Today's Cars and their MPGs
11-10-2007, 11:55 AM
#1
Senior Member
True Car Nut
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: August 07 COTM....NEBF '06, CEBF '06 OHMM '06 ONBF '07 CEBF '07
Posts: 4,064
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Today'* Cars and their MPGs
*Placed in the Lounge due to dicussion of other cars*
Reading this thread in General Chat ( http://www.bonnevilleclub.com/forum/...ic.php?t=88955 ) got me to thinking...
Our cars starting in 89 was capable of more than 30 MPG on the highway with a large V6 (both NA and */C) (not counting the GX3 geared one) pretty effortless. Now today'* compacts are capable of that on the highway. For example, a Toyota Yaris with a 1.5L four banger and auto gets 35 MPG on the highway. Granted all compact cars got us licked in the city but highway is what we're focusing on. Our cars are faster, bigger, and more comfy than that and we're only 2-3 MPG behind it.
What gives? I never understood why we're competivite on the highway with other compact cars even though we're faster (than most of them) roomier, and full-sized.
Can anyone explain?
Reading this thread in General Chat ( http://www.bonnevilleclub.com/forum/...ic.php?t=88955 ) got me to thinking...
Our cars starting in 89 was capable of more than 30 MPG on the highway with a large V6 (both NA and */C) (not counting the GX3 geared one) pretty effortless. Now today'* compacts are capable of that on the highway. For example, a Toyota Yaris with a 1.5L four banger and auto gets 35 MPG on the highway. Granted all compact cars got us licked in the city but highway is what we're focusing on. Our cars are faster, bigger, and more comfy than that and we're only 2-3 MPG behind it.
What gives? I never understood why we're competivite on the highway with other compact cars even though we're faster (than most of them) roomier, and full-sized.
Can anyone explain?
11-10-2007, 12:13 PM
#2
Guest
Posts: n/a
Can't explain it at all..
Now lets look at it this way... You have a car, Say it weighs 3200 Lbs.... And then you have a 2.3L Trying to move it around... And granted they do a good job of it.. But Most don't seem to be great a Towing around 3200 Lbs at Low RPM'* to achieve Better MPG'*...
A long time ago in the Family we had an accord EX with the 2.2 16v 4 cylinder... I still love that car... But on the open road at 80 Mph it was twisting almost 3000 Rpms... It was the more sporty model...
Now we look at my 91 Bonneville... At 50 Mph the engine is turning 1400-1450 Rpms... So I am lucky to be twisting 2000-2100 @ 80 Mph.... I did 31 in this car with severe speeding and the AC on.. I was blown away when I stopped for fuel and did the math.... 31.... I thought that can't be right, its a 91... No way it does that good... I drove all the way back and refueled till it was Pissing fuel on the ground... And got a 30( had some stop and go in there).... Made more trips and was speeding and still easily pulled a 31.... If I was doing 75-80 I think I could pull 34 easily..
These motors don't turn a lot of Revs on the road.... A lot of us aren't easy on the car in stop and go traffic either... But to be able to pull a large car around with a Large V6 and still be able to get into the 20'* all city... Thats pretty good..
For a long time I have felt what all of the manufactures were doing with 4 cylinders in the name of mileage was a bit crazy.. Put a 2.3 Into what we could pretty much call a Premium Midsized car and expect that its going to do good.. Then you have a Big V6 that does almost the same...
Over the years I think some of the engine combinations have been a strange mismatch... we could have used a Quad 4 in a bonneville... But that would have been a bit of a struggle... And even if it had a 3.43 or 3.47 ratio you'd be spinning it faster to accomplish the same thing the V6 would have...
But in the end its all about what people want, Its about Fuel economy, Emission.... and the like..
For what ever reason, the 3800 was a great design and ended up being a lot more than I think GM figured it would be... The Newer V6'* are impressing me a bit in terms of what they can do... The 4 Cylinders are getting better as well
__________________
Best Car Insurance | Auto Protection Today | FREE Trade-In Quote
Now lets look at it this way... You have a car, Say it weighs 3200 Lbs.... And then you have a 2.3L Trying to move it around... And granted they do a good job of it.. But Most don't seem to be great a Towing around 3200 Lbs at Low RPM'* to achieve Better MPG'*...
A long time ago in the Family we had an accord EX with the 2.2 16v 4 cylinder... I still love that car... But on the open road at 80 Mph it was twisting almost 3000 Rpms... It was the more sporty model...
Now we look at my 91 Bonneville... At 50 Mph the engine is turning 1400-1450 Rpms... So I am lucky to be twisting 2000-2100 @ 80 Mph.... I did 31 in this car with severe speeding and the AC on.. I was blown away when I stopped for fuel and did the math.... 31.... I thought that can't be right, its a 91... No way it does that good... I drove all the way back and refueled till it was Pissing fuel on the ground... And got a 30( had some stop and go in there).... Made more trips and was speeding and still easily pulled a 31.... If I was doing 75-80 I think I could pull 34 easily..
These motors don't turn a lot of Revs on the road.... A lot of us aren't easy on the car in stop and go traffic either... But to be able to pull a large car around with a Large V6 and still be able to get into the 20'* all city... Thats pretty good..
For a long time I have felt what all of the manufactures were doing with 4 cylinders in the name of mileage was a bit crazy.. Put a 2.3 Into what we could pretty much call a Premium Midsized car and expect that its going to do good.. Then you have a Big V6 that does almost the same...
Over the years I think some of the engine combinations have been a strange mismatch... we could have used a Quad 4 in a bonneville... But that would have been a bit of a struggle... And even if it had a 3.43 or 3.47 ratio you'd be spinning it faster to accomplish the same thing the V6 would have...
But in the end its all about what people want, Its about Fuel economy, Emission.... and the like..
For what ever reason, the 3800 was a great design and ended up being a lot more than I think GM figured it would be... The Newer V6'* are impressing me a bit in terms of what they can do... The 4 Cylinders are getting better as well
__________________
Best Car Insurance | Auto Protection Today | FREE Trade-In Quote
11-10-2007, 01:03 PM
#3
Senior Member
True Car Nut
I think it has to do with the way the motor is designed. tempos advertised 40+ mpg on the road back in the day. One guy i think got 52mpg one time. I think it has to do with the low end torque of the motor. Most cars now days are all OHC, DOHC, etc, which dont have the low end grunt that the OHC'* do. maybe?
11-10-2007, 01:09 PM
#4
Guest
Posts: n/a
They are getting better.... The VVT technology is giving them a lot more in the low end and a lot more in the top end... Its getting to a point where the DOHC engines are really coming around in terms of what a 3800 owner wants out of a car.. I had a Chance to Drive a 3.5 Twin Cam and was impressed... Didn't feel as torquey as a 3800 but it ran good..
I still would have loved to see a 24v 3800 V6
__________________
Best Car Insurance | Auto Protection Today | FREE Trade-In Quote
I still would have loved to see a 24v 3800 V6
__________________
Best Car Insurance | Auto Protection Today | FREE Trade-In Quote
11-10-2007, 01:56 PM
#5
Senior Member
True Car Nut
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Bloomington, MN
Posts: 3,693
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i think don covered it pretty well
just looking at my sisters honda, which has a 2.2L, runs like 3000 to 3500 rpms at 70-75 mph ish, where as my bonneville used to run like 2000 rpms. if they could make a 4 banger put out as much torque (right ) they could probably get 50'* or 60'* in the MPG range
and a DOHC 3800 would be SWEET!
just looking at my sisters honda, which has a 2.2L, runs like 3000 to 3500 rpms at 70-75 mph ish, where as my bonneville used to run like 2000 rpms. if they could make a 4 banger put out as much torque (right
) they could probably get 50'* or 60'* in the MPG rangeand a DOHC 3800 would be SWEET!
11-10-2007, 05:14 PM
#6
Senior Member
Posts like a Northstar
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Memphis,TN Originally from MA
Posts: 571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
24v 3800 would be sweet, I did a thread on it a few months back and not too many people liked the idea.
http://www.bonnevilleclub.com/forum/...er=asc&start=0
http://www.bonnevilleclub.com/forum/...er=asc&start=0
11-10-2007, 05:23 PM
#7
Senior Member
True Car Nut
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 5,158
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yeah... the Civvy turns 2800rpm at 100km/h (60mph). And 3450rpm at 120km/h (75mph). It'* the gearing. That said, this gearing means that there'* a lot more highway punch than you'd expect out of a 92hp (when new) 1.5L coupled to an autotranny. Once you're up to speed, it'* super super rare that this thing has to kick it out of overdrive in order to make it up hills or for any passing. I just put my foot down a tad more and watch the speed climb steadily.
The 4-speed auto redlines out of first gear at just under 40mph
The 4-speed auto redlines out of first gear at just under 40mph
11-10-2007, 06:46 PM
#8
Senior Member
Posts like a Corvette
19/25 mpg
http://www.subaru.com/shop/specifica...mmand=features
It is funny I could go all day and get 27-29, but the cars that are comperable in power gets worse then my granny land barg. the ricer are toting that imports are superior in every way. I just find it funny.
http://www.subaru.com/shop/specifica...mmand=features
It is funny I could go all day and get 27-29, but the cars that are comperable in power gets worse then my granny land barg. the ricer are toting that imports are superior in every way. I just find it funny.
11-11-2007, 08:45 AM
#9
PopaDopaDo
True Car Nut
Lets face it the 3800/ 4t6x combo was one of the most efficient there ever was.
Even dealers
when I tell them The big old OLDS gets 32+ mpg hwy doing 75 and 180k on the odo.
Even dealers
when I tell them The big old OLDS gets 32+ mpg hwy doing 75 and 180k on the odo.
11-11-2007, 09:36 AM
#10
Guest
Posts: n/a
Thats the truth Tim... Unless you have owned one, you'd never think a Large GM car with a 3800 would get any good mileage
__________________
Best Car Insurance | Auto Protection Today | FREE Trade-In Quote
__________________
Best Car Insurance | Auto Protection Today | FREE Trade-In Quote