Muscle Per Gallon Index
10-19-2005, 10:45 AM
#11
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,276
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
dude, you got it all wrong. what we need to do, is take the price per barrel of oil, P, multiply the inverse by the billions of dollars OPEC is profiting off of our gas hungry vehicles, square that, divide that into the quadratic equation, and multiply it times the coefficient of drag on the car.....that will net the Politically Correct Index of the car.
(-b+/-root(b^2-4ac)/2a)
---------------------------- *c/d = PCI
(1/P)*(OPEC^2)
so, the Z06 comes out: 2.5
The Highlander Hybrid: 27
Toyota Prius: 1,000,000!
(-b+/-root(b^2-4ac)/2a)
---------------------------- *c/d = PCI
(1/P)*(OPEC^2)
so, the Z06 comes out: 2.5
The Highlander Hybrid: 27
Toyota Prius: 1,000,000!
10-19-2005, 02:43 PM
#13
Moderator
I like spicy chicken.
10-19-2005, 03:06 PM
#14
Originally Posted by switchcars,Oct 19 2005, 07:38 AM
yea, this index is pretty useless, they need to remake their equation, so it relies MORE on mpg than on hp, because all the cars with massive HP just own the list.
something like x=(0.5HP*(mpg*2))/100
something like x=(0.5HP*(mpg*2))/100
(Hint: your formula's identical to the original one.) 
10-20-2005, 08:13 AM
#15
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Palo Alto
Posts: 5,387
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by pantyraider,Oct 18 2005, 04:59 PM
Stupid comparison. The Z06 has a ridiculously tall 6th gear as do the other supercars on the list.
Great performance AND the option to get good mileage (with somewhat limited power in that gear).
Or
Great performance but NO option to use a high mileage gear.
It's not cheating so long as it works (and it does)
10-20-2005, 05:26 PM
#16
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: CA.WA.[TX].VA
Posts: 2,657
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by ninethreeeleven,Oct 18 2005, 02:03 PM
I would also like to point out that any and all of the cars (except maybe the crazy hybrids) won't be getting EPA fuel economy at their estimated horsepower.
13mpg at 6600 RPM? I don't think so.
13mpg at 6600 RPM? I don't think so.
I say "trying" because a 190 horsepower Elise is probably more fun to drive than a 202 horsepower F150. Weight, among many other things, is a big reason.
A better measure would be something like MPG / 0-60TIME .
Both MPG and 0-60 time are dependent on weight--MPG inversely and 0-60 time directly. Which means you could rewrite this like:
(MPGx / weight) / (0-60TIMEx * weight)
=(MPGx/0-60TIMEx) / weight
10-21-2005, 09:52 AM
#17
Registered User
[QUOTE=b0mbrman,Oct 20 2005, 06:26 PM] I think you're missing the point of what they're trying to find which is a vehicle that is fuel efficient for normal driving but fast and fun when you get that urge.
I say "trying" because a 190 horsepower Elise is probably more fun to drive than a 202 horsepower F150. Weight, among many other things, is a big reason.
A better measure would be something like MPG / 0-60TIME .
Both MPG and 0-60 time are dependent on weight--MPG inversely and 0-60 time directly. Which means you could rewrite this like:
(MPGx / weight) / (0-60TIMEx * weight)
=(MPGx/0-60TIMEx) / weight
I say "trying" because a 190 horsepower Elise is probably more fun to drive than a 202 horsepower F150. Weight, among many other things, is a big reason.
A better measure would be something like MPG / 0-60TIME .
Both MPG and 0-60 time are dependent on weight--MPG inversely and 0-60 time directly. Which means you could rewrite this like:
(MPGx / weight) / (0-60TIMEx * weight)
=(MPGx/0-60TIMEx) / weight
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
fltsfshr
S2000 Vintage Owners
2
07-30-2012 03:08 PM
2007 Zx-10
Car and Bike Talk
63
05-28-2009 11:24 AM