Posted on 01/29/2012 6:58:21 AM PST by Kaslin
Obama doesn't give a flying rip-a$$ about what kind of a car the people need. The only ones he cares about use mass transit or just boost a car when they need one for a joy-ride or to go cash their EITC check. The rest of us that have to fend for ourselves? He's just trying to make us so dependent on Government we won't fight back.
I agree USA needs a great car along the lines you mention; it would have been made already had not the Federal Government and onerous states like California fiddled with safety, emissions, and mileage requirements. The Federal Government should not be in the business of regulating designs, performance, propulsion, etc. of vehicles, period! Were this a Constitutionally-approved function, the colonial Federal Government would have regulated the hay and feed fed to horses, mules and oxen back when the Founding Fathers designed (I say with inspiration from God) this country.
“I am curious as to how many people regularly use cruise control.”
All the time, every day. I have several 5 mile sections to drive to get to town and use it then. On the freeway it is nearly impossible due to idiots.
I *like* my cruise control. When I’m driving for 8-9-10 hours at a time, the reduced fatigue using the cruise control is well worth ANY claimed (marginal) “increase” in fuel use experienced.
I do agree that using it on hilly or very curvy roads is not as efficient as allowing the car to gain and lose speed as the road profile demands.
Actually, I have not noticed any increase in fuel usage with the cruise control, but I’ve been driving only 35 years. Using it on the prairies I have gotten over 30 MPG in my 20+ year old V-8 Crown Vic.
Hyper-milers may not use cruise, but they tend to ignore MANY rules of the road as well in their quest to squeeze every last inch of distance out of their fuel. Do a search on their websites and see how inconsiderately they use the road. You’ll likely never reference them again when making a post about driving, since they are often more dangerous than drunks.
Actually cruse control saves money! Set it at the highest rate you can run without getting tickets. Tickets cost a lot more than any fuel savings and tickets are going up faster in cost than gas.
The Yugo will be the upscale vehicle.
nobama built the “right” car. EPIC FAIL car representing an EPIC FAIL president.
On flat straight roads there is only “marginal” difference but on hilly and curvy roads the difference can be major. I have owned a 1985 Crown Vic, a 1991 Crown Vic, a 1996 Crown Vic Police Interceptor and currently have the Mercury Grand Marquis 2004 model which is of course the same car. The best mileage I ever got with cruise control was 28 mpg traveling southbound on I-95 which was not hilly, it was close to flat. The best I ever got WITHOUT cruise control was 31.4 mpg with the Mercury driving in very hilly country, some of it almost mountainous. I call that more than a marginal difference. Simply put cruise control is NOT a gas saver in reality. If you prefer to use it fine, you will get no argument from me, I just want people to stop kidding themselves that using cruise control gives maximum mpg.
Diesel has more energy per unit volume, more energy per unit weight, and has potential for more efficiency because of his higher compression ratio.
If you heat the fuel before you inject it, and use a supercritical injector, you can get 20% improved efficiency.
Most engines do ‘negative work’ by compressing burned fuel (injection is before top dead center). A supercritical injector can remove that negative energy. One company that developed a patented supercritical fuel injector is
Transonic Combustion. No I don’t own stock. The above information is available off its web site.
All I was trying to put forth was my personal experience.
Your personal anecdotes are no more and no less accurate than mine. That you choose to denigrate the usefulness and accuracy of Cruise Control is not *MY* issue.
Why you want to decry ANY tool that can be a boon to those who travel long distances is most worrying, since I am shocked that you consider it your business to denigrate the usefulness of the tool.
How strange that a poster here would try to decide for others what is best, this being a conservative (leave me to my own devices) website. Nor should any worries about CC’s use by others be your concern or business!
I have driven literally millions of miles in my personal vehicles, let alone the time I have spent driving for my employers.
Cruise control is one of the most useful and time-saving tools there is for those who drive long trips regularly. You avoid tickets by staying under the speed limit, you save time by not slowing down when not necessary, and you are far less tired at the end of your 10 hour drive.
Yes some of this comes at the MINOR expense of a few ounces of fuel every dozen miles, but so what? If an additional 10 cents per mile is going to destroy your budget, you are WAY over your head at the beginning of your trip anyway!
Really, fuel savings is a very MINOR consideration when engaging cruise. That YOU bought into the fuel savings thing isn’t MY fault. I LIKE getting 30+ MPG while not getting a tired calf muscle after driving all day.
You go ahead and cramp up after 6 hours on the road, because you want to save 1 ounce of fuel every 19 miles because your foot is in constant motion. I’ll wave at you as I cruise by your rest stop at 75 MPH still comfortable and enjoying my drive while you walk off your cramping calf muscles.
You build a product the Public wants and you are successful.
This is the Ameritopia (thanks Mark Levin) the Progressives hope for.
You build a product the Dear Leader wants, and the Evil Taxpayers bail you out when you lose your a$$.
Re- education? Gah, can’t I have my coffee before I hear that word in the morning? Am I on the wrong board? Just picking on ya in fun :)
$0.10/mile is a LOT of money. Did you really mean that, or did you mean to say $0.01?
Overreact often? You seem to think I have personally attacked you. I don’t actually care if you choose to drive something that gets three MPG! I simply am tired of “experts” telling people to use cruise control for maximum gas mileage. Anyone who knows the truth knows that in hilly country it can easily cost you twenty percent or even more in extra fuel use. You may choose to believe whatever you wish but I am trying to raise awareness among those who DO want to get better mileage.
As far as the fatigue factor goes I have not found it to matter one way or the other but if cruise control allows you to be less tired then use it but don’t try to tell me that I am wrong about something I know to be true.
My reeducation will be a lot more pleasant than what Obama has in mind for you, you can take that to the bank8>)
I know diesels can be hard to start in winter. When I worked for a truck rental outlet, sometimes we had to use additives to keep it from gelling in the cold weather. My father was in Korea from 1955/56 during his hitch with the Army, he remembers starting diesel trucks on gasoline, let them idle for 30 seconds to a minute to warm up and then shifted the fuel lever to diesel and they were good to go.
The diesel truck I worked on use Cat engines, and was tested by the Army in Fairbanks. Preferred fuel is JP-8 which is aircraft kerosene with a deicer (and other additives). We had a gizmo to burn some of the kerosene to warm up the batteries before starting the engine, and to warm the engine coolant.
In CA you normally can’t employ the cruise control because no one else on our hills and valleys is using it.
You are of course free to try it, so long as you stay off folk’s bumpers.
I have used it in Arizona at night, and find it useful for keeping my V8 from sneaking too far past the speed limit, and it is a nice addition to West Texas drives.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.