100 mpg?

[manta22]

You've brought up a point that all the "TV Experts" seem to have missed, Tom.

In the fall of 1964 I ordered a new 1965 Pontiac GTO Coupe with every performance option in the catalog-- 389, 3- 2bbls, close- ratio 4-sp, Positraction, full metallic brakes ram air package, etc, etc. It cost $3501.20 back then and gas was around 32 cents a gallon for high octane-- 36 cents for Sonoco 260.

My guess is that a similar new car now would cost about 10 times more; guess what-- gas is now also about 10 times the 1964 cost.

Of course it only got about 12 mpg but it was fun, fun, fun.

[Richard Thomason]

I'll add my 1960 Corvair to the list. Gutless, needed a valve job every 30,000 miles, a real econobox that when you ran the gasoline heater in the winter got a whopping 13 mpg. Go figure.

[panic]

What to do about the price of energy?
The thing they won't talk about:
change this:



to this:

[Milwaukee Midget]

The biggest problem with newer cars is weight.  All those 14 air bags, power (seats, door locks, windows, mirrors, sunvisors, etc) add weight.  The crash requirements add weight.  Emissions equipment adds weight.  Accelerating and maintaining that weight takes some fixed amount of energy.

38chevy454 is spot on with this comment.  If you'll permit me a soapbox, we've become accustomed to driving around in our nanny-inspired cocoon-cars so someone else in their nanny-inspired cocoon-car doesn’t kill us.

Personally, as a guy who routinely drives a vehicle with the crashworthiness of an oatmeal box, it can be scary being passed by a pickup that you can look up into the wheel wells of.

But little buzz-boxes can be a lot of fun to drive, are usually more efficient, and are easier on the pocket book.  And if the technology that has developed in the last 20+ years were to be applied to a smaller, lighter chassis with fewer bells and whistles, better fuel economy could easily be had.

As far as safety is concerned, cars don't kill people, people kill people.  Better drivers education, not airbags, 5-mph bumpers, or crumple zones, are what will be necessary if we want to have a 100-MPG car.  Until then, I don't think people will give up their cocoons.

[Milwaukee Midget]

What to do about the price of energy?
The thing they won't talk about:
change this:

to this:

Are you proposing invading Saudi Arabia?   How will that get us a 100-mpg car?
Let's stay on topic

[MCR]

I take it back.

I believe it can be done, and more importantly SHOULD be done.  At least as an example to spit in the eye of the naysayers.

Yes, nobody would buy one, our government would ban it, Ralph Nader would roast it, but much like the EV-1 (first modern electric car was a Chevy), it would prove that it can be done with off-the-shelf technology.

>80PSI small dia narrow tires full faired and enclosed.  Tubular chassis, tilt up glass body with polycarbonate fixed windows.  Chain front wheel drive.  Small turbo diesel or high compression fuel injected low-rpm gasoline engine.  Seating for 4 in a semi-reclined attitude.  Perhaps the two rear seats pointed backwards.  Helmets, harnesses, and perimeter bars for safety.

It might take as little as 12 HP to go 60mph with 4 people on level ground.  For hills or emergency acceleration?  Nitrous oxide assist.

[Milwaukee Midget]

I take it back.

I believe it can be done, and more importantly SHOULD be done.  At least as an example to spit in the eye of the naysayers.

Yes, nobody would buy one, our government would ban it, Ralph Nader would roast it, but much like the EV-1 (first modern electric car was a Chevy), it would prove that it can be done with off-the-shelf technology.

>80PSI small dia narrow tires full faired and enclosed.  Tubular chassis, tilt up glass body with polycarbonate fixed windows.  Chain front wheel drive.  Small turbo diesel or high compression fuel injected low-rpm gasoline engine.  Seating for 4 in a semi-reclined attitude.  Perhaps the two rear seats pointed backwards.  Helmets, harnesses, and perimeter bars for safety.

It might take as little as 12 HP to go 60mph with 4 people on level ground.  For hills or emergency acceleration?  Nitrous oxide assist.

NOW you're talking like a Land Speed Racer!

[Seldom Seen Slim]

http://blog.wired.com/cars/2008/07/a-410-cubic-inc.html

[Dean Los Angeles]

Complain about the safety equipment if you want, with 40,000 deaths and 600,000 injuries a year it's no wonder the government has to keep you from doing stupid things.

Every day I read about someone that was ejected because they didn't want to bother with the seat belt.

There is a place for these people:
http://www.darwinawards.com/

[MCR]

Complain about the safety equipment if you want, with 40,000 deaths and 600,000 injuries a year it's no wonder the government has to keep you from doing stupid things.

Every day I read about someone that was ejected because they didn't want to bother with the seat belt.

There is a place for these people:
http://www.darwinawards.com/

It's also been proven that running into things is related to injuries and deaths.  If you reduce the number of times you run into stuff, you reduce the body count.

Driver's training is worse today than before but there are better airbags.  I don't think that's a wise trade, but that's me.

I logged about 200,000 miles on street bikes, commuting 200 miles a day.  The greatest threat to my life wasn't crumple zones, it was drivers that should not have been issued licenses.  What made me hang up my jacket wasn't SNELL ratings, it was the Cell Phone.  Risk became too great.

[Milwaukee Midget]

Complain about the safety equipment if you want, with 40,000 deaths and 600,000 injuries a year it's no wonder the government has to keep you from doing stupid things.

Every day I read about someone that was ejected because they didn't want to bother with the seat belt.

There is a place for these people:
http://www.darwinawards.com/

It's not safety equipment specifically that I object to.  But I do object to vehicle designs being dictated by the government based on lowest common denominator drivers and worse case scenarios.

When I say "cocoon cars", what I'm referring to are heavy inefficient automobiles that have so isolated us from the physics and real-world effects of operating a motor vehicle that one can be lulled into a sense of security that belies that fact that we're piloting two tons of steel, iron, plastic and rubber down the highway. 

The padding, thick doors, heavy bumpers, power steering and brakes - all work to give a driver a sense of security that is out of line with the true physics of operating a car.  It's my contention that this sense of security leads to complacency because the driver is not sufficiently physically engaged in the act of driving.

And that is precisely why I like smaller cars.

Maybe I'm hardcore, but I'll take manual brakes, a non-assisted rack-and-pinion, a tight seat belt that I control the tension over and no AC, and the associated awareness that driving such a light, nimble vehicle gives me, over hydraulic assisted steering, power brakes, passive restraints, and 900 lbs of extra equipment that is only there for the worse case scenario.

And if natural selection prefers the comfortable, unaware driver in the 4000 lb pickup/sport ute/minivan over the proactive, aware, engaged driver in the in the 1800 lb econobox or sports car, then it's unlikely we'll ever see a 100 MPG car.

[desotoman]

Complain about the safety equipment if you want, with 40,000 deaths and 600,000 injuries a year it's no wonder the government has to keep you from doing stupid things.

Now if we could just keep our Government (Politician's) from doing Stupid things...............
Sorry Dean, I could not resist.

Tom G.

[racer x]

The Sr 50 from Aprilia in restricted form will give 120 mpg with out any trouble. In unrestricted mode and riding like I stole it I got over 100 mpg on a daily basis. after boring out to 70 cc with  a top speed on gps of 64 mph it still got 85 mpg and has storage under the seat.

[Jonny Hotnuts]

In Spain I rented a car made by Skoda (VW group).
It made 110 BHP and got 50 mpg on Diesel.

In truth....I really liked the car. Most cars that get good MPG have no power but this car had plenty of hp and great MPG to boot.


Too bad they are not in the US.

[836dstr]

I have lately been thinking about selling my '32 HiBoy with a thumper 383, TH350, hugh rear tires and steep rear gear. It's a daily driver in good weather and fun to drive.

I've been thinking about building a light weight 'glass '27 Track style T Roadster with a 2.3L Pinto or Ranger 4 cyl. and 5 speed. Should get decent MPG, perform well and still be fun to drive. No airbags or side bars, just a cautious driver.

Hotrodders do adapt. Should be some interesting rides being built in the next years.

Tom