some people surely did, but it’s not like it was widespread. As an example, Ford sold 233,000 Expeditions in 1999. Last year they only sold 37,000. Sales tanked between 2007 and 2008 and never recovered.
Most of it. According to some random website using a slightly lower figure than our local price, around 58p duty, 22p VAT, and only 53p for the actual fuel including retailer mark up. Sounds about right.
When I have the opportunity, I do get to fill the ol’ clunker up on one of the US bases here at approximately $4/gallon. Sadly, I don’t always have that opportunity.
3 gallons per day is probably a round trip of 60 miles to/from work and a weekend of going to the store and running errands. That’s about 22,000 per year at 20 mpg. Not all that uncommon.
When (or if) I do make that choice, I certainly won’t be bitching about gas prices, or my oh-so-oppressed status as a commuter, banished to the hinterland because of “prohibitive” downtown rents. (You probably don’t know, either, that Gary Indiana’s writing is routinely contrived to achieve the maximum poetic effect.) Dingbats are not per se badly characterized so much as they are simply characterless. It’s up to the neighborhood as a whole to define them. Haven’t you ever been through West Hollywood?
Anyway, dingbats are not the issue. They’re zoned differently–adjacent to the dingbat zones here are plenty of spacious houses with pools, right in my neighborhood, selling between $400,000 and $450,000.
Well, they aren’t mansions–if that’s what you want. (Those are up the hill a few blocks, where Leonardo and Madonna used to live.) And if that’s what you want, I don’t know why you’d be bitching about gas prices.
\ Here is a chart on Harleys. They claim to get from 33 to 48 MPG. That is not especially good. They suck in winter and the rain.
I often wondered why a motorcycle company did not come out with a high MPG bike. I am sure it could sell.
Most bikes get better mileage than Harleys. Someone really concerned about gas could get something a lot leaner than a hog bike.
That’s because Harleys are based on iron age technology. A 600cc Honda Fireblade will do 40 mpg and 165 mph. There are lots of “high mpg” bikes, anyway. They’re called scooters. 150cc scooter will brush 100 mpg (although it probably won’t go quicker than 70 mph).
:rolleyes: it’s because they’re cruisers. aerodynamic drag is the issue, and that goes for pretty much any motorcycle of that type. Yes, even Honda’s.
A Harley 1200 custom does 42 city, 57 hwy.
Which means they can’t go on the highway.
Harley-Davidson’s published economy figures are “estimates”, so I wouldn’t put too much stock in them.
ETA: I will say, though, that I’m quite surprised to see how much less efficient most bikes are than I thought. I was under the impression that a motorcycle would do 50 mpg at an absolute minimum, just based on weight.
Sounds like you’re close enough to bike?
pdts
all that means is that there’s no official test for motorcycles like there is for cars. it does not mean that they just pulled numbers out of the air. Honda doesn’t even bother at all.
the problem is not so much the bike, but the meatbag that’s moistening the seat. the human body is not very aerodynamic. especially in riding gear.
The people who use less than a gallon a day are more likely to be the lazy slobs. They can probably walk/bike. Someone who uses 3 gallons a day is traveling at least 30 miles, I commend anyone who can walk 30 miles a day.
I would more-or-less agree with this, except the bad choices people are making are affecting all of us (and will do so even more in the future). In my opinion, of course.
I think that a lot of the problem is how the communities are laid out. Once you get out of the city, the default is to build single family homes with larger yards. In the city, new construction tends to be not longer than two bedrooms. If I want three bedrooms, my options are a three bedroom town house or a single family house. In a lot of places, any time they want to build with any density, the neighbors come out and oppose it. When you are in the suburbs, the zoning tends to be such that an area is zoned for single family houses and definitely not mixed use.
I suspect that the people whose use averages out to less than a gallon a day are probably not driving every day, but rather have some other arrangement.
Ironically enough, I wasn’t kidding earlier when I said that I could cut our driving down. We live in the city, and my wife and I commute together. Her job is on the way to mine. We really only drive any real distances on the weekend, and most of it is for pleasure such as visiting. They opened a Harris Teeter less than a mile from my house so we can stop for groceries on the way home and avoid having to make a separate trip for groceries.
Most people are also like my mother and think they eat far less than what they actually do. I was purposefully giving her a lowball figure so as to account for her misjudgment. But that said, I was a very stable size 8 when I ate 1500-1600 calories a day. I didn’t start losing weight–at a very slow pace–until I added exercise to my life. It’s very doable if you are not used to eating a lot every day.
I think it all comes down to fear. Really, I do. People are afraid to live closer to the city because of fear of crime and the perceptions of the city schools. People are afraid to give up a car and have a SO stay at home because they are afraid of living off of one pay check…even if they can conceive of this choice producing a better quality of life for everyone. People are afraid to take mass transit…they are afraid of walking or biking…they are afraid of granny carts…they are afraid of carpooling. People are scared to do different things or being different.
When I tell people I walk as far as I do every morning and afternoon, people look at me like I’m nuts. Maybe it is nuts. I have to dedicate two hours of my day to walking, rain or shine, through safe and unsafe streets. But really it’s not that big of a deal. Most people spend at least an hour for commuting. I just have an additional one. Most people who exercise dedicate at least an hour for that. Well, I have one already built into my schedule, plus an additional one. Yes, I have to wake up a bit early and get home a bit later than I would if I drove, but chances are I wouldn’t be using that extra time to be productive anyway.
If you live a certain way believing this is just how it’s going to be, no excuses, then it becomes normal after awhile. We all have this mentality. That’s why it becomes so hard to see when “normal” is unreasonable.
I put about 10,000 miles a year on my Corolla - including a long trip or two. I live and work on Chicago’s north shore, with about a 12 mile round trip commute. I bike when the weather’s decent.
My wife is too sick to work right now, and has been for a couple of years, but she was working just a couple of miles away when she did.
When I worked downtown, I took the train. Sometimes I’d drive to the train; sometimes I’d bike.
I keep a spreadsheet of my gas usage for my car - I use about 10 gallons in slightly more than 2 weeks, typically (my tank holds right about 10 gallons, and fillups happen to cycle about evenly with paychecks).
My wife needs a fillup about every three weeks, but a 14 gallon tank. So our household uses right about half that 3-gallon a day mark.
I walk or bike errands when I can, too. And my ass is fabulous.
So in other words, you have probably the optimum scenario for someone with a car: a very short commute, only one person commuting in the family (no kids to shuttle around?), a bike-able area, and a fuel efficient car, and yet you can barely keep your gas consumption down to 1/2 of that 3 gallon/day average. That doesn’t seem very good at all. Really doesn’t seem to merit the self-righteousness of the OP.
hopefully it’s much smaller than your ego.
You have to look at the problem as whole too. Harley motorcycles don’t get good gas mileage based on what they weigh and what they can do. Even if motorycles became incredibly fuel efficient, the accident rate and they medical cost associated with them is unacceptable. It wipes out any gas mileage advantages. People use motorcycles a lot in some foreign countries with lots of congested cities but again, we don’t live in a foreign country 
and the needs are quite different.
You want to a real example of a piss-poor solution to an American problem? Check out Smart Cars. You know, those little hippy pieces of shit that can barely hold two people and nothing else. They must get great gas mileage right? Nope. It is in the low 30’s mpg to near 40 best case scenario. They stripped a car down to basically a cartoon and produced something that gets worse gas mileage than the much more spacious and useful Volkswagon Jetta TDI Diesel which you can buy all day long. They should fire all their engineers. Only a few areas in the U.S. have parking problems so severe that they warrant a mini-car but whatever makes people feel better despite the numbers must be worth it.
You are correct. That sounds pretty terrible to me too. Add another driver into the mix and some kids and the OP is already over the average. How could this happen to me Oh Lord!!! I live in the Greater Boston area which has good public transportation in U.S. terms as a whole. There is none near me. None as in nada for 10 miles or more and there hasn’t ever been. It isn’t a recent thing. The Puritans didn’t have much of a need for it and that tradition continues to the present day. I have to drive or move me and my family. I average just about 3 gallons a day by myself but there is little I can do about that. I work on medium term contracts and try to keep my area within a 35 mile radius of home. I can’t move every two years and come out ahead so t is better to drive wherever work calls and do it.