Cash for Clunkers

**TopHatter** · 23 Aug 09,, 23:58

Originally Posted by ArmchairGeneral

If I keep between 50 and 65 and do my best to avoid braking and hard acceleration I can get 40 mpg from my 20 year old Camry.

And my friends wonder why I've always considered the Big Three to be piles of absolute dogshit that deserve to rot on the side of a road 2000 miles from the nearest humanity.

**zraver** · 24 Aug 09,, 02:21

Originally Posted by TopHatter

I can control my own driving. I have no such option with regards to the millions of other drivers I encounter.

So very true.

**Rumrunner** · 24 Aug 09,, 16:52

Originally Posted by TopHatter

And my friends wonder why I've always considered the Big Three to be piles of absolute dogshit that deserve to rot on the side of a road 2000 miles from the nearest humanity.

And how...my dad just junked his 85 Camry sedan after it got totalled in a mall parking lot. The beast had 287,000 miles on it and still was going strong.

Some sad sights for the US automakers:

The Top Ten Cash for Clunkers Trade-Ins:
1. 1998 Ford Explorer
2. 1997 Ford Explorer
3. 1996 Ford Explorer
4. 1999 Ford Explorer
5. Jeep Grand Cherokee
6. Jeep Cherokee
7. 1995 Ford Explorer
8. 1994 Ford Explorer
9. 1997 Ford Windstar
10. 1999 Dodge Caravan

The Top Ten Cash for Clunkers New Cars:
1. Ford Focus
2. Honda Civic
3. Toyota Corolla
4. Toyota Prius
5. Ford Escape
6. Toyota Camry (US Built)
7. Dodge Caliber
8. Hyundai Elantra
9. Honda Fit
10. Chevy Cobalt

**Shek** · 24 Aug 09,, 17:50

Here's something to ponder when you think about the normalized decline in traffic fatalities:

**gunnut** · 24 Aug 09,, 20:31

Originally Posted by ArmchairGeneral

Not yet. Temperatures will have to increase significantly before the equilibrium shifts that far.

edit: OTOH, there is conflicting evidence regarding the impact of increased CO2 concentration/decreased pH on calcifying organisms. Some studies have actually shown an increase in calcification with increased pH. Go figure.

Phytoplankton calcification in a high-CO2 world. [Science. 2008] - PubMed Result
Wiley InterScience :: Session Cookies

So in other words...we don't know jack shit!

The debate is not ovah! The science is not settled.

**gunnut** · 24 Aug 09,, 20:40

Originally Posted by TopHatter

Whilst I've intellectually known that tromping down on the accelerator and routinely going 5-15 mph over the limit has a deleterious effect on mileage, I was still pleasantly surprised to see an increase of 80-90 miles between fill-ups.

Originally Posted by ArmchairGeneral

If I keep between 50 and 65 and do my best to avoid braking and hard acceleration I can get 40 mpg from my 20 year old Camry.

My personal experiences have shown that hard acceleration has more impact at fuel efficiency than high speed cruising.

My old 1990 Eclipse (2L, non-turbo) was rated at 20-something for highway. On several long trips where I averaged around 80 miles per hour, I got more than 30 miles per gallon.

My current 2006 Impreza (2.5L, non-turbo) is rated at 28 on the highway. On long trips where I averaged between 75 to 80 mph, the minimum I get is 28.5. I've once reached 30+ mpg.

Both cars have had troubles reaching the listed mileage in city driving. Both cars have auto transmission.

**gunnut** · 24 Aug 09,, 20:43

Originally Posted by TopHatter

As would I.

I've always worn my seatbelt, every single time I've gotten into an automobile, since I was at least 14.

I also insist on all of my passengers wearing one while in my car. No exceptions.

Plus, my 2006 Eclipse will start yelling at me (in the form of annoying electronic beeps) if I don't put it on...and it has 2 airbags for both driver- and passenger-side occupants.

Personally I think all cars should have this feature, at least for the front seats.

Ok go ahead and bring on the derisive "Nanny State" accusations

Well, I think the public should demand auto makers to put these features in the cars through buying decisions. The public should put these on because it's the smart thing to do. The government shouldn't mandate auto makers to put these in, how many airbags to have, and that the consumers to wear seat belts.

**Blue** · 24 Aug 09,, 20:57

As a cop, the only only time I ever wrote citations where for people who violated child safety restraint laws or underaged motor cyclists for helmet laws. In Kansas at the time, you could write secondary adult seatbelt violations, meaning if they where not wearing it when pulled over for something else, you could cite them. I would not. Motorcyclists over 18 did not have to wear a helmet.

As a cop, I did however, strongly advocate the use of seatbelts and helmets. With that, I am vehemently against any of those laws for folks over 18. I wear a seatbelt when I feel like it and I wear a MC helmet under strong protest. As soon as I hit another state that doesn't require helmets, I take it off.

Being MADE to wear this stuff is what I am against, not the reason. You can't legislate the type of sense they are trying to push here. I am not stupid. I am fully aware, probably more than most folks, of what could happen if I don't use this equip and i am prepared for the consequences. It about freedom to me, plain and simple.

**ArmchairGeneral** · 25 Aug 09,, 05:10

Originally Posted by gunnut

My personal experiences have shown that hard acceleration has more impact at fuel efficiency than high speed cruising.

My old 1990 Eclipse (2L, non-turbo) was rated at 20-something for highway. On several long trips where I averaged around 80 miles per hour, I got more than 30 miles per gallon.

My current 2006 Impreza (2.5L, non-turbo) is rated at 28 on the highway. On long trips where I averaged between 75 to 80 mph, the minimum I get is 28.5. I've once reached 30+ mpg.

Both cars have had troubles reaching the listed mileage in city driving. Both cars have auto transmission.

Have you tried going slower much? I did all right going 70-80, maybe 35 mpg, but then I noticed that I got my best mileage by far on strips where the speed limit was 55. I'd say going 70 doesn't make too much of a difference for me, but much above that and it drops off significantly. Of course, a good bit of my data for higher speeds is from road trips with friends who like to do 80-85, and thus my mileage was affected by the weight of extra people and luggage. Anyhow, different cars are different. Newer cars especially are probably designed for higher cruising speeds.

**gunnut** · 25 Aug 09,, 20:07

Originally Posted by ArmchairGeneral

Have you tried going slower much? I did all right going 70-80, maybe 35 mpg, but then I noticed that I got my best mileage by far on strips where the speed limit was 55. I'd say going 70 doesn't make too much of a difference for me, but much above that and it drops off significantly. Of course, a good bit of my data for higher speeds is from road trips with friends who like to do 80-85, and thus my mileage was affected by the weight of extra people and luggage. Anyhow, different cars are different. Newer cars especially are probably designed for higher cruising speeds.

No, I have never tried cruising long distances at 55mph. I figure the highway fuel efficiency data was collected by EPA's tests and the government's number is ALWAYS correct. :P

Seriously, 15% extra fuel efficiency does not warrant an extra hour spent on the road, if it even exists. Also, it's dangerous to drive at 55mph when all the traffic around me is between 70mph and 85mph, on a 2 lane interstate.

**Ironduke** · 25 Aug 09,, 23:59

Originally Posted by gunnut

No, I have never tried cruising long distances at 55mph. I figure the highway fuel efficiency data was collected by EPA's tests and the government's number is ALWAYS correct. :P

Seriously, 15% extra fuel efficiency does not warrant an extra hour spent on the road, if it even exists. Also, it's dangerous to drive at 55mph when all the traffic around me is between 70mph and 85mph, on a 2 lane interstate.

Depends on how fast you need to get to where you're going. I've got a 1300 mile haul ahead of me to DC coming up this weekend. I reckon if I keep my speed down between major cities when I can, I can save a full tank of gas.

**gunnut** · 26 Aug 09,, 00:29

Originally Posted by Ironduke

Depends on how fast you need to get to where you're going. I've got a 1300 mile haul ahead of me to DC coming up this weekend. I reckon if I keep my speed down between major cities when I can, I can save a full tank of gas.

Maybe. Of course some people would gladly pay a tank of gas to save a day's time. A day of work is easily more than $100 for most, in some cases, a few hundred, if not thousands of dollars.

Then there's the safety concern. Going deliberately slower than the traffic flow just to save on gas might cost you more in the long run. People get agitated driving behind slow cars. They might drive in a less safe manner trying to get around the said slow cars. You can control your driving, but you can't control other people. What if someone like that hits you or cause you to have an accident? A tank of gas is just not worth it.

We should drive as fast as the condition allows. That condition includes the current traffic flow. If everyone is driving at 50mph, then don't drive fast. If everyone is moving at 75mph, then go with the flow. Remember, cars moving in the same direction at the same speed don't hit each other. Cars hit each other when there's a differential in velocity.

**Blue** · 26 Aug 09,, 03:39

If I ain't goin' for the scenery........I'm haulin ass and I don't care if I was burning Condor feathers for fuel. Got Rush Limbaugh ridin shotgun.....

**furkensturker** · 26 Aug 09,, 08:49

Originally Posted by 7thsfsniper

As a cop, the only only time I ever wrote citations where for people who violated child safety restraint laws or underaged motor cyclists for helmet laws. In Kansas at the time, you could write secondary adult seatbelt violations, meaning if they where not wearing it when pulled over for something else, you could cite them. I would not. Motorcyclists over 18 did not have to wear a helmet.

As a cop, I did however, strongly advocate the use of seatbelts and helmets. With that, I am vehemently against any of those laws for folks over 18. I wear a seatbelt when I feel like it and I wear a MC helmet under strong protest. As soon as I hit another state that doesn't require helmets, I take it off.

Being MADE to wear this stuff is what I am against, not the reason. You can't legislate the type of sense they are trying to push here. I am not stupid. I am fully aware, probably more than most folks, of what could happen if I don't use this equip and i am prepared for the consequences. It about freedom to me, plain and simple.

I don't understand your thinking not wanting to were seatbelts and helmets. We have a system here where as a part of your car/bike registration is an insurance fee called "third party insurance". It covers all people injured in accidents. I just paid my rego last week and the 3rd party part was $420.00. If everyone had your thoughts our 3rd party insurance would be through the roof, not to mention the suffering that would be created.

I have 9 years experience doing road accident rescue and have first hand knowledge of just what happens when people ignore seatbelt laws.

Sometimes Govt's legislates to protect us from ourselves.

Freddie

**Ironduke** · 26 Aug 09,, 09:36

Originally Posted by Rumrunner

And how...my dad just junked his 85 Camry sedan after it got totalled in a mall parking lot. The beast had 287,000 miles on it and still was going strong.

Some sad sights for the US automakers:

The Top Ten Cash for Clunkers Trade-Ins:

The Top Ten Cash for Clunkers New Cars:[/B]

What Are the Top American-Made Cars?

Cars.com's American-Made Index rates vehicles built and bought in the U.S. Factors include sales, where the car's parts are made and whether the car is assembled in the U.S. Models that have been discontinued are disqualified, as are those with a domestic-parts content rating below 75 percent.

1. Toyota Camry Georgetown, Ky.; Lafayette, Ind.
2. Ford F-150 Dearborn, Mich.; Claycomo, Mo.
3. Chevrolet Malibu Kansas City, Kan.
4. Honda Odyssey Lincoln, Ala.
5. Chevrolet Silverado 1500 Fort Wayne, Ind.
6. Toyota Sienna Princeton, Ind.
7. Toyota Tundra San Antonio
8. GMC Sierra 1500 Fort Wayne, Ind.
9. Ford Taurus Chicago
10. Toyota Venza Georgetown, Ky.

http://www.cars.com/go/advice/Story....ory=amMade0709

Does "Made in America" Still Mean Anything?

[...]
For example, Chrysler's retro PT Cruiser may recall American cars of the prewar era, but it's produced at a Chrysler plant in Toluca, Mexico. And according to the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration (NHTSA), only 35 percent of the PT Cruiser's content is sourced in the U.S. or Canada. The "American" Ford Fusion contains just 30-percent U.S./Canadian content, whereas the competing "Japanese" Honda Accord contains 70 percent, Nissan Altima 65 percent and Toyota Camry 80 percent.

http://www.edmunds.com/advice/buying...5/article.html

My next car will be an American car. It will have a big fat 1 to start the VIN (not a 3) and be more American-made than any similar-style car an American automaker can offer.