Maybe it's simply my un-natural inclincation for seeing conspiracy and patterns where they do not exist, but...
Has anybody besides me noticed the unusually-retarded increases in gas mileage US car manufacturers have realized over the past 50 years?
In 1956, the top performer for gas efficiency was the AMC Rambler, at
32 mpg. Horsepower for cars ranged from 120 to 300+ that year, with more cars in the 25 mpg range than we have today. All of this when the cars were made almost entirely of steel, no computer-regulation, or etc.
Juxtaposed with engine retrogression, think of the progress made by the computer industry since 1986, just 20 years ago. Makes one wonder...
I am not an automotive engineer, but I think the mileage was pretty good in those days, but pollution emissions (including lead) were pretty high. As emissions were improved, the mileage went down, and then improved to where it is today. Still, the government has not required much improvement in recent years.
Originally posted by FreakyKBHThere has been no selection pressure for increased mileage, since gasoline has been cheap. Indeed, the selection pressure has been for horsepower, rather than efficiency. Once there is a selection pressure (consumer demand for efficiency) then I forecast you'll see a rapid increase in efficiency, more towards what we have in Europe and in Japan.
Maybe it's simply my un-natural inclincation for seeing conspiracy and patterns where they do not exist, but...
Has anybody besides me noticed the unusually-retarded increases in gas mileage US car manufacturers have realized over the past 50 years?
In 1956, the top performer for gas efficiency was the AMC Rambler, at
32 mpg. Horsepower for cars ra ...[text shortened]... the progress made by the computer industry since 1986, just 20 years ago. Makes one wonder...
Good theory that evolution....
Originally posted by FreakyKBHMiles were shorter back then.
Maybe it's simply my un-natural inclincation for seeing conspiracy and patterns where they do not exist, but...
Has anybody besides me noticed the unusually-retarded increases in gas mileage US car manufacturers have realized over the past 50 years?
In 1956, the top performer for gas efficiency was the AMC Rambler, at
32 mpg. Horsepower for cars ra ...[text shortened]... the progress made by the computer industry since 1986, just 20 years ago. Makes one wonder...
Originally posted by scottishinnzI'd agree, but--- as stated--- cars were ranging from 120HP to 300+ in the 50's. We haven't seen a huge change in the everyday car in this area, either.
There has been no selection pressure for increased mileage, since gasoline has been cheap. Indeed, the selection pressure has been for horsepower, rather than efficiency. Once there is a selection pressure (consumer demand for efficiency) then I forecast you'll see a rapid increase in efficiency, more towards what we have in Europe and in Japan.
Good theory that evolution....
And if performance is the issue, how is that an electric car is able to beat a Ferrari and a $400,000 Porsche? Granted, the electric car is only good for 150 mile... right now. It seems to me that if Ford were serious about surviving (and not on the teat of Saudi oil), its predominant R/D would be in alternative sources. I'm just saying.
Originally posted by FreakyKBHInternal combustion engines are limited in how efficient they can be. You shoot some gas into a piston, explode it, do it again. You can recycle some of the off gas and play with the timing and amount of gas/air mixture but that's about it.
Maybe it's simply my un-natural inclincation for seeing conspiracy and patterns where they do not exist, but...
Has anybody besides me noticed the unusually-retarded increases in gas mileage US car manufacturers have realized over the past 50 years?
In 1956, the top performer for gas efficiency was the AMC Rambler, at
32 mpg. Horsepower for cars ra ...[text shortened]... the progress made by the computer industry since 1986, just 20 years ago. Makes one wonder...
Burning gas in an engine is limiting in so far as mpg go. Sure computers double their speed every 18 months but how does that translate into real time? 1 second to do a computation instead of 2? Performance is relative.
Get outta combustion engines if you want to increase mpg substantially.
Originally posted by uzlessAgreed. Why do the US manufacturers then stay with such antiquated systems?
Internal combustion engines are limited in how efficient they can be. You shoot some gas into a piston, explode it, do it again. You can recycle some of the off gas and play with the timing and amount of gas/air mixture but that's about it.
Burning gas in an engine is limiting in so far as mpg go. Sure computers double their speed every 18 months but ho ...[text shortened]... ormance is relative.
Get outta combustion engines if you want to increase mpg substantially.