Canadian Money Forum banner
41 - 60 of 63 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
514 Posts
this is what underdrive pulleys are for. work great!

Did an interesting fuel experiment in the past weeks as I needed to replace a part that required me to remove my serpentine belt until the part arrived. So without an alternator, power steering pump or A/C being driven for a little more than half the tank I gained almost 1L per 100kms. I was quite surpised that the load on these caused such a drain on fuel and of course the inconvenience of driving without the belt is far greater than the fuel savings. :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8 Posts
Based on how much I drive, the less fuel consumed, the better.

Based on my mileage I will save 12000 over ten years with a Golf TDI @ 60 mpg vs Altima @ 45 mpg...

If I drove my wife's Tacoma, I 'd save almost 18000$

Diesel re sale value higher than 90% vehicles on the road, and the above savings doesn't take into account diesel is cheaper than gas 3/4 of the year at least where I live.

To get a accurate total cost of ownership including re-sale value, subscribe to consumer reports and find your potential car and click on ownership costs. the Golf Diesel est cost is 0.45 per KM which is among the lowest of any car i've seen. There are cheaper cars to run, but the Golf is a bit more premium and my costs might be lower due to the fact I drive more than the K driven that CR uses to determine costs of ownerships... So, cost isn't the only thing... but
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
91 Posts
I bought my last car for it's efficiency. I'm saving $2,000 a year in gas vs a similar sized vehicle. This is going from a Dodge Caliber with a 1.8L to a Kia Niro PHEV.

My average fuel consumption has gone from 10 L/100 km's to 2.3 L/100 km's. The Caliber wasn't as bad on gas it that number suggests. I do/did a lot of towing with both of those cars.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,753 Posts
I don't care either. At 10,000-15,000 km per year, it simply does not make enough difference to be 10l/100km or 7l/100km or 4l/100km
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
928 Posts
I agree AltaRed. It is what it is, and why obsess over it. Compared to insurance, maintenance and depreciation it's a very minor expense. I could never understand why my father always filled the tank to overflowing, then wrote down the mileage so he could calculate MPG. What's the point? My wife's father was exactly the same. Until the day he finally gave up his last vehicle at age 95 he was still doing the same thing. Why measure something you have no influence over? Other than the obvious things like correct tire pressure, a clean air filter and take that load of bricks out of the trunk the only real measurable impact you can have over gas mileage is to slow down.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
4,279 Posts
Discussion Starter · #48 ·
I agree AltaRed. It is what it is, and why obsess over it. Compared to insurance, maintenance and depreciation it's a very minor expense. I could never understand why my father always filled the tank to overflowing, then wrote down the mileage so he could calculate MPG. What's the point?
Everyone is different, I enjoy logging the data for the 5 seconds it takes per fill up. It can also tell me if something is not right engine wise, as in maintanence might be needed. If you don't drive much it probably doesn't make sense to do it though.

BTW, my quick calculation shows I spent more per year (on average and per today's prices) on fuel than insurance and maintenance combined for my car. I almost could have bought another car with the money I've saved on fuel. :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,753 Posts
We all spend on fuel in the absolute sense with ICEs. The question is whether relatively small differences in consumption rate (the specific subject of this thread) are that meaningful. Obviously, the more fuel efficient the better but significant degradation in performance (and I would say safety such as passing on two lane highways) is a high price to pay for, say 7l/100km versus 9l/100km. Things like stop/start at red lights, cylinder de-activations, etc. come close to pure nonsense.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
4,279 Posts
Discussion Starter · #50 ·
Obviously, the more fuel efficient the better but significant degradation in performance (and I would say safety such as passing on two lane highways) is a high price to pay for, say 7l/100km versus 9l/100km.
Not sure I follow you on the performance and safety point ... talking about passing due to lower HP? If so, that's never been issue for me.

Things like stop/start at red lights, cylinder de-activations, etc. come close to pure nonsense.
I agree.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,753 Posts
Acceleration is primarily about torque, not HP. A small naturally aspirated 2 litre four banger doesn't cut it on Highway 1 through BC relative to, for example, a 2.5 litre turbocharged engine. I've seen too many close calls on that highway in the past 20+ years. A reason why many opted for the 3 litre, or 3.5 litre V6.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
4,279 Posts
Discussion Starter · #52 ·
Acceleration is primarily about torque, not HP. A small naturally aspirated 2 litre four banger doesn't cut it on Highway 1 through BC relative to, for example, a 2.5 litre turbocharged engine. I've seen too many close calls on that highway in the past 20+ years. A reason why many opted for the 3 litre, or 3.5 litre V6.
That's really a driver issue, nothing to do with the vehicle. I've towed my trailered motorcycle numerous times in the mountains (to Kelowna) and never had a problem with my Golf.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,234 Posts
With Vancouver gas prices it's definitely on my mind. I've bought fuel-efficient cars in the past, but I ended up returning to a larger, less fuel-efficient model. I only buy older used vehicles, which makes it harder to find something fuel-efficient and safe, that also has decent power and cargo space.

My current vehicle has 309K on it, so I expect to be in the market again soon. I've been putting it off for a while because the prices I'm seeing in the used market are frightening right now.

I wish there were more fuel efficient wagons available, since I'm not really an SUV person.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,932 Posts
I consider it as part of Total cost of ownership.
But really I'm spending 20L/month in fuel, even if I doubled my consumption it's insigificant.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
511 Posts
Acceleration is primarily about torque, not HP.
Unless your transmission is broken, acceleration is almost entirely about HP. Torque is just a feel good thing. It lets you be lazy about downshifting and it gives the false impression that the engine is not working hard because of low rpm. It's even more true these days with 8-10 speed automatics and CVTs where the engine can be kept near its maximum output at any speed.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,678 Posts
BTW, my quick calculation shows I spent more per year (on average and per today's prices) on fuel than insurance and maintenance combined for my car. I almost could have bought another car with the money I've saved on fuel. :)
I guess you are due for an EV?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,753 Posts
Acceleration is mostly about ft lbs of torque. The flat torque curve is what gives EVs an advantage over ICEs overall, and what a well designed turbo-charger can give one at low rpm. HP is the key factor for maximum speed.

The torque curve was one of the key drivers for me to buy a Mazda with a turbo-charged 2.5l and true 5 speed auto, over a RAV4 which had to howl like a banshee with its CVT. There was no comparison especially at low speeds. I couldn't get the RAV4 test driver back to the dealership fast enough.

I thought most would know that. As in Torque vs Horsepower Explained

P.S. My last Nissan was a CVT. I hated how the engine had to scream with the pedal to the floor and the temporary lag while the CVT got the most from engine torque. That was exactly the same effect in the 2020 RAV4 we test drove. Disappointing is the kindest way to express that. I want the tires to immediately want to squeak when the hammer goes down.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
740 Posts
I'm about 20K per year in driving. I went from a mid sized pickup to a chevy volt.

Truck was about $3600 in gs in a year. Volt was less than $200 in gas, and maybe $extra 800 on electric bill.
 
41 - 60 of 63 Posts
Top