Edward

Manual (5 Speed) Transmission
2 Door
Hatchback
1.5 L motor

Thanks in Advance

Edward

Brian Nystrom

Edward wrote:
> Manual (5 Speed) Transmission
> 2 Door
> Hatchback
> 1.5 L motor
>
> Thanks in Advance
>
> Edward

If you're willing to drive 40MPH on the highway, you'll get phenomenal
mileage, but there's more to consider than just MPG. Driving too slowly
creates a serious road hazard as other drivers must brake or maneuver
around your vehicle. Driving 60-65 should get you good mileage without
getting you rear-ended.

Speedy Jim

Edward wrote:
> Manual (5 Speed) Transmission
> 2 Door
> Hatchback
> 1.5 L motor
>
> Thanks in Advance
>
> Edward
>

I have that exact car. Steady 60MPH hiway routinely gets 40 MPG.
(I was a little disappointed that it didn't get 50 MPG :-)

Fluff up the tires and hold the speedo needle steady as a rock,.

Speedy Jim
http://www.nls.net/mp/volks/

Edward

Thanks



On Sun, 19 Dec 2004 13:19:17 GMT, Brian Nystrom
<brian.nystrom@att.net> wrote:

>Edward wrote:
>> Manual (5 Speed) Transmission
>> 2 Door
>> Hatchback
>> 1.5 L motor
>>
>> Thanks in Advance
>>
>> Edward
>
>If you're willing to drive 40MPH on the highway, you'll get phenomenal
>mileage, but there's more to consider than just MPG. Driving too slowly
>creates a serious road hazard as other drivers must brake or maneuver
>around your vehicle. Driving 60-65 should get you good mileage without
>getting you rear-ended.

Edward

Thanks Jim


On Sun, 19 Dec 2004 09:40:03 -0500, Speedy Jim <volks@nls.net> wrote:

>Edward wrote:
>> Manual (5 Speed) Transmission
>> 2 Door
>> Hatchback
>> 1.5 L motor
>>
>> Thanks in Advance
>>
>> Edward
>>
>
> I have that exact car. Steady 60MPH hiway routinely gets 40 MPG.
> (I was a little disappointed that it didn't get 50 MPG :-)
>
> Fluff up the tires and hold the speedo needle steady as a rock,.
>
>Speedy Jim
>http://www.nls.net/mp/volks/

illusion123a

wow, i have an 02 2 door automatic, and i average 25 mpg, city/ suburan/
highway driving. I will be driving on the highway more in the comming
weeks, (and i have in the past, but I dont think I ever got more then 30
mpg but this was when was car was brand new)

Brian Nystrom

illusion123a wrote:
> wow, i have an 02 2 door automatic, and i average 25 mpg, city/ suburan/
> highway driving. I will be driving on the highway more in the comming
> weeks, (and i have in the past, but I dont think I ever got more then 30
> mpg but this was when was car was brand new)
>
I get better mileage than that in my Elantra.

Dances With Crows

On Wed, 22 Dec 2004 16:21:45 GMT, Brian Nystrom staggered into the Black
Sun and said:
> illusion123a wrote:
>> What's the best highway speed for a 2002 Accent in terms of
>> miles/gallon? i average 25 mpg, city/ suburan/ highway driving. I
>> will be driving on the highway more in the comming weeks, (and i have
>> in the past, but I dont think I ever got more then 30 mpg but this
>> was when was car was brand new)
> I get better mileage than that in my Elantra.

How nice.

If you think about it for 5 seconds, you'll realize that you'll get at
or close to the best mileage when A) the car is in the highest gear
possible B) the engine RPMs are as low as possible and the engine isn't
lugging. This happens around 45 MPH in most automatic-transmission cars
and is at or near that speed in many manual-transmission cars.
("Freeway-friendly 5th gear" may push that up to 50ish, depending on the
gearbox.)

If you drive 45 on most freeways in an Accent, some twit in an Escalade
will run right over you while talking on his cellphone. 55's a decent
compromise unless you live in the BosWashNYCLA area, at which point
you'll have to drive at least 70 to avoid getting killed.

2003 Tiburon GT, mileage at last fillup 24.7 MPG, usual freeway speed
~5 MPH over the posted limit unless it's raining/snowing/slippery.

--
The early bird who catches the worm works for someone who comes in
late and owns the worm farm. --Travis McGee
There is no Darkness in Eternity/But only Light too dim for us to see

Christopher Wong

In article <slrncsjc11.8n9.danSPANceswitTRAPhcrows@crow202.dy ndns.org>, Dances With Crows wrote:
> On Wed, 22 Dec 2004 16:21:45 GMT, Brian Nystrom staggered into the Black
> Sun and said:
>> illusion123a wrote:
>>> What's the best highway speed for a 2002 Accent in terms of
>>> miles/gallon? i average 25 mpg, city/ suburan/ highway driving. I
>>> will be driving on the highway more in the comming weeks, (and i have
>>> in the past, but I dont think I ever got more then 30 mpg but this
>>> was when was car was brand new)
>> I get better mileage than that in my Elantra.
>
> If you think about it for 5 seconds, you'll realize that you'll get at
> or close to the best mileage when A) the car is in the highest gear
> possible B) the engine RPMs are as low as possible and the engine isn't
> lugging. This happens around 45 MPH in most automatic-transmission cars
> and is at or near that speed in many manual-transmission cars.
> ("Freeway-friendly 5th gear" may push that up to 50ish, depending on the
> gearbox.)

According to http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/driveHabits.shtml, optimum speed
is 55mph. Pretty graph included. That's a generalization, of course. The
original poster wanted to know what the Accent's specific optimum speed
would be, since this can vary from car to car. I doubt that anyone has the
answer.

There is a vast difference between highway driving without traffic and rush
hour (where much of the time is spent in 0 MPG idling) or city driving. My
2001 Accent (automatic) gets 26-27 MPG on my rush hour route. I once got 38
MPG where 75% of the miles was from a road trip with mostly highway driving
at 65-75 mph.

Chris

Brian Nystrom

Dances With Crows wrote:
> On Wed, 22 Dec 2004 16:21:45 GMT, Brian Nystrom staggered into the Black
> Sun and said:
>
>>illusion123a wrote:
>>
>>>What's the best highway speed for a 2002 Accent in terms of
>>>miles/gallon? i average 25 mpg, city/ suburan/ highway driving. I
>>>will be driving on the highway more in the comming weeks, (and i have
>>>in the past, but I dont think I ever got more then 30 mpg but this
>>>was when was car was brand new)
>>
>>I get better mileage than that in my Elantra.
>
>
> How nice.

Yeah, it is. I'm pretty impressed with the mileage it gets with a 2
liter engine.

> If you think about it for 5 seconds, you'll realize that you'll get at
> or close to the best mileage when A) the car is in the highest gear
> possible B) the engine RPMs are as low as possible and the engine isn't
> lugging. This happens around 45 MPH in most automatic-transmission cars
> and is at or near that speed in many manual-transmission cars.
> ("Freeway-friendly 5th gear" may push that up to 50ish, depending on the
> gearbox.)

No kidding.

> If you drive 45 on most freeways in an Accent, some twit in an Escalade
> will run right over you while talking on his cellphone.

I believe I said that half a dozen posts ago.

> 55's a decent
> compromise unless you live in the BosWashNYCLA area, at which point
> you'll have to drive at least 70 to avoid getting killed.

I get away with 65 without a problem in the Boston area and to my
surprise, I actually pass quite a few cars at that speed. It seems that
the speed disparity between the fastest and slowest cars is just higher
around here. Combine that with the traffic volume and the stupid policy
of letting people drive in the breakdown lane during rush hour and it
pretty well explains the high number of accidents.

K. Collier

The fact that the website is promoting 55mph as the optimum speed is
government propaganda. It may be the best speed for some cars but not all.
Having said that, mpg will decrease a fair amount at speeds over 65... but
in my experience there is a plateau between 70-80 mph.

Kevin


"Christopher Wong" <cwong@world.std.com> wrote in message
news:slrncskku3.l9a.cwong@localhost.localdomain...
> In article <slrncsjc11.8n9.danSPANceswitTRAPhcrows@crow202.dy ndns.org>,
Dances With Crows wrote:
> > On Wed, 22 Dec 2004 16:21:45 GMT, Brian Nystrom staggered into the Black
> > Sun and said:
> >> illusion123a wrote:
> >>> What's the best highway speed for a 2002 Accent in terms of
> >>> miles/gallon? i average 25 mpg, city/ suburan/ highway driving. I
> >>> will be driving on the highway more in the comming weeks, (and i have
> >>> in the past, but I dont think I ever got more then 30 mpg but this
> >>> was when was car was brand new)
> >> I get better mileage than that in my Elantra.
> >
> > If you think about it for 5 seconds, you'll realize that you'll get at
> > or close to the best mileage when A) the car is in the highest gear
> > possible B) the engine RPMs are as low as possible and the engine isn't
> > lugging. This happens around 45 MPH in most automatic-transmission cars
> > and is at or near that speed in many manual-transmission cars.
> > ("Freeway-friendly 5th gear" may push that up to 50ish, depending on the
> > gearbox.)
>
> According to http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/driveHabits.shtml, optimum
speed
> is 55mph. Pretty graph included. That's a generalization, of course. The
> original poster wanted to know what the Accent's specific optimum speed
> would be, since this can vary from car to car. I doubt that anyone has the
> answer.
>
> There is a vast difference between highway driving without traffic and
rush
> hour (where much of the time is spent in 0 MPG idling) or city driving. My
> 2001 Accent (automatic) gets 26-27 MPG on my rush hour route. I once got
38
> MPG where 75% of the miles was from a road trip with mostly highway
driving
> at 65-75 mph.
>
> Chris

Brian Nystrom

K. Collier wrote:
> The fact that the website is promoting 55mph as the optimum speed is
> government propaganda.

Quite true, though it may be more accurate to say that it's insurance
industry propaganda. It's funny how the old 55MPH speed limit started
out as an (ineffective) energy conservation measure, but ended up
becoming a "safety" issue once the insurance companies glommed onto it.

Christopher Wong

In article <Q0Yyd.344$qf5.307@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.ne t>, K. Collier
wrote:
> The fact that the website is promoting 55mph as the optimum speed is
> government propaganda. It may be the best speed for some cars but not all.
> Having said that, mpg will decrease a fair amount at speeds over 65... but
> in my experience there is a plateau between 70-80 mph.

It's funny that you would dismiss the 55mph speed as propaganda and yet
substantially agree with it. The mpg chart at
http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/driveHabits.shtml is exactly why 55mph was
set as the nationwide speed limit in the oil crisis 70s. If you look at the
chart, you will find that mpg drops off rapidly after 65, but not that much
between 55 and 65. So basically, you agree with the "propaganda", as does GM
(http://www.gm.com/company/gmability/...fuel_tips.html).

I'm willing to accept that more powerful cars can have a higher optimum
speed, but the original post was a question about the tiny Accent's optimum
speed. Making hand-waving comments about govt propaganda gets us no closer
to answering that question. My feeling on the other hand is that the old
numbers are still valid for the Accent. Cars have not changed their basic
shape much, after all, and aerodynamics still play a major role in the mpg
game. And the best numbers we have -- and I noticed the pooh-pooh-ers have
no numbers -- suggest that the 55 mph generalization is still valid. Here's
another data point for another small car backing the 55 mph optimum:

"Most people aren't aware of the European mileage specs: (A3 Jetta)
44-mpg at 75-mph, 56-mpg at 55-mph, and 37-mpg in the city."
(http://www.stealthtdi.com/BestofBothWorlds.html)

Chris

Christopher Wong

In article <mQczd.1159681$Gx4.161752@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>, Brian Nystrom wrote:
> K. Collier wrote:
>> The fact that the website is promoting 55mph as the optimum speed is
>> government propaganda.
>
> Quite true, though it may be more accurate to say that it's insurance
> industry propaganda. It's funny how the old 55MPH speed limit started
> out as an (ineffective) energy conservation measure,

How do you know it was ineffective?

Chris

Brian Nystrom

Christopher Wong wrote:
> In article <mQczd.1159681$Gx4.161752@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>, Brian Nystrom wrote:
>
>>K. Collier wrote:
>>
>>>The fact that the website is promoting 55mph as the optimum speed is
>>>government propaganda.
>>
>>Quite true, though it may be more accurate to say that it's insurance
>>industry propaganda. It's funny how the old 55MPH speed limit started
>>out as an (ineffective) energy conservation measure,
>
>
> How do you know it was ineffective?

Because it was arguably the most widely ignored law in the history of
the United States. People hated it and they voted with their right feet.
It was such a pathetic joke that states and the federal government had
to resort to all kinds of arcane numbers juggling to show any level of
compliance at all, in order to avoid every state losing the federal
highway funds that were contingent on compliance.

One reason that the "double nickel" hung around as long as it did was
that many states used enforcement of the speed limit as a means of
de-facto taxation of drivers. It was a huge cash cow, particularly in
draconian states like CT and NY, and they were unwilling to relinquish
the revenue source.

The other main reason was that the insurance industry mistakenly decided
that it was a good safety policy that could save them money in claims.
They were wrong about that, as the speed differential between vehicles
on the highways has a much greater affect on accident rates than the
speed limit and the 55 MPH limit increased the speed differential.

They were wrong about airbags saving them money, too. The irony of that
is that their greed actually resulted in safer cars.