(800) 853-2651
SHOP NOW

You Got to Love It !!!!

D

Dutchman

Well-known Member
Sunday I paid 3.69 for gas... today it's 3.52 ...I guess it just shows you that AMERICANS are useing comman sence , when you have to drive you get what you need in one trip..[ I know I do ]
It's going the right way.... down ...

Just my thoughts..... KEEP UP THE GREAT WORK....
Mark
 
Hi Mark, Did you see those canned tomatoes that I posted 8 or 10 postings down. Gas is still $3.75
for regular here in MD. Hal
 
I wouldn't call it common sense --- I'd call it just not having the money ---
It would be common sense to drive slower -- but your not going to see that --- I see them crazes passing me and I'm doing 60mph --- driving slower is common sense -- but VERY Few have it..
 
Most modern cars have overdrive, probably get the same fuel mileage at 80 or 60.
 
I paid $3.49 for gas today in Tulsa. It is still 10 cents higher in the rural/smaller communities. Higher gas prices have forced me to stay home and not be out runnin' around all the time.
 
[i:654c4848f0]Most modern cars have overdrive, probably get the same fuel mileage at 80 or 60[/i:654c4848f0]

[b:654c4848f0]LOL[/b:654c4848f0]

Next you will be saying going from 0 to 60 in 6 seconds burns the same amount of gas as going from 0 to 60 in 12 seconds.
 
The state of Mn is crying about the loss of revenue from lack of expected gasoline sales, might have to raise the gasoline tax.
 
Now that's just ignorant. It takes more fuel to go 0 to 60 in 12 seconds. Consider the graph of the velocity. On the vertical axis we have speed. On the horizontal axis we have time.

On the first graph we go 0 to 60 in 6 seconds. For simplicity we will assume a linear increase in speed. On the second graph we go 0 to 60 in 12 seconds. Clearly the second graph will be twice as wide. As both graphs reach the same height, we can graphically see that the second graph will have more area (perhaps twice as much.) Since we are consuming fuel throughout the time we are accelerating, it becomes obvious that we will consume more fuel going from 0 to 60 in 12 seconds than if we make the same acceleration in 6 seconds. We don't even have to break out the limits and the Riemann Sums to demonstrate this.
:)
 
It is really hard for me to give you a answer because I do not know if you are just being funny or really believe that bull you just typed out.

Lets just say it is a proven FACT that jack rabbit starts; fast stops; and fast speed burns more gas.
If you believe otherwise you have been grossly miss informed.
 
A couple of problems with your graphs-fuel flow rate will be different between the 2 vehicles, and inertia must be accounted for. Also (a minor factor) wind resistance would be a factor at higher speeds.
 
Just who is this Ms. Informed who grossed out those rabbits, and then has the gaul to call out the FACTS police, huh? I still say the aformentioned graft says it all.
 
Wind resistance (drag) increases exponentially above 45 MPH. The faster ya's goes, the worse gas mileage ya's gets. Until you break the space/time contimuum barrier and go hyperwarp, of course. But even then you'll likely only get 30 or so MPG. (Your hyperwarp mileage may vary). If you drive an F-150 like me, even hyperwarp won't save your sorry @#$%.
 
You actually answered your own question when you said "fast speed burns more gas." Your statement says nothing about how fast something accelerates. It comes down to the basic kinetic energy formula.....KE=1/2MV^2. This says that for a particular velocity, a certain amount of energy is needed to "create" that velocity. The graph example is really the best example to demonstrate that less total energy is used when accelerate at a higher rate. The less time spent at any one particular speed results in less energy being required by the system to get to a particular speed. It's basic calculus and physics.
 
With the proper modifications, speed won't affect mileage that much (and in a smaller, aerodynamic vehicle)... My 94 Honda del Sol had a 1.5 liter 4-banger and a 5-speed that I put in with higher (numerically lower) gearing than the original. I was able to run 75 mph at around 1800 rpm. 43 mpg is my average for the years that I owned it. It would make around that at any speed between 45 mph and 75 mph... and it was fun to drive.

100_0173.jpg
 
Just filled my little ford pickup. $122.00 gas is still over $4.10/gal here in Calif.(Don't even want to think about my 350 dually close to 90 gal for it)So no trips to buy or pickup some more tractors anywhere over 300 miles. Chuck
 
I don't know. I live on the border and a lot of people from Wisconsin drive out of there way to fill up here in Minnesota because gas is a few cents cheaper. I will pay an extra 50 cents for a tank of Wisconsin gas rather than go out of my way.

The MN gas tax is a flat tax and not related to the price of fuel, so if they're getting less revenue from it, that's good, it means people are wasting less fuel and abusing the roads less.

I would gladly pay more in gas tax if the state can start keeping our roads and bridges in order. Which is omething they cannot seem to do lately.
 
John --- you sure don't know what your talking about --- the faster you go -- the more it takes -- and that applies to every thing --- like what was said --- NO Common Sense ....
 
Now that is a load of crap. Sorry for being so blunt but, well.... there is something to be said about educated idiots. Not that you are one.
 
Whats happened is that the futures market ran out of power ,, Airlines and trucking Co ect.. buy their fuel a yr. ahead and lock in a price ,, Speculator GAmblers Seen the rocket Lite and Jum,ped on Board , and Fed the flames wirh Oxygen induced speculator $$$$$.. This Cause the 1st group Airlines ect. To panic and buy more ,, fearing Shortages ,ect. BID HIGHER , Next week , You'll be glad ya locked in your price !!!!!.. Then the rocket ship loses powr and falls back to earth ,, Until the speculator gambler genuises can get it to lite and take off to a new level ,, AND all THE AIRLINES ,TRUCKING CO'S.ECT WILL HAVE TO SAY AMEN ,,,or die
 
Modern overdrive is a croc! I have a '05 F-250 six speed manual. In 6th (od) at roughly 60 mph my engine turns 2k. I also have a '79 F-150 straight 4 speed manual. At 60 mph in 4th engine runs 2k. Tell me that there is overdrive in my '05. Ralph Nader did away with true overdrive because of the freewheeling and non-engine braking. I had a '62 Galaxie 500 four door sedan that ran around 28 to 30 mpg. THAT was overdrive.
 
I just took a 930 mile trip this past weekend to Iowa and back. I drove slower and improved my fuel mileage substantially. I figured in the bigger scheme, 20 or 30 minutes in driving each day wasn't going to affect me. I was pulling a trailer and in Illinois you are supposed to drive 55 on the interstate while doing so. Going up, I drove 65 or so, coming back, I kept it at 55. In Indiana, I can drive 70 while pulling the trailer, but if I do, the suburban will either hunt gears, even in tow mode, or will simply drink the gas while never kicking over into overdrive. If I slow from 71 or 72, which I normally drive, to 65, it will pretty much stay in overdrive, even on most hills and will conserve fuel.

I averaged 15.2 mpg over the course of the trip. Going up though, I drove faster and was actually only averaging about 14. Coming back I averaged over 16, but drove slower.

Anyway, I realized that when I pull a trailer, I can save a substantial amount of fuel and money if I slow down.
 
I have to believe that the 3/4 ton 250 has a lower geared (higher numerically) rear end than the 1/2 ton 150, What are the ratios in the 6 speed, I'll guess that 5 AND 6 are less than 1 to 1 and 4th is the direct 1 to 1 like 4th was in the 4 speed, try comparing rpms in direct (1 to 1). Remember when you could actually spec out a vehicle the way you wanted for engine, trans, and rear gearing???
 
I know a person who has a new diesel VW and they get 50mpgs all the time. 50-90mph





The whiners have it. WAAAAA
 
Dangit Scottie, I need more MPG! Now!

He's a man Jim, not a god!

If we don't get more MPG Bones, we'll all be talkin to God soon.

Capten, I've inflated the tires and got .776 MPG and rolled up the windas. Let's see how she does now!

Make it so, Scottie. Engage! Er, wait, I still got it in Park...
 
Come back in a week or two, no don't, but anyway take your wifes car and drive it 55 for a tank then 75 for a tank and tell me if it's not just a couple mpg different.







The whiners have it. WAAAAA
 
YUP --- People will say anything -- and Most every one will believe them (( Until you check it for yourself )) -- WAAAAAA
 
Here is a prototype car built especially to see if high MPG could be accomplished--and it can.

Perhaps 30-50 percent of todays automobiles could be replaced by such IF and only IF the American mindset could be changed from I WANT and I NEED to this will work for me. Perhaps high dollar gasoline will provide work toward that.

Initial cost would be the other factor which would stop some in their tracks.

I'm speaking of replacing a lot of second cars which are only used for commuting, not common cars in rural areas which haul a lot of groceries home, etc. nor those driven by soccer moms hauling kids around.
High MPG VW
 
They modify the present Hybreds with more and better batteries and get 100mpg.









The whiners have it. WAAAAA
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

jon f mn
My 190 gets a new drive motor.
Replies
6
Views
388
Ande
Ande
D
Case 530 Forklift
Replies
4
Views
387
Ande
Ande
D
Up date on Linda { not good }
Replies
15
Views
732
VAC400
V
jon f mn
Diagnose this engine problem if you can
2 3
Replies
43
Views
1K
CEP ACB
C
S
Ford 4000 turns over won't start
Replies
17
Views
1K
ErnieD
E
Tractor Parts Tractor Manuals

We sell tractor parts! We have the parts you need to repair your tractor - the right parts. Our low prices and years of research make us your best choice when you need parts. Shop Online Today.

Copyright © 1997-2024 Yesterday's Tractor Co.

All Rights Reserved. Reproduction of any part of this website, including design and content, without written permission is strictly prohibited. Trade Marks and Trade Names contained and used in this Website are those of others, and are used in this Website in a descriptive sense to refer to the products of others. Use of this Web site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy TRADEMARK DISCLAIMER: Tradenames and Trademarks referred to within Yesterday's Tractor Co. products and within the Yesterday's Tractor Co. websites are the property of their respective trademark holders. None of these trademark holders are affiliated with Yesterday's Tractor Co., our products, or our website nor are we sponsored by them. John Deere and its logos are the registered trademarks of the John Deere Corporation. Agco, Agco Allis, White, Massey Ferguson and their logos are the registered trademarks of AGCO Corporation. Case, Case-IH, Farmall, International Harvester, New Holland and their logos are registered trademarks of CNH Global N.V.

Yesterday's Tractors - Antique Tractor Headquarters
Website Accessibility Policy

Back
Top