U.S. vehicle fuel efficiency has increased only 3 mpg in 80 years

Gizmag ^ | 08/05/09 | unknown

[jwparkerjr]

Gizmag is always on the lookout for alternative means of powering vehicles and saving precious fossil fuels. But, in truth, the vast majority of us still drive exclusively petrol-powered cars. And the even sadder truth, outlined in a new research from the University of Michigan, is that the average fuel efficiency of a US vehicle has improved only three miles per gallon since the days of the Ford Model T.

[jwparkerjr]

Never could figure out how to find the article itself, just this comment and picture.

[Beagle8U]

http://www.gizmag.com/us-vehicle-fuel-efficiency-improves-3mpg-80-years/12410/

[paulycy]

Assuming this is true, it seems like some sort of physical threshold due to the limitations of physics in the trade-off between transportation power requirements and safety concerns rather than some evil plot of the auto manufacturers.

They’d sell a lot more cars if they could offer SUVs with mini-car mileage.

But the left doesn’t respect science anywhere near what they say they do, do they?

[xcamel]

Lies, and damned lies.

If the writer had his head any farther up his @, his colon would be considered a snorkel.

[norwaypinesavage]

The title is a bit misleading, because it ignores significant fuel economy penalties that are built into vehicles due to government regulations. Remember the early days of air pollution regulations which required automobile manufacturers to blow extra unburned fuel into engines, and then burn up the excess in catalytic converters, in order to decrease nitrous oxide emissions? Those were the days of 8 and 10 mpg passenger cars.

If you look at fuel economy before this time, and then compare it to current fuel economy, which uses three-way (simultaneous oxidation of unburned hydrocarbons and reduction of nitrous oxides, requiring oxygen sensors and computer controlled fuel ratios) catalysts, the fuel economy improvements haven't been so great. If you include this technology requirement, the fuel economy improvements have been enormous.

[Venturer]

The Model T wasnt choked down with $2,000 dollars worth of emission equipment, electric windows, leather heated seats, a radio, DVD player, cruise control, and it didnt weigh 2 tons.

[RoadTest]

“precious fossil fuels”

Fossil fuels are about as precious as dirt. I’ve lost track of the number of reports of vast oil reserves discovered in and around the U.S.A., only to be left in the ground by (Democrat) law!

[ltc8k6]

Yep. Damned lies.

No mention of the emissions reductions either, which are huge.

People often mention cars of the 80’s that got 50mpg, like a CRX HF, and complain that new cars don’t do as well, but those earlier cars were spewing out way more emissions.

[Sacajaweau]

And it was a cranky, too.

[Sacajaweau]

MPG/Weight

[NavVet]

Of course, if you consider the much faster speeds and much greater weight / cargo capacity of modern vehicles you could rephrase the headline to read.

Modern cars can move more than a ton at twice the maximum speed of a model T and still burn less fuel than Henry Ford’s first car.

[mad_as_he$$]

Bull$hit. The Model t got like 8 miles to the gallon. Now if you take ALL miles traveled and divide by the fuel used you could get that number taking into consideration truck traffic. However, there are less gasoline stations per vehicle than EVER before so how does that compute?

[bitterohiogunclinger]

Ignoring the fact that the model T was basically little more than a grocery cart with an engine is only part of the story.
Cars today are carrying a half ton of smog reducing equipment, air conditioning, air bags, seat belts, and hardly ever need maintenance. I remember cars well from the 50’s and 60’s that needed a tuneup every thousand miles.

[snoringbear]

“Assuming this is true”

It's probably true. However, it's not an apples to apples comparison. I don't know exactly what a Model T weighs but a modern car of similar weight with a modern small four cylinder engine probably gets considerably better gas mileage. I guess I could do a Google and get the facts but it's too much work to just quantify the obvious.

[Hardastarboard]

The Model T wasnt choked down with $2,000 dollars worth of emission equipment, electric windows, leather heated seats, a radio, DVD player, cruise control, and it didnt weigh 2 tons.

Exactly! And it had a top speed of about 35 mph.

[snoringbear]

“And it was a cranky, too.”

Yeah :) And, when calculating Model T mpg, one should discount the many miles it was pushed to get to a true net number. However, the Model T did have one advantage that today’s cars don’t have; due to it’s engine’s low compression it would run on kerosene which was a handy feature. Gas stations were still few and far between but virtually every general mercantile store sold kerosene (or coal oil as the old folks called it).

[mountainlion]

I don't believe it. Who writes this stuff. An unknown expert in what? I went form 14 mpg on a 58 Chevy to 24 by some adjustment. I was not under EPA dictates at the time and gas was a whole lot better.

[paulycy]

I guess I could do a Google and get the facts but it's too much work to just quantify the obvious.

Yeah, don't do it on my behalf. It's true enough I think.

[calex59]

Actually most cars in the 50s and 60s didn’t have to be tuned up every 1000 miles. 10,000 was more like it. However, oil changes were carried out at 1000 miles, that is if you wanted to keep the car for very long! Points were the chief cause of tune ups and were not that hard to do actually. It was easier to maintain cars back then and anyone could do it. I don’t miss the 1000 mile oil changes though!

[Perfesser]

The Model T wasnt choked down with $2,000 dollars worth of emission equipment, electric windows, leather heated seats, a radio, DVD player, cruise control, and it didnt weigh 2 tons.

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

..... and it didn’t have to sit idling in traffic for hours.