Thread: Hybrid Vehicles

I like the weather warning strip under the doors too.
If the snow gets to the line, stay the f-ck home!
Hehe

Originally Posted by MikeB52

I like the weather warning strip under the doors too.
If the snow gets to the line, stay the f-ck home!
Hehe

Yea, and when the snow gets to the orange markers on the roof rack it is time to use the escape hatch, I mean sun roof.

Bob

yea, my wife drives an outback. it's a solid vehicle. Personally, I like the Forrester better.

Colour me happy. We took the Forester for a run down the highway today with the cruise set at 100 kph. I had reset the trip odometer before we left the house and on return the car said we used 6.8 l/100 km. Put in terms I understand that was 41.5 mpg (Imperial gallon)/34.7 mpg (US gallon). The Canadian government rates it at 39 mpg Imperial gallon and 33 mpg US gallon. That is about what I could get from my lighter smaller 2011 KIA Forte with a 2.4 litre engine and front wheel drive. If these initial results hold true I'd be more than happy.

Bob

If you figure the cost of replacing the hybrid sooner. Which seems likely, your gas savings will be eaten up. One exception would be in NY hybrids are allowed to use HOV lanes for a faster commute. Time(the thing that life is made of) is wasted.

To me its interesting to test a few tankfuls with good old fashioned math. From what I understand there are no rules or regulations with the car computers so they are not going to design them to read lower than actual mileage. I am happy with the mileage on my ram 1500 4 wheel drive for what it is and does but it is consistently .5 to 1 mpg us gal higher than actual. That is 2 to 4% higher.

I have slacked testing every tankful but my last couple of vehicles have had fuel gauges that work.

Originally Posted by 32t

To me its interesting to test a few tankfuls with good old fashioned math. From what I understand there are no rules or regulations with the car computers so they are not going to design them to read lower than actual mileage. I am happy with the mileage on my ram 1500 4 wheel drive for what it is and does but it is consistently .5 to 1 mpg us gal higher than actual. That is 2 to 4% higher.

I have slacked testing every tankful but my last couple of vehicles have had fuel gauges that work.

Yes, I'm inclined to believe there would be a difference if you filled the tank, did a run and filled the tank back up again. It has on all the vehicles I have owned so far. OTH who can say how accurate the pump reading is just like what your car is telling you. I know pumps are certified but who knows what monkey business happens after the certification. Just shaving a tiny bit off each gallon that is pumped could make the same difference. Never mind how successful you are in filling the tank exactly the same way each time. So long as you are getting with in +/- 5% of the government rating all is normal.

Never had a vehicle without a working fuel gauge that was decently accurate and never let my tank go below 1/2 if possible. Glad you are happy with what your Ram 4x4 gets but that is not the point either. The point is that you are getting near enough to what it is rated for to have no bitches about it.

Just ask VW what it has cost them globally to deliberately mess with the computers on their diesel cars.

Bob

As long as you are happy to believe a fictional number set by the company that sold you the vehicle I am happy for you.

Here's an interesting article by Car and Driver.

https://www.caranddriver.com/feature...mpg-estimates/

Amongst the information is this----

"One last fuel-economy tidbit: Don’t even think of comparing EPA figures with standardized fuel-economy tests from other countries because the test cycles are very different. For example, the European highway rating, called “extra urban,” is higher than the EPA’s by about 30 percent, so a rating on that cycle of, say, 60 mpg, would be closer to 40 in this country. The mainstream press, not realizing the difference, often complains that automakers refuse to bring efficient models here when, in fact, they may not be all that efficient when measured by U.S. standards".

Originally Posted by 32t

As long as you are happy to believe a fictional number set by the company that sold you the vehicle I am happy for you.

Look, I just told you any way you or I measure fuel economy it is subject to errors, deliberate or other wise. All you can hope for is a close approximation of what it is. If you compare what the car says with what you get filling the tank and doing the math and they are fairly close you are good to believe the fuel economy is somewhere around those two marks. Neither method is precise enough because of flaws in the methods. You can believe I will also be using the fill and math method as I have always done in the past and that has never been exactly what the car says it is but fairly close in most cases. As long a you are happy with a quite possibly fictional number of gallons set by the petroleum industry that sells you the gas we are in the same boat.

Bob