Main Area and Open Discussion > Living Room
Show us a picture of your.. CAR!!!
mouser:
Maybe this can be the codymobile?
--- End quote ---
Would be nice :up:
Tell Elio to send me a free one.
Stoic Joker:
Um... I hate to be harsh, but... a 1970 Dodge Challenger would do 0-60 in 7.0. So for something that is classified as a motorcycle ... That is slow.
-Stoic Joker (August 02, 2013, 06:09 PM)
--- End quote ---
Physics being what they are, you have a choice between economy or speed.-Tinman57 (August 02, 2013, 08:15 PM)
--- End quote ---
That's a myth, and a damn sad one at that. Regardless of what eco-spastic Prius types want to spew in an attempt to get everyone else to castrate themselves. The fact is that the primary design premise for both performance and economy are identically and precisely the same. That being the highest combustion efficiency per cycle. Half the yahoos the buy those pathetic eco boxes end up getting worse mileage because you gotta slam the petal to the floor and pray you can make it through the intersection before the light turns red again. Ford OTOH did a brilliant job with the Mustang which gets 35mpg while still making 305hp. That is an intelligent balance point between the two. Putting a cocktail straw in the intake doesn't guarantee you good mileage ... It does however prevent one from getting any useful horsepower.
The Elio is built for super economy, safety and reliability. Even then, a 2010 Harley Sportster 883 Iron, which is a performance bike, does 0 -60 in 6.6 seconds. The Elio is only 3 seconds slower and get's about 33 more MPG.-Tinman57 (August 02, 2013, 08:15 PM)
--- End quote ---
3 seconds in a drag race is a country freaking mile, and the Sportster is a girls bike. My rather not stock 87 FLHTP - which I've had for close to 20 years - will do 0-60 in about 4 seconds and gets close to 50 mpg. Point I was making is that 9.6 seconds is slow for a motorcycle...and it is...just ain't no way around that. It's not atrocious...but is just a bit...slow. Ya know?
In an Elio, get hit from the side or back. Front and/or side airbags deploy and the steel cage protects you.-Tinman57 (August 02, 2013, 08:15 PM)
--- End quote ---
...You are trapped in a beer can that's being crushed with a balloon.
I've been hit on a bike before, more than once. Rolled onto one guy's hood...and then got up...and kicked out his windshield.
Now lets add some more facts:
...
-Tinman57 (August 02, 2013, 08:15 PM)
--- End quote ---
Okay, I've been riding on the street since I was 14, and I'm almost 50 now ... So yes, I'm familiar with the weather. I've run across Tennessee length wise on a 110 degree day, and best I can tell...it wasn't fatal.
I've been on bikes all my life.-Tinman57 (August 02, 2013, 08:15 PM)
--- End quote ---
Me too, hence the original comment. I just chose to use an old school muscle car as an example because of its (relatively obvious) seriously inferior power-to-weight-ratio. Which yet still managed to be 30+% faster. Which frankly I'd blame the DOT for. ...Or the air conditioning ... It's a coin toss. :)
My last motorcycle was a Suzuki GSXR1100G with a Vance & Hines Stage 3 Kit and V&H Competition Only exhaust. It did 0 - 60 in 1.9 seconds in first gear and had a top end of 160 mph.-Tinman57 (August 02, 2013, 08:15 PM)
--- End quote ---
Hm... I'd of thought it should top out closer to 185 at stage 3, unless it was geared really low. Back when I was about 17 I had a 74 Kawasaki Z1 that had been tricked out by one of the local semi pro drag racers of the time. I got clocked by the local Sheriff's department at 155 mph on that damn thing one night on a new years eve.
I've wanted another bike and came close to buying a Harley several times. But because of my disability I would probably dump the bike as soon as I came to a stop. Then I was going to buy a Can-Am 3 wheeler, don't have to worry about dropping it, but then have to put up with the weather conditions, and with the drugs I'm on I don't do heat very well, to the point of throwing up and going in shock.-Tinman57 (August 02, 2013, 08:15 PM)
--- End quote ---
Hay, better 3 wheels than four. But enough with the weather already... I get enough of that crap from the wife who's been menopausal for going on 13 years now.
The Can-Ams are just flat out F'ugly.
The Elio I've no problem with. It's kind of slick looking and is American made ... It's just a bit slow for a motorcycle.
Shades:
Good mileage has also a lot to do with weight/mass of a car.
Acceleration of a mass requires exponential input of energy, not linear amount of input. Moving a mass through air makes sure of that and aerodynamics cannot fix that, only partially negate it.
Friction on the surface that enables acceleration is always a problem, but you need it else you'll loose grip. And all of these negatives become more prevalent above 55 to 60MPH.
Stay below that speed and your engine can be a lot smaller and more efficient without giving up too much acceleration capacity. 50 to 60 miles per gallon is quite attainable even with current day tech.
And you'll get even more MPG's if you trade your lead foot in for a plastic one.
In short: people want their cars to go too fast too quickly and then complain that they have to spend so much on gas bills.
Every one likes to go to their destination as fast as they can, myself included. When you take a look at the amount of energy that has to put into your vehicle of choice to cut 5 minutes of travel time, or leave home 5 minutes earlier and see how money that already saves, you would be amazed.
That money you can spend on other fun things. Going fast is fun for me, so I don't mind occasionally spending money on that.
And there are also times when cruising can be just as fun, especially in a country where the average age is still under 30 years, has more women than men and summer practically all-year-round.
You learn to appreciate reggeaton music quite quickly over here, I can tell you that much. Oh, I almost forgot to mention that beer is sold in liter bottles over here... ;)
cmpm:
If I was to go as small as the Elio, I'd opt for a Fiat 500.
Better looking and better style that will last a lot longer than these other small "things". More money I'm pretty sure. But it's been around a while and a lot of options and standard equipment is up there with higher trim level sedans and coupes. http://www.topspeed.com/cars/fiat-500/ke1708.html
Gas mileage depends a lot on the foot, as everyone knows. Or hills...
The Accord gets over 30 driving easy around town, and as high as 48 with city/highway miles.
The "blue technology" by VW, boasting over 50mpg, is a shut off the engine when stopped deal, and fires back up when you hit the gas. Ford has that option on some of their cars. I don't think I would like that at all. But it seems smarter.
Back to the Fiat. Lighter is faster, no doubt. A lighter car can be a lot faster then a car that has 100 horsepower more imo, with the better technology of getting all the power to the wheels quicker. Some of the smaller motors, 4 cylinders, of today get more horsepower than some of the older v8s.
cmpm:
I meant to add that in addition to the stop start tech for fuel mileage, is the use of low resistance tires and better coasting ability without a lot of drag on the engine when you let off the gas.
The CVT transmission contributes a lot to less drag and better mpg. It's design is to keep an even amount of g-force accelerating and, by what I've observed, keeping the rpms below 3000, if I don't push the pedal a lot. I can drop it down to sport and it will wind out the gears, more like a standard automatic at higher rpms. I think the Honda cvt is better than most cvts except maybe the Nissan.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version