Engineer
Elite Member
- Oct 9, 1999
- 39,230
- 701
- 126
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: Engineer
Originally posted by: zendari
Originally posted by: charrison
While you car does not do bad for its mpg, you could still get a car with better mpg easily. You consuming less gas would help everyone by pushing demand lower. But of course all you will do is complain, which of course is right. BUt we also know actions speak louder than words.
:thumbsup: I wonder how many of these gas whiners drive automatic transmission.
Yea, and air condition too. Hell, the radio uses electricity so it makes a .0000001% savings in gas to turn it off. A for you. Anyone, reading comments from the likes of you, that thinks a democrat is "elitist" is full of crap. I've never read so much "elitist" crap in all of my life. Our future is in sh!tty hands if its going to be run by people like you (not that it's not already in sh!tty hands anyway)
Again, let them eat cake. I'm sure they can buy one after they pony up $13,000 for a new car.
Well there is a quantifiable difference between manual and automatic. You usually get an extra 2mpg for having manual over and automatic. However that gap will likely be closed by 5 speed automatics that are starting to be produce. I believe there was also some research done on a computer operated manual transmission(push a button and change gears), so it offers the fuel savings of a manual with the ease of operation of a automatic.
Everyone doesn't want to drive a manual transmission either. Do you? Do they see it in your Expedition model? Like I said, if you're going to go there then you might as well cut out AC, radio, extra lighting, computers as they all cause extra load (expecially AC) and use more gas.
On a side note, it will be interesting to see cars becoming more fuel efficient, etc. with "usually" lower power trying to run all of the gadgets and AC.