|
|
| Author |
Message |
ball
|
|
Ballmobile II
| 
May 15 23:36 UTC 2006 |
There is talk of replacing the (broken) car driven by Mrs.
ball with a "mini-van". We have found that installing a
child seat significantly reduces useable space, especially
when it is occupied (no folding down the rear seats, piling
up boxes in the rear passenger seat etc.) Ballmobile II
should be as fuel-efficient as is practical (E-85? Mrs. ball
will veto BioDiesel), should be reliable and hopefully not
be absolutely horrible to drive.
|
| 91 responses total. |
keesan
|
|
response 1 of 91:
|
May 16 02:15 UTC 2006 |
How fuel-efficient is practical? Our 1986 Toyota got at least 40 miles per
gallon on hills.
|
ball
|
|
response 2 of 91:
|
May 16 05:48 UTC 2006 |
Presumably downhill. The 2005 Toyota station wagon that I
drive yielded about 32 miles per gallon (about 7 l/100km)
when it was new. I haven't checked recently. That's with a
small, docile 1.9 litre 4-cylinder gasoline (petrol) engine.
|
keesan
|
|
response 3 of 91:
|
May 17 01:28 UTC 2006 |
We got this going up and down steep hills in Vermont, actually it was closer
to 50 mpg.
|
nharmon
|
|
response 4 of 91:
|
May 17 12:07 UTC 2006 |
50mpg??? For some reason I doubt this.
|
keesan
|
|
response 5 of 91:
|
May 17 17:39 UTC 2006 |
We calculated miles and gallons.
|
nharmon
|
|
response 6 of 91:
|
May 17 18:08 UTC 2006 |
This was a Toyota, are you sure you didn't pull a Nasa?
|
keesan
|
|
response 7 of 91:
|
May 17 22:52 UTC 2006 |
What is a Nasa?
|
slynne
|
|
response 8 of 91:
|
May 17 22:57 UTC 2006 |
I think it is a reference to NASA (the space agency) confusing imperial
and metric measurements.
|
tod
|
|
response 9 of 91:
|
May 17 23:02 UTC 2006 |
re #7
Its Romanian for g-dmother
|
ball
|
|
response 10 of 91:
|
May 17 23:26 UTC 2006 |
Re #3: Was this in a petrol/gasoline vehicle or Diesel?
|
gull
|
|
response 11 of 91:
|
May 18 02:51 UTC 2006 |
I've seen improvements of 10% or more in some cars just by driving
slowly. I've also seen some cars where the odometer was wildly
inaccurate, due to the wrong size tires.
|
ball
|
|
response 12 of 91:
|
May 18 16:03 UTC 2006 |
I would like to drive slower than I do most days, but my
schedule is a limiting factor.
|
n8nxf
|
|
response 13 of 91:
|
May 19 17:27 UTC 2006 |
We use to have a Toyota Corolla (1.8L gas) that would get 50mpg on the freeway
at 60 MPH but never with stop & go driving. We even ran the tires at 40 psi.
The new Corolla use to get 40 MPG average but new, safer, Michelin HydroEdge
tires cut that down to about 33 MPG.
|
keesan
|
|
response 14 of 91:
|
May 19 23:52 UTC 2006 |
I think ours is a Corolla. 1987, four-door.
|
ball
|
|
response 15 of 91:
|
May 20 02:07 UTC 2006 |
The Matrix that I drive is basically a Corolla station
wagon. I have to go some way tomorrow, so perhaps I'll get
to check the fuel consumption.
|
ball
|
|
response 16 of 91:
|
Oct 13 00:47 UTC 2006 |
I drove my wife's car to work today and it broke down on the
off-ramp of the Interstate. I've had it towed to a place
that will hopefully have a look at it tomorrow morning. In
view of at least one known problem (a bent valve) I would
not be surprised to learn that it was beyond economical
repair. Certainly my wife's initial reaction to the news was
to suggest that we go vehicle shopping tomorrow.
Potential new vehicles that she's mentioned already are a
Toyota Camry (large sedan) or a mini-van of some kind (which
I imagine would have worse fuel economy, but more room
inside).
|
keesan
|
|
response 17 of 91:
|
Oct 13 01:33 UTC 2006 |
Why do you want more room in the car? It would probably be cheaper to rent
a truck once a year if you need to carry large things. Also to buy another
used vehicle.
|
tod
|
|
response 18 of 91:
|
Oct 13 03:36 UTC 2006 |
It'd be cheaper to ride a bike but not everybody wants to live like Ted
Kaczynski, Cindy.
|
ball
|
|
response 19 of 91:
|
Oct 13 03:53 UTC 2006 |
Re #17: The Toyota Matrix that I drive never fealt cramped
until we put a child seat in it. At a minumum, we want
enough room for one baby, one stroller plus luggage or
groceries. Elbow room is also useful when changing nappies
(the baby's) or boots (mine). During the ownership period
of the new vehicle, we might have another child so room
for expansion would be a definite plus. It will probably
be a second-hand car that's new enough to be reliable. My
wage won't stretch to a brand new car.
|
keesan
|
|
response 20 of 91:
|
Oct 13 13:22 UTC 2006 |
How many miles would you drive this replacement vehicle while you owned it?
Any car with a trunk would have room for a stroller and groceries, and also
for at least two baby seats in back. But maybe you want more personal space
if you are a tall/wide person. Are there cars which have a larger interior
but still get better mileage than a van? Jim fits into a small car only if
he leans the seat back to make headroom (he has to sit at an angle).
Why do you change diapers in a car rather than a restroom?
|
ball
|
|
response 21 of 91:
|
Oct 13 19:13 UTC 2006 |
Wild guess: 100,000 miles or further provided the vehicle
holds up. Our strollers are larger than usual (stooping and
pushing don't go well together) and we usually have a *lot*
of groceries. We could buy a little less if we ate less and
presumably if we had a garden in which to grow vegetables.
With a stroller in the back of the Matrix, I could get
perhaps three grocery bags in there.
We change the baby in the car sometimes because it's more
convenient than arriving somewhere, trying to locate the
bathroom, and hoping that there is a changing table or
having to figure out what to do with things we're carrying
while we're busy with the baby (wait until we're at the car
and the things are stowed, more arms are free). Some bath-
rooms are so unsanitary that *I* don't want to go in them,
let alone take a baby in there.
Perhaps a Camry station wagon, if such a thing exists.
|
keesan
|
|
response 22 of 91:
|
Oct 13 20:24 UTC 2006 |
Assuming gasoline averages $3/gallon over the life of your vehicle (no
inflation), with a minivan getting 20 mpg and a car getting 40 mpg, 100,000
miles would be 5000 or 2,500 gallons, a difference of 2,500 gallons at
$3/gallon (which is probably a low estimate) or $7,500 extra to drive the
minivan. Someone please correct my arithmetic or assumptions. You could
buy a lot of groceries for that amount (and more if the price of gas goes
up over the next ten years). If you drove it 10 years, $750/year, about
$60/month. If you change babies in the car for three years, that would be
$2500/year for a portable baby-changing table with wheels. $200/month.
It would also produce double the pollution, if you care about that.
Our local supermarket will pick out and deliver groceries for $15, which
would let you have your groceries delivered once a week for what you would
save in gas. If gasoline averages $6 of course it is double the
difference ($15,000 extra over the 100,000 miles). Is there a difference
in insurance rates or purchase costs on minivans vs small cars?
|
ball
|
|
response 23 of 91:
|
Oct 13 22:23 UTC 2006 |
I won't buy any vehicle that only gets 20 MPG. Most cars
(petrol/gasoline ones) won't get 40 MPG. I think a van is
likely to suffer lower economy than a car (even a station
wagon) because of increased weight and drag, so even if the
numbers are wrong, the concept is probably valid. National
Geographic thinks the price of oil (and petrol) is likely to
increase consistently over the next ten years, which sounds
quite likely.
I do care about pollution. It's a shame that I can't buy a
fuel cell car today. It's also unfortunate that a family of
three living in the Mid West require two cars. My sister has
a husband, three children and they have no car because they
live in Britain and the few things that aren't in walking
distance can be reached easily via inexpensive public
transport.
My wife has to choose her own groceries. You'd have to ask
her about that. Insurance may actually be less expensive for
a van than a car because they're larger and the perception
seems to be that the passengers are less vulnerable in the
event of a collision. Perhaps they also think 'soccer moms'
drive with more care.
|
keesan
|
|
response 24 of 91:
|
Oct 14 02:04 UTC 2006 |
For $750/year (or more) would it be worth making a few extra trips to the
grocery store? Our 1987 Dodge Colt gets about 40 mpg, and I assume newer cars
could do better. What do the best new ones get? What do the best minivans
get?
|