Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site cepu.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!ittvax!dcdwest!sdcsvax!bmcg!cepu!scw From: scw@cepu.UUCP Newsgroups: net.auto Subject: Re: "The biggest farce ever" faster speed =? better mpg Message-ID: <286@cepu.UUCP> Date: Wed, 20-Jun-84 14:54:52 EDT Article-I.D.: cepu.286 Posted: Wed Jun 20 14:54:52 1984 Date-Received: Thu, 21-Jun-84 11:00:28 EDT References: <2104@ihnss.UUCP> <714@ut-ngp.UUCP> <141@godot.UUCP> Reply-To: scw@cepu.UUCP (Steve Woods) Organization: VA Wadsworth Med. Center; LA CA Lines: 28 In article <141@godot.UUCP> bradley@godot.UUCP (Bradley C. Kuszmaul) writes: >It may actually be the case that you got better milage at 62 than 55 >because of a number of factors (possibly including that your toyota >is better tuned for 62 than 55) [...] the cube. sigh) so 75 mph >is going to be roughly twice as expensive as 55 mph. I have empirically >verified this in the following vehicles > 72 volvo station wagon (presumably built for high speeds since > it is pre 55 mph) > 72 vw window van. (same comment, except being german where the > autobahns rule more so) > 78 honda civic cvcc > 66 jeep (not fair since it is badly shaped, but fuel economy > dropped from 14 at 45mph to 10 at 55mph to 5 at 65 mph. These cars are not exactly what you'd call slippery (Esp. the VW), in fact they are really rather blocky, in addition the honda suffers from being grossly underengined. My '70 Opel GT (esentially a Kadett in a diffrent suit) got marginally better milage at 70 than running slower (28@70 vs 25@60). The engine/trany/rear-end ratios were such that the engine ran at 3500 RPM (MAX torque) @ 70 MPH. The body was esentially the same as the (69?-82?) Vette (actually it's the other way around Opel had the body style first). -- Stephen C. Woods (VA Wadsworth Med Ctr./UCLA Dept. of Neurology) uucp: { {ihnp4, uiucdcs}!bradley, hao, trwrb, sdcsvax!bmcg}!cepu!scw ARPA: cepu!scw@ucla-cs location: N 34 06'37" W 118 25'43"