Re: Don't believe Corvette owners lies about supposed fuel economy

....killed Nissan crosspost

Bob Drake wrote:
> On a 30 mile highway near my home, I indicated 36 MPG at 60 MPH, 6th 
> gear, with one passenger.  At 70 it dropped to 33.
> 
> I think GM needs to look at power to weight ratios and gear ratios to 
> get some economy in the dogs they sell.  A high overdrive in a 7-spd 
> automatic transmission would go a long way to cutting fuel expenses.
> 
> While I am on this rant, I drove my 2000 Ford Ranger (V6 Flex Fuel, FWD,

> 24 MPG highway) to Strasburg, PA for a conference.  We have NO Ethanol 
> E-85 stations in Northern Virginia.  I found an E-85 station in 
> Strasburg, filled up on E-85 at $2.50 per gallon and got 23 MPG 
> highway.  Something is wrong with the oil companies in Northern Virginia

> - wonder if they are keeping the bio-fuel people out?
> 
> Bob
> 2000 C5
> 

That comparison on mileage seems a bit apples & 
oranges since the Ford in question is designed 
to a 'truck-rated' (semi-commercial) duty cycle 
with limited reserve horsepower and the 'vette 
is designed for a gigantic reserve horsepower 
and non-commercial duty cycle.

I've no clue as to where Corvette engineers 
established their, "standard-day, max continuous 
sustained r-w horsepower rating."  I do know 
that they have increased it over the years. 
Compared to my C4, the C5 ('02) can sustain 
higher speeds across the desert without cooling 
issues. Arguably, another apples-and-oranges 
comparison since the C4 is auto and my C5 is manual.

The talk about E-85 and Bio fuels is nice but 
Bio is very limited in production potential and 
availability.  That isn't going to change.  (I 
feel pretty sure that when I croak in 10-15 
years, I'll be able to order a chunk of steak 
for my final meal.)

"Alternative" fuels are fine for grad-students 
or hippies with a modified VW bus going cross- 
country. They aren't sufficient in quantity for 
any energy company to consider making an 
investment to store, distribute and market them. 
  .....  "sorry honorable customer -- no frying 
oil until 6 a.m.... after McDonalds changes the 
fat in their deep fryers."

The distribution issues in Ethanol preclude it's 
use West of the Rockies unless we toss much of 
our sugar beet production into the game--that 
would raise hell with our farm commodity and 
beef cattle production.  Flex-fuel or E85 logos 
on the vehicles in California are a joke.  Ain't 
gonna happen here. The long-term, bottomline 
economics in these fuels--after give-away 
subsidies expire--make them a foolhardy 
investment unless something very magic happens 
in how they are grown and made.

Unless 90% of us immediately adopt a diet of 
twigs and nuts, we are dependent on gasoline and 
we've got to learn how to best use it.  About 
the only way to extract ourselves from this 
lockstep is to move power generation to Nuclear 
and then power municipal travel with electricity 
leaving petrol for long-haul highway and 
airplane transport.  Meanwhile, it's going to be 
a rough several years and we've got to just suck 
it up.

Alternative--set on our hands, bitch and become 
a fourth world country.

We are no longer in control of this. Oil and 
gasoline are increasingly traded on foreign 
markets.  We now make more money exporting 
Diesel and other distillates (JP etc.) than by 
selling them domestically.
--
pj