Why don't we get to the root of the problem? Usually, it's because we would rather swing at meaningless limbs than to get to the core problem and solve it.
Is anyone out there a little suspicious that the 3 largest American car makers ALL decided at the same time that they were upon the brink of total destruction? Is it not a little odd that they all came upon this enlightened state right after our liberal-infested congress handed out millions of our money to banks that had squandered funds previously? A happy coincidence? I think not.
Ford, GM, and Chrysler have known for over a decade that they were running on borrowed time. They all have tried to adjust, make deals, make wanted cars, and deal with ever-strict CAFE standard as they come down from the government. These companies are top heavy, sluggish, and crippled with a terribly greedy, insane union that refuses to make any concessions. Read: $$$ Meanwhile, Asian companies and German companies continue to be more innovative, less top heavy (in terms of numbers and salaries), more flexible, and make do without unionization. As stated in previous blogs here, the American companies will never see any true, lasting change as long as the UAW is a part of who they are. And the UAW will never give up its grip until the companies are dead and gone. A grim picture.
The big three bosses are lobbying for money to pay off UAW debts. A few hundred million here and there will not be enough to make a huge difference. Too much has to happen. It's a pipe dream. And besides, the timing can't be ignored. They didn't go to Washington because they all mystically happened upon the same circumstances at the same time. They descended upon Washington because the vultures were circling and they wanted some free money. End of story.
Whether or not they actually get any money is a truly moot point. $$$ won't solve this problem. Cutting $$$ will. Their top heavy managers will be forced to take a cut, even as their jobs are cut. The UAW will HAVE to make real concessions in benefits and pay scales, which as stated, is as likely as Barny Frank going straight. They will have to become pared down, lithe, financially adjusted businesses that desire more to be viable and competitive, than to be rich and autonomous.
Either way you cut it, harsh events and big time adjustments are coming. Even if GM goes south, some investment group will cash in, buy up tooling, plants, and some of the workers, and make a go at it. Same with Ford, and already happening at Chrysler. 100 year old businesses can, and do, go under, but another upstart waiting for their chance is always waiting in the wings. We can only hope such entrepreneurs will learn from their sluggish, over fed forebears and avoid the same mistakes.
Can we ever hope the same for Congress? Hope seems shallow up against such a thing. Prayer is a far better answer. And vocalization.
By the way, write your representatives often, and pointedly. It's their J O B to listen.
Friday, December 12, 2008
Tuesday, December 2, 2008
The Big Need for the Big Three
The automobile, as a reliable and ubiquitous form of transportation, has only been around for about 90 years. Perhaps some people have forgotten that fact. What this means is....very few car companies have been in business for most of those 90 years. Cadillac, Chevrolet, Ford, and a few small European companies make up that short list. The "Big Three" we hear about in the news these days are "established icons" in American industry because they have been in continuous business for only 90 years, or less. In the whole business world, such a run would be considered sophomore level at best.
In those 90 years, some car companies have come and gone, some have merged, and some have swapped places with world leader and world follower more than once. It is a volatile business, making cars. Fraught with myriad issues and complexities not experienced in many other manufacturing entities, building a modern automobile that can meet or exceed hundreds of expectations and legal parameters, AND sell well, is a daunting task. Preston Tucker found this out back in the 40's when he ventured to build highly modern and safe automobiles far advanced for their day. His company's failure was not innovation -- rather, it was not having the ability to keep such a progressive dream moving long enough to become stable.
Today, General Motors, Ford, and what is left of Chrysler are begging for funds (supposedly loans) to help keep them afloat. To the point, what they are really asking for is money to keep the unions at bay until they can figure out how to reconfigure themselves in the ever-changing world. We'll get to the dastardly union situation later, but now let's look at why the big three are where they are.
To be honest, life is good for everyone working at any level in the big three. Common line workers have a very good pay scale, promise of a salary if they work or are laid off, and very good working conditions. It's not rocket science either, as they say. Middle management jobs are plentiful, as these companies are very top heavy, a "mile wide and an inch deep," in corporate speak. Managers get hired and fired quickly, but again, once in the union, they get something just for one days work, the rest of their lives. And at the top, where truly huge decisions and risks are made and taken, high 6 figure, and low 7 figure salaries are not at all uncommon. So pay is not an issue. Volatility is, but that's true elsewhere.
The big three have a long history (if you consider 40+ years long) of making large cars with middlin' styling and so-so build quality, and could get away with a sluggish response to innovation and advancement for decades due mainly to the fact that they had little competition. Complacency breeds complacency, so while Tucker saw the need for disc brakes in the late 40's, Detroit didn't see that same need until the early 70's. Even then, having 4 wheel disc brakes did not become common until the 90's. European cars beat the Detroit 3 by almost 2 decades on that one. The point being made is that advances like fuel injection, overdrive transmissions, and certain safety measures were installed very late in the game, and then, at a slow dribble. Sluggish. But the big bosses at the big three are not being sluggish about asking for money!
We taught Japan and China how to make cars. They still imitate our innovation, styling, and recently, our portly size, but they do so with a much leaner and more progressive approach to the whole industry. Think in terms of a 350 lb. NFL lineman and a lean, mean 170 sprinter both approaching the task of moving a 40 lb bucket forward 1 mile. The big lineman handles the weight fine, but the distance causes him to be lethargic. The sprinter struggles with the weight, but over that one mile, he has quicker reflexes, better stamina, and ultimately, gets it there faster. Such is Japan vs. America. We are slow to move, even though we have the technology and innovation, and apparently, we are willing to let things slide until we have to act. Chevrolet still used throttle body fuel injection in their high selling trucks until 1995. That was a full 15 years after throttle body injection was forsaken for the dinosaur method of fuel delivery that it was by other car manufacturers. Why? Because Chevy was selling trucks like hot cakes, and saw "no need" to advance the technology. Besides, refitting their engines with modern (efficient and far more powerful) fuel injection would cost money. Ford does the same thing, as has much of the greater Chrysler corporation.
Lethargic, top heavy, and dubious union influences have crippled the big three. They have all been in trouble for years, even decades. Ford has been changing leadership like diapers on a baby, all to no avail. Their designers are obviously gay tree huggers and their truck-biased inventory has created a huge void in income. Without the Mustang, Ford would already be dead. Chrysler is now privately owned by a community of investors (most don't know this), having been dumped by their Mercedes-Benz partners years ago. Bad choices and few saving grace models are keeping it limping along, for awhile. GM is so large, so diversified, and so much closer to reinventing itself that it may actually make it long term, even in today's market. But GM is the epitome of the aforementioned lethargic giant, and too many people have long since dismissed them as the maker of second rate, bland vehicles that could be so much better, if only someone at GM gave a d$#@.
What the Big Three need is not a buy out, or a bail out, or even a government loan. What they need is the following:
1. Deal with the Unions: American automobile unions cost the big three an average of $2000+ per car in benefits and wages. The average for the Japanese brands? Less than $20. Just that fact alone sets the stage for a no-win situation. Maybe some real pressure will result in the union bosses finally giving some ground, but don't count on it. Small concessions may be the only hope. The union influence, and their irrational price gouging and demands, have made the big three obsolete in the world market. Keep in mind that if any of the big three go under, without a "bail out," the unions will not likely budge an inch. They will instead take every dime they can, call it a day, and move on.
There are several car plants in the south, owned by Mercedes, BMW, and Toyota, among others, that offer good jobs to Americans, but they are not unionized. Those "foreign" brands are doing rather well, and they are not forced to pay elaborate fees to unions. It is a huge deal. Either the big three subdue the unions, or the unions will bury the big three.
2. Reorganize: This is an "in-house" affair, as these huge conglomerates have swelled over the years and have gotten used to having millions of expendable income to invest as they wish. Don't be fooled -- Ford, GM and Chrysler have all spend tens of millions on "halo" cars (either super performance/impractical cars, or ultra luxury/unreachable cars) at various times, just to prove they could. Today, these companies are trotting out so-called "green cars" (ahem) that are impractical, unusable, and terrifically underdeveloped.
CEO's and upper management are accustomed to million dollar bonuses, huge offices, and pleasure trips. The car industry is a viable, tremendous help to America's economy, but they have been bloated, lethargic, and apathetic for decades. They think their name and status will carry the day, but presently, they are in Washington begging for dollars they have every intention of wasting on union obligations.
The Big Three must be forced to become the svelte three, with conservative attitudes in all they do, accountability in their finances, and a willingness to essentially start over as if they are the underdog, and willing to work hard for low pay just to compete. Aside from adopting that attitude from the top down, they are already doomed.
3. Re-Focus: Electric cars appease the worthless tree huggers among us. No one else. Just like wind power, electric cars, hydrogen powered cars, and solar cars will always be a dream of some that is infinitely impractical. The American three must bite the bullet and invest in technologies they know will work: smaller, more efficient engines, lighter vehicles, and a commitment to diesel.
Direct fuel injection is a new technology that allows the fuel spray to be introduced directly into the combustion chamber. Don't fall asleep! This technology is finally being put into production decades after it should have been, but what it means is more power with less fuel. Win-win, which is a rare thing in automobiles. GM has direct injection in just a few models. Shame. Japanese makers are putting it into effect across the board. GM knows it will cost money to retro-fit this DI technology, but it will reap great benefits for all. So why do they drag their heels? Cause they are lethargic, money grubbing idiots. Hence, the begging before a corrupt congress.
Turbo-charging and turbo diesels are incredibly effective and efficient power plant ideas, but have almost no showing in the big three because, again, they are stuck in their financial muck, and have the ability to change directions like a huge ship with a tiny rudder.
The reality that is coming is not solar, wind, or batteries -- the reality is smaller cars with small, efficient power plants that make big power, all running on OIL!
The Big Three are in trouble, have been in trouble, and will be in trouble until they get serious about survival, serious about implementing technology that increases power and efficiency, and get serious about being highly proactive in an ever changing world. Today, they are far too lazy and hazy to do anything resembling that. From the top down to the guy who sweeps the floor, wages must be cut, innovation must be lauded and implemented, and less time needs to be spent listening to people who don't know a water pump from a breast pump, and more time listening to people who want to build quality, highly evolved vehicles, and know how to do it. That is what started the big three, and that is what will save them.
NOT some Elmer Fudd-sounding congressman that sent the housing market into the dumpster, which is exactly where he lives his life.
In those 90 years, some car companies have come and gone, some have merged, and some have swapped places with world leader and world follower more than once. It is a volatile business, making cars. Fraught with myriad issues and complexities not experienced in many other manufacturing entities, building a modern automobile that can meet or exceed hundreds of expectations and legal parameters, AND sell well, is a daunting task. Preston Tucker found this out back in the 40's when he ventured to build highly modern and safe automobiles far advanced for their day. His company's failure was not innovation -- rather, it was not having the ability to keep such a progressive dream moving long enough to become stable.
Today, General Motors, Ford, and what is left of Chrysler are begging for funds (supposedly loans) to help keep them afloat. To the point, what they are really asking for is money to keep the unions at bay until they can figure out how to reconfigure themselves in the ever-changing world. We'll get to the dastardly union situation later, but now let's look at why the big three are where they are.
To be honest, life is good for everyone working at any level in the big three. Common line workers have a very good pay scale, promise of a salary if they work or are laid off, and very good working conditions. It's not rocket science either, as they say. Middle management jobs are plentiful, as these companies are very top heavy, a "mile wide and an inch deep," in corporate speak. Managers get hired and fired quickly, but again, once in the union, they get something just for one days work, the rest of their lives. And at the top, where truly huge decisions and risks are made and taken, high 6 figure, and low 7 figure salaries are not at all uncommon. So pay is not an issue. Volatility is, but that's true elsewhere.
The big three have a long history (if you consider 40+ years long) of making large cars with middlin' styling and so-so build quality, and could get away with a sluggish response to innovation and advancement for decades due mainly to the fact that they had little competition. Complacency breeds complacency, so while Tucker saw the need for disc brakes in the late 40's, Detroit didn't see that same need until the early 70's. Even then, having 4 wheel disc brakes did not become common until the 90's. European cars beat the Detroit 3 by almost 2 decades on that one. The point being made is that advances like fuel injection, overdrive transmissions, and certain safety measures were installed very late in the game, and then, at a slow dribble. Sluggish. But the big bosses at the big three are not being sluggish about asking for money!
We taught Japan and China how to make cars. They still imitate our innovation, styling, and recently, our portly size, but they do so with a much leaner and more progressive approach to the whole industry. Think in terms of a 350 lb. NFL lineman and a lean, mean 170 sprinter both approaching the task of moving a 40 lb bucket forward 1 mile. The big lineman handles the weight fine, but the distance causes him to be lethargic. The sprinter struggles with the weight, but over that one mile, he has quicker reflexes, better stamina, and ultimately, gets it there faster. Such is Japan vs. America. We are slow to move, even though we have the technology and innovation, and apparently, we are willing to let things slide until we have to act. Chevrolet still used throttle body fuel injection in their high selling trucks until 1995. That was a full 15 years after throttle body injection was forsaken for the dinosaur method of fuel delivery that it was by other car manufacturers. Why? Because Chevy was selling trucks like hot cakes, and saw "no need" to advance the technology. Besides, refitting their engines with modern (efficient and far more powerful) fuel injection would cost money. Ford does the same thing, as has much of the greater Chrysler corporation.
Lethargic, top heavy, and dubious union influences have crippled the big three. They have all been in trouble for years, even decades. Ford has been changing leadership like diapers on a baby, all to no avail. Their designers are obviously gay tree huggers and their truck-biased inventory has created a huge void in income. Without the Mustang, Ford would already be dead. Chrysler is now privately owned by a community of investors (most don't know this), having been dumped by their Mercedes-Benz partners years ago. Bad choices and few saving grace models are keeping it limping along, for awhile. GM is so large, so diversified, and so much closer to reinventing itself that it may actually make it long term, even in today's market. But GM is the epitome of the aforementioned lethargic giant, and too many people have long since dismissed them as the maker of second rate, bland vehicles that could be so much better, if only someone at GM gave a d$#@.
What the Big Three need is not a buy out, or a bail out, or even a government loan. What they need is the following:
1. Deal with the Unions: American automobile unions cost the big three an average of $2000+ per car in benefits and wages. The average for the Japanese brands? Less than $20. Just that fact alone sets the stage for a no-win situation. Maybe some real pressure will result in the union bosses finally giving some ground, but don't count on it. Small concessions may be the only hope. The union influence, and their irrational price gouging and demands, have made the big three obsolete in the world market. Keep in mind that if any of the big three go under, without a "bail out," the unions will not likely budge an inch. They will instead take every dime they can, call it a day, and move on.
There are several car plants in the south, owned by Mercedes, BMW, and Toyota, among others, that offer good jobs to Americans, but they are not unionized. Those "foreign" brands are doing rather well, and they are not forced to pay elaborate fees to unions. It is a huge deal. Either the big three subdue the unions, or the unions will bury the big three.
2. Reorganize: This is an "in-house" affair, as these huge conglomerates have swelled over the years and have gotten used to having millions of expendable income to invest as they wish. Don't be fooled -- Ford, GM and Chrysler have all spend tens of millions on "halo" cars (either super performance/impractical cars, or ultra luxury/unreachable cars) at various times, just to prove they could. Today, these companies are trotting out so-called "green cars" (ahem) that are impractical, unusable, and terrifically underdeveloped.
CEO's and upper management are accustomed to million dollar bonuses, huge offices, and pleasure trips. The car industry is a viable, tremendous help to America's economy, but they have been bloated, lethargic, and apathetic for decades. They think their name and status will carry the day, but presently, they are in Washington begging for dollars they have every intention of wasting on union obligations.
The Big Three must be forced to become the svelte three, with conservative attitudes in all they do, accountability in their finances, and a willingness to essentially start over as if they are the underdog, and willing to work hard for low pay just to compete. Aside from adopting that attitude from the top down, they are already doomed.
3. Re-Focus: Electric cars appease the worthless tree huggers among us. No one else. Just like wind power, electric cars, hydrogen powered cars, and solar cars will always be a dream of some that is infinitely impractical. The American three must bite the bullet and invest in technologies they know will work: smaller, more efficient engines, lighter vehicles, and a commitment to diesel.
Direct fuel injection is a new technology that allows the fuel spray to be introduced directly into the combustion chamber. Don't fall asleep! This technology is finally being put into production decades after it should have been, but what it means is more power with less fuel. Win-win, which is a rare thing in automobiles. GM has direct injection in just a few models. Shame. Japanese makers are putting it into effect across the board. GM knows it will cost money to retro-fit this DI technology, but it will reap great benefits for all. So why do they drag their heels? Cause they are lethargic, money grubbing idiots. Hence, the begging before a corrupt congress.
Turbo-charging and turbo diesels are incredibly effective and efficient power plant ideas, but have almost no showing in the big three because, again, they are stuck in their financial muck, and have the ability to change directions like a huge ship with a tiny rudder.
The reality that is coming is not solar, wind, or batteries -- the reality is smaller cars with small, efficient power plants that make big power, all running on OIL!
The Big Three are in trouble, have been in trouble, and will be in trouble until they get serious about survival, serious about implementing technology that increases power and efficiency, and get serious about being highly proactive in an ever changing world. Today, they are far too lazy and hazy to do anything resembling that. From the top down to the guy who sweeps the floor, wages must be cut, innovation must be lauded and implemented, and less time needs to be spent listening to people who don't know a water pump from a breast pump, and more time listening to people who want to build quality, highly evolved vehicles, and know how to do it. That is what started the big three, and that is what will save them.
NOT some Elmer Fudd-sounding congressman that sent the housing market into the dumpster, which is exactly where he lives his life.
Friday, October 3, 2008
Alternantives
What do you have in your life that is not affected by oil?
Before you begin thinking, the answer is "nothing." The following, minute list reflects everyday things that come quite directly from oil:
gasoline
diesel
grease
plastics
rayon
various finishes, sealants, and paints
rubber
polyester....to name just a few.
We didn't even take the time to mention that all of our food, wood products, building materials, clothing, all modes of transportation, all metals, all synthetics....everything, makes it way to us, somehow, via oil. There is virtually NO ONE or NOTHING that is not affected in some meaningful way by oil.
Take away oil from our society, and you are left with............NOTHING. Well, actually, you are left with a society that resembles 1820 or so. Even then they had oil lamps and crude grease for wagon wheels. Does AlGore want to return to 1820? Does he want to give back his private jet? Does he want to sell off his Carbon Offset company that he owns? (yes, it has been proven that when AlGore pays his "carbon offsets', he is actually paying himself, just as any other mouth breathing idiot is doing if they pay those offsets)
Our entire society and social structure is built upon.......wait for it..........OIL.
What about this do the Democraps not get? Oh, they get it, but they feel the need to beat up on "big oil" in order to appease their brain dead constituents who don't know that almost all Democraps have huge share holdings in oil companies. And why not? They pay huge dividends! They also worship the creation rather than our creator, and somewhere back in time, a pot smoking liberal decided that oil is all dirty and yucky, and powers our 'awful' industrial society, so we need to eradicate that stinky black stuff and return to a greener, leaner civilization where everyone walks in sandals through fields of poppies (be sure to stop and eat a few) and finds food under rocks and money to buy their tattered clothing hanging on trees. Yeah buddy, sounds like a plan.
If you are a total moron.
Global warming is a notion of fancy. There is not a single thing proven about it. The doomsayers keep saying it's coming, but it hasn't, and won't. But what do they stand to gain? And while we're at it, who stands to gain by busting on oil? Good question!
This blog is not usually all that political, but in this case, it has to be. God gave us oil so that we could progress and have all the great things we have in order to travel, live longer, and move forward. Oil is no dirtier than dirt. We have lots of both, and both are necessary to sustain life. Those who claim that we must get away from oil chanted that same mantra in the 50's, again much louder in the 70's, and tried again during the Clinton administration. Horrible predictions were made in all those cases, and yet.....we still have plenty of oil, with no end in sight. "Experts" all try to predict how much oil is actually left, but that is like saying how much more sun we will have. Theories and predelictions abound, but no one really knows. All we do know is that the more we pump, and the more we look, the more we find. And it's all good.
Oil is cheap to find, cheap and easy to distill, is highly versatile, largely recyclable, readily available, and our present, past, and future energy champion that is reliable and versatile. And if all this is true, then why are there dolts out there who want to abandon oil? The dirty little secret is this -- they don't! (they just want to appear 'green.' shhhhhh!)
Solar power seems to make sense. The sun is hot, sun's rays are hot, sun melts things, so there ya go. But harnessing the sun's power has proven to be beyond what our present chemists, engineers, and energy providers can handle. Solar panels, when used to the extreme, can warm water, but try installing a roof top of solar panels on your house, along with all the necessary plumbing. Tons of weight, tons of costs, and tons of upkeep. Solar? Nah.
Wind power! Here we go! The Dutch are leading the way....uh, not so much. A field of wind machines in Wyoming reportedly cost 2 million dollars (back in 1990) and produced enough free electricity to power 10 homes for 10 minutes in one month. Maybe one day...but for now, wind talkers are just trying to blow smoke up your rear.
Electric cars! Wow! Uh, gotta get the electro from burning coal. Not free, not cheap, and electric cars are highly complicated, heavy, and highly inefficient. Oil spanks 'em with a big paddle.
And so on, and so on. This whole "hate oil" fiasco is like trying to find a cheap and easy replacement for sliced bread. Why not just eat the bread? Sure, its been around for awhile, but it is cheap, easy to get, easy to make, and can be really good for you. Oil is just like that. Cars today emit 1/5th of the harmful toxins that cars spewed just 20 years ago. Mileage regulations increase so quickly, that some automakers have to consider 50 mpg a target in a decade or more. Oil is as clean as it ever has been, and on top of that, we have more of it now than we have ever used in the past.
Get off the liberal bandwagon. Fill your car or truck up with good ol gasoline and burn it like there is no tomorrow. And do it with pride. Unashamed. Unhindered. There is plenty more where it came from, the prices ARE coming down (no liberal talks about that, do they?) and will continue to do so if that freak Obamer is banned from the white house. Drill baby drill is right. Drill and burn it and use it like it's growing under trees, because it is.
Before you begin thinking, the answer is "nothing." The following, minute list reflects everyday things that come quite directly from oil:
gasoline
diesel
grease
plastics
rayon
various finishes, sealants, and paints
rubber
polyester....to name just a few.
We didn't even take the time to mention that all of our food, wood products, building materials, clothing, all modes of transportation, all metals, all synthetics....everything, makes it way to us, somehow, via oil. There is virtually NO ONE or NOTHING that is not affected in some meaningful way by oil.
Take away oil from our society, and you are left with............NOTHING. Well, actually, you are left with a society that resembles 1820 or so. Even then they had oil lamps and crude grease for wagon wheels. Does AlGore want to return to 1820? Does he want to give back his private jet? Does he want to sell off his Carbon Offset company that he owns? (yes, it has been proven that when AlGore pays his "carbon offsets', he is actually paying himself, just as any other mouth breathing idiot is doing if they pay those offsets)
Our entire society and social structure is built upon.......wait for it..........OIL.
What about this do the Democraps not get? Oh, they get it, but they feel the need to beat up on "big oil" in order to appease their brain dead constituents who don't know that almost all Democraps have huge share holdings in oil companies. And why not? They pay huge dividends! They also worship the creation rather than our creator, and somewhere back in time, a pot smoking liberal decided that oil is all dirty and yucky, and powers our 'awful' industrial society, so we need to eradicate that stinky black stuff and return to a greener, leaner civilization where everyone walks in sandals through fields of poppies (be sure to stop and eat a few) and finds food under rocks and money to buy their tattered clothing hanging on trees. Yeah buddy, sounds like a plan.
If you are a total moron.
Global warming is a notion of fancy. There is not a single thing proven about it. The doomsayers keep saying it's coming, but it hasn't, and won't. But what do they stand to gain? And while we're at it, who stands to gain by busting on oil? Good question!
This blog is not usually all that political, but in this case, it has to be. God gave us oil so that we could progress and have all the great things we have in order to travel, live longer, and move forward. Oil is no dirtier than dirt. We have lots of both, and both are necessary to sustain life. Those who claim that we must get away from oil chanted that same mantra in the 50's, again much louder in the 70's, and tried again during the Clinton administration. Horrible predictions were made in all those cases, and yet.....we still have plenty of oil, with no end in sight. "Experts" all try to predict how much oil is actually left, but that is like saying how much more sun we will have. Theories and predelictions abound, but no one really knows. All we do know is that the more we pump, and the more we look, the more we find. And it's all good.
Oil is cheap to find, cheap and easy to distill, is highly versatile, largely recyclable, readily available, and our present, past, and future energy champion that is reliable and versatile. And if all this is true, then why are there dolts out there who want to abandon oil? The dirty little secret is this -- they don't! (they just want to appear 'green.' shhhhhh!)
Solar power seems to make sense. The sun is hot, sun's rays are hot, sun melts things, so there ya go. But harnessing the sun's power has proven to be beyond what our present chemists, engineers, and energy providers can handle. Solar panels, when used to the extreme, can warm water, but try installing a roof top of solar panels on your house, along with all the necessary plumbing. Tons of weight, tons of costs, and tons of upkeep. Solar? Nah.
Wind power! Here we go! The Dutch are leading the way....uh, not so much. A field of wind machines in Wyoming reportedly cost 2 million dollars (back in 1990) and produced enough free electricity to power 10 homes for 10 minutes in one month. Maybe one day...but for now, wind talkers are just trying to blow smoke up your rear.
Electric cars! Wow! Uh, gotta get the electro from burning coal. Not free, not cheap, and electric cars are highly complicated, heavy, and highly inefficient. Oil spanks 'em with a big paddle.
And so on, and so on. This whole "hate oil" fiasco is like trying to find a cheap and easy replacement for sliced bread. Why not just eat the bread? Sure, its been around for awhile, but it is cheap, easy to get, easy to make, and can be really good for you. Oil is just like that. Cars today emit 1/5th of the harmful toxins that cars spewed just 20 years ago. Mileage regulations increase so quickly, that some automakers have to consider 50 mpg a target in a decade or more. Oil is as clean as it ever has been, and on top of that, we have more of it now than we have ever used in the past.
Get off the liberal bandwagon. Fill your car or truck up with good ol gasoline and burn it like there is no tomorrow. And do it with pride. Unashamed. Unhindered. There is plenty more where it came from, the prices ARE coming down (no liberal talks about that, do they?) and will continue to do so if that freak Obamer is banned from the white house. Drill baby drill is right. Drill and burn it and use it like it's growing under trees, because it is.
Monday, September 15, 2008
Raise the Limit!
No, not the speed limit.....well, then again....
There is much talk these days about raising the legal age limit for beginning drivers from 16, 17, and even 18 (in a few states) to something more like 18 or 19 -- even 20, according to some lawmakers who feel such a move would eventually result in saving lives.
Upon hearing such news, anyone alive under the age of 20 will be furious, but anyone old enough to know better (say, 25 or older) will be happy to hear such talk. True, some congressmen and representatives are debating raising the age limit for beginner drivers in their state, as this cannot be a national or federal move. Their reasoning is based almost solely upon two factors: experience, and alcohol.
Sad to admit here in the US that drinking among teens is such a concern that raising the legal age for drivers is seen as an answer. Truth is, few 16 year olds today have the experience of responsibility and rational thinking on their side by that age. In fact, few 16 year olds have never had to think their way through anything more crucial that which friend to text next, as they watch their Tivo while playing video games. And to think that today's overly spoiled, and underly worked teens can get behind the wheel of a car (that Daddy has provided) and go spooling off, texting and talking all the time on their ever-present talkie device they can't live without.
Raising the legal limit would in fact save lives. No rational person is going to reasonably argue that point. Teens disproportionally have more accidents than middle age adults, and the reasons range from hormones (more risk taking) to stupidity (teens are just stupid) to drinking without control (OK, so adults are guilty here too unfortunately), and those factors, combined with little experience, results in lots of wrecks, tickets, and worse.
It is not being argued that all teen drivers are drunken, reckless idiots who careen aimlessly towards certain disaster. Not all. There are some who are sober, drive at a reasonable pace, and are just morons behind the wheel. One day they are driving slow, bolt upright, both hands on the wheel, using their turn signal going around a curve in the road, and after a few days or weeks of that, when comfort begins to take over, they become slouchy, careless, slack-jawed fools who have no sense of speed or direction. Tunes turned up to ten, seat in the fully reclined, fully lowered position, they speed down narrow streets, with that perpetual snide smile on their face, not having an idea of what they are doing. Truly dangerous, and truly needs to be changed.
Making teens wait until 18 or 19 (heck, let's go for 21) has tons of advantages, and no real disadvantages, except for their insipid whining, but they are going to do that anyway. But is raising the legal limit enough? Can we do more, or are there other ways to accomplish the same thing?
Another tactic would be this: make every teen pay for their own car, insurance, and gas. No, really. Pass a law that forces teens to put money into an account that is funded by direct deposits from their place of work. Once they have enough in the account to pay cash for the car, 6 months of pre-paid insurance, and enough left over for a full tank, then they can purchase a car.
This makes all teens find a job, actually work, and learn the value of a dollar. Just think what such a law would do to turn our present crop of rancid, self absorbed, spoiled brats. We would suddenly have a work force of snotty nosed teens who are motivated to work hard, save money, and learn how to do for themselves. The on-going premise of this plan is that after the initial purchase (which will take years to accrue), they still have to make insurance payments, repairs, and buy gas with the fund supplied by the direct deposit account. Mommy and Daddy's money is no longer available for use. The fact that millions would commit suicide if such a plan was actually enacted makes it all the more appealing.
Another plan would be for all high schools to ban any teens driving to school in private cars. And colleges nationwide should limit parking on school property with a private car to just juniors and seniors. Some colleges do in fact not allow freshmen to have a car (on campus) until they have completed 32 hours of work. Raise that to 80 hours and you're getting somewhere! Besides, if a college student can't walk a mile or two a day, they need to thank Nintendo and Twinkies for their atrophy and get off their butts and start exercising.
Nationwide, the legal age for beginner drivers needs to be raised, state to state, to at least 19, and in concert with that move, far more stringent driving tests, both written and actual, need to be put in place to make getting a license something the brain takes part in. One out of every 50 Americans die in a car wreck. Hundreds of thousands a year, and about half of those have alcohol involved. So why not raise the age limit? Why not take away the license of DUI offenders for 5 years minimum, with 1 year of jail time minimum to boot? Why not?
A big reason why this is not happening, is because YOU, the public, are not yelling at prosecutors and judges, demanding that sanity be brought back to our roads. So, write your congress, representatives, chief of police, et al and make your voice heard.
And teen Johnny or Susie can just cool their jets, work a little, and save up for their first heap awhile longer.
Yeah, right.
There is much talk these days about raising the legal age limit for beginning drivers from 16, 17, and even 18 (in a few states) to something more like 18 or 19 -- even 20, according to some lawmakers who feel such a move would eventually result in saving lives.
Upon hearing such news, anyone alive under the age of 20 will be furious, but anyone old enough to know better (say, 25 or older) will be happy to hear such talk. True, some congressmen and representatives are debating raising the age limit for beginner drivers in their state, as this cannot be a national or federal move. Their reasoning is based almost solely upon two factors: experience, and alcohol.
Sad to admit here in the US that drinking among teens is such a concern that raising the legal age for drivers is seen as an answer. Truth is, few 16 year olds today have the experience of responsibility and rational thinking on their side by that age. In fact, few 16 year olds have never had to think their way through anything more crucial that which friend to text next, as they watch their Tivo while playing video games. And to think that today's overly spoiled, and underly worked teens can get behind the wheel of a car (that Daddy has provided) and go spooling off, texting and talking all the time on their ever-present talkie device they can't live without.
Raising the legal limit would in fact save lives. No rational person is going to reasonably argue that point. Teens disproportionally have more accidents than middle age adults, and the reasons range from hormones (more risk taking) to stupidity (teens are just stupid) to drinking without control (OK, so adults are guilty here too unfortunately), and those factors, combined with little experience, results in lots of wrecks, tickets, and worse.
It is not being argued that all teen drivers are drunken, reckless idiots who careen aimlessly towards certain disaster. Not all. There are some who are sober, drive at a reasonable pace, and are just morons behind the wheel. One day they are driving slow, bolt upright, both hands on the wheel, using their turn signal going around a curve in the road, and after a few days or weeks of that, when comfort begins to take over, they become slouchy, careless, slack-jawed fools who have no sense of speed or direction. Tunes turned up to ten, seat in the fully reclined, fully lowered position, they speed down narrow streets, with that perpetual snide smile on their face, not having an idea of what they are doing. Truly dangerous, and truly needs to be changed.
Making teens wait until 18 or 19 (heck, let's go for 21) has tons of advantages, and no real disadvantages, except for their insipid whining, but they are going to do that anyway. But is raising the legal limit enough? Can we do more, or are there other ways to accomplish the same thing?
Another tactic would be this: make every teen pay for their own car, insurance, and gas. No, really. Pass a law that forces teens to put money into an account that is funded by direct deposits from their place of work. Once they have enough in the account to pay cash for the car, 6 months of pre-paid insurance, and enough left over for a full tank, then they can purchase a car.
This makes all teens find a job, actually work, and learn the value of a dollar. Just think what such a law would do to turn our present crop of rancid, self absorbed, spoiled brats. We would suddenly have a work force of snotty nosed teens who are motivated to work hard, save money, and learn how to do for themselves. The on-going premise of this plan is that after the initial purchase (which will take years to accrue), they still have to make insurance payments, repairs, and buy gas with the fund supplied by the direct deposit account. Mommy and Daddy's money is no longer available for use. The fact that millions would commit suicide if such a plan was actually enacted makes it all the more appealing.
Another plan would be for all high schools to ban any teens driving to school in private cars. And colleges nationwide should limit parking on school property with a private car to just juniors and seniors. Some colleges do in fact not allow freshmen to have a car (on campus) until they have completed 32 hours of work. Raise that to 80 hours and you're getting somewhere! Besides, if a college student can't walk a mile or two a day, they need to thank Nintendo and Twinkies for their atrophy and get off their butts and start exercising.
Nationwide, the legal age for beginner drivers needs to be raised, state to state, to at least 19, and in concert with that move, far more stringent driving tests, both written and actual, need to be put in place to make getting a license something the brain takes part in. One out of every 50 Americans die in a car wreck. Hundreds of thousands a year, and about half of those have alcohol involved. So why not raise the age limit? Why not take away the license of DUI offenders for 5 years minimum, with 1 year of jail time minimum to boot? Why not?
A big reason why this is not happening, is because YOU, the public, are not yelling at prosecutors and judges, demanding that sanity be brought back to our roads. So, write your congress, representatives, chief of police, et al and make your voice heard.
And teen Johnny or Susie can just cool their jets, work a little, and save up for their first heap awhile longer.
Yeah, right.
Friday, July 11, 2008
Stuff No One Cares About
So, just what are the best advancements that have taken place in the automobile world in the past 5 decades?
Likely, almost every American driver has considered this question a hundred times during moments of mental lax in the past year. So, to answer such a question with a bunch of general information that few care about, read on.
However, if you care about living long enough to get home from work, or care about the safety of your family and loved ones, you might want to read with more interest.
Advancements in automotive design can be broken into the following categories for organizational and comprehension purposes: safety, technology, efficiency, performance and utility.
Safety: Preston Tucker built some automobiles back in the 50's that were far advanced for their day. They had a form of safety glass, disc brakes, the engine in the rear of the car, and seat belts, among other safety and performance features. They even had headlights that would move in the direction of the steering wheel in a turn. Crazy, advanced stuff for that day. Currently, all cars have safety glass, all have disc brakes (far more efficient) at least in the front, a few have rear engines, and all have seat belts. But upon the platform Tucker built, auto makers have added air bags, improved seat belt design, lane departure warning systems, and all sorts of electronic vehicle control systems that tie together the brakes, shock absorbers, and transmission in a concerted effort to keep cars from skidding and sliding out of control. Some even have special sensors that keep your car away from other cars while using cruise control. Space age stuff.
Aside from some of these passive and active safety systems, auto makers are also continually working with chassis and body design to build in to any given car "crush zones" whereas, various types of steel are used in certain areas to help the car absorb an impact gradually (milliseconds are counted here) in a "bend, but don't break" philosophy of design. While many cars have more plastic than steel in their bodies, every weld, every panel, every cross beam has been tested for optimum crash testing effectiveness. Sure, tiny little Asian cars made out of tin cans still fold up like a paper plate when hit, but they do indeed have more impact survivability built in than the heaviest of land barges of the 50's.
It's not all the bells and feminine voiced reminders that make cars safer today. It's the big tail lights, the brighter head lights, the larger mirrors, the better tires, shocks, brakes, and steering that aid the average driver the most. To no one's surprise, driver skill and attentiveness is still far and away the greatest contributing factor to safety, but in today's autos, even a doofus has a better chance of stopping short of, or steering clear of, a potential disastrous situation.
Technology: What did we do before satellite navigation was installed in cars? Did people actually read maps and road signs? Well, people did read maps and signs, and probably were just as safe and attentive as those with fancy pants sat/nav systems. Even though this author sees infotainment technology advancements in cars as frivolous and unnecessary in most instances, technology has vastly improved auto performance, efficiency, and safety in many key areas.
Anti-lock brakes is a technology that first appeared on BMW motorcycles. There was a time when the pulsing sensations of ABS brakes almost made some makers to abandon the tech, but wisely, they held on and let the driving public adapt. Almost as much as tire advancement, anti-lock brakes has potentially saved millions of lives over the years.
Port-fuel injection technology took us from the long-held carburetor era to a more efficient, cleaner future once and for all. Again, some BMW's, early Corvettes, and a few other exotics tried to use a form of fuel injection in the early days, mimicking what was used on some air craft. Fuel injection is a precise delivery of fuel to each cylinder, allowing for better starts, less emissions, and more power. Fuel injection allowed 4 cylinder engines to make decent power, and big V8's to get decent mileage. Like ABS, this technology changed the automotive landscape.
Suspension technology has advanced not so much in all new design, but in improved design and materials. Cars used unequal control arms in the front suspension 4 decades ago, just like today, but vastly improved shock absorber technology, tire design advancement, and model specific spring design has taken every day cars today to where high-end race cars were in the 60's. That's no lie. The average "sport" sedan (think: a Chevrolet Impala SS) could out-handle and maybe outrun a 60's vintage Corvette without breaking a sweat. Thanks to CAD design and advanced testing, cars and trucks today are far more predictable and stable handlers than ever thought possible just 30 years ago. If you ever get the chance, drive a restored 60's era muscle car around the block, and you will have all the convincing you need.
Efficiency: This category has already been touched upon in the preceding text, but it is worth saying again that a typical minivan with a V6 motor and seating for 7 can pull down 22 mpg on the highway, fully loaded with people and gear. A 1970 station wagon, with a V8 motor and seating for 8, might pull down 12 mpg on the highway, fully loaded with people and gear. OK, so some models with high geared rear ends may hit 15 mpg on a good day. But you get the point. And that bland minivan could easily out-brake, out run, and out handle the station wagon with ease.
So, how do 5,000 + pound pick up trucks and SUV's net 18 mpg on the highway? How do little rice-burner cars accelerate like sports cars of just 10 years ago and still get 30 mpg? Chalk it up to ever-increasing efficiency in design and implementation. Cars are not really getting any lighter, what with all the increased sound deadening materials, heavy stereo equipment, and all that safety gear being lugged around. What they are getting are more efficient motors (computer controlled, with fuel injection, see above) and far more efficient and fuel friendly transmissions. From basically the 40's to the early 80's, almost all cars and trucks were equipped with either 3 speed automatic transmissions, or 4 speed manuals. For that 40 year span in time, few overdrive transmissions were ever offered in any model. This translated to less than ideal performance and mileage. Today, few cars or trucks have any fewer than 5 speeds, and many now have 6, in both auto and manuals. The point? More gears helps your engine move the car more efficiently, and overdrives (sometimes dual in one transmission) help reduce engine RPM's, which improved mileage.
CAFE (corporate average fuel efficiency) regulations have been placed at a ridiculous level for 2015, at 35 mpg. This means that any auto manufacturer must now produce a line of cars and trucks that average 35 mpg across the board. Translation? For every fuel sucker that is produced, you must build a few fuel sipper models that bring the average back to 35 mpg. Better mileage sounds great, unless you understand vehicle physics and dynamics. In order to achieve 35 mpg CAFE regulations, auto builders will have to make smaller, slower, de-contented cars that no one wants to drive, unless you are a tree hugging college professor.
Performance: Really quick and to the point here, the most notable improvements have been mentioned once again, in the areas of fuel injection, transmission technology and advancements, suspension improvements, and tire technology.
In 1988, the Chevy Corvette produced 245 horsepower and 345 pound feet of torque, which was considered considerable in that day. The 2008 base model Corvette produces 400 horsepower and 400 pound feet of torque. The difference? A bigger engine? No, the difference in displacement is less than 15 cubic inches. What is different is cylinder head design, intake manifold design, computer controls, distributorless ignitions, and other smaller factors that make the internal combustion engine far more efficient. As technology increases, so does power, at least potentially.
Maybe the one area where technology has increased performance is in tire design. For a span of almost 30 years (approximately the late 50's to the early 80's), tire technology inched forward, if that. Biased-ply tires were the staple, and they were hard, poor handling, and skinny. Some older vintage sports cars have been virtually transformed with nothing more than the addition of modern radial design tires. In the 60's, almost all muscle cars wore either a F70-14, or G60-15 tire of bias ply design. These tires offered poor traction, a poor ride, hydroplaned liked a greased rock, and handled like an old wagon. Suspension advancements were practically still born due to the dearth of tire advancements.
Today, almost any given vehicle can be fitted with a dizzying array of tire choices, from max performance summer, to all season, to winter-specific tires with various speed ratings. There has never been a time when so many tire choices were available in so many sizes. Want to improve the handling and braking performance of your Accord sedan? Do nothing more than change out your all season, touring tires with some max performance, "summer" (not intended for driving in snow) tires of the same size, and feel a marked difference immediately. Your SUV handling a little sloppy and tipsy? Change out those All Terrain doughnuts for some highway specific performance tires and realize a huge difference in cornering confidence. It really is that easy. The irony is that today, suspension technology cannot keep up with the growing tire technology.
Utility: Finally, like magazines, today, you can buy a vehicle for almost any need or lifestyle. Today's autos come with front wheel drive, all wheel drive, rear wheel drive (the way it all should be!) and 4 wheel drive. You can get a two door, four door, 5 door, and vans with 2 sliding doors and a power lift gate. Minivans come with seating from anything from 2 to 9, with options all in between. We have SUV's, crossovers, sport utes, sports cars, sporty cars, sports sedans, pickup trucks, compacts, even military-derived vehicles. The point is, there has never been a time when the consumer had so many choices in so many genres.
Auto makers really pay attention to interior packaging today, and most try to maximize the available space to the best of their ability. The real advancements in utility though, come in the aforementioned multiplex of specific applications and accessories. Do we really need cars with 9 cupholders? No, nor do we need more DVD players and wireless headphones, but we're getting 'em by the basketfull. This is the stuff auto makers tout to make sales, but what is really changing the auto landscape is the application-specific tailoring that every manufacturer is submitting to every year. Just like tires, there is a vehicle for almost every niche in human society. As this trend continues, fewer cars are going to be made for the "masses." Is this a good thing? Probably not, but it does perpetuate the American appetite for ego-centrism and accomodation.
With all the advancements, you still have a 1 in 64 chance of dying in a vehicle related accident. Sobering numbers. So, to be concise and pointed, if you want to enjoy the advancements longer than most, turn off the gadgets, leave off the drink, sit up straight, place both HANDS on the wheel, stop talking, and drive with precision. Airbags, ABS brakes, electronic stability controls, and improved bumpers will not fix being stupid and inattentive. Oh, if we as a nation would only require far more strict driving tests and updates for the public, punish with severity those who drink and drive, and raise the legal driving age by a few years. It is this authors humble opinion that those 3 advancements would do far more than all the others listed in this article combined.
Drive precise!
Likely, almost every American driver has considered this question a hundred times during moments of mental lax in the past year. So, to answer such a question with a bunch of general information that few care about, read on.
However, if you care about living long enough to get home from work, or care about the safety of your family and loved ones, you might want to read with more interest.
Advancements in automotive design can be broken into the following categories for organizational and comprehension purposes: safety, technology, efficiency, performance and utility.
Safety: Preston Tucker built some automobiles back in the 50's that were far advanced for their day. They had a form of safety glass, disc brakes, the engine in the rear of the car, and seat belts, among other safety and performance features. They even had headlights that would move in the direction of the steering wheel in a turn. Crazy, advanced stuff for that day. Currently, all cars have safety glass, all have disc brakes (far more efficient) at least in the front, a few have rear engines, and all have seat belts. But upon the platform Tucker built, auto makers have added air bags, improved seat belt design, lane departure warning systems, and all sorts of electronic vehicle control systems that tie together the brakes, shock absorbers, and transmission in a concerted effort to keep cars from skidding and sliding out of control. Some even have special sensors that keep your car away from other cars while using cruise control. Space age stuff.
Aside from some of these passive and active safety systems, auto makers are also continually working with chassis and body design to build in to any given car "crush zones" whereas, various types of steel are used in certain areas to help the car absorb an impact gradually (milliseconds are counted here) in a "bend, but don't break" philosophy of design. While many cars have more plastic than steel in their bodies, every weld, every panel, every cross beam has been tested for optimum crash testing effectiveness. Sure, tiny little Asian cars made out of tin cans still fold up like a paper plate when hit, but they do indeed have more impact survivability built in than the heaviest of land barges of the 50's.
It's not all the bells and feminine voiced reminders that make cars safer today. It's the big tail lights, the brighter head lights, the larger mirrors, the better tires, shocks, brakes, and steering that aid the average driver the most. To no one's surprise, driver skill and attentiveness is still far and away the greatest contributing factor to safety, but in today's autos, even a doofus has a better chance of stopping short of, or steering clear of, a potential disastrous situation.
Technology: What did we do before satellite navigation was installed in cars? Did people actually read maps and road signs? Well, people did read maps and signs, and probably were just as safe and attentive as those with fancy pants sat/nav systems. Even though this author sees infotainment technology advancements in cars as frivolous and unnecessary in most instances, technology has vastly improved auto performance, efficiency, and safety in many key areas.
Anti-lock brakes is a technology that first appeared on BMW motorcycles. There was a time when the pulsing sensations of ABS brakes almost made some makers to abandon the tech, but wisely, they held on and let the driving public adapt. Almost as much as tire advancement, anti-lock brakes has potentially saved millions of lives over the years.
Port-fuel injection technology took us from the long-held carburetor era to a more efficient, cleaner future once and for all. Again, some BMW's, early Corvettes, and a few other exotics tried to use a form of fuel injection in the early days, mimicking what was used on some air craft. Fuel injection is a precise delivery of fuel to each cylinder, allowing for better starts, less emissions, and more power. Fuel injection allowed 4 cylinder engines to make decent power, and big V8's to get decent mileage. Like ABS, this technology changed the automotive landscape.
Suspension technology has advanced not so much in all new design, but in improved design and materials. Cars used unequal control arms in the front suspension 4 decades ago, just like today, but vastly improved shock absorber technology, tire design advancement, and model specific spring design has taken every day cars today to where high-end race cars were in the 60's. That's no lie. The average "sport" sedan (think: a Chevrolet Impala SS) could out-handle and maybe outrun a 60's vintage Corvette without breaking a sweat. Thanks to CAD design and advanced testing, cars and trucks today are far more predictable and stable handlers than ever thought possible just 30 years ago. If you ever get the chance, drive a restored 60's era muscle car around the block, and you will have all the convincing you need.
Efficiency: This category has already been touched upon in the preceding text, but it is worth saying again that a typical minivan with a V6 motor and seating for 7 can pull down 22 mpg on the highway, fully loaded with people and gear. A 1970 station wagon, with a V8 motor and seating for 8, might pull down 12 mpg on the highway, fully loaded with people and gear. OK, so some models with high geared rear ends may hit 15 mpg on a good day. But you get the point. And that bland minivan could easily out-brake, out run, and out handle the station wagon with ease.
So, how do 5,000 + pound pick up trucks and SUV's net 18 mpg on the highway? How do little rice-burner cars accelerate like sports cars of just 10 years ago and still get 30 mpg? Chalk it up to ever-increasing efficiency in design and implementation. Cars are not really getting any lighter, what with all the increased sound deadening materials, heavy stereo equipment, and all that safety gear being lugged around. What they are getting are more efficient motors (computer controlled, with fuel injection, see above) and far more efficient and fuel friendly transmissions. From basically the 40's to the early 80's, almost all cars and trucks were equipped with either 3 speed automatic transmissions, or 4 speed manuals. For that 40 year span in time, few overdrive transmissions were ever offered in any model. This translated to less than ideal performance and mileage. Today, few cars or trucks have any fewer than 5 speeds, and many now have 6, in both auto and manuals. The point? More gears helps your engine move the car more efficiently, and overdrives (sometimes dual in one transmission) help reduce engine RPM's, which improved mileage.
CAFE (corporate average fuel efficiency) regulations have been placed at a ridiculous level for 2015, at 35 mpg. This means that any auto manufacturer must now produce a line of cars and trucks that average 35 mpg across the board. Translation? For every fuel sucker that is produced, you must build a few fuel sipper models that bring the average back to 35 mpg. Better mileage sounds great, unless you understand vehicle physics and dynamics. In order to achieve 35 mpg CAFE regulations, auto builders will have to make smaller, slower, de-contented cars that no one wants to drive, unless you are a tree hugging college professor.
Performance: Really quick and to the point here, the most notable improvements have been mentioned once again, in the areas of fuel injection, transmission technology and advancements, suspension improvements, and tire technology.
In 1988, the Chevy Corvette produced 245 horsepower and 345 pound feet of torque, which was considered considerable in that day. The 2008 base model Corvette produces 400 horsepower and 400 pound feet of torque. The difference? A bigger engine? No, the difference in displacement is less than 15 cubic inches. What is different is cylinder head design, intake manifold design, computer controls, distributorless ignitions, and other smaller factors that make the internal combustion engine far more efficient. As technology increases, so does power, at least potentially.
Maybe the one area where technology has increased performance is in tire design. For a span of almost 30 years (approximately the late 50's to the early 80's), tire technology inched forward, if that. Biased-ply tires were the staple, and they were hard, poor handling, and skinny. Some older vintage sports cars have been virtually transformed with nothing more than the addition of modern radial design tires. In the 60's, almost all muscle cars wore either a F70-14, or G60-15 tire of bias ply design. These tires offered poor traction, a poor ride, hydroplaned liked a greased rock, and handled like an old wagon. Suspension advancements were practically still born due to the dearth of tire advancements.
Today, almost any given vehicle can be fitted with a dizzying array of tire choices, from max performance summer, to all season, to winter-specific tires with various speed ratings. There has never been a time when so many tire choices were available in so many sizes. Want to improve the handling and braking performance of your Accord sedan? Do nothing more than change out your all season, touring tires with some max performance, "summer" (not intended for driving in snow) tires of the same size, and feel a marked difference immediately. Your SUV handling a little sloppy and tipsy? Change out those All Terrain doughnuts for some highway specific performance tires and realize a huge difference in cornering confidence. It really is that easy. The irony is that today, suspension technology cannot keep up with the growing tire technology.
Utility: Finally, like magazines, today, you can buy a vehicle for almost any need or lifestyle. Today's autos come with front wheel drive, all wheel drive, rear wheel drive (the way it all should be!) and 4 wheel drive. You can get a two door, four door, 5 door, and vans with 2 sliding doors and a power lift gate. Minivans come with seating from anything from 2 to 9, with options all in between. We have SUV's, crossovers, sport utes, sports cars, sporty cars, sports sedans, pickup trucks, compacts, even military-derived vehicles. The point is, there has never been a time when the consumer had so many choices in so many genres.
Auto makers really pay attention to interior packaging today, and most try to maximize the available space to the best of their ability. The real advancements in utility though, come in the aforementioned multiplex of specific applications and accessories. Do we really need cars with 9 cupholders? No, nor do we need more DVD players and wireless headphones, but we're getting 'em by the basketfull. This is the stuff auto makers tout to make sales, but what is really changing the auto landscape is the application-specific tailoring that every manufacturer is submitting to every year. Just like tires, there is a vehicle for almost every niche in human society. As this trend continues, fewer cars are going to be made for the "masses." Is this a good thing? Probably not, but it does perpetuate the American appetite for ego-centrism and accomodation.
With all the advancements, you still have a 1 in 64 chance of dying in a vehicle related accident. Sobering numbers. So, to be concise and pointed, if you want to enjoy the advancements longer than most, turn off the gadgets, leave off the drink, sit up straight, place both HANDS on the wheel, stop talking, and drive with precision. Airbags, ABS brakes, electronic stability controls, and improved bumpers will not fix being stupid and inattentive. Oh, if we as a nation would only require far more strict driving tests and updates for the public, punish with severity those who drink and drive, and raise the legal driving age by a few years. It is this authors humble opinion that those 3 advancements would do far more than all the others listed in this article combined.
Drive precise!
Tuesday, July 8, 2008
Representation
Does your car represent who you are?
For people who live in countries where driving a car is only a dream, or even where having much of a choice is not the case, such a question is absurd. But here in the land 'O plenty, we think about such things. To wit, we shall delve into this trite and meaningless discussion and take a break from the usual rantings that are ever so needed and instructive.
Face it America, you still drive like a maniac with no sense of intelligence and no hint of attention. In the whole world of auto driving, Americans rank dangerously close to rock bottom. But again, for this particular article, we set aside those obvious shortcomings for lighter fare.
OK, so does your ride (shoe, sled, vee-hickle, wheels, et al) represent your personality? Many greasy-haired auto dealers would have you believe that, but is it true?
First, take the following quiz. All answers are on a scale, from one to ten, with one being least, and ten being highest. Figure out the rest on your own.
1. On the 1 - 10 scale, how important is the color of the car to you?
2. On the scale, where would you rank the importance of the utility of the vehicle?
3. How important is the layout of the interior to you?
4. How important is the powertrain (engine, transmission, power output, etc.) to you?
5. Where on the scale is your preference for a 4 door vehicle?
6. Where on the scale is your preference for a 2 door vehicle?
7. Pretend the scale is a preference for a convertible; where does it fall on the scale?
8. How important is the horsepower output of the car to you?
9. How likely are you to purchase a vehicle that resembles those in your peer group?
10. How likely are you to purchase a vehicle that you think your friends and family will approve of?
Now, the scoring. If you tended to answer those questions with numbers ranging from 7 - 10, then you are very likely to think that your car does indeed reflect your personality.
If your numbers tended to fall into the 4 - 6 range, then you are not neutral, but rather, a more cautious buyer who would like to have a car that is more "edgy," but you let other factors invade your decision making process.
If your numbers fell into the 1 - 3 range, you are likely someone who has no idea what an oil change is, and does not care. You probably have multiple yellow and red lights lit on your dash all the time, and multiple scrapes and dents on your exterior panels. A car is just transportation, and not much else. Your purchase of a car is either decided by someone else, or you have been (or will be) stuck with a used piece of crap that is a rolling death trap. Of course, you are not held captive by the trappings of material possessions of the mechanical kind, but on the other hand, your tires are bald, your brakes are worn, and the sky is not yellow - your windows are. Because they've never been cleaned. Got it?!
Well, back to the quiz and other indicators of personality vs vehicle.
So let's assume that to some degree, you do think your vehicle represents something of your personality. If that is the case, peruse the following color chart and see if anything lines up.
If your car is ___________________, this may mean _______________
If your car is black, this may mean that you want to stand out, but you also want to be stealthy. Black is one of the most illogical colors for a car, cause it shows dirts and dings like crazy, and is hot as hades in the summer sun. But black paint, like black clothing, supposedly carries an air of reserved power. Guys with balding and a sagging sadle like black, as do men who are still single in their early 30's. For women, it's girls in high school driving "daddy's car" or those who are in their 40's, who still listen to Zeplin and wear sun glasses when it's cloudy on their way to the mall. Black is the color of BMW's and Harley Davidson's. Nuff said.
If your car is white, this may mean you like things classy and clean. White can look really good with certain accessories like chrome wheels and blacked out trim. It says "I can look good enough for the country club and still have a little rebel hidden within." For guys, white is only acceptable if the car has some other outstanding trait, like a powerful engine, or is on a sporty, expensive brand, or is set off with spoilers and such. For gals, white appeals to the young married crowd who want to be different, or to those who are older who just want a clean appearance, with no fuss. As a side note, white was the most popular color for the past 20 years, knocked off recently only by silver. White is a color often seen on Volkswagens and American luxo-barges of the late 70's.
If your car is silver, this may mean you want to exude an air of sophistication. Silver is the staple color of Mercedes Benz, and it can make almost any brand look a little more expensive. Silver is difficult to keep up over the long run (it fades like mad) unless cared for consistently. Like white, silver needs certain off-setting marks to really make it pop, i.e., it needs help. A nice silver Daewoo with plastic wheel covers still looks sad and cheap. For guys, silver may indicate a give the impression that you make more money than you really do. For gals, silver definetly is used to give the impression that you have more money than you do. It evokes the notion of diamonds and expensive jewlery, and dealers know this. A well dressed woman is a sap for a clean silver car. On the other hand, a dealer faced with a gruff woman weaing a sleeveless plaid shirt may just direct her to the closest pickup truck.
If your car is red, this may mean that you've either hit the supposed "mid-life" crisis (gender has no bearing on this) or, you're young, are spending Daddy's money, and are fully convinced that this red car will vault you to the top of your chosen peer society. Red is simple -- it is totally impracticle, very hard to maintain, and stands out so much, you have to accept it and just move on. The worst color for geeky gamers and men who no longer want anything to do with women, red demands that you wear those shades at all times, invest in a really nice toupee, and shine your patent leather shoes once a week. On the other hand, if you just can't get enough attention, and you really don't care if your personality is abrasive, then paint it all red. Even the tires. Red is the color of Ferrari's and Alpha Romeo's, and it looks good on them. Not so much on old Caddies.
If your car is green, this may mean that you are either eco-friendly (a tree huggin' nut) or someone who likes to buck the system in a more subtle way. Green is the color of Jaguar and Ford (in the early 90's) and can, on certain models such as the XKE or a mid 60's Corvette, pop like a ray of sunshine on a cloudy day. A nice metallic green has a pleasant depth to it that is easy on the eyes, and uncommon enough to draw attention. Men who want to appear sophisticated yet down to earth like green, provided it is not one of those horrid pastel greens we banished in the 70's. Women who value hard work and like to spend money in a way that makes sense like green. If either gender tends to gravitate towards green, they likely have good credit, own a large flat screen TV, and find ways to stand out from the crowd in a most quiet way.
If your car is blue, this may mean you like things of royalty: golf, horse racing, a good card game, solid investments, and something other than steak. Blue is definetly the color for Ford, sometimes Mazda, and rarely Ferrari. A dark blue can make any car or truck look richer and more flamboyant. Off set with liberal amounts of chrome and polished aluminum, a rich blue paint job carries the notion of upper crust ideals with working man's budget. Men who tend towards blue may be of a more quiet disposition but with an eye for art. Women who like blue probably have designer dinner ware instead of expensive furniture. Dark, rich, metallic blue hues connotate the deep blue sea, with all its mystery and forboding, along with its beauty and coolness. However, if either gender opines for pastel and light blues, you definetly fit into that group that does not know what an oil change is, and does not care. Please,......please.......do us all a favor and pass on the pastel blue and get white. Or beige.
Finally, if your car is yellow, this may mean that you are pretty much like the red car people, only with less intelligence or ability to see how annoying you really are. Yellow is reserved for those who demand constant attention. If you are a nagging little gnat that smacks gum, wears tank tops to movies, and has tats all over your arms, you need yellow. If you have a college degree, don't shop at Wal Mart, and wear expensive watches, sorry, but yellow is not your best choice. And to be fair, a hot canary yellow looks really GOOD on so many cars! Too bad it has to be avoided due to the rabble that give it a bad name.
Is there a corelation between the color of your car, and your personality? Well maybe, and maybe not, as it all depends upon just how important color was to you in your initial decision making process. In later installments, we will look at other vehicle factors and their supposed alignment with your personality.
As a side note, the colors beige, brown, pink, and orange were not mentioned, as they are too ugly and drab to waste time on. If you own a pink anything, sell it for whatever you can get and walk until you gain some sense and taste. Or move to San Francisco.
For people who live in countries where driving a car is only a dream, or even where having much of a choice is not the case, such a question is absurd. But here in the land 'O plenty, we think about such things. To wit, we shall delve into this trite and meaningless discussion and take a break from the usual rantings that are ever so needed and instructive.
Face it America, you still drive like a maniac with no sense of intelligence and no hint of attention. In the whole world of auto driving, Americans rank dangerously close to rock bottom. But again, for this particular article, we set aside those obvious shortcomings for lighter fare.
OK, so does your ride (shoe, sled, vee-hickle, wheels, et al) represent your personality? Many greasy-haired auto dealers would have you believe that, but is it true?
First, take the following quiz. All answers are on a scale, from one to ten, with one being least, and ten being highest. Figure out the rest on your own.
1. On the 1 - 10 scale, how important is the color of the car to you?
2. On the scale, where would you rank the importance of the utility of the vehicle?
3. How important is the layout of the interior to you?
4. How important is the powertrain (engine, transmission, power output, etc.) to you?
5. Where on the scale is your preference for a 4 door vehicle?
6. Where on the scale is your preference for a 2 door vehicle?
7. Pretend the scale is a preference for a convertible; where does it fall on the scale?
8. How important is the horsepower output of the car to you?
9. How likely are you to purchase a vehicle that resembles those in your peer group?
10. How likely are you to purchase a vehicle that you think your friends and family will approve of?
Now, the scoring. If you tended to answer those questions with numbers ranging from 7 - 10, then you are very likely to think that your car does indeed reflect your personality.
If your numbers tended to fall into the 4 - 6 range, then you are not neutral, but rather, a more cautious buyer who would like to have a car that is more "edgy," but you let other factors invade your decision making process.
If your numbers fell into the 1 - 3 range, you are likely someone who has no idea what an oil change is, and does not care. You probably have multiple yellow and red lights lit on your dash all the time, and multiple scrapes and dents on your exterior panels. A car is just transportation, and not much else. Your purchase of a car is either decided by someone else, or you have been (or will be) stuck with a used piece of crap that is a rolling death trap. Of course, you are not held captive by the trappings of material possessions of the mechanical kind, but on the other hand, your tires are bald, your brakes are worn, and the sky is not yellow - your windows are. Because they've never been cleaned. Got it?!
Well, back to the quiz and other indicators of personality vs vehicle.
So let's assume that to some degree, you do think your vehicle represents something of your personality. If that is the case, peruse the following color chart and see if anything lines up.
If your car is ___________________, this may mean _______________
If your car is black, this may mean that you want to stand out, but you also want to be stealthy. Black is one of the most illogical colors for a car, cause it shows dirts and dings like crazy, and is hot as hades in the summer sun. But black paint, like black clothing, supposedly carries an air of reserved power. Guys with balding and a sagging sadle like black, as do men who are still single in their early 30's. For women, it's girls in high school driving "daddy's car" or those who are in their 40's, who still listen to Zeplin and wear sun glasses when it's cloudy on their way to the mall. Black is the color of BMW's and Harley Davidson's. Nuff said.
If your car is white, this may mean you like things classy and clean. White can look really good with certain accessories like chrome wheels and blacked out trim. It says "I can look good enough for the country club and still have a little rebel hidden within." For guys, white is only acceptable if the car has some other outstanding trait, like a powerful engine, or is on a sporty, expensive brand, or is set off with spoilers and such. For gals, white appeals to the young married crowd who want to be different, or to those who are older who just want a clean appearance, with no fuss. As a side note, white was the most popular color for the past 20 years, knocked off recently only by silver. White is a color often seen on Volkswagens and American luxo-barges of the late 70's.
If your car is silver, this may mean you want to exude an air of sophistication. Silver is the staple color of Mercedes Benz, and it can make almost any brand look a little more expensive. Silver is difficult to keep up over the long run (it fades like mad) unless cared for consistently. Like white, silver needs certain off-setting marks to really make it pop, i.e., it needs help. A nice silver Daewoo with plastic wheel covers still looks sad and cheap. For guys, silver may indicate a give the impression that you make more money than you really do. For gals, silver definetly is used to give the impression that you have more money than you do. It evokes the notion of diamonds and expensive jewlery, and dealers know this. A well dressed woman is a sap for a clean silver car. On the other hand, a dealer faced with a gruff woman weaing a sleeveless plaid shirt may just direct her to the closest pickup truck.
If your car is red, this may mean that you've either hit the supposed "mid-life" crisis (gender has no bearing on this) or, you're young, are spending Daddy's money, and are fully convinced that this red car will vault you to the top of your chosen peer society. Red is simple -- it is totally impracticle, very hard to maintain, and stands out so much, you have to accept it and just move on. The worst color for geeky gamers and men who no longer want anything to do with women, red demands that you wear those shades at all times, invest in a really nice toupee, and shine your patent leather shoes once a week. On the other hand, if you just can't get enough attention, and you really don't care if your personality is abrasive, then paint it all red. Even the tires. Red is the color of Ferrari's and Alpha Romeo's, and it looks good on them. Not so much on old Caddies.
If your car is green, this may mean that you are either eco-friendly (a tree huggin' nut) or someone who likes to buck the system in a more subtle way. Green is the color of Jaguar and Ford (in the early 90's) and can, on certain models such as the XKE or a mid 60's Corvette, pop like a ray of sunshine on a cloudy day. A nice metallic green has a pleasant depth to it that is easy on the eyes, and uncommon enough to draw attention. Men who want to appear sophisticated yet down to earth like green, provided it is not one of those horrid pastel greens we banished in the 70's. Women who value hard work and like to spend money in a way that makes sense like green. If either gender tends to gravitate towards green, they likely have good credit, own a large flat screen TV, and find ways to stand out from the crowd in a most quiet way.
If your car is blue, this may mean you like things of royalty: golf, horse racing, a good card game, solid investments, and something other than steak. Blue is definetly the color for Ford, sometimes Mazda, and rarely Ferrari. A dark blue can make any car or truck look richer and more flamboyant. Off set with liberal amounts of chrome and polished aluminum, a rich blue paint job carries the notion of upper crust ideals with working man's budget. Men who tend towards blue may be of a more quiet disposition but with an eye for art. Women who like blue probably have designer dinner ware instead of expensive furniture. Dark, rich, metallic blue hues connotate the deep blue sea, with all its mystery and forboding, along with its beauty and coolness. However, if either gender opines for pastel and light blues, you definetly fit into that group that does not know what an oil change is, and does not care. Please,......please.......do us all a favor and pass on the pastel blue and get white. Or beige.
Finally, if your car is yellow, this may mean that you are pretty much like the red car people, only with less intelligence or ability to see how annoying you really are. Yellow is reserved for those who demand constant attention. If you are a nagging little gnat that smacks gum, wears tank tops to movies, and has tats all over your arms, you need yellow. If you have a college degree, don't shop at Wal Mart, and wear expensive watches, sorry, but yellow is not your best choice. And to be fair, a hot canary yellow looks really GOOD on so many cars! Too bad it has to be avoided due to the rabble that give it a bad name.
Is there a corelation between the color of your car, and your personality? Well maybe, and maybe not, as it all depends upon just how important color was to you in your initial decision making process. In later installments, we will look at other vehicle factors and their supposed alignment with your personality.
As a side note, the colors beige, brown, pink, and orange were not mentioned, as they are too ugly and drab to waste time on. If you own a pink anything, sell it for whatever you can get and walk until you gain some sense and taste. Or move to San Francisco.
Monday, May 19, 2008
My Lead Foots
There is a good reason why you all are getting such poor mileage...
In this day of high gas prices, it is amazing that so few drivers are changing any of the habits that have led to unnecessairly low mileage figures all along.
What are the major contributors for the actual mileage your vehicle gets? Well, to state the obvious, it is one part driver, and one part vehicle configuration.
1. Vehicle configuration: Every motorized vehicle built by a major manufacturer has certain inherit limits to the mileage it can obtain. These limits are dictated by certain key design elements that cannot be escaped unless the vehicle is modified in some way. Following is a brief run-down of the key design elements that most affect mileage:
A.) Vehicle Weight - A car that weighs 2,500 pounds has a better chance of better mileage than a car with similar porportions that weighs 4,000 pounds. However, a very sleek vehicle that weighs 4,000 pounds might get very good mileage, even with a large engine, given some other elements are in its favor. But overall, a heavier vehicle struggles to obtain the same mileage of a welterweight.
B.) Engine size and configuration - Put an efficient, 120 hp four cylinder motor in a 4,000 pound car and watch the gas needle move with haste. The engine needs to be more than efficient; it needs to be properly matched to the car. However, overall, smaller motors suck down less fuel than larger motors. The more cylinders you have to feed, the more fuel is required. No way around it. But keep in mind that the Chevy Corvette, with a 400 hp V8 can easily see 28 mpg on the highway, provided it is driven sanely. There are tons of "rice burners" out there that never see 28 mpg on the highway, so more factors than just engine size makes up the whole mpg picture.
C.) Coefficient of Drag - known in the industry as "cd," your car has an assigned cd that is derived from wind resistance and power loss due to that inherent wind resistance. For example, a large 15 passenger van may have a cd of 45, whereas the aforementioned Corvette has a cd of about 29. A cd lower than 28 is rare, and most modern cars shoot for a cd in the low 30's. Total frontal area, mirror shapes and sizes, vehicle height (ground clearance and overall height), roof racks, and grill design, among other external design elements, all affect the cd rating. Most trucks have a poor cd number due to their overall massive design and flat fronts. This is why you see cd ratings dictating design in the automotive world. Everyone wants their vehicles to be as sleek as possible so that they can achieve better mpg numbers, and to reduce interior noise. Either way, a high cd number hurts highway mpg numbers no matter what.
D.) Gearing - In the "old days," almost all cars had a 3 speed transmission. "Overdrive" was unheard of except among 18 wheelers. Finally, after eons of time passed, auto makers finally decided to begin installing overdrive transmissions into cars. So, what does an "overdrive" do? Well, the term overdrive means that instead of having a direct 1:1 final drive ratio (one engine revolution for one differential revolution), in overdrive, you lower the engine revolutions, much in the same way a 10 speed bicycle, through gearing, can give the rider greater speed without having to pedal faster. Lower engine speeds equals less frictional losses internally, and lower fuel consumption. So, a vehicle with no overdrive, or with a very conservative overdrive, will suffer mileage woes compared to a vehicle that has a "tall" overdrive (low rpm's at highway speeds).
There are other, less influencial factors, but those are enough to make the point. So, what is the best case scenario for achieving top mileage? Easy! Just get yourself a very sleek, very lightweight car with a small, efficient motor teamed with a transmission with 5 or 6 gears and a tall or multiple overdrives, and high mileage may be in your future.
As for a reality check, the makers of your vehicle have made compromises in all 4 areas mentioned and what they came up with in terms of vehicle parameters will greatly affect your mileage numbers.
But, there is one other major contributing factor -- YOU!
2. The Driver: Even the most fuel efficient car can get sucky mileage when in the hands of a lead footed driver. There are tons of you out there getting 14 and 16 mpg when 18 and 20 is easily obtainable, if you would only stop throttling it everywhere you go! Americans are some of the most lead footed, impatient, and drag race-oriented drivers in the world. And more often than not, the person next to you that seems to be trying to warp time is not some pencil-necked teen boy, but a youngish, cell phone talking, makeup fixing soccer mom who knows nothing of using a blinker or how to make a proper turn.
Seems like everyone is running and gunning like there is no tomorrow, and when gas is $4 a gallon, you would think there would be a little more caution applied in the right foot. But no, Americans are all drag racers, rushing off to make the most of their self centered days filled with senseless activity and deplorable relationships. And their mileage just plain sucks. But do they care? Guess not.
If, by some miracle, you would like to make a few changes in your personal driving habits so as to reap the benefits of greater mpg, here are a few basic hints:
A.) Accelerate modestly - In city driving, your mileage is almost 75% determined by how you accelerate from a stop. Gun it, and mileage goes down dramatically. Ease off the line and accelerate in a linear fashion, and you may start getting mileage you never knew was possible.
B.) Learn to coast - if you don't know what this means, it implies that there is always some time that passes between letting off the gas pedal, and applying the brake pedal. Most Americans always go directly from gas to brake, and brake to gas, with no time in between. If that is you, then your mileage is far worse than possible and you are to blame. When you are coming upon a red light or stop sign, just ease off the gas and coast for a bit. It saves your brakes and improves your city mpg and besides.....you have to stop anyway, so why not just ease off and enjoy the ride?
C.) Be Consistent - avoid stabbing the throttle. Ease into, and off of, the gas pedal, find a speed that is safe and legal, and with great finess, maintain that speed. The "rabbit" next to you gunning it will have to stop at the next red light like you do, so don't worry about him. THINK about your driving and work at being fluid and consistent.
D.) Lay off the brakes - Goes with coasting and being easy on the gas. Use your brakes to stop, but not to slow down. If you are paying attention and maintaining safe distances, you can moderate your proximity to other cars via gentle and calculated throttle inputs. Look ahead for brake lights, and when you see them lighting up coming towards you, ease off the gas and prepare to stop. Keep in mind that repeated stabbing of the brakes cuts mpg heavily, so be fluid!
Half of your mpg figure is determined by the vehicle designer, but the other half is up to you. Put down the cell phone, set aside the cola, tell the kids to shut up, and think about your driving. Slow down, ease up, become more fluid with finess, and watch your mpg numbers climb.
Drive precise!
In this day of high gas prices, it is amazing that so few drivers are changing any of the habits that have led to unnecessairly low mileage figures all along.
What are the major contributors for the actual mileage your vehicle gets? Well, to state the obvious, it is one part driver, and one part vehicle configuration.
1. Vehicle configuration: Every motorized vehicle built by a major manufacturer has certain inherit limits to the mileage it can obtain. These limits are dictated by certain key design elements that cannot be escaped unless the vehicle is modified in some way. Following is a brief run-down of the key design elements that most affect mileage:
A.) Vehicle Weight - A car that weighs 2,500 pounds has a better chance of better mileage than a car with similar porportions that weighs 4,000 pounds. However, a very sleek vehicle that weighs 4,000 pounds might get very good mileage, even with a large engine, given some other elements are in its favor. But overall, a heavier vehicle struggles to obtain the same mileage of a welterweight.
B.) Engine size and configuration - Put an efficient, 120 hp four cylinder motor in a 4,000 pound car and watch the gas needle move with haste. The engine needs to be more than efficient; it needs to be properly matched to the car. However, overall, smaller motors suck down less fuel than larger motors. The more cylinders you have to feed, the more fuel is required. No way around it. But keep in mind that the Chevy Corvette, with a 400 hp V8 can easily see 28 mpg on the highway, provided it is driven sanely. There are tons of "rice burners" out there that never see 28 mpg on the highway, so more factors than just engine size makes up the whole mpg picture.
C.) Coefficient of Drag - known in the industry as "cd," your car has an assigned cd that is derived from wind resistance and power loss due to that inherent wind resistance. For example, a large 15 passenger van may have a cd of 45, whereas the aforementioned Corvette has a cd of about 29. A cd lower than 28 is rare, and most modern cars shoot for a cd in the low 30's. Total frontal area, mirror shapes and sizes, vehicle height (ground clearance and overall height), roof racks, and grill design, among other external design elements, all affect the cd rating. Most trucks have a poor cd number due to their overall massive design and flat fronts. This is why you see cd ratings dictating design in the automotive world. Everyone wants their vehicles to be as sleek as possible so that they can achieve better mpg numbers, and to reduce interior noise. Either way, a high cd number hurts highway mpg numbers no matter what.
D.) Gearing - In the "old days," almost all cars had a 3 speed transmission. "Overdrive" was unheard of except among 18 wheelers. Finally, after eons of time passed, auto makers finally decided to begin installing overdrive transmissions into cars. So, what does an "overdrive" do? Well, the term overdrive means that instead of having a direct 1:1 final drive ratio (one engine revolution for one differential revolution), in overdrive, you lower the engine revolutions, much in the same way a 10 speed bicycle, through gearing, can give the rider greater speed without having to pedal faster. Lower engine speeds equals less frictional losses internally, and lower fuel consumption. So, a vehicle with no overdrive, or with a very conservative overdrive, will suffer mileage woes compared to a vehicle that has a "tall" overdrive (low rpm's at highway speeds).
There are other, less influencial factors, but those are enough to make the point. So, what is the best case scenario for achieving top mileage? Easy! Just get yourself a very sleek, very lightweight car with a small, efficient motor teamed with a transmission with 5 or 6 gears and a tall or multiple overdrives, and high mileage may be in your future.
As for a reality check, the makers of your vehicle have made compromises in all 4 areas mentioned and what they came up with in terms of vehicle parameters will greatly affect your mileage numbers.
But, there is one other major contributing factor -- YOU!
2. The Driver: Even the most fuel efficient car can get sucky mileage when in the hands of a lead footed driver. There are tons of you out there getting 14 and 16 mpg when 18 and 20 is easily obtainable, if you would only stop throttling it everywhere you go! Americans are some of the most lead footed, impatient, and drag race-oriented drivers in the world. And more often than not, the person next to you that seems to be trying to warp time is not some pencil-necked teen boy, but a youngish, cell phone talking, makeup fixing soccer mom who knows nothing of using a blinker or how to make a proper turn.
Seems like everyone is running and gunning like there is no tomorrow, and when gas is $4 a gallon, you would think there would be a little more caution applied in the right foot. But no, Americans are all drag racers, rushing off to make the most of their self centered days filled with senseless activity and deplorable relationships. And their mileage just plain sucks. But do they care? Guess not.
If, by some miracle, you would like to make a few changes in your personal driving habits so as to reap the benefits of greater mpg, here are a few basic hints:
A.) Accelerate modestly - In city driving, your mileage is almost 75% determined by how you accelerate from a stop. Gun it, and mileage goes down dramatically. Ease off the line and accelerate in a linear fashion, and you may start getting mileage you never knew was possible.
B.) Learn to coast - if you don't know what this means, it implies that there is always some time that passes between letting off the gas pedal, and applying the brake pedal. Most Americans always go directly from gas to brake, and brake to gas, with no time in between. If that is you, then your mileage is far worse than possible and you are to blame. When you are coming upon a red light or stop sign, just ease off the gas and coast for a bit. It saves your brakes and improves your city mpg and besides.....you have to stop anyway, so why not just ease off and enjoy the ride?
C.) Be Consistent - avoid stabbing the throttle. Ease into, and off of, the gas pedal, find a speed that is safe and legal, and with great finess, maintain that speed. The "rabbit" next to you gunning it will have to stop at the next red light like you do, so don't worry about him. THINK about your driving and work at being fluid and consistent.
D.) Lay off the brakes - Goes with coasting and being easy on the gas. Use your brakes to stop, but not to slow down. If you are paying attention and maintaining safe distances, you can moderate your proximity to other cars via gentle and calculated throttle inputs. Look ahead for brake lights, and when you see them lighting up coming towards you, ease off the gas and prepare to stop. Keep in mind that repeated stabbing of the brakes cuts mpg heavily, so be fluid!
Half of your mpg figure is determined by the vehicle designer, but the other half is up to you. Put down the cell phone, set aside the cola, tell the kids to shut up, and think about your driving. Slow down, ease up, become more fluid with finess, and watch your mpg numbers climb.
Drive precise!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)