« Never seen it myself | Main | Watchman's Rorschach as Objectivist super hero »
April 18, 2009
Only slightly more economical?
I love they way Mustangs look and I had an opportunity to rent a modern American muscle car once I loved the way it handled and sounded as well. Totally different than my tiny, slow, and efficient Civic. So while normally disinterested in car reviews, the 2010 Mustang review in the NY Times caught my eye and within It I saw this quote about fuel efficiency.
Do you agree with the author's assessment that the V-6 is only slightly more economical?
Fuel economy ratings for the V-8 are 16 miles a gallon in the city and 24 on the highway with the 5-speed manual gearbox and 17/23 for the 5-speed automatic. The base Mustang engine, a 210-horsepower 4-liter V-6, is only slightly more economical, with ratings of 18/26 for the manual transmission or 16/24 with a 5-speed automatic.Original Pony, Now Playing Catch-Up
16 vs 18 urban and 24 vs 26 highway. That doesn't sound like a big difference. Though it is.
I thought I'd mentioned this phenomena before, but I don't see anything in the archives. Measuring MPG makes the ordering of car efficiency easy, because higher numbers are better. But it makes cardinal comparisons more difficult, because each increase in the MPG by 1 has a non-linear relationship with fuel savings. Each such increase saves you (1/MPG)% in fuel per mile. Gallons per mile is a much easier way of comparing fuel usage than miles per gallon. Your fuel use is in gallons. Take the gallons per mile times the number of miles and you will quickly know. If you know the MPG here is what you do.
The V-8 uses 1/16 of a gallon for going an urban mile to the V-6's 1/18th of a gallon. That means that it uses .0625 gallons to the V-6's .0556. So the V-6 is actually 12.4% more efficient, which I would describe as more than slightly more efficient. The highway difference is less pronounced but still 8.3% more efficient. With the average American household spending about $1000 on automotive fuel, that about a $100 a year in savings. That's your two annual oil changes paid for on the fuel savings.
Posted by OneEyedMan at April 18, 2009 8:33 AM
Comments
Post a comment
Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)
(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)