The experiment I mentioned - well, I did it as much as I could stand. Mainly my downfall was airconditioning - there were a couple of days where I could NOT drive without it. Well. I could - if I wanted to arrive a sweaty mess to a cocktail party. Some of the days this week were over 30 degrees! And it's supposed to be getting colder? Bah.
So really I did not try much at all with my experiment this week, but I did manage to do 202 kilometres (125.51 miles) with 15.4 litres (4.06 gallons), which cost me $18.25.
So, if I am working that out correctly, I got:
13.11 kilometres per litre
or
30.91 miles per gallon.
So I got nearly an extra kilometre per litre.
So apparently 30.91 mpg is bad??? I have no idea. I have people in my (real) life saying 13.11 km/l is GOOD, but my last post had people saying it was bad. So I am severely confused now. (remember i drive a 4 cyl automatic in a hilly area, with a sports exhaust system that is apparently meant to increase 'performance', ie. use more petrol? it was like that when i bought it)
i upped my km/L !!!
April 21st, 2009 at 03:36 am
April 21st, 2009 at 01:03 pm 1240318984
In your earlier post, I was lost for a while in the conversions - In Ireland, we use miles per gallon while you were measuring in Kms per litre.
I drive an efficient car that does 14 kms litre urban driving... so 13 is Good !!
Well done on squeezing out the extra Km/L ! :-)
April 21st, 2009 at 01:05 pm 1240319158
April 21st, 2009 at 04:50 pm 1240332619
April 21st, 2009 at 05:23 pm 1240334613
April 21st, 2009 at 11:45 pm 1240357528
north georgia girl: i would not trust the assumption that bigger cars are safer - it depends on crash tests much more. an episode of topgear featured some cars in a crash test, and there were quite a few suv's and 4wd's that were of a much lower standard than say, a saab, subaru or audi that were just the normal sedan size.