Rocksolid Light

Welcome to novaBBS (click a section below)

mail  files  register  newsreader  groups  login

Message-ID:  

It wasn't exactly a divorce -- I was traded. -- Tim Conway


aus+uk / uk.d-i-y / Re: OT: mpg question

SubjectAuthor
* OT: mpg questionScott
+* Re: OT: mpg questionClive Arthur
|+- Re: OT: mpg questionTim Lamb
|+* Re: OT: mpg questionThe Natural Philosopher
||`* Re: OT: mpg questionScott
|| +* Re: OT: mpg questionNY
|| |+* Re: OT: mpg questionalan_m
|| ||+* Re: OT: mpg questionNY
|| |||+* Re: OT: mpg questionScott
|| ||||`- Re: OT: mpg questionTim+
|| |||`* Re: OT: mpg questionmm0fmf
|| ||| `* Re: OT: mpg questionAndy Burns
|| |||  +- Re: OT: mpg questionThe Natural Philosopher
|| |||  `* Re: OT: mpg questionAndrew
|| |||   `* Re: OT: mpg questionTim Streater
|| |||    `* Re: OT: mpg questionTim+
|| |||     `* Re: OT: mpg questionAndrew
|| |||      +* Re: OT: mpg questionTim Streater
|| |||      |`* Re: OT: mpg questionNY
|| |||      | `* Re: OT: mpg questionAnimal
|| |||      |  `* Re: OT: mpg questionlacksey
|| |||      |   `* Re: OT: mpg questionThe Natural Philosopher
|| |||      |    +* Re: OT: mpg questionlacksey
|| |||      |    |`* Re: OT: mpg questionAnimal
|| |||      |    | `- Re: OT: mpg questionlacksey
|| |||      |    `* Re: OT: mpg questionNY
|| |||      |     +* Re: OT: mpg questionThe Natural Philosopher
|| |||      |     |`* Re: OT: mpg questionTurnip Fucker
|| |||      |     | `* Re: OT: mpg questionThe Natural Philosopher
|| |||      |     |  `* Re: OT: mpg questionTurnip Fucker
|| |||      |     |   `* Re: OT: mpg questionFredxx
|| |||      |     |    `* Re: OT: mpg questionTurnip Fucker
|| |||      |     |     `* Re: OT: mpg questionFredxx
|| |||      |     |      `* Re: OT: mpg questionTurnip Fucker
|| |||      |     |       `* Re: OT: mpg questionFredxx
|| |||      |     |        `- Re: OT: mpg questionTurnip Fucker
|| |||      |     `- Re: OT: mpg questionRod Speed
|| |||      +- Re: OT: mpg questionmm0fmf
|| |||      `- Re: OT: mpg questionBrian D
|| ||`* Re: OT: mpg questionAndrew
|| || `- Re: OT: mpg questionScott
|| |`* Re: OT: mpg questionTim Streater
|| | +* Re: OT: mpg questionNY
|| | |`- Re: OT: mpg questionTim Streater
|| | `* Re: OT: mpg questionPaul
|| |  `* Re: OT: mpg questionTim Streater
|| |   `- Re: OT: mpg questionScott
|| `- Re: OT: mpg questionalan_m
|`* Re: OT: mpg questionHarry Bloomfield Esq
| `* Re: OT: mpg questionTim+
|  +* Re: OT: mpg questionTim Streater
|  |`* Re: OT: mpg questionFredxx
|  | `- Re: OT: mpg questionThe Natural Philosopher
|  +* Re: OT: mpg questionRichard
|  |`* Re: OT: mpg questionClive Arthur
|  | +* Re: OT: mpg questionRichard
|  | |`* Re: OT: mpg questionNY
|  | | `* Re: OT: mpg questionRichard
|  | |  `* Re: OT: mpg questionNY
|  | |   `* Re: OT: mpg questionRichard
|  | |    +* Re: OT: mpg questionRobin
|  | |    |`- Re: OT: mpg questionRichard
|  | |    `- Re: OT: mpg questionNY
|  | `- Re: OT: mpg questionAndrew
|  `* Re: OT: mpg questionAndrew
|   `- Re: OT: mpg questionTim+
+* Re: OT: mpg questionJeff Gaines
|+- Re: OT: mpg questionThe Natural Philosopher
|`- Re: OT: mpg questionAnthonyL
+* Re: OT: mpg questionPeter Johnson
|`* Re: OT: mpg questionwilliamwright
| +- Re: OT: mpg questionJeff Gaines
| +* Re: OT: mpg questionmm0fmf
| |`* Re: OT: mpg questionSH
| | +- Re: OT: mpg questionRod Speed
| | `* Re: OT: mpg questionAnimal
| |  `- Re: OT: mpg questionAnimal
| `* Re: OT: mpg questionSH
|  `- Re: OT: mpg questionARW
+* Re: OT: mpg questionJethro_uk
|+* Re: OT: mpg questionalan_m
||+* Re: OT: mpg questionJethro_uk
|||+- Re: OT: mpg questionalan_m
|||`- Re: OT: mpg questionThe Natural Philosopher
||`* Re: OT: mpg questionRod Speed
|| `* Re: OT: mpg questionNY
||  +* Re: OT: mpg questionRod Speed
||  |`* Re: OT: mpg questionNY
||  | +* Re: OT: mpg questionTim Streater
||  | |`* Re: OT: mpg questionNY
||  | | `- Re: OT: mpg questionTim Streater
||  | `- Re: OT: mpg questionRod Speed
||  `- Re: OT: mpg questionThe Natural Philosopher
|+* Re: OT: mpg questionThe Natural Philosopher
||`- Re: OT: mpg questionJethro_uk
|+* Re: OT: mpg questionARW
||`- Re: OT: mpg questionJethro_uk
|`* Re: OT: mpg questionVir Campestris
| `- Re: OT: mpg questionlacksey
+* Re: OT: mpg questionMartin Brown
|`* Re: OT: mpg questionFredxx
+- Re: OT: mpg questionJim Stewart ...
+* Re: OT: mpg questionlacksey
+* Re: OT: mpg questionARW
`* Re: OT: mpg questionMike Rogers

Pages:123456
Re: OT: mpg question

<t5q4sv$16a$1@dont-email.me>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/aus+uk/article-flat.php?id=52586&group=uk.d-i-y#52586

 copy link   Newsgroups: uk.d-i-y
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: adamwads...@blueyonder.co.uk (ARW)
Newsgroups: uk.d-i-y
Subject: Re: OT: mpg question
Date: Sun, 15 May 2022 06:59:59 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 23
Message-ID: <t5q4sv$16a$1@dont-email.me>
References: <7lsu7h9eb2k80alhu2omghva4ssnttjok6@4ax.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Sun, 15 May 2022 05:59:59 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="8ca198975cddcad92f9bd8365ceb112f";
logging-data="1226"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1939vZhkmW0B5LF8Qdc6yykJvjNemPez+I="
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.9.0
Cancel-Lock: sha1:6VUqJbuTZv7cdpzSUudvZ1XS1TA=
In-Reply-To: <7lsu7h9eb2k80alhu2omghva4ssnttjok6@4ax.com>
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
Content-Language: en-GB
X-Antivirus: Avast (VPS 220514-4, 14/5/2022), Outbound message
 by: ARW - Sun, 15 May 2022 05:59 UTC

On 14/05/2022 10:20, Scott wrote:
> I drove to Perth yesterday (Scotland not Australia), 62 miles. I set
> the drive computer at the start. On the way north, I was running late
> and driving a bit faster than usual. I also got caught in a traffic
> jam on the M8. When I arrived I checked the display and it showed
> 52.5 mpg. l reset the drive computer before returning. I drove more
> slowly on the way home, without the traffic jam, and got 48.8 mpg.
>
> Nissan Micra 1.2. Petrol. Manual gearbox, five gears.
>
> How can this be? I thought slowing down saved fuel. The only
> explanation I can think of is that I may have been driving into the
> wind on the way south. Could this account for the variation?

I always get more MPG on the way to the office than on the way back in
both the van or the car. 41 mile round trip.

I have decided it's the roundabouts (17 of the bastards), other traffic
and a heavy right foot. In a morning most of the roundabouts are usually
clear so I do not have to stop. On the way home I have to come to a stop
at the most of the roundabouts. It's the acceleration from standstill
that causes the loss of MPG.

Re: OT: mpg question

<t5q5h6$dj1$1@dont-email.me>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/aus+uk/article-flat.php?id=52588&group=uk.d-i-y#52588

 copy link   Newsgroups: uk.d-i-y
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: adamwads...@blueyonder.co.uk (ARW)
Newsgroups: uk.d-i-y
Subject: Re: OT: mpg question
Date: Sun, 15 May 2022 07:10:46 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 22
Message-ID: <t5q5h6$dj1$1@dont-email.me>
References: <7lsu7h9eb2k80alhu2omghva4ssnttjok6@4ax.com>
<0v8v7hhrbsem3pd864im011vkmdoj8benn@4ax.com>
<je9pviFregbU1@mid.individual.net> <t5p42f$1j66$2@gioia.aioe.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sun, 15 May 2022 06:10:46 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="8ca198975cddcad92f9bd8365ceb112f";
logging-data="13921"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+IiTIG3ikawAOQ0imj7XRchJgkb1D6VaU="
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.9.0
Cancel-Lock: sha1:jb5tDPx0VYag29w/nhD2YB3CDiM=
In-Reply-To: <t5p42f$1j66$2@gioia.aioe.org>
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
Content-Language: en-GB
X-Antivirus: Avast (VPS 220514-4, 14/5/2022), Outbound message
 by: ARW - Sun, 15 May 2022 06:10 UTC

On 14/05/2022 21:39, SH wrote:
> On 14/05/2022 14:43, williamwright wrote:
>> On 14/05/2022 13:47, Peter Johnson wrote:
>>> In March I drove from Woking to Leicester in a Prius. Before leaving,
>>> the Satnav said the distance was 118 miles and the trip computer
>>> estimated the range available to be also 118 miles.
>>> Reaching the M1 I tucked in behind a sequence of HGVs and made the
>>> journey at 60-65mph. Reached home with an estimated 5 miles range
>>> still available.
>>
>> The increases in fuel costs don't affect me because I always put
>> exactly £30's worth in.
>>
>> Bill
>
>
>
> One day, You'll be at pump 5 having put in 30 quids of petrol... You'll
> be hoping its enough to get you to pump 6!

£140 to fill up the van if using the cheapest fuel station. Sometimes
that is 3 times a week

Re: OT: mpg question

<t5q5us$m9n$1@dont-email.me>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/aus+uk/article-flat.php?id=52590&group=uk.d-i-y#52590

 copy link   Newsgroups: uk.d-i-y
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: adamwads...@blueyonder.co.uk (ARW)
Newsgroups: uk.d-i-y
Subject: Re: OT: mpg question
Date: Sun, 15 May 2022 07:18:03 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 34
Message-ID: <t5q5us$m9n$1@dont-email.me>
References: <7lsu7h9eb2k80alhu2omghva4ssnttjok6@4ax.com>
<t5o8tl$hd7$5@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Sun, 15 May 2022 06:18:04 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="8ca198975cddcad92f9bd8365ceb112f";
logging-data="22839"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19B+gifsh1+Xnq4cFlRqeZNa93TKMLzukM="
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.9.0
Cancel-Lock: sha1:svU0aE0VVinufCVXP125kMJUOS4=
In-Reply-To: <t5o8tl$hd7$5@dont-email.me>
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
Content-Language: en-GB
X-Antivirus: Avast (VPS 220514-4, 14/5/2022), Outbound message
 by: ARW - Sun, 15 May 2022 06:18 UTC

On 14/05/2022 13:56, Jethro_uk wrote:
> On Sat, 14 May 2022 10:20:53 +0100, Scott wrote:
>
>> I drove to Perth yesterday (Scotland not Australia), 62 miles. I set
>> the drive computer at the start. On the way north, I was running late
>> and driving a bit faster than usual. I also got caught in a traffic jam
>> on the M8. When I arrived I checked the display and it showed 52.5 mpg.
>> l reset the drive computer before returning. I drove more slowly on
>> the way home, without the traffic jam, and got 48.8 mpg.
>>
>> Nissan Micra 1.2. Petrol. Manual gearbox, five gears.
>>
>> How can this be? I thought slowing down saved fuel. The only
>> explanation I can think of is that I may have been driving into the wind
>> on the way south. Could this account for the variation?
>
> Depends on loads of things, not least the envelope where the engine
> produces the most efficient output - usually c. 3000-3500 rpm for petrol.
>
> I once saved 25% on a 100 mile journey by doing 55 instead of 75.

75MPH? I have CC set to 90MPH.

> You can tell how much of this climate "emergency" is bollocks from the
> fact that a rigidly enforced 65mph limit on motorways would save the UK
> quite a bit in fuel consumption. (Although not as much as not travelling
> at all).

Have a go on the M1 from junction 34 to 32. 60MPH for air quality -
applies to all vehicles including electric ones. And when there was 25
miles of 50MPH road works further south I got brilliant MPG going to
Watford.

Re: OT: mpg question

<b3h18h1e2rmm01ft7qcj181drnnnhrs0pl@4ax.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/aus+uk/article-flat.php?id=52600&group=uk.d-i-y#52600

 copy link   Newsgroups: uk.d-i-y
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!news.szaf.org!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: newsgro...@gefion.myzen.co.uk (Scott)
Newsgroups: uk.d-i-y
Subject: Re: OT: mpg question
Date: Sun, 15 May 2022 10:15:49 +0100
Lines: 34
Message-ID: <b3h18h1e2rmm01ft7qcj181drnnnhrs0pl@4ax.com>
References: <7lsu7h9eb2k80alhu2omghva4ssnttjok6@4ax.com> <op.1l6bzhzcx9d686@pvr2.lan> <cs708hlv1odu87car4q5sv7298cvikvce8@4ax.com> <op.1l6htalqx9d686@pvr2.lan>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Trace: individual.net FD0WrgxyQAoL/KQuiZUSbwFRPVyZDQRYnouiYwgu/10/Ux5anV
Cancel-Lock: sha1:MjmmndIATkNtAXzqBVCo2GkmkSY=
User-Agent: ForteAgent/8.00.32.1272
 by: Scott - Sun, 15 May 2022 09:15 UTC

On Sun, 15 May 2022 07:54:36 +1000, lacksey <lki567@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Sun, 15 May 2022 07:31:33 +1000, Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk>
>wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 15 May 2022 05:48:43 +1000, lacksey <lki567@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Sat, 14 May 2022 19:20:53 +1000, Scott
>>> <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I drove to Perth yesterday (Scotland not Australia), 62 miles. I set
>>>> the drive computer at the start. On the way north, I was running late
>>>> and driving a bit faster than usual. I also got caught in a traffic
>>>> jam on the M8. When I arrived I checked the display and it showed
>>>> 52.5 mpg. l reset the drive computer before returning. I drove more
>>>> slowly on the way home, without the traffic jam, and got 48.8 mpg.
>>>>
>>>> Nissan Micra 1.2. Petrol. Manual gearbox, five gears.
>>>>
>>>> How can this be? I thought slowing down saved fuel. The only
>>>> explanation I can think of is that I may have been driving into the
>>>> wind on the way south. Could this account for the variation?
>>>
>>> Yep, easily. And in lower gears for longer in the traffic jam.
>>
>> Do lower gears improve fuel economy? I thought it was the other way
>> round and fifth gear would be the most efficient.
>
>Not in a traffic jam.

Not following this unfortunately. Are you saying a gallon of petrol
will take you more miles travelling in first and second gear with lots
of stop-start than it would driving at a steady speed on a motorway?

Re: OT: mpg question

<op.1l7f3ozvx9d686@pvr2.lan>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/aus+uk/article-flat.php?id=52602&group=uk.d-i-y#52602

 copy link   Newsgroups: uk.d-i-y
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!news.szaf.org!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: lki...@gmail.com (lacksey)
Newsgroups: uk.d-i-y
Subject: Re: OT: mpg question
Date: Sun, 15 May 2022 20:15:14 +1000
Lines: 41
Message-ID: <op.1l7f3ozvx9d686@pvr2.lan>
References: <7lsu7h9eb2k80alhu2omghva4ssnttjok6@4ax.com>
<op.1l6bzhzcx9d686@pvr2.lan> <cs708hlv1odu87car4q5sv7298cvikvce8@4ax.com>
<op.1l6htalqx9d686@pvr2.lan> <b3h18h1e2rmm01ft7qcj181drnnnhrs0pl@4ax.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15; format=flowed; delsp=yes
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Trace: individual.net l2PaaQggP/4RfMclq48ZoAyk/Z3HdHRYwy1oJT6nwklg7wrY0=
Cancel-Lock: sha1:Z9u72C/YNSVMRNAcRB675a7fzrE=
User-Agent: Opera Mail/1.0 (Win32)
 by: lacksey - Sun, 15 May 2022 10:15 UTC

On Sun, 15 May 2022 19:15:49 +1000, Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk>
wrote:

> On Sun, 15 May 2022 07:54:36 +1000, lacksey <lki567@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 15 May 2022 07:31:33 +1000, Scott
>> <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, 15 May 2022 05:48:43 +1000, lacksey <lki567@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Sat, 14 May 2022 19:20:53 +1000, Scott
>>>> <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I drove to Perth yesterday (Scotland not Australia), 62 miles. I set
>>>>> the drive computer at the start. On the way north, I was running
>>>>> late
>>>>> and driving a bit faster than usual. I also got caught in a traffic
>>>>> jam on the M8. When I arrived I checked the display and it showed
>>>>> 52.5 mpg. l reset the drive computer before returning. I drove more
>>>>> slowly on the way home, without the traffic jam, and got 48.8 mpg.
>>>>>
>>>>> Nissan Micra 1.2. Petrol. Manual gearbox, five gears.
>>>>>
>>>>> How can this be? I thought slowing down saved fuel. The only
>>>>> explanation I can think of is that I may have been driving into the
>>>>> wind on the way south. Could this account for the variation?
>>>>
>>>> Yep, easily. And in lower gears for longer in the traffic jam.
>>>
>>> Do lower gears improve fuel economy? I thought it was the other way
>>> round and fifth gear would be the most efficient.
>>
>> Not in a traffic jam.
>
> Not following this unfortunately. Are you saying a gallon of petrol
> will take you more miles travelling in first and second gear with lots
> of stop-start than it would driving at a steady speed on a motorway?

No, that staying in fifth gear doesn't work in a traffic jam.

Re: OT: mpg question

<WMWdnfroFZ3bRx3_nZ2dnUU7-cWdnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/aus+uk/article-flat.php?id=52604&group=uk.d-i-y#52604

 copy link   Newsgroups: uk.d-i-y
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feed1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!peer01.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!border1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!buffer1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!buffer2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.brightview.co.uk!news.brightview.co.uk.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 15 May 2022 05:47:34 -0500
Date: Sun, 15 May 2022 11:47:34 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.9.0
Subject: Re: OT: mpg question
Content-Language: en-GB
Newsgroups: uk.d-i-y
References: <7lsu7h9eb2k80alhu2omghva4ssnttjok6@4ax.com>
From: mik...@mattishall.org.uk (Mike Rogers)
In-Reply-To: <7lsu7h9eb2k80alhu2omghva4ssnttjok6@4ax.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <WMWdnfroFZ3bRx3_nZ2dnUU7-cWdnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>
Lines: 20
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-Go33SKp64dpTrxoX4GGyMo++00AqY7G6T8wMRYOLB8mYAvX9rgEm7O7pJykZsmT1Waa8+LbPDt7PUXq!M0J7OD9VzpUApSDtf3HCSgXDKG/t+uVW4a1uAPJJMN9aHC6r2k3BsgUEs1TRExLEzbjE0ReAr8aS!EBheeSoFcP7vz2oLJ6WcFG0k
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
X-Original-Bytes: 1824
X-Received-Bytes: 1946
 by: Mike Rogers - Sun, 15 May 2022 10:47 UTC

On 14/05/2022 10:20, Scott wrote:
> I drove to Perth yesterday (Scotland not Australia), 62 miles. I set
> the drive computer at the start. On the way north, I was running late
> and driving a bit faster than usual.

What 55MPH instead of your usual 35MPH?
I also got caught in a traffic
> jam on the M8. When I arrived I checked the display and it showed
> 52.5 mpg. l reset the drive computer before returning. I drove more
> slowly on the way home,
Back to your normal 35MPH
without the traffic jam, and got 48.8 mpg.
>
> Nissan Micra 1.2. Petrol. Manual gearbox, five gears.
>
> How can this be?
55MPH is allegedly the most economical speed.

Mike

Re: OT: mpg question

<58o18hphk7r5jb5f41v1rtov8qqjd4jkt8@4ax.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/aus+uk/article-flat.php?id=52607&group=uk.d-i-y#52607

 copy link   Newsgroups: uk.d-i-y
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!usenet.goja.nl.eu.org!news.freedyn.de!news1.tnib.de!feed.news.tnib.de!news.tnib.de!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: newsgro...@gefion.myzen.co.uk (Scott)
Newsgroups: uk.d-i-y
Subject: Re: OT: mpg question
Date: Sun, 15 May 2022 12:20:19 +0100
Lines: 52
Message-ID: <58o18hphk7r5jb5f41v1rtov8qqjd4jkt8@4ax.com>
References: <7lsu7h9eb2k80alhu2omghva4ssnttjok6@4ax.com> <op.1l6bzhzcx9d686@pvr2.lan> <cs708hlv1odu87car4q5sv7298cvikvce8@4ax.com> <op.1l6htalqx9d686@pvr2.lan> <b3h18h1e2rmm01ft7qcj181drnnnhrs0pl@4ax.com> <op.1l7f3ozvx9d686@pvr2.lan>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Trace: individual.net Jjx5aKYMWDeeSzJ0fcL2GQ5rzOl8VX6UNi1IYu+RoJ0BPXMspZ
Cancel-Lock: sha1:re4Ax0hBZCrypSdeyIRWBakXEu8=
User-Agent: ForteAgent/8.00.32.1272
 by: Scott - Sun, 15 May 2022 11:20 UTC

On Sun, 15 May 2022 20:15:14 +1000, lacksey <lki567@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Sun, 15 May 2022 19:15:49 +1000, Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk>
>wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 15 May 2022 07:54:36 +1000, lacksey <lki567@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, 15 May 2022 07:31:33 +1000, Scott
>>> <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Sun, 15 May 2022 05:48:43 +1000, lacksey <lki567@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Sat, 14 May 2022 19:20:53 +1000, Scott
>>>>> <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I drove to Perth yesterday (Scotland not Australia), 62 miles. I set
>>>>>> the drive computer at the start. On the way north, I was running
>>>>>> late
>>>>>> and driving a bit faster than usual. I also got caught in a traffic
>>>>>> jam on the M8. When I arrived I checked the display and it showed
>>>>>> 52.5 mpg. l reset the drive computer before returning. I drove more
>>>>>> slowly on the way home, without the traffic jam, and got 48.8 mpg.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Nissan Micra 1.2. Petrol. Manual gearbox, five gears.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> How can this be? I thought slowing down saved fuel. The only
>>>>>> explanation I can think of is that I may have been driving into the
>>>>>> wind on the way south. Could this account for the variation?
>>>>>
>>>>> Yep, easily. And in lower gears for longer in the traffic jam.
>>>>
>>>> Do lower gears improve fuel economy? I thought it was the other way
>>>> round and fifth gear would be the most efficient.
>>>
>>> Not in a traffic jam.
>>
>> Not following this unfortunately. Are you saying a gallon of petrol
>> will take you more miles travelling in first and second gear with lots
>> of stop-start than it would driving at a steady speed on a motorway?
>
>No, that staying in fifth gear doesn't work in a traffic jam.

I think we are at cross purposes here.

I said I got better mpg travelling north despite a traffic jam, and
attributed this to the wind. You responded that driving in lower
gears for longer in the traffic jam may also have been a contributory
factor [to the improved mpg]. I simply queried the suggestion that a
traffic jam would improve fuel economy as I cannot see how this can be
correct. .

Re: OT: mpg question

<ppo18h9taosh7s6hk870itm028kt7f1gvr@4ax.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/aus+uk/article-flat.php?id=52608&group=uk.d-i-y#52608

 copy link   Newsgroups: uk.d-i-y
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!news.szaf.org!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: newsgro...@gefion.myzen.co.uk (Scott)
Newsgroups: uk.d-i-y
Subject: Re: OT: mpg question
Date: Sun, 15 May 2022 12:27:07 +0100
Lines: 27
Message-ID: <ppo18h9taosh7s6hk870itm028kt7f1gvr@4ax.com>
References: <7lsu7h9eb2k80alhu2omghva4ssnttjok6@4ax.com> <WMWdnfroFZ3bRx3_nZ2dnUU7-cWdnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Trace: individual.net xg9p9uDuSMcsCL6yT2oTWQyqE2wjd0032M/8se1ZPv2iQxS31J
Cancel-Lock: sha1:weHhF4iW9DUARSUillHRVQ/82gY=
User-Agent: ForteAgent/8.00.32.1272
 by: Scott - Sun, 15 May 2022 11:27 UTC

On Sun, 15 May 2022 11:47:34 +0100, Mike Rogers
<mike@mattishall.org.uk> wrote:

>On 14/05/2022 10:20, Scott wrote:
>> I drove to Perth yesterday (Scotland not Australia), 62 miles. I set
>> the drive computer at the start. On the way north, I was running late
>> and driving a bit faster than usual.
>
>What 55MPH instead of your usual 35MPH?

No mate - efficient vehicle:
https://www.honestjohn.co.uk/realmpg/nissan/micra-2003

>I also got caught in a traffic
>> jam on the M8. When I arrived I checked the display and it showed
>> 52.5 mpg. l reset the drive computer before returning. I drove more
>> slowly on the way home,
>Back to your normal 35MPH
>without the traffic jam, and got 48.8 mpg.
>>
>> Nissan Micra 1.2. Petrol. Manual gearbox, five gears.
>>
>> How can this be?
>55MPH is allegedly the most economical speed.

Which was the point of my question, which others have already
answered, thanks.

Re: OT: mpg question

<59e8f4c6e5charles@candehope.me.uk>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/aus+uk/article-flat.php?id=52609&group=uk.d-i-y#52609

 copy link   Newsgroups: uk.d-i-y
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!buffer2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.orpheusnet.co.uk!news.orpheusnet.co.uk.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 15 May 2022 06:54:24 -0500
From: char...@candehope.me.uk (charles)
Subject: Re: OT: mpg question
Newsgroups: uk.d-i-y
Date: Sun, 15 May 2022 12:54:13 +0100
Message-ID: <59e8f4c6e5charles@candehope.me.uk>
References: <7lsu7h9eb2k80alhu2omghva4ssnttjok6@4ax.com> <WMWdnfroFZ3bRx3_nZ2dnUU7-cWdnZ2d@brightview.co.uk> <ppo18h9taosh7s6hk870itm028kt7f1gvr@4ax.com>
User-Agent: Pluto/3.18 (RISC OS/5.29) NewsHound/v1.52-32
Organization: None
Cache-Post-Path: slave.orpheusnet.co.uk!unknown@81.5.154.219
X-Cache: nntpcache 3.0.2 (see http://www.nntpcache.com/)
Lines: 36
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-2heEm/WxvluH4mqFgfeGWEPenSiSsKx+l1ozKkc6lVryodSLbZ7/86aj2f4vnm6aFOauGfpqa5nP1fb!SWEKcbgPXYikPo/v/VEqMjqwIY+/+FHpxRhZP8UnQbHpSr28niRfuUGUjLx9WY2MAuZS64J2KJGm!PA==
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
X-Original-Bytes: 2401
 by: charles - Sun, 15 May 2022 11:54 UTC

In article <ppo18h9taosh7s6hk870itm028kt7f1gvr@4ax.com>,
Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
> On Sun, 15 May 2022 11:47:34 +0100, Mike Rogers
> <mike@mattishall.org.uk> wrote:

> >On 14/05/2022 10:20, Scott wrote:
> >> I drove to Perth yesterday (Scotland not Australia), 62 miles. I set
> >> the drive computer at the start. On the way north, I was running late
> >> and driving a bit faster than usual.
> >
> >What 55MPH instead of your usual 35MPH?

> No mate - efficient vehicle:
> https://www.honestjohn.co.uk/realmpg/nissan/micra-2003

> >I also got caught in a traffic
> >> jam on the M8. When I arrived I checked the display and it showed
> >> 52.5 mpg. l reset the drive computer before returning. I drove more
> >> slowly on the way home,
> >Back to your normal 35MPH
> >without the traffic jam, and got 48.8 mpg.
> >>
> >> Nissan Micra 1.2. Petrol. Manual gearbox, five gears.
> >>
> >> How can this be?
> >55MPH is allegedly the most economical speed.

> Which was the point of my question, which others have already
> answered, thanks.

it will depend on the aerodynamics of the vehicle. I find my Enyaq is best
at 62mph.

--
from KT24 in Surrey, England
"I'd rather die of exhaustion than die of boredom" Thomas Carlyle

Re: OT: mpg question

<66s18hplon13v521dla7co814dvb6p4tcq@4ax.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/aus+uk/article-flat.php?id=52612&group=uk.d-i-y#52612

 copy link   Newsgroups: uk.d-i-y
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!news.szaf.org!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: newsgro...@gefion.myzen.co.uk (Scott)
Newsgroups: uk.d-i-y
Subject: Re: OT: mpg question
Date: Sun, 15 May 2022 13:24:00 +0100
Lines: 37
Message-ID: <66s18hplon13v521dla7co814dvb6p4tcq@4ax.com>
References: <7lsu7h9eb2k80alhu2omghva4ssnttjok6@4ax.com> <WMWdnfroFZ3bRx3_nZ2dnUU7-cWdnZ2d@brightview.co.uk> <ppo18h9taosh7s6hk870itm028kt7f1gvr@4ax.com> <59e8f4c6e5charles@candehope.me.uk>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Trace: individual.net r86GifWQZf4GXk0CR2NsNw8Ciz65f5rkEjHGhz4kUSMi9CqlI8
Cancel-Lock: sha1:Vwk/SYrsuqfohhLYBss5VrplKFE=
User-Agent: ForteAgent/8.00.32.1272
 by: Scott - Sun, 15 May 2022 12:24 UTC

On Sun, 15 May 2022 12:54:13 +0100, charles <charles@candehope.me.uk>
wrote:

>In article <ppo18h9taosh7s6hk870itm028kt7f1gvr@4ax.com>,
> Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
>> On Sun, 15 May 2022 11:47:34 +0100, Mike Rogers
>> <mike@mattishall.org.uk> wrote:
>
>> >On 14/05/2022 10:20, Scott wrote:
>> >> I drove to Perth yesterday (Scotland not Australia), 62 miles. I set
>> >> the drive computer at the start. On the way north, I was running late
>> >> and driving a bit faster than usual.
>> >
>> >What 55MPH instead of your usual 35MPH?
>
>> No mate - efficient vehicle:
>> https://www.honestjohn.co.uk/realmpg/nissan/micra-2003
>
>> >I also got caught in a traffic
>> >> jam on the M8. When I arrived I checked the display and it showed
>> >> 52.5 mpg. l reset the drive computer before returning. I drove more
>> >> slowly on the way home,
>> >Back to your normal 35MPH
>> >without the traffic jam, and got 48.8 mpg.
>> >>
>> >> Nissan Micra 1.2. Petrol. Manual gearbox, five gears.
>> >>
>> >> How can this be?
>> >55MPH is allegedly the most economical speed.
>
>> Which was the point of my question, which others have already
>> answered, thanks.
>
>it will depend on the aerodynamics of the vehicle. I find my Enyaq is best
>at 62mph.

Airspeed rather than groundspeed I assume :-)

Re: OT: mpg question

<t5qspr$eou$2@dont-email.me>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/aus+uk/article-flat.php?id=52615&group=uk.d-i-y#52615

 copy link   Newsgroups: uk.d-i-y
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: tnp...@invalid.invalid (The Natural Philosopher)
Newsgroups: uk.d-i-y
Subject: Re: OT: mpg question
Date: Sun, 15 May 2022 13:47:55 +0100
Organization: A little, after lunch
Lines: 11
Message-ID: <t5qspr$eou$2@dont-email.me>
References: <7lsu7h9eb2k80alhu2omghva4ssnttjok6@4ax.com>
<t5q4sv$16a$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Sun, 15 May 2022 12:47:55 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="0439606ed206a58bd7ff8f1970a0b398";
logging-data="15134"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/4tAOovIp95lPI68ZD2rjT42DiAAZRmGM="
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.8.1
Cancel-Lock: sha1:nQYVUbE6iq2lpBFSAvWvTqAQEwQ=
In-Reply-To: <t5q4sv$16a$1@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: en-GB
 by: The Natural Philosop - Sun, 15 May 2022 12:47 UTC

On 15/05/2022 06:59, ARW wrote:
> It's the acceleration from standstill that causes the loss of MPG.
In anything with weight and a large engine that is absolutely the case.
I monitor fuel consumption on a per tank basis. Two stops to let people
past on a narrow country road will take a 10 mile trip from 35mpg down
to 30mpg.

--
Karl Marx said religion is the opium of the people.
But Marxism is the crack cocaine.

Re: OT: mpg question

<t5qt3q$iv1$1@dont-email.me>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/aus+uk/article-flat.php?id=52616&group=uk.d-i-y#52616

 copy link   Newsgroups: uk.d-i-y
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: tnp...@invalid.invalid (The Natural Philosopher)
Newsgroups: uk.d-i-y
Subject: Re: OT: mpg question
Date: Sun, 15 May 2022 13:53:14 +0100
Organization: A little, after lunch
Lines: 17
Message-ID: <t5qt3q$iv1$1@dont-email.me>
References: <7lsu7h9eb2k80alhu2omghva4ssnttjok6@4ax.com>
<WMWdnfroFZ3bRx3_nZ2dnUU7-cWdnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Sun, 15 May 2022 12:53:14 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="0439606ed206a58bd7ff8f1970a0b398";
logging-data="19425"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/0fowMui1Cela8gIF16cP9iHbxrzDIS0g="
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.8.1
Cancel-Lock: sha1:ig1p+siCN23FJv1nGM2rXR8GWmA=
In-Reply-To: <WMWdnfroFZ3bRx3_nZ2dnUU7-cWdnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>
Content-Language: en-GB
 by: The Natural Philosop - Sun, 15 May 2022 12:53 UTC

On 15/05/2022 11:47, Mike Rogers wrote:
> 55MPH is allegedly the most economical speed.
There is no single 'most economical speed' For a Boeing 737 its around
450mph
For my car its around 65mph. For a bicycle its somewhere around 12mph.
It is a mixture of three things on a wheeled vehicle - the least energy
needed is when rolling resistance matches air resistance. The smaller
the tyre width and the lighter the vehicle the slower that will be...but
that may not be where the engine is most efficient, that too has its
optimum speed for best efficiency.

--
Karl Marx said religion is the opium of the people.
But Marxism is the crack cocaine.

Re: OT: mpg question

<38662732.674319089.124860.tim.downie-gmail.com@news.individual.net>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/aus+uk/article-flat.php?id=52627&group=uk.d-i-y#52627

 copy link   Newsgroups: uk.d-i-y
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!aioe.org!news.uzoreto.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: tim.dow...@gmail.com (Tim+)
Newsgroups: uk.d-i-y
Subject: Re: OT: mpg question
Date: 15 May 2022 14:57:54 GMT
Lines: 24
Message-ID: <38662732.674319089.124860.tim.downie-gmail.com@news.individual.net>
References: <7lsu7h9eb2k80alhu2omghva4ssnttjok6@4ax.com>
<WMWdnfroFZ3bRx3_nZ2dnUU7-cWdnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: individual.net f5Xs80zJ3yB/nDSw092NnwALEiTnDjKBTYcExBOdkHzzBfsWs=
Cancel-Lock: sha1:BBSwIfg7r+LNYUd6jRfxOckiqY8= sha1:8v3uVQdAsRI09otZGtmS87bhOqo=
User-Agent: NewsTap/5.5 (iPad)
X-Face: VQ}*Ueh[4uTOa]Md([|$jb%rw~ksq}bzqA;z-.*8JM`4+zL['N\ORHCI80}]}$]$e5]/i#v qdYsE'yh@ZL3L{H:So{yN)b=AZJtpaP98ch_4W}
 by: Tim+ - Sun, 15 May 2022 14:57 UTC

Mike Rogers <mike@mattishall.org.uk> wrote:

> 55MPH is allegedly the most economical speed.

Personally, I find this highly doubtful.

Given the way that wind resistance rises with the square of speed (in
general) it seems incredibly improbably that 55 mph should be more
economical than 40 mph say.

Far more likely is that the OP had a weak headwind (say just 10mph) one way
and a tailwind the other way.

Whilst a 10mph wind might not be noticed it effectively makes a 20mph
difference in wind on a return journey.

I suspect the 55 mph figure has been taken out of context. More likely
it’s a figure quoted and being significantly more economical than 70 mph
but still allows reasonable progress to be made in real world traffic.

Tim

--
Please don't feed the trolls

Re: OT: mpg question

<t5r4os$1gf2$1@gioia.aioe.org>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/aus+uk/article-flat.php?id=52629&group=uk.d-i-y#52629

 copy link   Newsgroups: uk.d-i-y
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!aioe.org!lVLPNwJB8igYYuJ/5QFQJA.user.46.165.242.91.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: smith...@btinternet.com.invalid (Richard)
Newsgroups: uk.d-i-y
Subject: Re: OT: mpg question
Date: Sun, 15 May 2022 16:03:56 +0100
Organization: Aioe.org NNTP Server
Message-ID: <t5r4os$1gf2$1@gioia.aioe.org>
References: <7lsu7h9eb2k80alhu2omghva4ssnttjok6@4ax.com>
<op.1l6bzhzcx9d686@pvr2.lan> <cs708hlv1odu87car4q5sv7298cvikvce8@4ax.com>
<op.1l6htalqx9d686@pvr2.lan> <b3h18h1e2rmm01ft7qcj181drnnnhrs0pl@4ax.com>
<op.1l7f3ozvx9d686@pvr2.lan> <58o18hphk7r5jb5f41v1rtov8qqjd4jkt8@4ax.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Info: gioia.aioe.org; logging-data="49634"; posting-host="lVLPNwJB8igYYuJ/5QFQJA.user.gioia.aioe.org"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@aioe.org";
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.8.1
X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.9.2
Content-Language: en-US
 by: Richard - Sun, 15 May 2022 15:03 UTC

On 15/05/2022 12:20, Scott wrote:
> On Sun, 15 May 2022 20:15:14 +1000, lacksey <lki567@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 15 May 2022 19:15:49 +1000, Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, 15 May 2022 07:54:36 +1000, lacksey <lki567@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Sun, 15 May 2022 07:31:33 +1000, Scott
>>>> <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Sun, 15 May 2022 05:48:43 +1000, lacksey <lki567@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sat, 14 May 2022 19:20:53 +1000, Scott
>>>>>> <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I drove to Perth yesterday (Scotland not Australia), 62 miles. I set
>>>>>>> the drive computer at the start. On the way north, I was running
>>>>>>> late
>>>>>>> and driving a bit faster than usual. I also got caught in a traffic
>>>>>>> jam on the M8. When I arrived I checked the display and it showed
>>>>>>> 52.5 mpg. l reset the drive computer before returning. I drove more
>>>>>>> slowly on the way home, without the traffic jam, and got 48.8 mpg.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Nissan Micra 1.2. Petrol. Manual gearbox, five gears.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> How can this be? I thought slowing down saved fuel. The only
>>>>>>> explanation I can think of is that I may have been driving into the
>>>>>>> wind on the way south. Could this account for the variation?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yep, easily. And in lower gears for longer in the traffic jam.
>>>>>
>>>>> Do lower gears improve fuel economy? I thought it was the other way
>>>>> round and fifth gear would be the most efficient.
>>>>
>>>> Not in a traffic jam.
>>>
>>> Not following this unfortunately. Are you saying a gallon of petrol
>>> will take you more miles travelling in first and second gear with lots
>>> of stop-start than it would driving at a steady speed on a motorway?
>>
>> No, that staying in fifth gear doesn't work in a traffic jam.
>
> I think we are at cross purposes here.
>
> I said I got better mpg travelling north despite a traffic jam, and
> attributed this to the wind. You responded that driving in lower
> gears for longer in the traffic jam may also have been a contributory
> factor [to the improved mpg]. I simply queried the suggestion that a
> traffic jam would improve fuel economy as I cannot see how this can be
> correct. .

That's because you're discussing with rod speed.

Re: OT: mpg question

<t5r70m$pmc$1@dont-email.me>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/aus+uk/article-flat.php?id=52632&group=uk.d-i-y#52632

 copy link   Newsgroups: uk.d-i-y
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: adamwads...@blueyonder.co.uk (ARW)
Newsgroups: uk.d-i-y
Subject: Re: OT: mpg question
Date: Sun, 15 May 2022 16:42:15 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 16
Message-ID: <t5r70m$pmc$1@dont-email.me>
References: <7lsu7h9eb2k80alhu2omghva4ssnttjok6@4ax.com>
<t5q4sv$16a$1@dont-email.me> <t5qspr$eou$2@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sun, 15 May 2022 15:42:14 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="8ca198975cddcad92f9bd8365ceb112f";
logging-data="26316"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19mYDzRU+cB4rdgyXNiBQc2CvBGGdxZKfQ="
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.9.0
Cancel-Lock: sha1:23nRQpZSQQQQQqElIaYPB7Ux2z0=
In-Reply-To: <t5qspr$eou$2@dont-email.me>
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
Content-Language: en-GB
X-Antivirus: Avast (VPS 220515-4, 15/5/2022), Outbound message
 by: ARW - Sun, 15 May 2022 15:42 UTC

On 15/05/2022 13:47, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 15/05/2022 06:59, ARW wrote:
>> It's the acceleration from standstill that causes the loss of MPG.

> In anything with weight and a large engine that is absolutely the case.
> I monitor fuel consumption on a per tank basis. Two stops to let people
> past on a narrow country road will take  a 10 mile trip from 35mpg down
> to 30mpg.
>
>
That's about the MPG difference I get in the van when stopping at the
roundabouts and not stopping.

Although in lockdown my MPG dropped as I was able to drive as fast as I
wanted:-)

Re: OT: mpg question

<t5r9i0$hd7$11@dont-email.me>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/aus+uk/article-flat.php?id=52638&group=uk.d-i-y#52638

 copy link   Newsgroups: uk.d-i-y
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: jethro...@hotmailbin.com (Jethro_uk)
Newsgroups: uk.d-i-y
Subject: Re: OT: mpg question
Date: Sun, 15 May 2022 16:25:36 -0000 (UTC)
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 11
Message-ID: <t5r9i0$hd7$11@dont-email.me>
References: <7lsu7h9eb2k80alhu2omghva4ssnttjok6@4ax.com>
<t5o8tl$hd7$5@dont-email.me> <t5p90s$kfn$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sun, 15 May 2022 16:25:36 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="a41e08779bb4058ea03e2d4dd5842fa1";
logging-data="17831"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19m+Pao4BZKGxZCZt9zf+fqUkQRLt0nQa4="
User-Agent: Pan/0.146 (Hic habitat felicitas; 8107378
git@gitlab.gnome.org:GNOME/pan.git)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:PslMX7EV/o0dznryEFKwB5mUiDY=
X-No-Archive: Yes
 by: Jethro_uk - Sun, 15 May 2022 16:25 UTC

On Sat, 14 May 2022 23:04:12 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

> On 14/05/2022 13:56, Jethro_uk wrote:
>> [quoted text muted]
> That's not a fact. In fact rigid speed limits end up with people braking
> and accelerating all the time to keep to them. Biggest fuel burn for me
> is roads with humps in them and chicanes that are one way.

Again, if they were serious about this environment bollocks, they'd
flatten a fucktonne of roads. The A419 Hot Air Balloon road in
Gloucestershire springs to mind.

Re: OT: mpg question

<t5r9jr$hd7$12@dont-email.me>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/aus+uk/article-flat.php?id=52639&group=uk.d-i-y#52639

 copy link   Newsgroups: uk.d-i-y
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: jethro...@hotmailbin.com (Jethro_uk)
Newsgroups: uk.d-i-y
Subject: Re: OT: mpg question
Date: Sun, 15 May 2022 16:26:35 -0000 (UTC)
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 43
Message-ID: <t5r9jr$hd7$12@dont-email.me>
References: <7lsu7h9eb2k80alhu2omghva4ssnttjok6@4ax.com>
<t5o8tl$hd7$5@dont-email.me> <t5q5us$m9n$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sun, 15 May 2022 16:26:35 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="a41e08779bb4058ea03e2d4dd5842fa1";
logging-data="17831"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19TSOn+e839DQwjovxVHeJfPtmwf0NxoIk="
User-Agent: Pan/0.146 (Hic habitat felicitas; 8107378
git@gitlab.gnome.org:GNOME/pan.git)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:VmCuCnTYxATjv9CiQn/oUTNkF2o=
X-No-Archive: Yes
 by: Jethro_uk - Sun, 15 May 2022 16:26 UTC

On Sun, 15 May 2022 07:18:03 +0100, ARW wrote:

> On 14/05/2022 13:56, Jethro_uk wrote:
>> On Sat, 14 May 2022 10:20:53 +0100, Scott wrote:
>>
>>> I drove to Perth yesterday (Scotland not Australia), 62 miles. I set
>>> the drive computer at the start. On the way north, I was running late
>>> and driving a bit faster than usual. I also got caught in a traffic
>>> jam on the M8. When I arrived I checked the display and it showed
>>> 52.5 mpg.
>>> l reset the drive computer before returning. I drove more slowly on
>>> the way home, without the traffic jam, and got 48.8 mpg.
>>>
>>> Nissan Micra 1.2. Petrol. Manual gearbox, five gears.
>>>
>>> How can this be? I thought slowing down saved fuel. The only
>>> explanation I can think of is that I may have been driving into the
>>> wind on the way south. Could this account for the variation?
>>
>> Depends on loads of things, not least the envelope where the engine
>> produces the most efficient output - usually c. 3000-3500 rpm for
>> petrol.
>>
>> I once saved 25% on a 100 mile journey by doing 55 instead of 75.
>
> 75MPH? I have CC set to 90MPH.

That's nice dear

>
>
>> You can tell how much of this climate "emergency" is bollocks from the
>> fact that a rigidly enforced 65mph limit on motorways would save the UK
>> quite a bit in fuel consumption. (Although not as much as not
>> travelling at all).
>
>
> Have a go on the M1 from junction 34 to 32. 60MPH for air quality -
> applies to all vehicles including electric ones. And when there was 25
> miles of 50MPH road works further south I got brilliant MPG going to
> Watford.

Or the M5 J2-J1.

Re: OT: mpg question

<t5rm23$ea6$1@dont-email.me>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/aus+uk/article-flat.php?id=52651&group=uk.d-i-y#52651

 copy link   Newsgroups: uk.d-i-y
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: me...@privacy.invalid (NY)
Newsgroups: uk.d-i-y
Subject: Re: OT: mpg question
Date: Sun, 15 May 2022 20:58:51 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 3
Message-ID: <t5rm23$ea6$1@dont-email.me>
References: <7lsu7h9eb2k80alhu2omghva4ssnttjok6@4ax.com> <t5p3sf$kjv$1@dont-email.me> <op.1l6el8ezbyq249@pvr2.lan> <t5p5et$v9k$1@dont-email.me> <jeam41F252oU1@mid.individual.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
format=flowed;
charset="utf-8";
reply-type=response
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Sun, 15 May 2022 19:58:59 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="2621a042d147c81d4c2d237fb5706759";
logging-data="14662"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+5sPWHQVBH17Bmgh8irVFHozjwle6E7pE="
Cancel-Lock: sha1:+6cOxDTPSU4EvRwgWghhpdLhmjI=
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V14.0.8089.726
In-Reply-To: <jeam41F252oU1@mid.individual.net>
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Windows Live Mail 14.0.8089.726
Importance: Normal
X-Antivirus: Avast (VPS 220515-6, 15/5/2022), Outbound message
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
 by: NY - Sun, 15 May 2022 19:58 UTC

"Tim Streater" <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote in message
news:jeam41F252oU1@mid.individual.net...
> On 14 May 2022 at 22:03:19 BST, "NY" <me@privacy.invalid> wrote:
>
>> Do German autobahns have the US characteristic of a dedicated exit lane
>> before a junction and a dedicated entry lane after it to allow leaving
>> traffic to slow down below the speed of traffic that is not leaving, and
>> to
>> allow entering traffic plenty of space to get up to the speed of the
>> traffic
>> that they are joining? (*) As long as the dedicated exit lane is clearly
>> marked (which wasn't always the case on "motorways" that I drove on in
>> Massachusetts in the late 90s) to avoid the problem of last minute lane
>> changes, the exit/entry lane is a good idea.
>
> The bad thing about US freeways is that you have two off-roads at each
> actual
> exit, depending on which way you want to go (left or right) at the top.
> They
> do this instead of having a roundabout at the top as we do. Two bad
> consequences of this:
>
> 1) If you're not sure which one you need and take the wrong one, you're
> then
> going in the wrong direction on the road you've exited onto, and the lack
> of
> roundabouts make it hard to turn around. Especially if they also prevent
> U-turns at a number of subsequent junctions.
>
> 2) Traffic exiting on one of those exits is crossing traffic entering at
> one
> of the two entrances. This is quite dangerous as traffic getting on the
> freeway is accelerating while traffic getting off is trying to slow down.

I don't remember seeing any junctions with two exits for the two directions.
Maybe I was lucky - this was in rural Massachusetts (towns about 30 miles
north of Boston) with one long journey from there to/from Cape Cod. That was
when I was visiting my sister and her family who were living near Boston for
a few years.

Americans really don't like roundabouts. I only remember one, and that's
where the coastal road and the road onto the Cape Code peninsular cross. It
was a six-way roundabout (called a "rotary") and I worked out what to expect
from the advance sign, so I got into the left lane, went round
anti-clockwise (which felt slightly odd) and came off. All a bit of a
non-event: what I was very used to, except a perfect mirror-image. When I
stopped at a cafe a few miles later, the car behind me also stopped, and the
driver actually came over and shook my hand: he'd been behind me and had
been impressed with the fact that I seemed so confident. Then he heard my
voice and he said "Gee, you're not even American. You're not even used to
driving on the right." I though for a moment he was going to bow and kiss my
feet ;-)

> I found US roads to be poorly signed and badly designed (the 4-way stop is
> another POS). Their aim appears to be to ensure that you can't drive from
> A to
> B without becoming an administrative criminal (and thus paying a fine).

I only encountered one 4-way-stop junction while I was there, and that was
near the airport. Thankfully I was the only car at the junction, so I didn't
have to play the "what order did everyone arrive in" game. The 4WS junction
is badly flawed for two reasons: it uses time (order of arrival) rather than
position (give way to traffic coming from the left - in the US); and it
forces all traffic to stop dead, rather than allowing traffic to keep
rolling - maybe even at full speed limit - if it can see that there is no
traffic coming from the conflicting directions. I prefer the UK arrangement
for cross-roads, where one direction is designated the major road with
absolute priority over traffic coming at 90 degrees which must give way -
nice and simple, and not based on "I was here before you".

One peculiarity that I noticed with US signing (leaving aside distances
quoted in absurdly large number of feet, instead of "100 yards" or "2 1/2
miles") was the fact that at a T junction, the direction signs give
directions with respect to the way the road was oriented at that point. So
you'd be travelling generally northwards, but if the road locally turned
east-west, or even back on itself and there was a junction, you were
signposted East and West, or even North and South but reversed. Here, the
local orientation of the road is immaterial: the road will say "N" or "S"
based on whether the destination is north or south of where you are.

I also had to endure the most stupid, idiotic, nonsensical, imbecilic road
atlas I've ever seen. Here in the UK, all the pages of a road atlas are to
the same scale, in the same cartographic style, and are ordered
consecutively west to east for one row, and then west to east for the next
maps further north, and so on. If you are going east-west then you only need
to turn forwards or backwards by one page. This map book (my sister and her
family bought it when they first arrived, and then realised that it was
crap) had double-page spreads organised by alphabetically by "town"
(effectively the built-up part of the town and the surrounding countryside
that came under that town council's jurisdiction), and each map would be at
a different scale according to the boundaries of the "town". As you were
about to leave one map, you had to turn to a completely different part of
the book (not to a consecutive page) and then try to work out where the
overlap was when the spacing of roads was different because of the change of
scale, and maybe there was even detail on one map that wasn't present on the
other. This was in the days before satnavs - late 1990s. And the
continuation arrows at the edge of a map said "continued on Ipswich" (so you
had turn pages until you found it), and not even "continued on page 17".
That map book was an object lesson in how to make a book as un-user-friendly
as possible - it probably won first prize in the Bastard Map Book From Hell
contest ;-)

Very often, where a minor road joined a major road, there was no
give-way/yield/stop line. If the junction is at a right angle, you can infer
where you have to stop from the edges of the kerbs (sorry, curbs), but where
the junction of your minor road is on a bend of a major road, it's very
difficult to judge where the imaginary *curved* line is.

There were some very good things. Drivers were a lot more tolerant of car
that took their time in getting away from lights (partly because there is no
red+amber phase to give you time to put the car in gear and take the
handbrake off), and, both in small towns and in central Boston, they were
far more willing to stop to let pedestrians cross, even at places other that
designated pedestrian crossings. I once stopped near a shop front (ie not on
the kerb) and looked across at the building opposite, before planning to
carry on walking along the street. Immediately traffic in both directions
stopped, thinking I was about to cross. Their zebra crossings had me baffled
for a while: there was a sign "PED XING" which was a random set of letters
until it dawned on me "PEDestrian (Cross)-ing".

The main problem on rural roads was if you got behind a school bus:
essentially you were stuck behind it for eternity because unless the road
was clear you couldn't overtake it while it was moving, and when it stopped
it flashed its "DO NOT OVERTAKE" lights, and the driver didn't even wait for
a few seconds after the last child had got clear, to allow traffic stuck
behind to overtake before he set off again.

The one thing about American cars which was indescribably dangerous was the
combined side/indicator and tail/indicator lights, where two front lights
were replaced by a steady white light on one side and a flashing one on the
other, likewise for steady/flashing red lights at the back. My sister was
taking my parents out for a drive and was stopped in the middle of the road,
indicating left to turn into a side road. And her car was hit from behind by
a driver who didn't see the flashing tail light, and who assumed that
because she didn't have her brake lights on (because she was stopped on the
handbrake until she could see a gap) she was setting off. At least we have
indicators which are a different colour, even if modern car design
co-locates those indicators with the bright brake lights or with the
headlights. Ever since then, I've got into the habit of flashing my brake
lights a couple of times when I'm stopped in the middle of the road if I see
a car coming up behind me, or even breaking my unwritten rule of never
keeping my brake lights on (to avoid dazzling that car behind) when I'm
stopped, in the special case when I'm stopped in the middle of the major
road waiting to turn.

Re: OT: mpg question

<t5rnls$qgo$1@dont-email.me>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/aus+uk/article-flat.php?id=52652&group=uk.d-i-y#52652

 copy link   Newsgroups: uk.d-i-y
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: me...@privacy.invalid (NY)
Newsgroups: uk.d-i-y
Subject: Re: OT: mpg question
Date: Sun, 15 May 2022 21:26:24 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 1
Message-ID: <t5rnls$qgo$1@dont-email.me>
References: <7lsu7h9eb2k80alhu2omghva4ssnttjok6@4ax.com> <WMWdnfroFZ3bRx3_nZ2dnUU7-cWdnZ2d@brightview.co.uk> <38662732.674319089.124860.tim.downie-gmail.com@news.individual.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
format=flowed;
charset="utf-8";
reply-type=original
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Sun, 15 May 2022 20:26:36 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="2621a042d147c81d4c2d237fb5706759";
logging-data="27160"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX188qGuoshnLMWDa8oz+qyvy+ue2xR8PBnQ="
Cancel-Lock: sha1:x6rjygSMqnPa8E0kB4YhjE2kocg=
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V14.0.8089.726
In-Reply-To: <38662732.674319089.124860.tim.downie-gmail.com@news.individual.net>
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Windows Live Mail 14.0.8089.726
Importance: Normal
X-Antivirus: Avast (VPS 220515-6, 15/5/2022), Outbound message
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
 by: NY - Sun, 15 May 2022 20:26 UTC

"Tim+" <tim.downie@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:38662732.674319089.124860.tim.downie-gmail.com@news.individual.net...
> Mike Rogers <mike@mattishall.org.uk> wrote:
>
>> 55MPH is allegedly the most economical speed.
>
> Personally, I find this highly doubtful.
>
> Given the way that wind resistance rises with the square of speed (in
> general) it seems incredibly improbably that 55 mph should be more
> economical than 40 mph say.

The most efficient speed is probably the slowest at which you can drive in
top gear. So 40 mph in sixth may be more efficient that 35 mph in fifth. I
imagine there are a lot of other factors as well: it may well be that petrol
engines and diesel engines behave differently as regards efficiency when
it's a toss-up between driving with a slightly higher engine speed but less
load on the engine, versus a slightly lower engine speed in the next gear up
which makes the engine work harder.

As far as I can tell, my HDi diesel car gives better results with the engine
running more slowly and *slightly* labouring in a just-too-high gear, as
opposed to with the engine running more freely but more quickly in a
just-too-low gear. But I think my previous petrol cars were the other way
round. As far as I could tell.

The problem with determining which is better is that the instantaneous fuel
consumption figures on a trip computer are often *too* instantaneous so they
vary all over the place from second to second, whereas if there was an
averaged update every 2-5 seconds, you could compare the two cases (slightly
too low a gear versus slightly too high a gear) without lots of random
"clutter" in the readings.

Re: OT: mpg question

<jed7gmFgvjkU1@mid.individual.net>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/aus+uk/article-flat.php?id=52653&group=uk.d-i-y#52653

 copy link   Newsgroups: uk.d-i-y
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!news.szaf.org!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: timstrea...@greenbee.net (Tim Streater)
Newsgroups: uk.d-i-y
Subject: Re: OT: mpg question
Date: 15 May 2022 20:52:38 GMT
Lines: 50
Message-ID: <jed7gmFgvjkU1@mid.individual.net>
References: <7lsu7h9eb2k80alhu2omghva4ssnttjok6@4ax.com> <t5p5et$v9k$1@dont-email.me> <jeam41F252oU1@mid.individual.net> <t5rm23$ea6$1@dont-email.me>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=fixed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: individual.net 4a7ejQJBzaQ1TriGtlsmIgre6F0dYWmoirIhsDP5x5iBRh+zFt
Cancel-Lock: sha1:IixVt99BifAOszYnOBhoqncZLBg=
X-No-Archive: Yes
User-Agent: Usenapp for MacOS
X-Usenapp: v1.19/l - Full License
 by: Tim Streater - Sun, 15 May 2022 20:52 UTC

On 15 May 2022 at 20:58:51 BST, "NY" <me@privacy.invalid> wrote:

> "Tim Streater" <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote in message
> news:jeam41F252oU1@mid.individual.net...
>> On 14 May 2022 at 22:03:19 BST, "NY" <me@privacy.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> Do German autobahns have the US characteristic of a dedicated exit lane
>>> before a junction and a dedicated entry lane after it to allow leaving
>>> traffic to slow down below the speed of traffic that is not leaving, and
>>> to
>>> allow entering traffic plenty of space to get up to the speed of the
>>> traffic
>>> that they are joining? (*) As long as the dedicated exit lane is clearly
>>> marked (which wasn't always the case on "motorways" that I drove on in
>>> Massachusetts in the late 90s) to avoid the problem of last minute lane
>>> changes, the exit/entry lane is a good idea.
>>
>> The bad thing about US freeways is that you have two off-roads at each
>> actual
>> exit, depending on which way you want to go (left or right) at the top.
>> They
>> do this instead of having a roundabout at the top as we do. Two bad
>> consequences of this:
>>
>> 1) If you're not sure which one you need and take the wrong one, you're
>> then
>> going in the wrong direction on the road you've exited onto, and the lack
>> of
>> roundabouts make it hard to turn around. Especially if they also prevent
>> U-turns at a number of subsequent junctions.
>>
>> 2) Traffic exiting on one of those exits is crossing traffic entering at
>> one
>> of the two entrances. This is quite dangerous as traffic getting on the
>> freeway is accelerating while traffic getting off is trying to slow down.
>
> I don't remember seeing any junctions with two exits for the two directions.
> Maybe I was lucky - this was in rural Massachusetts (towns about 30 miles
> north of Boston) with one long journey from there to/from Cape Cod.

I was in California. There are some differences between states.

There are some things that were better regarding roas/traffic. One is the
Turn-right-on-red-if-its-safe. The other is the hard rule that if an emergency
vehicle is passing, you pull over and stop. We could do woth that here.

--
"The problem with defending the purity of the English language is that English is about as pure as a cribhouse whore. We don't just borrow words; on occasion, English has pursued other languages down alleyways to beat them unconscious and rifle their pockets for new vocabulary."

James Nicoll, rasfw

Re: OT: mpg question

<538700598.674340470.932558.tim.downie-gmail.com@news.individual.net>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/aus+uk/article-flat.php?id=52654&group=uk.d-i-y#52654

 copy link   Newsgroups: uk.d-i-y
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!news.uzoreto.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: tim.dow...@gmail.com (Tim+)
Newsgroups: uk.d-i-y
Subject: Re: OT: mpg question
Date: 15 May 2022 20:59:56 GMT
Lines: 53
Message-ID: <538700598.674340470.932558.tim.downie-gmail.com@news.individual.net>
References: <7lsu7h9eb2k80alhu2omghva4ssnttjok6@4ax.com>
<t5ntgp$sf8$1@dont-email.me>
<t5o15h$4hm$1@dont-email.me>
<qj3v7hth0loh4r8u1uilevah8crccpq0g9@4ax.com>
<t5o3qc$l67$1@dont-email.me>
<je9mofFqrsnU1@mid.individual.net>
<t5ocm2$hjo$1@dont-email.me>
<2vdv7hpe61q6l7ird65fdpp9272a0k5lj6@4ax.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: individual.net SMo3Y67MLXBYm8On3TzgvQ9PdNtv1nPXvweQFYIPPP0b0Gvp4=
Cancel-Lock: sha1:d6uUgEwdqmU7Z15qCF1wE1ktQrw= sha1:7TYLSYTSYYLgQkmit19bukoIduM=
User-Agent: NewsTap/5.5 (iPad)
X-Face: VQ}*Ueh[4uTOa]Md([|$jb%rw~ksq}bzqA;z-.*8JM`4+zL['N\ORHCI80}]}$]$e5]/i#v qdYsE'yh@ZL3L{H:So{yN)b=AZJtpaP98ch_4W}
 by: Tim+ - Sun, 15 May 2022 20:59 UTC

Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
> On Sat, 14 May 2022 15:00:20 +0100, "NY" <me@privacy.invalid> wrote:
>
>> "alan_m" <junk@admac.myzen.co.uk> wrote in message
>> news:je9mofFqrsnU1@mid.individual.net...
>>> On 14/05/2022 12:29, NY wrote:
>>>
>>>> It's possible that the car used for the record had a less powerful engine
>>>> (if that makes it more efficient) and I couldn't find any mention of
>>>> whether the drivers had a lower self-imposed maximum speed to use less
>>>> fuel. Maybe they only did each leg of the journey on a day that the wind
>>>> was predominantly behind them ;-)
>>>
>>> Or all unnecessary weight removed from the vehicle. No spare wheel, no
>>> luggage, no back seat etc.
>>
>> And maybe only put in a small amount of fuel and keep filling up, to reduce
>> the weight of fuel. 60 litres of diesel weighs about 50 kg which is about
>> half a person (OK, half a fairly heavy person like wot I am).
>>
>> My grandpa had lived through fuel rationing in the war and had been taught
>> how to conserve fuel for the times when he was making an authorised journey.
>> It's ironic that his technique of slipping into neutral as he was slowing
>> down (which he still did to the day he stopped driving shortly before he
>> died in 1999) would actually be counterproductive with a modern
>> computer-controlled engine. I've proved it with the instantaneous
>> fuel-consumption menu on my car: pressing the clutch and keeping the engine
>> idling uses a measurable amount of fuel (which displays as around about 150
>> mpg) whereas lifting off the throttle and staying in gear (ie clutch not
>> pressed) uses a mythical 999 mpg. That's because the computer can cut the
>> fuel *totally* if the motion of the car on overrun will keep the engine
>> turning, whereas with the car in neutral (or clutch pressed) a token amount
>> of fuel is needed to keep the engine ticking over.
>
> Interesting. I never knew that. I was taught to move into neutral in
> advance of the stop and coast to save fuel but when I did the Advanced
> Driving course, I was told the opposite (in gear at all times when
> moving).
>

But this ignores the “in gear drag” which means the loss of an amount of
kinetic energy. If the drag is costing you more in wasted fuel than an
idling engine, you’re better off coasting.

Working out exactly at what speeds and circumstances this applies isn’t
straightforward.

Tim

--
Please don't feed the trolls

Re: OT: mpg question

<149894834.674340722.615875.tim.downie-gmail.com@news.individual.net>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/aus+uk/article-flat.php?id=52655&group=uk.d-i-y#52655

 copy link   Newsgroups: uk.d-i-y
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feed1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!peer03.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!peer02.ams1!peer.ams1.xlned.com!news.xlned.com!newsreader4.netcologne.de!news.netcologne.de!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: tim.dow...@gmail.com (Tim+)
Newsgroups: uk.d-i-y
Subject: Re: OT: mpg question
Date: 15 May 2022 20:59:56 GMT
Lines: 16
Message-ID: <149894834.674340722.615875.tim.downie-gmail.com@news.individual.net>
References: <7lsu7h9eb2k80alhu2omghva4ssnttjok6@4ax.com>
<t5ntgp$sf8$1@dont-email.me>
<t5opec$ab8$1@dont-email.me>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: individual.net mJaMElqaSUV5FDsPKRNZzgjh5zO3vfJZUnkzeE6GWeSCIVcgo=
Cancel-Lock: sha1:+csvAfUseiSHUmOok3ZYbTT21rA= sha1:Zy5YErqr8eHMQeoXTYWICPg9FO0=
User-Agent: NewsTap/5.5 (iPad)
X-Face: VQ}*Ueh[4uTOa]Md([|$jb%rw~ksq}bzqA;z-.*8JM`4+zL['N\ORHCI80}]}$]$e5]/i#v qdYsE'yh@ZL3L{H:So{yN)b=AZJtpaP98ch_4W}
X-Received-Bytes: 1426
 by: Tim+ - Sun, 15 May 2022 20:59 UTC

Harry Bloomfield Esq <a@harrym1byt.plus.com> wrote:
> Clive Arthur has brought this to us :
>> Much the same happened to me on a longer trip of 260 miles which I'd done a
>> few times. Yes, I'm pretty sure it's the wind that makes the difference.
>
> ..and me, I beat 60mpg going east but that declined to 50 going west
> against the breeze.
>

I used 50kWhr this weekend to do 260 miles (130 north, 130 south). Not sure
what that is in mpg…

Tim

--
Please don't feed the trolls

Re: OT: mpg question

<284157107.674340940.163352.tim.downie-gmail.com@news.individual.net>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/aus+uk/article-flat.php?id=52656&group=uk.d-i-y#52656

 copy link   Newsgroups: uk.d-i-y
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!aioe.org!usenet.goja.nl.eu.org!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!news.imp.ch!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: tim.dow...@gmail.com (Tim+)
Newsgroups: uk.d-i-y
Subject: Re: OT: mpg question
Date: 15 May 2022 20:59:56 GMT
Lines: 27
Message-ID: <284157107.674340940.163352.tim.downie-gmail.com@news.individual.net>
References: <7lsu7h9eb2k80alhu2omghva4ssnttjok6@4ax.com>
<WMWdnfroFZ3bRx3_nZ2dnUU7-cWdnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>
<38662732.674319089.124860.tim.downie-gmail.com@news.individual.net>
<t5rnls$qgo$1@dont-email.me>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: individual.net /IE5q2+kY0Vp4ECSsJA1awDCkUc7KcBy7a5wDulHMOxofJDpg=
Cancel-Lock: sha1:SaYnlnNrOxMPDIIwGncphYSzIRE= sha1:JS6YAJ1qkolNBUSqYVfNGnUsnx8=
User-Agent: NewsTap/5.5 (iPad)
X-Face: VQ}*Ueh[4uTOa]Md([|$jb%rw~ksq}bzqA;z-.*8JM`4+zL['N\ORHCI80}]}$]$e5]/i#v qdYsE'yh@ZL3L{H:So{yN)b=AZJtpaP98ch_4W}
 by: Tim+ - Sun, 15 May 2022 20:59 UTC

NY <me@privacy.invalid> wrote:
> "Tim+" <tim.downie@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:38662732.674319089.124860.tim.downie-gmail.com@news.individual.net...
>> Mike Rogers <mike@mattishall.org.uk> wrote:
>>
>>> 55MPH is allegedly the most economical speed.
>>
>> Personally, I find this highly doubtful.
>>
>> Given the way that wind resistance rises with the square of speed (in
>> general) it seems incredibly improbably that 55 mph should be more
>> economical than 40 mph say.
>
> The most efficient speed is probably the slowest at which you can drive in
> top gear.

Gears? An abomination forced upon a motor with terrible power
characteristics! ;-)

In reality, I’d bet that doing 40mph in a lower gear would still be more
economical than 55 in top just because of wind resistance.

Tim

--
Please don't feed the trolls

Re: OT: mpg question

<jed9hbFhbluU1@mid.individual.net>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/aus+uk/article-flat.php?id=52657&group=uk.d-i-y#52657

 copy link   Newsgroups: uk.d-i-y
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!news.szaf.org!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: timstrea...@greenbee.net (Tim Streater)
Newsgroups: uk.d-i-y
Subject: Re: OT: mpg question
Date: 15 May 2022 21:27:07 GMT
Lines: 19
Message-ID: <jed9hbFhbluU1@mid.individual.net>
References: <7lsu7h9eb2k80alhu2omghva4ssnttjok6@4ax.com> <t5ntgp$sf8$1@dont-email.me> <t5opec$ab8$1@dont-email.me> <149894834.674340722.615875.tim.downie-gmail.com@news.individual.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=fixed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: individual.net orFAiBCplGNfhIZBDumk2gqR8nNHbVUq5EE7vuqb/errBUxnHC
Cancel-Lock: sha1:3P/iWH3N3fIj2qTIBJlAmEk0xR0=
X-No-Archive: Yes
User-Agent: Usenapp for MacOS
X-Usenapp: v1.19/l - Full License
 by: Tim Streater - Sun, 15 May 2022 21:27 UTC

On 15 May 2022 at 21:59:56 BST, Tim+ <tim.downie@gmail.com> wrote:

> Harry Bloomfield Esq <a@harrym1byt.plus.com> wrote:
>> Clive Arthur has brought this to us :
>>> Much the same happened to me on a longer trip of 260 miles which I'd done a
>>> few times. Yes, I'm pretty sure it's the wind that makes the difference.
>>
>> ..and me, I beat 60mpg going east but that declined to 50 going west
>> against the breeze.
>>
>
> I used 50kWhr this weekend to do 260 miles (130 north, 130 south). Not sure
> what that is in mpg…

A litre contains about 10kWh, so that's 5 litres. A gallon is 4.55 litres. So
there you are.

--
"A committee is a cul-de-sac down which ideas are lured and then quietly strangled." - Sir Barnett Cocks (1907-1989)

Re: OT: mpg question

<6fs28h5fgj994hks1q806jp4hk9uca1dr5@4ax.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/aus+uk/article-flat.php?id=52658&group=uk.d-i-y#52658

 copy link   Newsgroups: uk.d-i-y
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!news.szaf.org!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: newsgro...@gefion.myzen.co.uk (Scott)
Newsgroups: uk.d-i-y
Subject: Re: OT: mpg question
Date: Sun, 15 May 2022 22:35:08 +0100
Lines: 61
Message-ID: <6fs28h5fgj994hks1q806jp4hk9uca1dr5@4ax.com>
References: <7lsu7h9eb2k80alhu2omghva4ssnttjok6@4ax.com> <op.1l6bzhzcx9d686@pvr2.lan> <cs708hlv1odu87car4q5sv7298cvikvce8@4ax.com> <op.1l6htalqx9d686@pvr2.lan> <b3h18h1e2rmm01ft7qcj181drnnnhrs0pl@4ax.com> <op.1l7f3ozvx9d686@pvr2.lan> <58o18hphk7r5jb5f41v1rtov8qqjd4jkt8@4ax.com> <t5r4os$1gf2$1@gioia.aioe.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Trace: individual.net VaZjqWPkStEiqpu8pYKCSA84XX2kEtjQmRmccyTPavrHBe2wB5
Cancel-Lock: sha1:Tu45c7r1qSBUBWeagfC5HePyNDU=
User-Agent: ForteAgent/8.00.32.1272
 by: Scott - Sun, 15 May 2022 21:35 UTC

On Sun, 15 May 2022 16:03:56 +0100, Richard
<smithski@btinternet.com.invalid> wrote:

>On 15/05/2022 12:20, Scott wrote:
>> On Sun, 15 May 2022 20:15:14 +1000, lacksey <lki567@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, 15 May 2022 19:15:49 +1000, Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Sun, 15 May 2022 07:54:36 +1000, lacksey <lki567@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Sun, 15 May 2022 07:31:33 +1000, Scott
>>>>> <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sun, 15 May 2022 05:48:43 +1000, lacksey <lki567@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Sat, 14 May 2022 19:20:53 +1000, Scott
>>>>>>> <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I drove to Perth yesterday (Scotland not Australia), 62 miles. I set
>>>>>>>> the drive computer at the start. On the way north, I was running
>>>>>>>> late
>>>>>>>> and driving a bit faster than usual. I also got caught in a traffic
>>>>>>>> jam on the M8. When I arrived I checked the display and it showed
>>>>>>>> 52.5 mpg. l reset the drive computer before returning. I drove more
>>>>>>>> slowly on the way home, without the traffic jam, and got 48.8 mpg.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Nissan Micra 1.2. Petrol. Manual gearbox, five gears.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> How can this be? I thought slowing down saved fuel. The only
>>>>>>>> explanation I can think of is that I may have been driving into the
>>>>>>>> wind on the way south. Could this account for the variation?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Yep, easily. And in lower gears for longer in the traffic jam.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Do lower gears improve fuel economy? I thought it was the other way
>>>>>> round and fifth gear would be the most efficient.
>>>>>
>>>>> Not in a traffic jam.
>>>>
>>>> Not following this unfortunately. Are you saying a gallon of petrol
>>>> will take you more miles travelling in first and second gear with lots
>>>> of stop-start than it would driving at a steady speed on a motorway?
>>>
>>> No, that staying in fifth gear doesn't work in a traffic jam.
>>
>> I think we are at cross purposes here.
>>
>> I said I got better mpg travelling north despite a traffic jam, and
>> attributed this to the wind. You responded that driving in lower
>> gears for longer in the traffic jam may also have been a contributory
>> factor [to the improved mpg]. I simply queried the suggestion that a
>> traffic jam would improve fuel economy as I cannot see how this can be
>> correct. .
>
>That's because you're discussing with rod speed.

I did not realise that. The laws of physics are different in
Australia.

Pages:123456
server_pubkey.txt

rocksolid light 0.9.7
clearnet tor