| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Robert Blass
Guest
|
 Posted: Wed Jul 02, 2008 12:15 am Post subject: 2002 Ford Taurus gets 18 MPG??? THAT seems insane to me. |
 |
|
This car is getting 18 MPG, that does not sound normal to me. Is their
a website which tells me the average MPG for this car???
I've tested this MPG several times and 18 was the most frequent MPG,
but one time it measured 16 MPG. With gasoline prices what they are
this made me kind of angry if you consider the old pocket book.
Is their something that is kind of undocumented that I should know
about this automobile?
I am a super extra duper newbie when it comes to automotive repairs so
please be gentle. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Kruse
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 02, 2008 12:15 am Post subject: Re: 2002 Ford Taurus gets 18 MPG??? THAT seems insane to me. |
|
|
On Jul 1, 7:20 pm, Robert Blass <bl...@messenger.xcx> wrote:
| Quote: |
Just like light bulbs. It's already been proven you can make a regular
encadescant light bulb which can last up to 100 years even flipping it
on/off throughout that 100 years. But guess who bought and buried the
patents? You guessed it, OIL companies
|
Uh, I think encadescant starts with the letter "I", along with a few
other letters off. No matter.
Actually, you CAN make an incandescent bulb last a long time. Just
make it rated for a higher
voltage and it will burn cooler and last longer. Of course, the watts
used per candlepower will be
a lot higher and your electricity per lumen output will be a lot
higher. You'd think the oil companies would
be PUSHING a bulb like that. But hey, the bulb would last 100 years.
BTW, patents can be accessed by public views, even if the oil
companies did buy them up and after so many
years, the patents expire. You would think that all the "gas saving"
patents of the 70s could be used by now.
Try not to be so paranoid. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
I. Care
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 02, 2008 12:49 am Post subject: Re: 2002 Ford Taurus gets 18 MPG??? THAT seems insane to me. |
|
|
In article <5a0l64pa7bp1c043senbd5k5t8gla3j9te@xxx.org>,
blame@messenger.xcx says...
| Quote: |
I've tested this MPG several times and 18 was the most frequent MPG,
but one time it measured 16 MPG.
A simple Google search with "2002 Ford Taurus se mpg" gave as the first |
item in the list: http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/noframes/18283.shtml
This lists the new/revised fuel economy ratings. The 2002 Taurus Se is
listed as: 18mpg city, 25mpg highway, combined 21mpg on gas. If you
are using E85 the mpg goes down to 13mpg, 18mpg, and 15mpg respectively.
Isn't internet searching easy and informative?
--
I. Care
Address fake until the SPAM goes away ;-} |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Andrew Rossmann
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 02, 2008 2:41 am Post subject: Re: 2002 Ford Taurus gets 18 MPG??? THAT seems insane to me. |
|
|
In article <5a0l64pa7bp1c043senbd5k5t8gla3j9te@xxx.org>,
blame@messenger.xcx says...
| Quote: |
This car is getting 18 MPG, that does not sound normal to me. Is their
a website which tells me the average MPG for this car???
I've tested this MPG several times and 18 was the most frequent MPG,
but one time it measured 16 MPG. With gasoline prices what they are
this made me kind of angry if you consider the old pocket book.
Is their something that is kind of undocumented that I should know
about this automobile?
I am a super extra duper newbie when it comes to automotive repairs so
please be gentle.
|
I have a 2000 Sable with the Duratec. My average over the 7 years I've
owned it is 19.32MPG. That is mostly suburban driving. Not much in the
way of expressway driving, but mostly moderate traffic and lights.
--
If there is a no_junk in my address, please REMOVE it before replying!
All junk mail senders will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the
law!!
http://home.att.net/~andyross |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Robert Blass
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 02, 2008 4:20 am Post subject: Re: 2002 Ford Taurus gets 18 MPG??? THAT seems insane to me. |
|
|
On Tue, 1 Jul 2008 12:49:53 -0700, I. Care <icare@spamthis.com> sayd
the following:
| Quote: |
In article <5a0l64pa7bp1c043senbd5k5t8gla3j9te@xxx.org>,
blame@messenger.xcx says...
I've tested this MPG several times and 18 was the most frequent MPG,
but one time it measured 16 MPG.
A simple Google search with "2002 Ford Taurus se mpg" gave as the first
item in the list: http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/noframes/18283.shtml
This lists the new/revised fuel economy ratings. The 2002 Taurus Se is
listed as: 18mpg city, 25mpg highway, combined 21mpg on gas. If you
are using E85 the mpg goes down to 13mpg, 18mpg, and 15mpg respectively.
Isn't internet searching easy and informative?
|
18mpg? This car sucks ass then. I wish people would be some good mpg
cars, fully gasoline powered ones. I think in 2008 we should be able
to easily get 50 mpg out of a big V-8 Engine. Such technology was
probably bought and buried by the American Oil Companies.
Just like light bulbs. It's already been proven you can make a regular
encadescant light bulb which can last up to 100 years even flipping it
on/off throughout that 100 years. But guess who bought and buried the
patents? You guessed it, OIL companies
The reason we don't have nuclear power in larger numbers is because
Big COAL companies have paid out $Billions to force congress to oppose
the building of nuclear power plants. Coal companies also pay off
scientists to fund studies trying to make nuclear power sound more
dangerous than a gun or stick of explosives.
Like I said, 18 mpg even for 2002 sucks asses.
Thanks for the link by the way. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
tango
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 02, 2008 7:45 am Post subject: Re: 2002 Ford Taurus gets 18 MPG??? THAT seems insane to me. |
|
|
Robert Blass <blame@messenger.xcx> wrote in
news:5a0l64pa7bp1c043senbd5k5t8gla3j9te@xxx.org:
| Quote: |
This car is getting 18 MPG, that does not sound normal to me. Is their
a website which tells me the average MPG for this car???
I've tested this MPG several times and 18 was the most frequent MPG,
but one time it measured 16 MPG. With gasoline prices what they are
this made me kind of angry if you consider the old pocket book.
Is their something that is kind of undocumented that I should know
about this automobile?
I am a super extra duper newbie when it comes to automotive repairs so
please be gentle.
|
18 MPG is bad mileage for a Taurus. have a 2002 which averages 24 MPG
around town and on road with about 50-50 split between the two. I have a
good friend who has two and my brother in-law had two and all got good
mileage. how many people are with you and do you drive like many, seeing
how fast you can go from one stop signal to the other. Sounds like you need
to get it checked.
I have the Vulcan 12 valve 155 HP engine. I believe you have the 200 HP
version which won't get as good in town but does about as well on the road. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Ted Mittelstaedt
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 02, 2008 11:00 am Post subject: Re: 2002 Ford Taurus gets 18 MPG??? THAT seems insane to me. |
|
|
"Robert Blass" <blame@messenger.xcx> wrote in message
news:qjel64dc70ru4sfnhqg1dkve6hiuqrtg2p@xxx.org...
| Quote: |
On Tue, 1 Jul 2008 12:49:53 -0700, I. Care <icare@spamthis.com> sayd
the following:
In article <5a0l64pa7bp1c043senbd5k5t8gla3j9te@xxx.org>,
blame@messenger.xcx says...
I've tested this MPG several times and 18 was the most frequent MPG,
but one time it measured 16 MPG.
A simple Google search with "2002 Ford Taurus se mpg" gave as the first
item in the list: http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/noframes/18283.shtml
This lists the new/revised fuel economy ratings. The 2002 Taurus Se is
listed as: 18mpg city, 25mpg highway, combined 21mpg on gas. If you
are using E85 the mpg goes down to 13mpg, 18mpg, and 15mpg respectively.
Isn't internet searching easy and informative?
18mpg? This car sucks ass then. I wish people would be some good mpg
cars, fully gasoline powered ones.
|
If you want to get better MPG then learn to drive better MPG, you can
start here:
http://www.hypermiling.com/car-mpg.html
Note:
http://www.treehugger.com/files/2008/05/hypermiling-couple-peugeot-australia-guiness-world-record.php
"...Helen and John Taylor drove around the coast of Australia in an
un-modified Peugeot 308 HDi 110 (a non-hybrid, diesel car) for 25 days. Over
the 9,062 miles (14,584 kilometers) that they and their luggage traveled,
they averaged 75.6 miles per US gallon..."
Now, I will hasten to say that these incredible world records in hypermiling
are only achieved by the illegal practice of "drafting" (ie: tailgating)
large
trucks. That's the part that they don't talk about.
But, even using the legal hypermiling driving techniques, a 5MPG
improvement is easy to get.
| Quote: |
I think in 2008 we should be able
to easily get 50 mpg out of a big V-8 Engine.
|
We can. We have known how to do it for years. What you do is tune
the intake runners and the exhaust headers to the peak powerband
of the engine, then you run the engine at a constant RPM.
The issue is transmitting constant rpm power to the rear
wheels. That's the difficult part.
| Quote: |
Such technology was
probably bought and buried by the American Oil Companies.
Just like light bulbs. It's already been proven you can make a regular
encadescant light bulb which can last up to 100 years even flipping it
on/off throughout that 100 years. But guess who bought and buried the
patents? You guessed it, OIL companies
|
You can walk into your local home improvement store and buy
extended length light bulbs. They are called "garage door opener"
bulbs. They have extra thick filaments and more filament supports
to prevent the vibration of the opener from killing them. However
the extra thick filament causes them to last far far longer if used in
a standard fixture (not a garage door opener)
| Quote: |
The reason we don't have nuclear power in larger numbers is because
Big COAL companies have paid out $Billions to force congress to oppose
the building of nuclear power plants. Coal companies also pay off
scientists to fund studies trying to make nuclear power sound more
dangerous than a gun or stick of explosives.
|
How do you run a car on nuclear energy?
Ted |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Robert Blass
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 02, 2008 10:30 pm Post subject: Re: 2002 Ford Taurus gets 18 MPG??? THAT seems insane to me. |
|
|
On Wed, 2 Jul 2008 01:47:58 -0700, "Ted Mittelstaedt"
<tedm@toybox.placo.com> sayd the following:
| Quote: |
How do you run a car on nuclear energy?
Ted
|
The same way Nuclear fuel rods are used in modern nuclear power plants
to generate heat translated into electricity. You'd need a fuel rod
smaller than a pencil to have 100+ years of power use.
Of course the 'bargain' cars would run $100Million and up.
But after a while the price would come down PLUS you could recycle
those fuel rods for a newer car to use. It would be crazy time
efficient after 10 years.
Also the grade of uranium used in power plants would not be needed for
a stupid car. You could use 10% power grade uranium which could be
designed quicker and be cheaper because you wouldn't need to worry
about the quality of the fuel rods.
It will never happen because of fearful Liberals who would label the
idea as "Chernobyl on wheels"
600 Million automobiles off the highway RIGHT NOW! Imagine the
environmental benefits that would be overnight?
Also no need to make all that diesel and gasoline anymore in such
crazy qualities.
I really don't see any downside to this idea but I'm sure someone will
say some Chernobyl-type scenario.
Also, who would give a flying damn what a barrel of oil costs then? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Robert Blass
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 02, 2008 10:33 pm Post subject: Re: 2002 Ford Taurus gets 18 MPG??? THAT seems insane to me. |
|
|
On Wed, 02 Jul 2008 02:45:51 GMT, tango <tango@cynet.com> sayd the
following:
| Quote: |
Sounds like you need
to get it checked.
I have the Vulcan 12 valve 155 HP engine. I believe you have the 200 HP
version which won't get as good in town but does about as well on the road.
|
No, I have the 155 HP engine in mine. It's got less than 76K original
miles and I usually have 1 or 2 people in the car at times.
I've never paid much attention to how fast I drive either. Then again
it's not like I am on the Highways/Interstates that much...it's mainly
99% inside the city where I *might* go 50-55 mph at times.
I likely have a super duper serious problem which would likely end up
costing me a seriously great deal of money that I don't have right
now.
This sucks so much. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Robert Blass
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 02, 2008 10:38 pm Post subject: Re: 2002 Ford Taurus gets 18 MPG??? THAT seems insane to me. |
|
|
On Wed, 2 Jul 2008 01:47:58 -0700, "Ted Mittelstaedt"
<tedm@toybox.placo.com> sayd the following:
That was a cute little page. I never knew about this 'keep moving'
aspect before.
thanks man |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 03, 2008 4:13 pm Post subject: Re: 2002 Ford Taurus gets 18 MPG??? THAT seems insane to me. |
|
|
On Jul 1, 3:15 pm, Robert Blass <bl...@messenger.xcx> wrote:
| Quote: |
This car is getting 18 MPG, that does not sound normal to me. Is their
a website which tells me the average MPG for this car???
I've tested this MPG several times and 18 was the most frequent MPG,
but one time it measured 16 MPG. With gasoline prices what they are
this made me kind of angry if you consider the old pocket book.
Is their something that is kind of undocumented that I should know
about this automobile?
I am a super extra duper newbie when it comes to automotive repairs so
please be gentle.
|
Try avoiding any fuel with ethanol in it. Ethanol reduces MPG and
performance. For a test switch to a higher octane like 89 and see if
there's a difference.
Eric |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
tango
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 04, 2008 2:38 am Post subject: Re: 2002 Ford Taurus gets 18 MPG??? THAT seems insane to me. |
|
|
Robert Blass <blame@messenger.xcx> wrote in
news:bren64tjnliljohf1kctt8eo8pcpuvo7um@xxx.org:
| Quote: |
On Wed, 02 Jul 2008 02:45:51 GMT, tango <tango@cynet.com> sayd the
following:
Sounds like you need
to get it checked.
I have the Vulcan 12 valve 155 HP engine. I believe you have the 200
HP version which won't get as good in town but does about as well on
the road.
No, I have the 155 HP engine in mine. It's got less than 76K original
miles and I usually have 1 or 2 people in the car at times.
I've never paid much attention to how fast I drive either. Then again
it's not like I am on the Highways/Interstates that much...it's mainly
99% inside the city where I *might* go 50-55 mph at times.
I likely have a super duper serious problem which would likely end up
costing me a seriously great deal of money that I don't have right
now.
This sucks so much.
If it's 99% city driving in stop and go 18 MPG is about right for a mid |
size car. The Taurus is not a gas hog but when you drive in the city with
stop and go driving that's not unrealistic.
What kind of car and mileage did you get before you got the Taurus. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
59 Attacks blocked
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
