2nd Generation (GE 08-13) 2nd Generation specific talk and questions here.

mpg at 55?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old May 8, 2009 | 07:15 PM
  #1  
cab0053's Avatar
Thread Starter
|
Member
5 Year Member
iTrader: (3)
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 942
From: Rochester, NY
mpg at 55?

I poked around but could not find it quickly...

what mpg are you getting cruising at 55? here in upstate ny, many highways/parkways are 55 and i was just wondering what I could be getting....
 
Old May 8, 2009 | 08:27 PM
  #2  
niko3257's Avatar
FitFreak GE8 DIY Guy
iTrader: (3)
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 1,929
From: Palm Coast FLA
5 Year Member
around that speed your looking into the 40MPG area.
i cruise just under the 60mph mark and i get an avg of
39-42 mpg at those speeds. this is all hand calculated also.
 
Old May 8, 2009 | 08:28 PM
  #3  
keepitpg's Avatar
i love college
iTrader: (10)
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 2,410
From: Monrovia, CA / SLC, UT
with my scanguage, i was cruising at 60 mph and getting 50 mpg. but im really low. so less air resistance. so you should be getting around 45 mpg
 
Old May 8, 2009 | 08:58 PM
  #4  
solbrothers's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (2)
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 7,343
From: Vallejo, Ca
5 Year Member
you cant say anything for sure. every second of driving is different
 
Old May 10, 2009 | 04:11 PM
  #5  
john21031's Avatar
Member
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 1,058
From: SoCal/Castaic
5 Year Member
Originally Posted by keepitpg
. but im really low. so less air resistance.
Why so?

Air resistance is defined by coefficient of drag times frontal surface area, which for both cars would be identical. The fact that your car is lowered may or may not help overall air resistance.

Maybe if it's lower, less air is able to bypass it underneath creating extra pressure in the front forcing air to go around and above the body. But maybe less air under the car also means less turbulence...

I think it's hard to say. What's your reasoning?
 
Old May 10, 2009 | 07:29 PM
  #6  
cab0053's Avatar
Thread Starter
|
Member
5 Year Member
iTrader: (3)
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 942
From: Rochester, NY
Originally Posted by solbrothers
you cant say anything for sure. every second of driving is different
most def. just looking for approximation


thanks for the replies..
 
Old May 10, 2009 | 08:08 PM
  #7  
keepitpg's Avatar
i love college
iTrader: (10)
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 2,410
From: Monrovia, CA / SLC, UT
Originally Posted by john21031
Why so?

Air resistance is defined by coefficient of drag times frontal surface area, which for both cars would be identical. The fact that your car is lowered may or may not help overall air resistance.

Maybe if it's lower, less air is able to bypass it underneath creating extra pressure in the front forcing air to go around and above the body. But maybe less air under the car also means less turbulence...

I think it's hard to say. What's your reasoning?
idk.. but i have a scanguage and i noticed an increase in mpg after i lowered my car
 
Old May 10, 2009 | 08:10 PM
  #8  
BakedCookies's Avatar
Member
5 Year Member
iTrader: (16)
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 1,459
From: VA
Originally Posted by keepitpg
idk.. but i have a scanguage and i noticed an increase in mpg after i lowered my car
my gas mileage improved as well after lowering my car.
 
Old May 10, 2009 | 11:17 PM
  #9  
Tork's Avatar
Member
5 Year Member
iTrader: (2)
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,251
From: Winthrop Harbor Illinois/ Presque Isle Wisconsin
Originally Posted by john21031
Why so?



Maybe if it's lower, less air is able to bypass it underneath creating extra pressure in the front forcing air to go around and above the body. But maybe less air under the car also means less turbulence...
Good logic I think
Now consider that the bottom of yer car (with all the chassis parts, exhaust etc) is the least aerodynamic by a fairly large margin.
 
Old May 10, 2009 | 11:39 PM
  #10  
cab0053's Avatar
Thread Starter
|
Member
5 Year Member
iTrader: (3)
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 942
From: Rochester, NY
Originally Posted by BakedCookies
my gas mileage improved as well after lowering my car.
how many miles did you have at the time?
I heard from many gd owners that 10k is the final mark where the mileage peaks and holds. perhaps the ge is similar.

also, what was the increase? thanks.

Originally Posted by Tork
Good logic I think
Now consider that the bottom of yer car (with all the chassis parts, exhaust etc) is the least aerodynamic by a fairly large margin.
isn't that why body kits were originally designed for? air flow? I remember top gear mention something like this...
 
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
SilverEX15
3rd Generation (2015+)
19
Jun 25, 2018 04:06 PM
'12Fit
2nd Generation (GE 08-13)
6
Jul 10, 2012 04:05 AM
Fatbrando
General Fit Talk
2
Jun 9, 2012 09:16 PM
nc73
1st Generation (GD 01-08)
53
Mar 5, 2011 08:36 PM
BoostTed
2nd Generation (GE 08-13)
17
Dec 20, 2010 12:38 AM




All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:46 AM.