I suck at driving... 8km/L that sucks

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by Tomcat07

I'm surprised nobody has asked this yet.

Do you live in a high altitude region? .

Montreal is only 500 (ft +/-) above sea level so not that.

[SciOnDrifTtSlIdeR]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

.

two year old car 16 200 kms, id much rather store it for winter then to have it destroyed by salt

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by SciOnDrifTtSlIdeR

two year old car 16 200 kms, id much rather store it for winter then to have it destroyed by salt

5 months 28,670 kms and salt is the least of my worries!
Last three Mitsus were all 4 years old, had over 200,000 kms and winter driven every year without a rust spot so I expect no less from Toyota.

[navanodd]

Originally Posted by Mikeez

For the idiot you said I am clueless that is measure in KM/L lol. I can measure it anyway you want, there is no ideal measurement.


Do I have to measure distance with meters or can I measure it with mm, cm, dm, m, dam, hm, km, etc...?


I can very well measure it in any way I want. I could even measure it in


mL / 10 KM
or
gal / 200 miles

This is why people hate engineers.


And fyi, if you're in Montréal doing short city trips in the car theres your reason for poor mileage. This car gets good city mileage when warm. It hates the cold and is much more sensitive than other vehicles I've driven.


You say you use a car starter? That would also use a lot with this car. It idles nice and rich on really cold starts to warm up the catalytic converters. Driving (gently) to warm the car will both warm the car quicker and you'll use less gas.


One tank last winter I only had short city driving to/from work and had consistently low temperatures and required a lot of idling for ice and snow clearing. I got an abysmal 16.9 L/100 km. I sincerely apologize if that is not in your preferred unit of measure. I suppose cubic meters of fuel per meter travelled would be the SI equivalent.

[strat61caster]

Originally Posted by Quentin

I wish the U.S. would adopt the volume/distance standard. There is a nice linear relationship with efficiency and fuel expenses -- improving by one unit saves the same amount of money no matter where you start rather than a decaying savings as you improve your fuel efficiency by one unit in mpg. I have coworkers that freak out when their Prius goes from 50mpg in the summer to 45mpg in the winter. The cost is completely negligible. Someone that goes from 15mpg to 14mpg is spending a lot more money with that seemingly small 1mpg change.

As alluded to elsewhere in this thread it all depends on the purpose.

For practical everyday driving I'd much rather have a feel for distance/volume, I know how much fuel my tank holds, I can estimate how much fuel I have left based on the fuel gauge then I can estimate based on driving conditions how far I can go before my next fill up. With basic multiplication and observation when I was driving a lot I used to do this on a near daily basis to plan my driving over the next few days.

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by strat61caster

As alluded to elsewhere in this thread it all depends on the purpose.

For practical everyday driving I'd much rather have a feel for distance/volume, I know how much fuel my tank holds, I can estimate how much fuel I have left based on the fuel gauge then I can estimate based on driving conditions how far I can go before my next fill up. With basic multiplication and observation when I was driving a lot I used to do this on a near daily basis to plan my driving over the next few days.

Ummmm, Strat, it works every bit as easy the other way around! I know how many liters I have and how many of them I will need to go the distance I want. Simply the inverse of what you do with the exact same results.

[strat61caster]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

Ummmm, Strat, it works every bit as easy the other way around! I know how many liters I have and how many of them I will need to go the distance I want. Simply the inverse of what you do with the exact same results.

So I know my car will get 11L/100km
I have lets say 30 L in the tank.
Now I invert the economy rating and multiply? So 3,000/11? I guess that's 300 minus a bit km? Sorry that doesn't seem intuitive to me.

Unless you mean the other way around: I know exactly the distance of this windy road I want to try out this weekend and I'll go to that diner on the way back and I know it won't be closed? That sounds like no fun at all and lots of looking at a map.


27 mpg, half a tank is say 6 gallons, 6g*25mpg=150 miles + 2g*6mpg=162miles on the tank I have left.

(No the numbers aren't consistent, can't be bothered)

[Ultramaroon]

Originally Posted by FRiSson

I don't know if this is true for all, but the shift points are preposterous. They usually tell me to shift at 1,400 rpm. I can't believe that lugging the engine would save gas.

Drive an AT with a light foot and it will shift exactly that way.

[Ultramaroon]

Originally Posted by navanodd

This is why people hate engineers.

That's not engineer, that's just douche.

[Ultramaroon]

Originally Posted by strat61caster

So I know my car will get 11L/100km
I have lets say 30 L in the tank.
Now I invert the economy rating and multiply? So 3,000/11? I guess that's 300 minus a bit km? Sorry that doesn't seem intuitive to me.

Makes perfect sense to me. If I know how many litres my tank will hold I can easily estimate my range. I think it's all a matter of having a feel for it.

[Quentin]

Originally Posted by strat61caster

As alluded to elsewhere in this thread it all depends on the purpose.

For practical everyday driving I'd much rather have a feel for distance/volume, I know how much fuel my tank holds, I can estimate how much fuel I have left based on the fuel gauge then I can estimate based on driving conditions how far I can go before my next fill up. With basic multiplication and observation when I was driving a lot I used to do this on a near daily basis to plan my driving over the next few days.

Does the FR-S have a 'range to empty' indicator in the dash? I can't remember. I know I roughly get 350 miles per tank. If I'm at 1/4 tank, I have 80 miles or so left. Every Toyota I've owned has tha tank sized in such a way that my driving cycle returns 350 to 400 miles per tank from full to gas light.

[Ultramaroon]

Originally Posted by Quentin

Does the FR-S have a 'range to empty' indicator in the dash? I can't remember. I know I roughly get 350 miles per tank. If I'm at 1/4 tank, I have 80 miles or so left. Every Toyota I've owned has tha tank sized in such a way that my driving cycle returns 350 to 400 miles per tank from full to gas light.

No range calc. Dunno why. It's just a few extra lines of code they already have.

I haven't really bled the tank dry and I'm about 300 mi between fills.

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by strat61caster

So I know my car will get 11L/100km
I have lets say 30 L in the tank.
Now I invert the economy rating and multiply? So 3,000/11? I guess that's 300 minus a bit km? Sorry that doesn't seem intuitive to me.

Unless you mean the other way around: I know exactly the distance of this windy road I want to try out this weekend and I'll go to that diner on the way back and I know it won't be closed? That sounds like no fun at all and lots of looking at a map.


27 mpg, half a tank is say 6 gallons, 6g*25mpg=150 miles + 2g*6mpg=162miles on the tank I have left.

(No the numbers aren't consistent, can't be bothered)

Guess it is just what you are used to as it does not seem convoluted to me at all.
I know that the tank is 1/2 full and that is 25 liters, I get 10 L/100 kilometers so I am good for 250 kilometers. There is no need to flip it back to how many kilometers I can go per liter as I already have my answer.
Neither way is more difficult or better then the other as they both tell you how far you can go on the fuel you have.

[Tcoat]