural area, wouldn't you live closer to work then, and wouldn't it be cheaper in the long run than gas? If you live so far, get a job close to where you live, or move closer to where you work! I know people who commute to Toronto from Barrie.

Well have you ever left the city? Everything is spread out, hence the quiet slow paced life. You have to travel to get groceries, go to work, bring your kids to school, and even go get gas. The only reason why I live so close to my work, is because I am in the Army and live on the base.

As for people that commute. Sometimes you don't have a choice, the type of work you do is not available where you live. Some people actually don't like this city. I know this might sound crazy to you, but it's true. And Barrie isn't rural, it is basically just a suburb of the GTA.

Some people would think you are BATTY!

Writing4Fun
September 23rd, 2005, 10:56 PM
And Barrie isn't rural, it is basically just a suburb of the GTA.
:eek: :eek: What?!?! :eek: :eek: Oh, bite your tongue! Don't let anyone from Barrie hear you say that. OK, so maybe it's not rural anymore, but they are so not part of the GTA.

OK, so I'm not that ticked off about the comment, but seriously, lots of people would lynch you for that one. ;)

As for finding a job closer to home - I agree that some people can do this. There's also telecommuting (you'd be surprised what your employer would agree to if you'd just ask), and starting your own business. Unfortunately, jobs in these "smaller" towns don't pay as much as those in the big city. Take my hubby for example - if he were to find the same job he's doing now but located in Barrie, he could expect to earn about $5 less per hour than what he's making now. No idea why - the work is the same, the machines are the same, the experience/talent required to do the job are the same. *shrugs* Just one of those things, I guess.

About moving closer to work - sorry, that I don't agree with. I've said it in another thread - people should work to live, not live to work. I'm not going to sell my home (which I love), leave this beautiful town (which I also love), uproot my children, just to be closer to a job that may or may not be there in a year or two. N'uh, uh. Ain't gonna happen. Hubby'll just have to drive a Smart Car. ;)

Prin
September 23rd, 2005, 10:58 PM
Reminds me of Chris Rock's speech in "head of state":
Do you work in a city you can't afford to live in? That ain't right! :D

chico2
September 24th, 2005, 09:06 AM
Raingirl,in my household we have ALWAYS conserved energy,we had the kids well trained :D They even now conserve in their own homes.
But it's not about some heroic measures to save the Earth,more like not wasting money we could put to better use.
Still,I keep an energy-saving light on for the cats bathroom 24/7 :D
As for moving closer to your work-place or changing jobs??
Hubbie worked(now retired for 3 weeks)for the Toronto Star,originally in Toronto,they later moved to Vaughan(Woodbridge) and I LOVE Oakville,would not have dreamed of moving.
Changing jobs,is in this day and age,not an option for most,who are lucky to have a wellpaying job...why would you,just because gas will cost you maybe 50$ more a month :confused:
I too never grew up with a car and had 3 kids before a car,I lugged groceries,went to doctors and anything else using Transit with 3 little kids in tow,not something I would recommend to anyone,but something I had to do.
Luckily times changed,as did our financial situation and I have never been in a bus since!!

Rick C
September 24th, 2005, 12:16 PM
By the way, if a car is too underpowered (most cars made by Saturn come to mind), they become guzzlers too. Like the new Aereo (Suzuki). People think, oh, it's small and Japanese, so it will be economical. It is actually one of the worst. If the engine is too small, you end up revving the motor at like 5000rpm while cruising on the highway and that is a huge waste. If you can cruise at 2000rpm in a car on the highway, then you're saving gas.

Thank God for my V-8 Durango then!!!

Rick C
www.goldentales.ca

chico2
September 24th, 2005, 04:28 PM
Rick,I really like the looks of the Durango..but it must be a real guzzler like our V8,5.9L Jeep.
It is actually our 3rd fullsize Jeep and we swear by them.
We were looking at the NEW 2006 Jeep Commander,it would be great for you out in the boonies.
My "little" Volvo is turbo and it is a wonderfully quick little thing and good on gas,but still,when we drive to South Carolina next month,we take the Jeep,much more comfy and we have experienced snowstorms in the mountains,or rainstorms and better safe than sorry,even if it will cost us a couple of hundred more in gas.

Rick C
September 24th, 2005, 07:32 PM
By coincidence, I was out test driving a new Dodge Durango and a new Jeep Grand (American spelling) Cherokee this afternoon.

Both have Hemi's but I like the luxury of the Cherokee versus the extra space of the Durango. A few more miles to the gallon on the Cherokee as well.

I might buy meself (intentional grammatical error to denote slang) one. . . . Cherokee that is.

Rick C
www.goldentales.ca

love my dogs
September 24th, 2005, 07:50 PM
Rick- Why do you need a hemi?

Puppyluv
September 24th, 2005, 08:26 PM
Rick- The Grand Cherokee's are a great choice! My brother drives one (he too lives in Alberta, where bigger cars are still the norm, and will be for a good while) and he loves it!
Oooo now that I'm thinking about them, I have a little cherokee story. Not that you would do this, since I'm PRETTY sure you're not a reckless 17 year old girl with a REALLY rich dad (but just in case :p ): The orthodontist I used to see had a daughter just a couple of years younger than me. When she turned 16, her dad gave her a Grande Cherokee for her b-day. 3 weeks later she rolled it on Highway 1. Her Dad bought her a new one. 5 weeks later she rolled it on Highway 2 (I'm not making these numbers up, just sheer coincidence). Her dad bought her another one. I was in his office one day having a yearly checkup to make sure my teeth were still straight, when his receptionist came running in, saying his daughter was on the phone. Why was she calling? You guessed it, she rolled it again!
Anyways, the moral of the sotry is, be careful, they roll really easily. (BTW [which stands for By The Way :p ] she was never injured in any of her rolls.)

Rick C
September 24th, 2005, 08:51 PM
Rick- Why do you need a hemi?

. . . . so I can do 120 kmh on the highway at 2000 rpm's and save gas like Prin says!!! :highfive: :angel:

Seriously, the Cherokee apparently has a system which disengages the hemi and takes on a more normal, lower-gas-munching mode when its not being used. I believe its rated at 27 mpg.

Also, it goes like snot when you ram on the pedal!!!

And yes, it DOES do 120 kmh on the highway at 2000 rpm's. Thanks to Prin's tip, I tested it out.

Regarding the rollover aspect, apparently they've thrown some sort of computerized gizmo in there to auto-control braking, etc, if it senses the yaw of the vehicle getting out of control . . . . . I threw it around some tight corners on a local highway and had the salesman with me hanging on to the door handle even as he was double daring me to try rolling it.

The Durango has more space than the 98 version I have now and more get-up-and-go. You would think I wouldn't need much space but I had my current Durango filled from floor to ceiling/front to back (seriously) with grass clippings off the acreage just a few weeks ago. Stuffing that thing full of crap is pretty normal around here on the bald butt prairie.

I also like the big fat tires of the Durango and the fact that its heavy and wide . . . a very solid vehicle.

I've thought about a Nissan Pathfinder as well and may give that a test drive.

Carol told me not to come home if I didn't buy something with leather seats on account of Golden Retriever hair.

Anyway, we are pondering things over the weekend.

Rick C
www.goldentales.ca

gdamadg
September 24th, 2005, 10:07 PM
OK, so I'm not that ticked off about the comment, but seriously, lots of people would lynch you for that one.

Writing4Fun,

I know a lot of people would lynch me, my girlfriends father included. But seriously, your not that far off from the GTA. And driving up the 400 and even a good chunk of the 11, looks just like the outskirts of the GTA. I was just poking fun, if I had my choice in that area, Barrie would be it.

I also like the big fat tires of the Durango and the fact that its heavy and wide . . . a very solid vehicle.

Rick C,

I have a 2000 Durango. I love it, doesn't have the Hemi, but that 4.7L V8 still hauls a**. And it is pretty good on gas mileage. As for the big fat tires, I was using mine today. To get into my new favourite pond out in the woods for duck hunting. My nice fancy SUv, all scratched up and dirty. I have friends that cringe when I tell them where I was with it. I took the new Durango out for a spin, but I think it seems just like a minivan on steriods. I like the comfort and the durability of a truck in the older models. I hear the Jeep Commander is supposed to be pretty good though. Perhaps when the Durango is on it's last legs, I will get one.

Prin
September 25th, 2005, 01:44 AM
Thank God for my V-8 Durango then!!!

Rick C
www.goldentales.ca
Well, that's an interesting read on it... At least if you can cruise at 2000, you're better than another suv struggling at 3500-4000...

And these discussions about moving closer to work, I have to say, we just moved 30kms further, and everything is so much cheaper out here, it makes up for the gas.

- My insurance dropped by almost half (last year it was $940, now it's $490).
- We don't get any parking tickets anymore (which used to amount to about $300/year, if you can't find parking for literally kms during the hours you aren't allowed to park in your neighborhood, you have to "make do").
- We don't get nearly as much damage to our car bodies (when you park on the street, your car is fair game).
- And I don't waste as much money on gas while sitting in gridlocked traffic (the roads from the burbs in Montreal are way faster moving than the "Met", which is right in the middle of Montreal, and was the only highway we used to be able to take if we wanted to get anywhere). And I also do way less city driving, which is more gas consuming than highway.

Add to all that the PEACE and QUIET! And the wildlife (did I already mention the toads?!)

If you live in the city, you work in the city and then go home to the city. There were studies done a few years ago that showed that people who were exposed to low-level noise all day ended up having significantly higher blood pressure than those who were in a quieter environment. So at the end of the day, I like to go home and NOT hear the traffic with my windows shut. By the time we moved, we didn't realize how loud it was until we really listened- it's loud. The city is loud and dusty and dirty and smoggy... I would rather pay extra for gas (which I'm not anyway) than risk my health again.

End of rant. :o

chico2
September 25th, 2005, 09:25 AM
Rick,I honestly can highly recommend the Jeep Grand Cherokee,we have all the luxuries in ours anybody could think of,leatherseats included...and it can certainly move,leaving all minivans behind going up a steep hill :D
and still drives like a luxury-car.
Before we bought another Jeep,we tried a Pathfinder,but found it drove like a truck,so back to the Jeep.
We were warned about it being a gas-guzzler,being a 5.9L V8 and it is,but we just have to live with it :D
Another choice would be the Volvo XC90 a beautiful SUV,but a bit more expensive.
As for roll overs,we've had Jeep Cherokees since 1979,driven in all kinds of weather and roads,if you do not know how to drive,I would say it's the drivers problem,not the Jeep.
Here's a pic of our beauty!!

love my dogs
September 25th, 2005, 10:43 AM
Prin, I know what you mean about the insurance! We just moved to the city, and our insurance went up.

I called in and said "hey wait a minute, that can't be right......we are much closer to work now, and therefore drive less KM"

In the end, my insurance actually went down...by $6.00 per year.:D

Prin
September 25th, 2005, 12:49 PM
LOL Mine went up last year because a lot of 1.6's got into accidents... I think our area might have been more expensive too because we were near the SAAQ testing area (where you go to do the test for your license), so we had driving school cars EVERYWHERE! They were really annoying. If the insurance wasn't higher because of them, it dang well should have been... :eek:

melanie
September 25th, 2005, 05:52 PM
ok we dont agree, im far too green and we are obviously from very different sides fo a big fence, POWER- but as i reexplained before, tis not getting more power, its getting cleaner use therefore using fuel more effeciently which is like getting more grunt for the buck. :eek: i should have been clearer for that. its like if you service your car often, it wil l run more efeciently and therefore get more value out of fuels....

hard valves- my research has found that all modern cars other than special vehicles such as work trucks and such, have hardened valves, it is a requirement of modern car design, i cannot fiind it in use before 1992 but thats may jsut be my research and im sure it was. so if you ahve hardened valves im sure you cant kill them by using effecient fuels, certainly cant cvorrode them or such,..

PARTICULATE MATTER- inrelation to the environment particulate pollution is incredibly dangerous and has a huge impact, you may not see it in the air or soil, but it has a huge impact of soil quality, water quality, air quality and so forth, there are a miriad of toxins and heavey metals and all sorts fo stuff in particulate pollution, when that comes out of your car in emissions it goes somewhere, thats right it goes itno your environment, affecting lots of things not to mention the effects on human health. in australia some 7000 people each year die from the effets of particulate pollution,. the majority from air quality. so in a nut shell these effects that are shown so obviously in human most definatly can be found impacting your environment.

and here is a list from the aus EPA of just some of those pollutants found in your air and water, not to mention your body from exposure

Primary pollutants produced by human activity include:

oxides of sulfur, nitrogen and carbon
organic compounds, such as hydrocarbons (fuel vapour and solvents)
particulate matter, such as smoke and dust
metal oxides, especially those of lead, cadmium, copper and iron
odours
toxic substances.

“The impact of air toxics is a significant environmental issue. These are gaseous, aerosol or particulate pollutants which are present in the air in low concentrations but which may be a hazard to human, plant or animal life. They are emitted from a wide range of sources, including combustion processes. Motor vehicles are a dominant source. While all Australians are exposed to some level of air toxics, the highest concentrations are found in urban areas.”

Australian Government Department of Environment and Heritage,2005.


SOOOOOO NOOOOO dont worry, drive that car, do as you will, because apparently you will have no impact on your health or the environment, cause apparnetly its all jsut a load of cods wallop and you should burn fuel, esp oil and coal , their tthe best and emit bright lights when sparked, yayayayay :o :eek: :D .

Gazoo
September 25th, 2005, 07:30 PM
SOOOOOO NOOOOO dont worry, drive that car, do as you will, because apparently you will have no impact on your health or the environment, cause apparnetly its all jsut a load of cods wallop and you should burn fuel, esp oil and coal , their tthe best and emit bright lights when sparked, yayayayay :o :eek: :D .


Mehhh...........I'm a modernist...science got us into this mess...science will get us out :p

Human beings have existed as a species for at least 1,000,000 years (the approximate time the first tool-using primate, homo erectus, appears to have existed).

In only 100 years we've developed auto, train and air travel, we've gone to the moon, invented computer technology and darn near doubled our lifespans. (The average lifespan in 1900 was 47. Today it is 74).

The oil and energy problem is an inconvenience that we'll effectively deal with. We'll develop effective and efficient solar, geothermal, hydrogen, nuclear, wind or water power... just like we did with the fossil fuels after we discovered and utilized them.

What we need is more positive thinking, less negativity and more positive and sustainable living and design. We need to stop screaming the sky is falling and figure out what to do.

Here's a great link to a great thinker and his visions.

http://www.massivechange.com/

jjgeonerd
September 26th, 2005, 11:57 AM
SOOOOOO NOOOOO dont worry, drive that car, do as you will, because apparently you will have no impact on your health or the environment, cause apparnetly its all jsut a load of cods wallop and you should burn fuel, esp oil and coal , their tthe best and emit bright lights when sparked, yayayayay :o :eek: :D .

Actually, I 100% agree that burning fossil fuels is bad and we should do everything possible to reduce that. I also agree that cars are the major source of this pollution (whether particulate matter or not), and anything that can be done to reduce pollution from a car should be done.

The point I disagree with (and have presented ample evidence) is that using higher octane fuel leads to a cleaner, more fuel efficent vehicle...it doesn't. The answer is to use the fuel your car is designed for as listed in the owners manual. If it is designed for high octane, then use it because it is better. If it isn't, then using the higher octane can actually damage your vehicles emmission system, causing greater pollution.

You have yet to provide any evidence to support your belief that we should all be using high octane fuel because it burns cleaner and leads to better gas mileage. I would actually be very interesting in reading some data that supports this idea. If it's true, then I would gladly spend the extra money and switch.

Schwinn
September 26th, 2005, 09:37 PM
Schwinn- the Civic Si only has 160hp... The Acura RSX has 210. That's where my dilemma lies for my next car (provided my current car lasts long enough for me to be able to afford one or the other... :rolleyes: )

I'm thinking of the new one out due in the first week of October. It is currently rated at 195 hp. Originally it was stated at 200 hp. I just spoke with my brother-in-law this weekend who is an accountant for a corporation that includes a dealership, and now I'm thinking of a used Subaru WRX.

Prin
September 26th, 2005, 09:42 PM
Oh... Even better then...
The WRX is funny. All the Subarus used to have the same engine, but the WRX was listed as less reliable than all the others. Just goes to show how the "target market" affects the ratings...

love my dogs
September 26th, 2005, 09:51 PM
People think, oh, it's small and Japanese, so it will be economical. It is actually one of the worst. If the engine is too small, you end up revving the motor at like 5000rpm while cruising on the highway and that is a huge waste. If you can cruise at 2000rpm in a car on the highway, then you're saving gas.

Well, I though I should put my 4cyl. 2003 Hyundai Sonota to the test,....and guess what......it does 110KM at 2000rpm.

So you must just be talking about OLD cars with small engines, right?

Schwinn
September 26th, 2005, 10:00 PM
People who live REALLY far outside the city and commute. If you live so far, get a job close to where you live, or move closer to where you work! I know people who commute to Toronto from Barrie. I just don't get that...

Sure, just get a job closer to where you live, piece of cake. Because there are hundreds of them closer to where people live, people just prefer to travel an extra hundred kms. I know that's why I get up at 5 am and come home at 7:30 pm. Trust me, I'd love to work closer. Of course, then my wife, who has a job she loves, in a career she loves, would commute the other way. Never mind the fact that getting a house half the side with a lot so small I'd only need a weed-wacker to cut it would cost me three times the amount. But since I can't afford that, I'll just live in a condo. Except my daughter is my world, and while I have no problems with raising kids in the city, I do have a problem with them not being able to play in thier own backyard.

So that's why we commute, because given the choice between our ideal life for our family vs. work, we'll choose family.

Prin
September 26th, 2005, 10:01 PM
Well, I though I should put my 4cyl. 2003 Hyundai Sonota to the test,....and guess what......it does 110KM at 2000rpm.

So you must just be talking about OLD cars with small engines, right?
4cyl doesn't matter as much as the hp and the weight of the car. If a car has 90 hp and weighs a ton and another car has 130hp and is light, the "faster", lighter one will get better gas mileage.

If I look at the stats for the 2002 Sonata (the book I have closest is 2002), despite having a 4 cyl engine, it still has 149 hp- it's still fairly powerful.

When you look at my car, which is about 2,500lbs and has 127hp 4cyl engine, and you compare it to a Saturn S, which is about the same size- 2440lbs, but has 100hp, there will be a huge difference in gas consumption.

Schwinn
September 26th, 2005, 10:07 PM
Rick- Why do you need a hemi?

I think I speak for both Rick and myself when I say, if you're asking that question, you just wouldn't get the answer. ;)

The new Hemi is called "multi-displacement". I knew they were using it in the Magnum and the Charger, I didn't know it was going in thier other products, too. Basically, when you're accelerating, it's an eight cylinder, when you start easing off the gas, two cylinders shut off, and when you start cruising, another two shut off, and it is essentially a four cylinder cruising down the highway.

Prin
September 26th, 2005, 10:12 PM
LOL Schwinn- didn't you see all the commercials? You need to watch more tv. Less time with the baby, more time on the couch. :D

love my dogs
September 26th, 2005, 10:12 PM
Basically, when you're accelerating, it's an eight cylinder, when you start easing off the gas, two cylinders shut off, and when you start cruising, another two shut off, and it is essentially a four cylinder cruising down the highway.

Then what's the point......unless your racing?

Prin
September 26th, 2005, 10:12 PM
Fuel economy. You don't need all that power when you're cruising.

Schwinn
September 26th, 2005, 10:14 PM
4cyl doesn't matter as much as the hp and the weight of the car. If a car has 90 hp and weighs a ton and another car has 130hp and is light, the "faster", lighter one will get better gas mileage.

If I look at the stats for the 2002 Sonata (the book I have closest is 2002), despite having a 4 cyl engine, it still has 149 hp- it's still fairly powerful.

When you look at my car, which is about 2,500lbs and has 127hp 4cyl engine, and you compare it to a Saturn S, which is about the same size- 2440lbs, but has 100hp, there will be a huge difference in gas consumption.

One other thing that matters is aerodynamics of the vehicle. For example, the RED RANGER is listed as having 28 mpg. But, when they test that, it is in a lab with the rear wheels on a dyno-meter, no outside influences, such as wind or load. It is merely measuring the milaege based on the measurements of the wheels spinning on the dyno. But when you take it out in the real world, and the wind starts hitting that square nose, and getting trapped in the bed behind the cab, mileage is a lot worse. (Of course, then I added the K&N air filter and the tonneau cover, it became a lot better)

Prin
September 26th, 2005, 10:16 PM
LOL It's so, so funny how you write RED RANGER. Like, "did you see it? Did you? Well?? Did you??"

Schwinn
September 26th, 2005, 10:18 PM
Then what's the point......unless your racing?

Again, I think I speak for Rick and I when I say...see my previous response! :crazy: (kidding)

Same reason why hybrid vehicles are hybrid. When you press the accelerator, the gasoline engine kicks in, to give you more horsepower to accelerate. Then, when you are cruising down the street, the electric motor kicks in. It's one of the main reasons why pure electric vehicles have never caught on. It's also the same thing as when you give your car gas, if you have an automatic, the transmission drops down a gear when you accelerate, or if you have a standard, you wouldn't put the car into 5th at 75 km/h when you're pulling onto the 401.

Schwinn
September 26th, 2005, 10:20 PM
LOL It's so, so funny how you write RED RANGER. Like, "did you see it? Did you? Well?? Did you??"

That's because RED RANGER is always said in a super-hero's voice! (With a bit of an echo, of course!)

love my dogs
September 26th, 2005, 10:25 PM
schwinn you are making me laugh :clown: