Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 38
  1. #1
    Mr. John Wayne CosmicCowboy's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Post Count
    44,134
    So says the billboard on I-10 coming into downtown from the north. My truck gets the same gas mileage at 75 as it does at 65. Any of you Internet Einsteins want to explain to me how I'm polluting more driving 75?

  2. #2
    Veteran Wild Cobra's Avatar
    My Team
    Portland Trailblazers
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Post Count
    43,117
    So says the billboard on I-10 coming into downtown from the north. My truck gets the same gas mileage at 75 as it does at 65. Any of you Internet Einsteins want to explain to me how I'm polluting more driving 75?
    In reality, the power required to propel vehicle through the air is a cube factor.

    If it takes 150 HP to go 65 MPH, then it takes 230 HP to go 75 MPH.

    I used to think it was a square factor, but I later learned otherwise. Now if it is a square factor, then the 150 HP at 65 MPH would be 200 HP at 75 MPH.

    Without extensive and careful monitoring, it's hard to say your mileage is the same.

    The sign is silly anyway since modern vehicle exhaust is generally cleaner than the air they take in. Unless... they are counting CO2 as a pollutant... Then it's laughably stupid.

  3. #3
    Mr. John Wayne CosmicCowboy's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Post Count
    44,134
    My on board computer calculates speed, RPM, fuel passed through the injectors, etc. to calculate and display mileage down to .01. It's basically the same at 75 as it is at 65.

  4. #4
    Veteran Wild Cobra's Avatar
    My Team
    Portland Trailblazers
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Post Count
    43,117
    My on board computer calculates speed, RPM, fuel passed through the injectors, etc. to calculate and display mileage down to .01. It's basically the same at 75 as it is at 65.
    That's not the reality of physics though. If you are really getting the same mileage, then maybe there is some built in inhibitor from getting higher mileage? There should be a noticeable difference, especially with a real time onboard computer calculation.

  5. #5
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Post Count
    97,536
    So says the billboard on I-10 coming into downtown from the north. My truck gets the same gas mileage at 75 as it does at 65. Any of you Internet Einsteins want to explain to me how I'm polluting more driving 75?
    your personal anecdote nullifies science, just like a Bible humper

    wind resistance at 75 is non-linearly more than at 65, so more fuel burned

    Speed Kills MPG

    How much?

    According to studies backed by the department of energy, the average car will be at its advertised MPG at 55 mph. But as the speed increases:

    - 3% less efficient at 60 mph
    - 8% less efficient at 65 mph
    - 17% less efficient at 70 mph
    - 23% less efficient at 75 mph
    - 28% less efficient at 80 mph

    See the graph below (from fueleconomy.gov):


    http://www.mpgforspeed.com/


    "At approximately 12 km/h rolling and air resistance have equivalent magnitude. At higher velocities air resistance dominates quite strongly."

    http://www.sheldonbrown.com/rinard/aero/formulas.htm

  6. #6
    Displaced 101A's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Post Count
    7,711
    That's not the reality of physics though. If you are really getting the same mileage, then maybe there is some built in inhibitor from getting higher mileage? There should be a noticeable difference, especially with a real time onboard computer calculation.
    You're not taking into account engine speed/torque - the gearing of his transmission/final drive ratio.

  7. #7
    Displaced 101A's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Post Count
    7,711

  8. #8
    Still Hates Small Ball Spurminator's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Post Count
    37,751
    I don't know the physics, I just question the logic of trying to appeal to speeders with an environmentalist message.

  9. #9
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Post Count
    97,536
    I don't know the physics, I just question the logic of trying to appeal to speeders with an environmentalist message.
    agreed.

    if gas were $5+/gal, billboards could make an economic appeal

  10. #10
    I can live with it JoeChalupa's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Post Count
    21,547
    I obey the law.

  11. #11
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Post Count
    97,536
    There's a long stretch on I10 West of SA where the limit is 75. Biggest offenders are pickup trucks doing 85+

  12. #12
    right about pizzagate Blake's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Post Count
    83,636
    There's a long stretch on I10 West of SA where the limit is 75. Biggest offenders are pickup trucks doing 85+
    It's also 75 heading southeast towards Corpus/Port A

  13. #13
    Mr. John Wayne CosmicCowboy's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Post Count
    44,134
    You ers driving 65 are a road hazard.

  14. #14
    Independent DMX7's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Post Count
    22,149
    So says the billboard on I-10 coming into downtown from the north. My truck gets the same gas mileage at 75 as it does at 65. Any of you Internet Einsteins want to explain to me how I'm polluting more driving 75?
    The sign is a waste, but you are not getting the same mileage at 75 as you are at 65 (basic physics says so). Einstein would be laughing at you for saying such a thing.

  15. #15
    Mr. John Wayne CosmicCowboy's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Post Count
    44,134
    The sign is a waste, but you are not getting the same mileage at 75 as you are at 65 (basic physics says so). Einstein would be laughing at you for saying such a thing.
    I'm actually aware of the physics but the difference is pretty insignificant. I just thought the sign was pretty dumb.

  16. #16
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Post Count
    97,536
    wind energy is increased by cube of wind speed

    75/65 = 1.15, cubed gives about 50% more wind resistance for 15% more speed

  17. #17
    I am that guy RandomGuy's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Post Count
    51,121
    So says the billboard on I-10 coming into downtown from the north. My truck gets the same gas mileage at 75 as it does at 65. Any of you Internet Einsteins want to explain to me how I'm polluting more driving 75?
    Your mileage is not the same at 75 as it is at 65. Physically impossible.

    If you were to record average MPH at those specific speeds and control for variables like wind, elevation changes, and drafting, you would find they are not the same, W/C touched on the most important parts.

    Even setting aside these considerations, engines have to be designed for an "average" speed anyway (optimized for a certain RPM), and the farther you get away from that, the farther you get away from that built-in optimal speed. Most US cars still have that "average" speed as 55 or so. (this particular bit is based on an explanation related to me by my brother in law, who was considering at one time becoming a NASCAR mechanic, and has some professional certifications in such things, he is a bit smarter than I am in some regards, and I trust him to get this bit spot on, if not my exact memory of the conversation)

    Hope that helps.

  18. #18
    I am that guy RandomGuy's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Post Count
    51,121
    I'm actually aware of the physics but the difference is pretty insignificant. I just thought the sign was pretty dumb.
    "Accurate" would be a better word.

    You might not like the conclusion, but you can't really argue with the physics.

    http://www.physicsclassroom.com/clas...Air-Resistance

    Most of the way down is a calculator, see for yourself.

    Hold all the other variables equal, and add 15% to speed. You get a total force that is about 50% higher.

  19. #19
    A neverending cycle Trainwreck2100's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Post Count
    40,879
    Your mileage is not the same at 75 as it is at 65. Physically impossible.

    If you were to record average MPH at those specific speeds and control for variables like wind, elevation changes, and drafting, you would find they are not the same, W/C touched on the most important parts.

    Even setting aside these considerations, engines have to be designed for an "average" speed anyway (optimized for a certain RPM), and the farther you get away from that, the farther you get away from that built-in optimal speed. Most US cars still have that "average" speed as 55 or so. (this particular bit is based on an explanation related to me by my brother in law, who was considering at one time becoming a NASCAR mechanic, and has some professional certifications in such things, he is a bit smarter than I am in some regards, and I trust him to get this bit spot on, if not my exact memory of the conversation)

    Hope that helps.
    I wouldn't say is physically impossible you'd just have to design an engine that works inefficiently at 65 that it burns as much gas at 75

  20. #20
    Veteran DarrinS's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Post Count
    42,561
    People stuck in rush hour traffic doing 10 mph are "polluting" more. Unless, you drive a hybrid like I do.

  21. #21
    I am that guy RandomGuy's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Post Count
    51,121
    I don't know the physics, I just question the logic of trying to appeal to speeders with an environmentalist message.
    Probably not overly effective. I would point out that the kinetic energy goes up at a squared rate as well. Less gas mileage, and more dangerous.

    I still speed tho. Rather spend less of my life in the car.

  22. #22
    I am that guy RandomGuy's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Post Count
    51,121
    I wouldn't say is physically impossible you'd just have to design an engine that works inefficiently at 65 that it burns as much gas at 75
    I stand corrected. A non-existent engine designed like that would indeed be more efficient.

  23. #23
    Veteran Wild Cobra's Avatar
    My Team
    Portland Trailblazers
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Post Count
    43,117
    You're not taking into account engine speed/torque - the gearing of his transmission/final drive ratio.
    You are correct. The torque curve changes the efficiency as well. The ratios will make a difference.

    Still, there should be some noticeable change.

  24. #24
    Veteran Wild Cobra's Avatar
    My Team
    Portland Trailblazers
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Post Count
    43,117
    You ers driving 65 are a road hazard.
    Agreed.

    Give me 130+ MPH any day!

  25. #25
    Veteran Wild Cobra's Avatar
    My Team
    Portland Trailblazers
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Post Count
    43,117
    People stuck in rush hour traffic doing 10 mph are "polluting" more. Unless, you drive a hybrid like I do.
    I challenge that idea.

    I contend that hybrids actually pollute more. modern internal combustion engines produce almost no emissions. but that is only after their catalytic converter heats up. With the hybrid turning on and off, the catalyst cooling between usage...

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •