Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Wrong. When you are simply cruising, the turbo is not spooling for the most part, so your MPG is similar to most any other non-turbo engine of a similar size. However, when you are accelerating and the turbo is spooled, your MPG is actually less then a comparable size non-turbo engine.
An engine at it's most basic is a large air pump. The more air you can feed into and out of it, the more power you can make. Of course, this air pump requires a certain amount of fuel in order to ignite. Therefore, the more air you cram into the engine, the more fuel you must add to maintain the proper ratio to allow combustion.
So, in our most basic understanding of a 2.0L motor...
A naturally aspirated one would move "y" amount of air and require "x" amount of fuel to do so.
A turbo via compression, increases the amount of air in the engine, so it becomes "y+z" and requires "x+z" amount of fuel to maintain the appropriate air:fuel ratio.
As for the Prius, having driven plenty of them, they are quite capable of attaining and handling speeds of 90+mph. My personal record is 102, indicated on the cars speedometer. The problem with the Prius though, is that the amount of power needed to maintain that speed is greater then the gas engine itself can supply, so the electric motor is engaged to provide additional power. As soon as the battery reserve drains, the car will begin to slow down into the 80mph range which the gas engine can maintain on its own.
Tell that to the saab that greatly suffers on city driving yet gets over 30 MPG when undisturbed on the highway.
Do you own my car? Honestly, you are giving a high school blue collar shop answer. You don't know how the MPGS are displaced.
A 2013 Camaro with the 325 hp motor or the Mustang with the 300 hp motor that is rated 29 - 30mpg on the highway. Even the Boss 302 is rated 27 mpg.
One reason Saab faded into oblivion.
Yes, it can be inferred that in your casual referencing the red neck Camaro, you really know a whole lot about the death of Saab. Saab died because costs were adding up and GM was in trouble, so they sold them off. It had NOTHING to do with the quality of the cars, engines, or turbos they were making.
Figures you would lean towards some European vehicle that never saw any success in this country. It died because it was God awful ugly and sales never amounted to much.
I'd take American muscle before one of those any day. Let me guess. As a kid you were the guy with the VW Beetle?
GM's fault. Not in the mind of one of the leading financial news source:
Quote:
Saab would have expired years ago had not GM taken it under its wing two decades ago. The reason is simple: Saab was simply too small to survive in its current configuration. At a time when German luxury makers like Mercedes-Benz and BMW make more than one million cars a year, Saab never sold more than 140,000 cars a year. Even Volvo made two or three times that many cars. Low production is fatal, because the auto industry is all about economies of scale. Trying to amortize the expenses of new model engineering, not to mention increasingly stringent safety and emissions technology, requires accounting gymnastics that are all but impossible unless volumes reach the hundreds of thousands.
The future was bleak. Saab was destined to remain small because its appeal was so narrow. While its owners may have reveled in being described as "quirky," their image never extended much beyond that of the corduroy jacket, Earth shoe wearing English professor -- not a broad base from which to build. Other European brands -- notably Audi -- did a better job of expanding their appeal. The most disliked cars of 2011
Saab bore another burden that was unbearably heavy: its base in high-wage, low output Sweden. As Dave Herman, who ran Saab in the 1990s, was quoted as saying, most recently in Automotive News: "Beautiful, healthy young people could get a doctor's certificate and then hop on their motorcycle with their gal and go off to a lake somewhere. The daily absenteeism rate was 18%." On days when Saab employees came to work, productivity was poor and quality abysmal. Saabs historically ranked near the bottom of J.D. Power's initial quality ratings.
- See more at: Saab without tears - Dec. 20, 2011
Figures you would lean towards some European vehicle that never saw any success in this country. It died because it was God awful ugly and sales never amounted to much.
I'd take American muscle before one of those any day. Let me guess. As a kid you were the guy with the VW Beetle?
GM's fault. Not in the mind of one of the leading financial news source:
Oh, so it's not GM's fault that they were doing TERRIBLY and had to ask the government to bail them out?
You are greatly misinformed and rather ignorant. Saabs are very common in the Northeast, even more so here in NJ.
Why do you think GM picked them up cheap. They dumped them when it was obvious that they were a money losing proposition. In 2010 & 2011, Saab barely sold 5000 units in the US. There best year since 2000 they sold 47,000 cars. By comparison, Audi sold 147,000 the sale year. BMW sold almost 250, 000 in the US.
We can't seem to find 20 million ILLEGAL immigrants in this country and nobody is allowed to ask them for paperwork. But Jane Q. Citizen gets stopped for a minor violation, produces 2 of the 3 pieces of paper needed (which by the way, just because you have an 'insurance card' doesn't mean that you have insurance). So the solution naturally is to steal, (I'm sorry --- "impound") the car from her. And we call ourselves the land of the free. The only thing free about this country is the free stuff we are giving to the welfare collectors and illegals. UGH!!!!
We can't seem to find 20 million ILLEGAL immigrants in this country and nobody is allowed to ask them for paperwork. But Jane Q. Citizen gets stopped for a minor violation, produces 2 of the 3 pieces of paper needed (which by the way, just because you have an 'insurance card' doesn't mean that you have insurance). So the solution naturally is to steal, (I'm sorry --- "impound") the car from her. And we call ourselves the land of the free. The only thing free about this country is the free stuff we are giving to the welfare collectors and illegals. UGH!!!!
Nice rant. If we only really had the details from "Jane" to support your thesis.
just because you have an 'insurance card' doesn't mean that you have insurance
Try that is you have to go to the ER. See if they buy that line. Or at Customs when traveling.
Maybe you forget YOU are required to have one. Or do you think it's the state's responsibility to make sure YOU have all your paperwork. It was never stated how long the old card was expired. Or did they even have an old card. A few days overdue is usually never an issue. Not having one or even an old one is another story. Seems the OP never calcified any of these questions.
So next time someone slams into your car and has no insurance information, it won't be a big deal.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
