Page Summary
kmusser - (no subject)
thatwordgrrl.livejournal.com - (no subject)
dawntreader - (no subject)
kmusser - (no subject)
neadods.livejournal.com - (no subject)
thatwordgrrl.livejournal.com - (no subject)
acroyear70.livejournal.com - (no subject)
javasaurus.livejournal.com - (no subject)
thatwordgrrl.livejournal.com - (no subject)
trinker.livejournal.com - (no subject)
thatwordgrrl.livejournal.com - (no subject)
thatwordgrrl.livejournal.com - (no subject)
kmusser - (no subject)
cozit.livejournal.com - (no subject)
javasaurus.livejournal.com - (no subject)
trinker.livejournal.com - (no subject)
trinker.livejournal.com - (no subject)
Style Credit
- Style: Neutral Good for Practicality by
Expand Cut Tags
No cut tags
no subject
Date: 2004-05-12 12:52 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-05-12 01:04 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-05-12 01:06 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-05-12 01:12 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-05-12 01:13 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-05-12 01:16 pm (UTC)If not, I urge you to try and do so. I did and I found several things about the Prius I did not like.
no subject
Date: 2004-05-12 01:18 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-05-12 02:23 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-05-12 02:32 pm (UTC)When I factor in what CA gas prices are, along with my ability come Jan. to ride as a single in the carpool lane (about the only thing I'm glad Der Governator has done), it makes financial sense to me.
*shrug* Some folx think that SUVs make financial sense. I happen not to be one.
It really is all in what is important to you, I suppose. Most of my driving is in stop-and-go commuter traffic,so anything that cuts down on my drivetime and/or my gas bills is okie-day by me.
And who says we Angelenos don't live in our cars? :>
no subject
Date: 2004-05-12 02:54 pm (UTC)Meanwhile, just to amuse myself, doing some math: 4x110=440miles, 440/11=40mpg. Advertised hwy mpg is 47.
no subject
Date: 2004-05-12 03:34 pm (UTC)As for older hybrids being less efficient - older *cars* are less efficient.
I certainly don't expect my car to hit that magic 47 for ever and ever.
no subject
Date: 2004-05-12 03:57 pm (UTC)OK, a 2003 shouldn't be that low on mpg, granted.
But if he is having this much trouble and his state has a 'lemon law,' it seems to me that he should take advantage of that.
I just don't think one bad car should taint the entire line of cars.
no subject
Date: 2004-05-12 03:58 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-05-12 09:30 pm (UTC)Lately we've been running between 47-50 mpg on a combination of 55 and 65 mph highways with a bit of slow stuff with lights on either end. But it's not unusual to get pretty close to 30-35 if I'm just driving it around Columbia... and it was worse, because of the combination of where the hills, off/on ramps and lights are, when I used it to take one kid to pre-school last year... much worse.
Hm... IIRC, the trip out to Chicago and back was somewhere between 45 and 48 mpg overall. And that included a few "backroad detours" for fun, and two "stuck in traffics for 45-70 minutes" and driving in rain or at least wet pavement (which also kills mileage a bit) almost the entire way home.
Pretty close to their advertised numbers. Though I'll agree that their city numbers are messed up... mostly because stop lights kill the mileage more than just about anything else.
no subject
Date: 2004-05-13 07:19 am (UTC)What I'm waiting for is for production models of methanol/ethanol cars -- all that grain that farmers burn every year to keep the economy happy could be fuel, ya know!
no subject
Date: 2004-05-13 08:52 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-05-13 08:55 am (UTC)