3.7L V6 - 48.5 mpg!
6/29/10, 01:10 PM
#42
Post *****
Thread Starter
Join Date: December 14, 2007
Location: State of Jefferson Mountains USA
Posts: 20,005
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
4 Posts
Not to nerd up the discussion too much, but I had to chime in. Converting water into hydrogen and oxygen actually costs energy. When you get hydrogen out of water, and then use that hydrogen to power something, you're not actually generating energy from water. Getting hydrogen out of water is literally the same as charging a battery - you need a power source to supply that energy. Then it's "stored" as potential energy. You get that energy back when that hydrogen bonds with oxygen again.
So you can use water from the ocean as a battery, but you still need to generate electricity.. from a power plant somewhere.
So you can use water from the ocean as a battery, but you still need to generate electricity.. from a power plant somewhere.
Its the same story for the ethanol scam turning precious food into inefficient fuel. It takes more (foreign) oil to produce than the ethanol you get out of it.
You're kidding right? If their old tech V6 is as good or better then why haven't they proven it yet?
6/29/10, 03:06 PM
#43
Cobra R Member
Join Date: March 12, 2004
Location: Orange County, CA
Posts: 1,560
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Going around a track at 50MPH proves what exactly? That you can run the engine at 1800RPM and get good mileage? How does this relate to real world driving? How about a Corvette in 6th gear? Their OD is nuts, I'm sure they could pull great numbers. I just don't see the point. The vehicle is rated at 31MPG for a reason.
Last edited by Adam; 6/29/10 at 03:07 PM.
6/29/10, 03:14 PM
#44
GTR Member
Going around a track at 50MPH proves what exactly? That you can run the engine at 1800RPM and get good mileage? How does this relate to real world driving? How about a Corvette in 6th gear? Their OD is nuts, I'm sure they could pull great numbers. I just don't see the point. The vehicle is rated at 31MPG for a reason.
Cumaro wouldn't get the same mpg under the same conditions, more aero drag and more mechanical drag.
6/29/10, 03:18 PM
#45
Post *****
Thread Starter
Join Date: December 14, 2007
Location: State of Jefferson Mountains USA
Posts: 20,005
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
4 Posts
Going around a track at 50MPH proves what exactly? That you can run the engine at 1800RPM and get good mileage? How does this relate to real world driving? How about a Corvette in 6th gear? Their OD is nuts, I'm sure they could pull great numbers. I just don't see the point. The vehicle is rated at 31MPG for a reason.
All they have to do is tweak the torque curves, TiVCT, MAP & overdrive for 'real world' driving.
Imagine a button on your steering wheel to change the above for traffic, sport, freeway cruise.
But before you get there you have to test it and prove it. And with EPA tightening all the time, Ford is leaping ahead of the also rans.
6/29/10, 05:42 PM
#46
GT Member
Join Date: April 24, 2010
Location: South Carolina
Posts: 148
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I drove to the beach this weekend and back, 245 miles round trip. Drove about 65 mph, 1500 rpm, most of the way, except for traffic and lights in a few small towns. Even tried a few speedy passes on slow cars. When I arrived home, I had averaged 30.3 mpg. To double check, I filled the tank and it took less than 8 gallons. Spot on. My car now has 457 miles and I am very happy with the the mpg, the hp, and the looks. I see 31 mpg or better in the near future. This weekend I'm going on a drive to the Virginia mountains and then to the Chesapeake Bay. That will give me some more mpg information.
6/29/10, 07:09 PM
#47
Legacy TMS Member
Join Date: September 20, 2004
Location: N.E. Wisconsin
Posts: 883
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
4 Posts
That's why I said we don't have the tech yet. But we will.
Its the same story for the ethanol scam turning precious food into inefficient fuel. It takes more (foreign) oil to produce than the ethanol you get out of it.
You're kidding right? If their old tech V6 is as good or better then why haven't they proven it yet?
Its the same story for the ethanol scam turning precious food into inefficient fuel. It takes more (foreign) oil to produce than the ethanol you get out of it.
You're kidding right? If their old tech V6 is as good or better then why haven't they proven it yet?
It really is just as impressive of a motor, and could probably have very good results (maybe not AS good) in a similar 45-55 MPH test at Bristol. It is geared a bit higher (like having the 3.31 opt. in the Mustang), and the M/T car is a little more eff. than the A/T if I remember right; plus it is like 300 lbs. heavier and probably not as aerodynamic as we all know.
The 2010 Camaro V8's are still old tech "push rod" design though ... maybe this was what you were thinking of.
Doug
6/30/10, 11:53 AM
#48
Post *****
Thread Starter
Join Date: December 14, 2007
Location: State of Jefferson Mountains USA
Posts: 20,005
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
4 Posts
The 2010 Camaro V6 is just as high tech as the new Mustang V6 in every way PLUS it one-up's us with Direct Injection.
It really is just as impressive of a motor, and could probably have very good results (maybe not AS good) in a similar 45-55 MPH test at Bristol. It is geared a bit higher (like having the 3.31 opt. in the Mustang), and the M/T car is a little more eff. than the A/T if I remember right; plus it is like 300 lbs. heavier and probably not as aerodynamic as we all know.
The 2010 Camaro V8's are still old tech "push rod" design though ... maybe this was what you were thinking of.
Doug
It really is just as impressive of a motor, and could probably have very good results (maybe not AS good) in a similar 45-55 MPH test at Bristol. It is geared a bit higher (like having the 3.31 opt. in the Mustang), and the M/T car is a little more eff. than the A/T if I remember right; plus it is like 300 lbs. heavier and probably not as aerodynamic as we all know.
The 2010 Camaro V8's are still old tech "push rod" design though ... maybe this was what you were thinking of.
Doug
As to fuel performance, I find it unusual the Camaro's peak torque is so high at 5000. Seems like the lack of low end would hamper city mileage but EPA says 18 city...
ENGINE TYPE: DOHC 24-valve V-6, aluminum block and heads, direct fuel injection Displacement: 218 cu in, 3564cc
Power (SAE net): 304 bhp @ 6400 rpm
Torque (SAE net): 273 lb-ft @ 5000 rpm
6/30/10, 12:08 PM
#49
Legacy TMS Member
Join Date: January 25, 2010
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 3,803
Received 1,528 Likes
on
1,046 Posts
Funny you should mention it, the V6 Camaro is what got me seriously interested in a new "pony car", and look what I ended up with!
The V6 Camaro actually gets very good mileage, and is very fun to drive -- I rented one for a 24-hour test drive and got 26 MPG measured/calculated average including a good bit of stop-and-go (but not much WOT because I was in unfamiliar territory) and 30.5 on a simulated highway/back-roads commute. It is rated a little lower than the V6 'stang, but pretty close. (for comparison I am getting 27-28 on a very similar commute with my GT, not bad!)
The Camaro was fun for a day, but I wouldn't want to live with one . . .
Anyway, it would be interesting to see what the Camaro would do in this test, I'd predict it would be in the mid 40's based on the Mustang's 48 . . . and it would be even better to see what a Prius would do, I think we'd see that the Mustang is a lot closer to the Prius in basic efficiency of turning gas into motion than a lot of people would assume.
The V6 Camaro actually gets very good mileage, and is very fun to drive -- I rented one for a 24-hour test drive and got 26 MPG measured/calculated average including a good bit of stop-and-go (but not much WOT because I was in unfamiliar territory) and 30.5 on a simulated highway/back-roads commute. It is rated a little lower than the V6 'stang, but pretty close. (for comparison I am getting 27-28 on a very similar commute with my GT, not bad!)
The Camaro was fun for a day, but I wouldn't want to live with one . . .
Anyway, it would be interesting to see what the Camaro would do in this test, I'd predict it would be in the mid 40's based on the Mustang's 48 . . . and it would be even better to see what a Prius would do, I think we'd see that the Mustang is a lot closer to the Prius in basic efficiency of turning gas into motion than a lot of people would assume.
6/30/10, 09:31 PM
#50
GT Member
Join Date: January 3, 2010
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 164
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Same here. Was looking at Accord and Altima coupes and one day a banner ad for the Camaro came up. "Cars like that can get 29mpg highway? Really?!?!?!?!"
6/30/10, 09:54 PM
#51
Legacy TMS Member
Publicity, people will talk more about the number and less about the technique. This is much the same as turning a good time at Nurburgring Nordschleife - great publicity but ultimately meaningless.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Rando
2010-2014 Mustang
8
8/25/21 11:12 AM