"Redonda" wrote in message
...

In my Honda with its 2 litre, 12-valve, computer-controlled fuel-injection
I
can reach 80mph on a motorway with very little throttle movement and then
ease off the gas until I'm just feathering the pedal to maintain that
speed.
In this way I get better fuel consumption than in the urban cycle.
There's
no public road in this septic isle that will allow me to use full throttle
at maximum torque.

In town traffic I can do the same, ie keep in a higher gear at lower
revs/speed (20mph in 5th gear) and still be able to accelerate smoothly
with
just a twitch of my right toes. The only thing that adversely affects
consumption is driving in London (and other major cities in the rush-hour)
where the stop/go/stop conditions force me to use 1st gear most of the
time.

Ah, I see.
Made up figures then with no facts.

W K wrote:
snip

Ah, I see.
Made up figures then with no facts.

No, not 'made up' figures. Just *my* personal experience in 37 years of
driving including road rallying (in the '60s and '70s with the RAF Motor
Sport Association), 7 1/2 ton trucks and small van deliveries (multi-drop
and long distance). When I've worked for companies with fleets of similar
vehicles I was always able to get better mpg than all the other drivers by
using some of the techniques employed by drivers in the old Mobil Economy
Run (does anyone know if the MER - or its equivalent - still takes place?).

--
Phil ,,,^.".^,,,


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.648 / Virus Database: 415 - Release Date: 31/03/2004

"Redonda" wrote in message
...
W K wrote:
snip

Ah, I see.
Made up figures then with no facts.

No, not 'made up' figures. Just *my* personal experience in 37 years of
driving including road rallying (in the '60s and '70s with the RAF Motor
Sport Association), 7 1/2 ton trucks and small van deliveries (multi-drop
and long distance). When I've worked for companies with fleets of similar
vehicles I was always able to get better mpg than all the other drivers by
using some of the techniques employed by drivers in the old Mobil Economy
Run (does anyone know if the MER - or its equivalent - still takes
place?).

No science then.
Just figures that you think you remember.

What is the fuel consumption of a modern, standard CAR at 20, 30 and 40?

Do you have any idea.

W K wrote:
"Redonda" wrote in message
...
W K wrote:
snip

Ah, I see.
Made up figures then with no facts.

No, not 'made up' figures. Just *my* personal experience in 37
years of driving including road rallying (in the '60s and '70s with
the RAF Motor Sport Association), 7 1/2 ton trucks and small van
deliveries (multi-drop and long distance). When I've worked for
companies with fleets of similar vehicles I was always able to get
better mpg than all the other drivers by using some of the
techniques employed by drivers in the old Mobil Economy Run (does
anyone know if the MER - or its equivalent - still takes place?).

No science then.
Just figures that you think you remember.

What is the fuel consumption of a modern, standard CAR at 20, 30 and
40?

Do you have any idea.

Enlighten me.

--
Phil ,,,^.".^,,,


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.648 / Virus Database: 415 - Release Date: 31/03/2004

"Redonda" wrote in message
...
W K wrote:
"Redonda" wrote in message
...
W K wrote:
snip

Ah, I see.
Made up figures then with no facts.

No, not 'made up' figures. Just *my* personal experience in 37
years of driving including road rallying (in the '60s and '70s with
the RAF Motor Sport Association), 7 1/2 ton trucks and small van
deliveries (multi-drop and long distance). When I've worked for
companies with fleets of similar vehicles I was always able to get
better mpg than all the other drivers by using some of the
techniques employed by drivers in the old Mobil Economy Run (does
anyone know if the MER - or its equivalent - still takes place?).

No science then.
Just figures that you think you remember.

What is the fuel consumption of a modern, standard CAR at 20, 30 and
40?

Do you have any idea.

Enlighten me.

I don't actually know.

YOU made an assertion that pollution would be greater at 20 than at 40 or
50.
If that assertion has any basis of truth, you could do with telling us.

W K wrote:
"Redonda" wrote in message
...
W K wrote:
"Redonda" wrote in message
...
W K wrote:
snip

Ah, I see.
Made up figures then with no facts.

No, not 'made up' figures. Just *my* personal experience in 37
years of driving including road rallying (in the '60s and '70s with
the RAF Motor Sport Association), 7 1/2 ton trucks and small van
deliveries (multi-drop and long distance). When I've worked for
companies with fleets of similar vehicles I was always able to get
better mpg than all the other drivers by using some of the
techniques employed by drivers in the old Mobil Economy Run (does
anyone know if the MER - or its equivalent - still takes place?).

No science then.
Just figures that you think you remember.

What is the fuel consumption of a modern, standard CAR at 20, 30 and
40?

Do you have any idea.

Enlighten me.

I don't actually know.

YOU made an assertion that pollution would be greater at 20 than at
40 or
50.
If that assertion has any basis of truth, you could do with telling
us.

I doubt there are any facts behind that comment.

Try this for a laugh, swim 10 lengths as fast as you can, then 10 lengths
quite slowly. Which one do you think you've used most energy for? Which
has produced more heat "pollution"? I know cars are very different, but you
still have the basic mechanics of pushing an object through a fluid at
speed.

"W K" wrote in message
...

I don't actually know.

YOU made an assertion that pollution would be greater at 20 than at 40 or
50.
If that assertion has any basis of truth, you could do with telling us.

http://www.naei.org.uk/other/vehicle_emissions_v2.xls

ought to be the place to look, but it is not as extensive, nor
clear as the london-research speed data used to be, which
showed pollution per km is best around 45mph (except NOx)

W K ) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were
saying :

What is the fuel consumption of a modern, standard CAR at 20, 30 and
40?

Enlighten me.

I don't actually know.

YOU made an assertion that pollution would be greater at 20 than at 40 or
50.
If that assertion has any basis of truth, you could do with telling us.

The easiest way to get an approximation would be to look at the old-style
fuel economy figures - urban, constant 56 are probably close enough to what
we want for this.

The constant 56 figures were always WAY better than the urban ones. That's
a good indication that there's a lot less pollution at free-moving speed.

Redonda wrote:
W K wrote:
"Redonda" wrote in message
...
W K wrote:
snip

Ah, I see.
Made up figures then with no facts.

No, not 'made up' figures. Just *my* personal experience in 37
years of driving including road rallying (in the '60s and '70s with
the RAF Motor Sport Association), 7 1/2 ton trucks and small van
deliveries (multi-drop and long distance). When I've worked for
companies with fleets of similar vehicles I was always able to get
better mpg than all the other drivers by using some of the
techniques employed by drivers in the old Mobil Economy Run (does
anyone know if the MER - or its equivalent - still takes place?).

No science then.
Just figures that you think you remember.

What is the fuel consumption of a modern, standard CAR at 20, 30 and
40?

Do you have any idea.

Enlighten me.

That's the whole point! Without actually measuring, nobody seems to have a
clue whether fuel consumption will be more or less in different gears or
revs. The best I can do personally is to apply my scientific knowledge to
the situation, but I don't state things like they are facts when I don't
have any!

Anyone feel like fitting some sort of flow rate thingy to their fuel line?

In article ,
says...

"Redonda" wrote in message
...
W K wrote:
snip

Ah, I see.
Made up figures then with no facts.

No, not 'made up' figures. Just *my* personal experience in 37 years of
driving including road rallying (in the '60s and '70s with the RAF Motor
Sport Association), 7 1/2 ton trucks and small van deliveries (multi-drop
and long distance). When I've worked for companies with fleets of similar
vehicles I was always able to get better mpg than all the other drivers by
using some of the techniques employed by drivers in the old Mobil Economy
Run (does anyone know if the MER - or its equivalent - still takes
place?).

No science then.
Just figures that you think you remember.

What is the fuel consumption of a modern, standard CAR at 20, 30 and 40?

Define modern define standard?
Can you be anymore vague?
Are we talking Smart car or Maybach (both modern Mercedes cars)?
Are we talking fully loaded, or single driver occupant?
See level or on the M62 over the pennines?
--
The poster formerly known as Skodapilot.
http://www.bouncing-czechs.com