Forum Index > Full Moon Saloon > Non-AWD/4WD Trailhead car (30+mpg/reliability/function)
 Reply to topic
Previous :: Next Topic
Author Message
Riverside Laker
Member
Member


Joined: 12 Jan 2004
Posts: 2814 | TRs | Pics
Riverside Laker
Member
PostWed Jun 27, 2012 7:55 pm 
Touron, please calculate these for us: Driver C drives 60 miles at 60 mph. Driver D drives half that distance at 30 mph. How fast does driver B need to go to catch up with driver A? Driver E drives 60 miles at 60 mpg. Driver F drives half that distance at 30 mpg. What mpg does driver F need to "catch up", or get 60 mpg for the entire distance?

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
touron
Member
Member


Joined: 15 Sep 2003
Posts: 10293 | TRs | Pics
Location: Plymouth Rock
touron
Member
PostWed Jun 27, 2012 8:31 pm 
Riverside, I will solve these one at a time, instead of my usual massivley parrallel method: uhh.gif
Quote:
Driver C drives 60 miles at 60 mph. Driver D drives half that distance at 30 mph. How fast does driver B need to go to catch up with driver A?
up.gif First of all, B comes after A in the alphabet, so using the Vanna White method, A will never catch B because B has a headstart, however when they reach the finish line (which is right before the Norwegian line which precedes the Swedish Line which is slightly south of the Arctic Circle), they will find Z waiting for them saying "What took y'all so long? I have been waiting X hours for you. ZZZzzzzzzz" uhh.gif
Quote:
Driver E drives 60 miles at 60 mpg. Driver F drives half that distance at 30 mpg. What mpg does driver F need to "catch up", or get 60 mpg for the entire distance?
up.gif This problem seems more difficult, but as with many things in life it is actually easier. First, using the Vanna White method again but using the latter letter corrolary, F comes after E, so actually F can laze around for awhile, sipping a latte and reading 100 hikes. However, F still has to do something or F will lose, so right at about Paddy Go Easy Pass, F should speed up to about 45 mph but coast as much as possible to conserve gas, and also hunch over the wheel to gain precious "downhill momentum" on the level. This will allow F to get 90mpg which is even more efficient if you are using litres. F will be well ahead of E, unless that is, F has an iron deficiency, in which case F will be behind e like this "Fe". Of course even if F has an iron deficiency, F should still try and race and not take a day off like that hotheaded Ferrous Boiler guy did. Touron, Phd

Touron is a nougat of Arabic origin made with almonds and honey or sugar, without which it would just not be Christmas in Spain.
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Riverside Laker
Member
Member


Joined: 12 Jan 2004
Posts: 2814 | TRs | Pics
Riverside Laker
Member
PostThu Jun 28, 2012 5:12 am 
Alright, Einstein. You clearly have spent more time with Vanna than with Dr. Hawkings. Y'see, driver B has to drive at the speed of Warp Infinity to catch the Canadian, driver eh. But by driving that fast, time will have slowed down relative to, eh, A, so driver B can slow down and coast across the line at a snail's pace in a VW Rabbit, just ekeing past our tortoise Canadian, who was so smugly thinking he was gonna win the battle. Now let's discuss how driver E can ketchup D. Y'see, clearly it can be shown by the reader with a few casual calculations that both have used a gallon of petrol shoving their galleons the distance. But driver E knows that he mustard use his electric mode hybrid hypergalleon rig to jettison himself on the back of a Mac ferrying vehicles destined for MacDonalds 30 miles hence, thus ketchupping D and whistling the Mr. Ed song as he sails past. QED

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
touron
Member
Member


Joined: 15 Sep 2003
Posts: 10293 | TRs | Pics
Location: Plymouth Rock
touron
Member
PostThu Jun 28, 2012 6:35 pm 
Riverside, QED, or whatever your name is, Your analysis is interesting and appears to be the product of much thought, but why should I trust you?? You are not a Phd like me. You did not spend eight years in the hallowed halls of academia plus several hours watching a few episodes of Wheel of Fortune. That doesn't mean you are wrong (because even a broken clock is correct twice a day), but I must read your computations with due deliberation, and a generous smidge of unbridled skepticism. Wait, you called me Einstein. Forget what I rambled above. Your are calculations are probably 100% correct plus 10 points of extra credit for you and an early recess. up.gif up.gif Now let's see: If you drive at Warp Infinity, you will have the Royal Canadian Mounted Police galloping up behind you (which means you are not going as fast as you think) yelling "whoa hossies, you are under arrest!" unless you are French Canadian, that is, because French is always pardoned. Now, Canadians are our relatives, so it is good that you factored relativity into your calculations. However, many consider them shoestring relatives, so I hope you are using shoestring theory, which is the cutting edge of psychics, because it conjectures the world fundamentally consists of broken laces. By the way, if your shoes have broken laces, or your laces are not tied, the Canadians will probably beat you in the race. And if you tie their shoelaces together you will probably win handily, according to shoestring theory, but don't let anyone else know that theory, k? It is our secret, which is why I am writing it to you in the post and not blabbing it to the world at large. Now, E can ketchup to D only by redlining. However kecthingup is basically being a vegetable as was famously proved a few years ago, so you can also veg out and win the race (basically relativity). If you don't try ketchup, or if you don't veg, but rather run the race half-arsedly, you will lose, so get your buns in gear and race to McDonalds, but don't drive thru it like the sign says, because, as I learned, you will total your car and the manager might end up putting you on the dollar menu. -Touron, PdH

Touron is a nougat of Arabic origin made with almonds and honey or sugar, without which it would just not be Christmas in Spain.
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Malachai Constant
Member
Member


Joined: 13 Jan 2002
Posts: 16075 | TRs | Pics
Location: Back Again Like A Bad Penny
Malachai Constant
Member
PostThu Jun 28, 2012 6:59 pm 
Pfffitt rolleyes.gif

"You do not laugh when you look at the mountains, or when you look at the sea." Lafcadio Hearn
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Mugs
Member
Member


Joined: 02 Jan 2007
Posts: 208 | TRs | Pics
Location: Kent, Wa.
Mugs
Member
PostThu Jun 28, 2012 8:02 pm 
Allison wrote:
But....aren't you a Subaru mechanic? Seems a somewhat lopsided comparison if you ask me.
Yes I was a suby tech...But I have worked on most cars (not all) especially within the Japanese world...so my comparison was based upon experience...I could have said the same thing about Honda as well...but ya know.
marzsit wrote:
show me a 200K subaru that hasn't had the heads redone, it's pretty rare and a head job on these isn't cheap.
Give me your address..I'll show you my suby that has over 200k on it, and still going with out HG replacement or any other major item for that matter.
tigermn wrote:
What is is with timing belts needing to be replaced on most vehicles? An expensive unnecessary repair with a better design. I know our Nissan Quest (basically a ford) van has a belt which has been replaced.... Unnecessary things like that just irritate me. Next they will have cars that have to have the pistons replaced every 50k miles or something.... My 2000 Nissan Maxima has 194k miles and is still on the original timing chain, which should last the life of the engine or at least close to it. I just lucked out on this one as back then I wasn't thinking much about anything other than replacing a dead car at the time.
Timing belts are very necessary to change at their service interval schedule. Timing belt are run by the crank gear and then go through a series of pullies and a tensioner, and often drive the water pump as well. It "goes around" all this "stuff" and then goes around your cam gear/s which in turn, rotates your cam/s. The cam/s open and close your valves at the appropriate time and and thus allows your engine to operate correctly (thats a very dumbed down, simple explanation.) A lot (not all, but most) of cars these days are, what is called a interference engine. Meaning if it comes out of time...(I.E. YOUR TIMING BELT BREAKS BECAUSE YOU THOUGHT IS WAS UN-NECESSARY TO REPLACE AT THE SERVICE SCHEDULE TIME.) the valves will hit the pistons, and then your done. Now you have to have the engine go under some major repairs. Its a belt..it wears out like any other belt. So when it goes un-replaced it can eventually wear out to the point of failure in many different ways. Also when the timing belt is replaced (provided its a reputable/knowledgeable shop) items like the cam and crank seals, water pump, pulleys and tensioner need to get replaced. If the belt just gets replaced then one of the other above said items can fail and cause a belt failure and then your back to the whole valve hit piston scenario again. Trust me, I have seen it more then once. The components already have 100k on them...their not going to make it another 100k (most of the time.) A timing chain...is just that, a chain. They're much more durable and have a very high logenivity. They only need to be replaced when they start to make noise...and sometimes that never happens. Now that technology has advanced enough to where chains don't come with some of the other drivability/runabilty issues they once had, a lot of car manufactures are beginning to use them again on there engines..including Subaru winksmile.gif
BigSteve wrote:
Lesson: avoid the EJ25 engine.
Avoid the Gen I 2.5 DOHC..but even now "we" have come up with ways to permanently fix them. The Gen II are some what crappy as well..but again we figured a way around them. Suby quite making the uber reliable 2.2 SOHC in 2003 so if your going to avoid the the "2.5" your really limiting your self.

I miss my 4.8Lb base weight as a ground dweller...But I sure DON'T MISS the ground.
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
boot up
Old Not Bold Hiker



Joined: 12 Dec 2006
Posts: 4745 | TRs | Pics
Location: Bend Oregon
boot up
Old Not Bold Hiker
PostThu Jun 28, 2012 8:48 pm 
I thought the head gasket issue just covered a certain range of years, after 2000. Sort of like Honda Accords be POS between 1998 and 2002, which I know because we owned a 2000 Accord which was constant EXPENSIVE trouble, including a dead auto transmission at 60k miles. Or Fords of ....well just about any year, unless you are the lucky 1 out of 1000 that seem to roll off the line and keep going on forever trouble free, that people refer to. Or a GM vehicle of ....well, people that buy those think putting a few thousand a year into a vehicle after year two, is just normal maintenance. biggrin.gif I am gambling that Subaru finally fixed the head gasket issue on the new 2.0i engine. I will not be happy if they carried that issue over. Rumor has it that it was a materials problem combined with an odd electrical problem, and they fixed it after denying it for too long. Supposedly, if I can believe a local Subaru "expert" mechanic, you have to keep the battery terminals REALLY clean on the trouble years of cars otherwise the electrons have an easier route going through the engine instead of the wiring, dragging a gaggle of headgasket ions with them, eventually leaving a gap in said gasket.

friluftsliv
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Allison
Feckless Swooner



Joined: 16 Dec 2001
Posts: 12287 | TRs | Pics
Location: putting on my Nikes before the comet comes
Allison
Feckless Swooner
PostThu Jun 28, 2012 8:56 pm 
Mugs, are you, or were you, a Subaru mechanic?
Quote:
keep the battery terminals REALLY clean on the trouble years of cars otherwise the electrons have an easier route going through the engine instead of the wiring, dragging a gaggle of headgasket ions with them, eventually leaving a gap in said gasket.
eek.gif

www.allisonoutside.com follow me on Twitter! @AllisonLWoods
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Tom_Sjolseth
Born Yesterday



Joined: 30 May 2007
Posts: 2652 | TRs | Pics
Location: Right here.
Tom_Sjolseth
Born Yesterday
PostThu Jun 28, 2012 9:01 pm 
I was going to ask the SAME QUESTION! My mechanic knows all there is to know about electrons (after all, how much really is there to know about them??). hockeygrin.gif

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Mugs
Member
Member


Joined: 02 Jan 2007
Posts: 208 | TRs | Pics
Location: Kent, Wa.
Mugs
Member
PostThu Jun 28, 2012 9:30 pm 
boot up wrote:
Supposedly, if I can believe a local Subaru "expert" mechanic, you have to keep the battery terminals REALLY clean on the trouble years of cars otherwise the electrons have an easier route going through the engine instead of the wiring, dragging a gaggle of headgasket ions with them, eventually leaving a gap in said gasket.
What ever suby "expert" told you that does know his head from his butt, and should not be allowed to work on anything but maybe a dull spoon.

I miss my 4.8Lb base weight as a ground dweller...But I sure DON'T MISS the ground.
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
tigermn
Member
Member


Joined: 10 Jul 2007
Posts: 9242 | TRs | Pics
Location: There...
tigermn
Member
PostThu Jun 28, 2012 9:44 pm 
Yea I know about timing BELTS and why they need to be replaced. I've owned cars in the past (and still own the van) that required replacement every whatever miles. I had one break once on a dodge car years ago. Luckily it didn't damage the engine. My point was why does anybody use that design when there is another option (the chain) that doesn't wear out near as often or as quick and isn't near as likely to snap and destroy your engine. huh.gif I guess they are in cahoots with the mechanics.

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Mugs
Member
Member


Joined: 02 Jan 2007
Posts: 208 | TRs | Pics
Location: Kent, Wa.
Mugs
Member
PostThu Jun 28, 2012 9:55 pm 
tigermn wrote:
Yea I know about timing BELTS and why they need to be replaced. I've owned cars in the past (and still own the van) that required replacement every whatever miles. I had one break once on a dodge car years ago. Luckily it didn't damage the engine. My point was why does anybody use that design when there is another option (the chain) that doesn't wear out near as often or as quick and isn't near as likely to snap and destroy your engine. huh.gif I guess they are in cahoots with the mechanics.
Up until recently "chain cars" were more expensive to manufacture, and in todays day and age, price point/profit is paramount. Chains also tended to be louder, had vibration issues,and were not as capable in performance (it takes more to rev them up) and also they have more friction then a belt and thus cause the engine to work harder, which in turn robs it of power output and also fuel mileage. Now days though they have greatly improved the designs and are starting to become very economical to manufacture. Plus it is keeping maintenance cost to the consumer down, which a very large driving factor today.

I miss my 4.8Lb base weight as a ground dweller...But I sure DON'T MISS the ground.
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Allison
Feckless Swooner



Joined: 16 Dec 2001
Posts: 12287 | TRs | Pics
Location: putting on my Nikes before the comet comes
Allison
Feckless Swooner
PostThu Jun 28, 2012 10:37 pm 
That reminds me of what I remember THE MOST about my Suub. camtimingbeltwaterpump camtimingbeltwaterpump camtimingbeltwaterpump camtimingbeltwaterpump camtimingbeltwaterpump camtimingbeltwaterpump camtimingbeltwaterpump camtimingbeltwaterpump camtimingbeltwaterpump camtimingbeltwaterpump camtimingbeltwaterpump camtimingbeltwaterpump camtimingbeltwaterpump camtimingbeltwaterpump camtimingbeltwaterpump camtimingbeltwaterpump Times like a million gazillion. It seemed like it was every couple of tanks of gas, but it probably wasn't THAT often.

www.allisonoutside.com follow me on Twitter! @AllisonLWoods
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
David K
Member
Member


Joined: 15 Oct 2007
Posts: 162 | TRs | Pics
Location: Bellevue, WA
David K
Member
PostThu Jun 28, 2012 10:44 pm 
boot up wrote:
Or Fords of ....well just about any year, unless you are the lucky 1 out of 1000 that seem to roll off the line and keep going on forever trouble free, that people refer to.
boot up, I have one of those, its a 1999 Ford Expedition 175,000 miles, 1 owner (me), other than normal maintenance including tires and brakes I typically spend spend less $500 per year fixing things. I just had the drivers side window motor replaced and the emissions systems worked on, it wasn't cheap but its a lot less than a year of depreciation had I replaced it with a new vehicle. At the end of the day the total cost of ownership fairly low, Depreciation = $0, insurance = cheap, maintenance = cheap, fuel expense = high.

If you watch Jaws backwards its the touching story of a giant shark who pukes up so many people the town is forced to build a beach.
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Tom_Sjolseth
Born Yesterday



Joined: 30 May 2007
Posts: 2652 | TRs | Pics
Location: Right here.
Tom_Sjolseth
Born Yesterday
PostThu Jun 28, 2012 10:53 pm 
David K, you speak with reason and logic.. that is not welcome here. down.gif

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
   All times are GMT - 8 Hours
 Reply to topic
Forum Index > Full Moon Saloon > Non-AWD/4WD Trailhead car (30+mpg/reliability/function)
  Happy Birthday Captain Trips, Backcountry Blake, Flower Sniffer, nwcjc, backpacker92out!
Jump to:   
Search this topic:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum