What would the $5.2 billion transportation tax increase cost you?

Started by bing101, March 30, 2017, 11:47:18 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

kkt

Quote from: Occidental Tourist on April 18, 2017, 01:00:30 AM
Quote from: J N Winkler on April 17, 2017, 10:51:45 AM
An extra $400 in fuel tax and license fees every year is quite small compared to an annual property tax bill of about $30,000 in desirable areas

If you have an annual property tax bill of $30,000, you live in Bel Air or Malibu.

Not necessarily.  California property taxes range up to 1.58%, so if the property's value is above $1.8M you'd be paying that much, and that's just a nicer than average house in L.A. county, not a mansion in Bel Air.  However, the taxes are based on what it was purchased for, not its current value, so many people pay less too.


mcarling

If I were still living in CA, the transportation tax increase wouldn't cost me very much because I sold my last hydrocarbon-fueled vehicle in 2013.  Electric vehicles are just so much nicer to drive.  I would never go back to burning fuel.
US 97 should be 2x2 all the way from Yakima, WA to Klamath Falls, OR.

Max Rockatansky

Quote from: mcarling on May 05, 2017, 10:12:38 AM
If I were still living in CA, the transportation tax increase wouldn't cost me very much because I sold my last hydrocarbon-fueled vehicle in 2013.  Electric vehicles are just so much nicer to drive.  I would never go back to burning fuel.

Except the obvious drawback of extended range being a constant issue and lack of infrastructure outside of suburbia for charging stations.  Also long term ownership is a much bigger issue in an electric due to the battery needing to be replaced at some point.  Even still, we are a long way off before electrics become a totally viable means of replacing the versatility of a combustion engine.  There is probably going to come a day when incentive credits will likely need to stop and fees to account for electric usage will need to be implimented...but that's way down the line.

vdeane

Plus electric cars take a very long time to charge.  A gas car can refuel in five minutes.  An electric car at a supercharger station will still leave you enough time to eat lunch.  At a regular one?  Better look for a hotel.  Range is generally shorter than a gas car too.  An electric car is a perfectly good commuter car (if you have somewhere at home to charge it; a BIG if for someone who isn't a homeowner with a garage), but to use one for road trips?  No way, not until the range and charging technology improve.  Plus they don't make manual transmission electric cars.
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position of NYSDOT or its affiliates.

Max Rockatansky

Not to forget even the entry level price is generally way higher even with tax incentives than a comparable combustion engine alternative.  Hybrids even have a markup over just a regular combustion counterpart, so really you are always starting in the hole with initial cost.  How much in gas savings would be really necessary to make up the cost difference for buying electric and/or a hybrid before the big maintenance items come up?   I guess it comes down to making a choice of what vehicle makes you happy but there is no way to qualify the statement that you are "Saving money" by purchasing full electric or hybrid.  I can see the costs coming down eventually as more normal cars are equipped with hybrid power trains and electrics takes more market share.

kalvado

Quote from: Max Rockatansky on May 05, 2017, 02:26:40 PM
Not to forget even the entry level price is generally way higher even with tax incentives than a comparable combustion engine alternative.  Hybrids even have a markup over just a regular combustion counterpart, so really you are always starting in the hole with initial cost.  How much in gas savings would be really necessary to make up the cost difference for buying electric and/or a hybrid before the big maintenance items come up?   I guess it comes down to making a choice of what vehicle makes you happy but there is no way to qualify the statement that you are "Saving money" by purchasing full electric or hybrid.  I can see the costs coming down eventually as more normal cars are equipped with hybrid power trains and electrics takes more market share.
Just as a random estimate:
if you buy a car which will run 150 k miles at 30 MPG (to make math simple, and numbers are within reason) you're looking at 5000 gallons of gas over car lifetime, $15k worth, give or take. I don't think that actually closes price gap between Tesla and comparable sedan even with tax rebate. Maintenance of electric car... Any estimates?

Max Rockatansky

Quote from: kalvado on May 05, 2017, 02:56:40 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on May 05, 2017, 02:26:40 PM
Not to forget even the entry level price is generally way higher even with tax incentives than a comparable combustion engine alternative.  Hybrids even have a markup over just a regular combustion counterpart, so really you are always starting in the hole with initial cost.  How much in gas savings would be really necessary to make up the cost difference for buying electric and/or a hybrid before the big maintenance items come up?   I guess it comes down to making a choice of what vehicle makes you happy but there is no way to qualify the statement that you are "Saving money" by purchasing full electric or hybrid.  I can see the costs coming down eventually as more normal cars are equipped with hybrid power trains and electrics takes more market share.
Just as a random estimate:
if you buy a car which will run 150 k miles at 30 MPG (to make math simple, and numbers are within reason) you're looking at 5000 gallons of gas over car lifetime, $15k worth, give or take. I don't think that actually closes price gap between Tesla and comparable sedan even with tax rebate. Maintenance of electric car... Any estimates?

I seem to recall the Tesla Roadster was 40k to replace the battery at the end of something like 8 years/100,000 miles or 30k if you bought the battery up front.  Granted that was about circa 2010 and it wasn't a car most people would ever consider unless they were fairly well off.  Supposedly with hybrids the cost of a new battery can run from $2,500 to $8,000 depending on what model, what materials the battery was made from, and when it was made.  I'd have grab some like-sized models on hybrids and full electrics to do a proper parts comparison. The prices on replacements has come down substantially in the last five years with lithium ion.

kalvado

Quote from: vdeane on May 05, 2017, 01:58:56 PM
Plus electric cars take a very long time to charge.  A gas car can refuel in five minutes.  An electric car at a supercharger station will still leave you enough time to eat lunch.  At a regular one?  Better look for a hotel.  Range is generally shorter than a gas car too.  An electric car is a perfectly good commuter car (if you have somewhere at home to charge it; a BIG if for someone who isn't a homeowner with a garage), but to use one for road trips?  No way, not until the range and charging technology improve.  Plus they don't make manual transmission electric cars.
BTW, regading charging... I've seen electric chargers on some SUNY campuses. Granted, this is few spots only, not even for 10% electric fleet... But as a commuter option that may end up being the case.
As far as I know, at least some parking lots in Winnipeg are already equipped with outlets (low power - for oil heaters, but that is a precedent)

qguy

And don't forget that even though electric cars are cleaner at the car, the pollution is simply moved elsewhere, not eliminated. The electrical power generation isn't always clean and the battery production definitely isn't.

kalvado

Quote from: qguy on May 05, 2017, 09:46:59 PM
And don't forget that even though electric cars are cleaner at the car, the pollution is simply moved elsewhere, not eliminated. The electrical power generation isn't always clean and the battery production definitely isn't.
There was a fairly interesting text.. http://spectrum.ieee.org/energy/renewables/unclean-at-any-speed/
Not that I buy everything at face value, though...

Max Rockatansky

Quote from: kalvado on May 05, 2017, 10:01:06 PM
Quote from: qguy on May 05, 2017, 09:46:59 PM
And don't forget that even though electric cars are cleaner at the car, the pollution is simply moved elsewhere, not eliminated. The electrical power generation isn't always clean and the battery production definitely isn't.
There was a fairly interesting text.. http://spectrum.ieee.org/energy/renewables/unclean-at-any-speed/
Not that I buy everything at face value, though...

A lot of people don't though, things are always much easier to digest with surface level facts alone.  With hybrids and electrics it seems that majority of the buyers are interested in buying an "image" rather than a "tool" to suit their needs.  I'm not saying that there is anything wrong with that...if you feel that's a good use of your money, then good on you.  But to come on here and say that you'll be saving money because "I'm an EV owner" is absurd when everything going into said purchase is stacked up.

Surprisingly there has been little substantial push back with any of this legislation with road repairs.  Really this situation got pretty bad with infrastructure in general this winter that it really forced an effort to do something about it finally. 

Sykotyk

We'd use far less gasoline or diesel if we simply drove better, more efficiently, and less waste in our driving.

I.e., consolidate trips. Avoid hard braking/quick acceleration.

The problem is, people see cost only in terms of 'dollars' in they only see it when they pay it. Most people only notice their cost to drive when they stop to fill up the tank. If they go from filling up every 14 days to ever 13 days, they're not going to usually notice it until two fuelings show up where formerly they had 1 in a pay check, month, etc. Taxes, meanwhile, outside the pump, show up annually.

People don't think of the cost of driving their vehicle on an annual or mileage basis. My mother's friend bought a used SUV because it was 'cheap', but then never has money for gas. And now, tires need replaced and they're way more than her former sedan. People do that with mileage all the time. They think in terms of 'cost at the pump' and not 'cost per mile' and figure how many miles they planned to drive.

In two years, my wife and I put over 40,000 miles on our car. We average about 30mpg between city and highway despite hwy being 38mpg and I've gotten it well above 40mpg on longer trips. My wife drives like she's constantly in a city in rush hour. The only good thing for us is we get free gas. So, of those 40,000 miles, we've actually only purchased about 300-400 gallons of gas being away from home.

kphoger

Quote from: Sykotyk on May 07, 2017, 07:14:05 PM
We'd use far less gasoline or diesel if we simply drove better, more efficiently, and less waste in our driving.

I.e., consolidate trips. Avoid hard braking/quick acceleration.

The problem is, people see cost only in terms of 'dollars' in they only see it when they pay it. Most people only notice their cost to drive when they stop to fill up the tank. If they go from filling up every 14 days to ever 13 days, they're not going to usually notice it until two fuelings show up where formerly they had 1 in a pay check, month, etc. Taxes, meanwhile, outside the pump, show up annually.

People don't think of the cost of driving their vehicle on an annual or mileage basis. My mother's friend bought a used SUV because it was 'cheap', but then never has money for gas. And now, tires need replaced and they're way more than her former sedan. People do that with mileage all the time. They think in terms of 'cost at the pump' and not 'cost per mile' and figure how many miles they planned to drive.

In two years, my wife and I put over 40,000 miles on our car. We average about 30mpg between city and highway despite hwy being 38mpg and I've gotten it well above 40mpg on longer trips. My wife drives like she's constantly in a city in rush hour. The only good thing for us is we get free gas. So, of those 40,000 miles, we've actually only purchased about 300-400 gallons of gas being away from home.

This is why I accelerate gradually compared to most other drivers around me, especially in cold weather.  I know how many miles to expect on a tank of gas, and anything under 300 is unacceptable to me.  So, when the needle hits ¾ tank, I know my trip odometer (reset at every fill-up) should be at least 75; at ½ tank, at least 150.  I first noticed the difference that acceleration makes in my old minivan, in which I started refusing to let the tach needle go above 2200 rpm unless really necessary.  In my current vehicle, I can change the trip odometer to show fuel economy instead–which I did for a while, and saw markedly how much of a difference acceleration makes on economy.

However, I still fail to see how hard braking expends more fuel.  If I take my foot off the gas pedal as soon as the next light down the road turns red, what difference does it make how long I coast before stepping on the brake?  In fact, if I expect the light might turn green before I get there, I might even save gas if I don't brake gradually, because then I wouldn't have as far to go to get back up to speed.
Keep right except to pass.  Yes.  You.
Visit scenic Orleans County, NY!
Male pronouns, please.

Quote from: Philip K. DickIf you can control the meaning of words, you can control the people who must use them.

kalvado

Quote from: kphoger on May 08, 2017, 01:15:41 PM

This is why I accelerate gradually compared to most other drivers around me, especially in cold weather.  I know how many miles to expect on a tank of gas, and anything under 300 is unacceptable to me.  So, when the needle hits ¾ tank, I know my trip odometer (reset at every fill-up) should be at least 75; at ½ tank, at least 150.  I first noticed the difference that acceleration makes in my old minivan, in which I started refusing to let the tach needle go above 2200 rpm unless really necessary.  In my current vehicle, I can change the trip odometer to show fuel economy instead–which I did for a while, and saw markedly how much of a difference acceleration makes on economy.
300? What kind of car is that?
from my experience aiming for 400 was tough, but doable on most cars I drove; and one I have right now should go 500+...

intelati49

Quote from: kalvado on May 08, 2017, 04:49:38 PM
Quote from: kphoger on May 08, 2017, 01:15:41 PM

This is why I accelerate gradually compared to most other drivers around me, especially in cold weather.  I know how many miles to expect on a tank of gas, and anything under 300 is unacceptable to me.  So, when the needle hits ¾ tank, I know my trip odometer (reset at every fill-up) should be at least 75; at ½ tank, at least 150.  I first noticed the difference that acceleration makes in my old minivan, in which I started refusing to let the tach needle go above 2200 rpm unless really necessary.  In my current vehicle, I can change the trip odometer to show fuel economy instead–which I did for a while, and saw markedly how much of a difference acceleration makes on economy.
300? What kind of car is that?
from my experience aiming for 400 was tough, but doable on most cars I drove; and one I have right now should go 500+...

Yeah. I like that challenge myself (2500rpm...) In my F150 I can get an "easy" 300 miles before I like to fuel up again (Little less than 1/4 remaining). But that's at 16 mph average, so still annoying.

Can't complain too much, just can't wait to have a more solid income to get a car for my daily driver.

kphoger

Quote from: kalvado on May 08, 2017, 04:49:38 PM
Quote from: kphoger on May 08, 2017, 01:15:41 PM

This is why I accelerate gradually compared to most other drivers around me, especially in cold weather.  I know how many miles to expect on a tank of gas, and anything under 300 is unacceptable to me.  So, when the needle hits ¾ tank, I know my trip odometer (reset at every fill-up) should be at least 75; at ½ tank, at least 150.  I first noticed the difference that acceleration makes in my old minivan, in which I started refusing to let the tach needle go above 2200 rpm unless really necessary.  In my current vehicle, I can change the trip odometer to show fuel economy instead–which I did for a while, and saw markedly how much of a difference acceleration makes on economy.
300? What kind of car is that?
from my experience aiming for 400 was tough, but doable on most cars I drove; and one I have right now should go 500+...

2006 Nissan Pathfinder.  They're known for having a small-ish gas tank.
Keep right except to pass.  Yes.  You.
Visit scenic Orleans County, NY!
Male pronouns, please.

Quote from: Philip K. DickIf you can control the meaning of words, you can control the people who must use them.

Max Rockatansky

Quote from: kphoger on May 09, 2017, 01:21:13 PM
Quote from: kalvado on May 08, 2017, 04:49:38 PM
Quote from: kphoger on May 08, 2017, 01:15:41 PM

This is why I accelerate gradually compared to most other drivers around me, especially in cold weather.  I know how many miles to expect on a tank of gas, and anything under 300 is unacceptable to me.  So, when the needle hits ¾ tank, I know my trip odometer (reset at every fill-up) should be at least 75; at ½ tank, at least 150.  I first noticed the difference that acceleration makes in my old minivan, in which I started refusing to let the tach needle go above 2200 rpm unless really necessary.  In my current vehicle, I can change the trip odometer to show fuel economy instead–which I did for a while, and saw markedly how much of a difference acceleration makes on economy.
300? What kind of car is that?
from my experience aiming for 400 was tough, but doable on most cars I drove; and one I have right now should go 500+...

2006 Nissan Pathfinder.  They're known for having a small-ish gas tank.

Even the 2017 Malibu I had as a loaner recently showed under 300 miles on a full tank.  The most I got it up to was about 330 after some back country driving.  The tank had to be less than 12 gallons, I noticed GM in particular is getting stingy on gas tank size as of late.  Even my 2014 Sonic has a 12 gallon tank which shows empty after 11. 

kkt

Getting under 300 miles happens to me occasionally.  2002 Mazda Protege, around 20 mpg in town, 14 gallon tank.  I know, the mileage is pretty disappointing for such a small car.  But good handling and a manual transmission makes me forgive it.

J N Winkler

Quote from: kphoger on May 08, 2017, 01:15:41 PMThis is why I accelerate gradually compared to most other drivers around me, especially in cold weather.  I know how many miles to expect on a tank of gas, and anything under 300 is unacceptable to me.  So, when the needle hits ¾ tank, I know my trip odometer (reset at every fill-up) should be at least 75; at ½ tank, at least 150.  I first noticed the difference that acceleration makes in my old minivan, in which I started refusing to let the tach needle go above 2200 rpm unless really necessary.  In my current vehicle, I can change the trip odometer to show fuel economy instead–which I did for a while, and saw markedly how much of a difference acceleration makes on economy.

Perhaps I am not flooring the gas often enough or long enough, but I have never been able to see the effect of a difference in driving style in tank averages.  I generally find that fuel economy is influenced by (in rough descending order, the actual sequence varying slightly from model to model) city versus highway driving mix; relative wind speed and heading on mostly-highway trips; frequency of cold starts; ambient temperatures; tire inflation pressures; and A/C use.  (The sequence varies partly because of upgrades to air induction systems which have had the effect of making fuel economy in newer cars less sensitive to cold ambient temperatures once the engine is fully warmed up.  As an example, my 1986 Nissan Maxima was very piggish in the cold even when warm, the 1994 Saturn SL2 is somewhat less so, and the 2005 Toyota Camry doesn't care how cold it is as long as it can get a long steady run between cold starts.)

I personally prefer gentle acceleration because it is resource-conserving in the wider sense:  it results in less wear and tear on the engine, transmission, and powertrain mounts, and it also facilitates a long headway between me and any vehicles in front, which allows me to maintain a steady speed while minimizing usage of the brakes and thus pad and rotor wear.  But acceleration up to a steady speed typically comprises a relatively small part of the total driving cycle, so I'd expect differences in fuel consumption to be similarly small.

The effects that are visible in the rolling average MPG readout on a typical trip computer are largely artifacts of recent resets.  The numerator is miles since last reset (up to a preset value) and denominator is fuel consumed (or, rather, total fuel injector open time multiplied by an assumed fuel dispensing rate) over the mileage in the numerator.  When the computer has been reset recently, both numbers are quite small, so a small fluctuation in driving style, time spent at idle, etc. will have an outsize effect on the displayed average MPG.  More than halfway through the tank, the MPG readout will have converged on a value that reflects secular trends affecting MPG, will be very hard to shift through isolated driving maneuvers like overtaking another car, and will typically be within 3 MPG of the eventual tank average.  (The average MPG readout has 10% inaccuracy built in anyway because the fuel pressure regulators used in cars with ordinary electronically controlled multipoint fuel injection will allow pressure to vary from nominal by as much as 10%.  Control within tighter limits is not really necessary to protect the valves since the primary oxygen sensor supplies the corrections necessary to keep the air-fuel mixture from leaning out in closed-loop operation.)

Quote from: kphoger on May 08, 2017, 01:15:41 PMHowever, I still fail to see how hard braking expends more fuel.  If I take my foot off the gas pedal as soon as the next light down the road turns red, what difference does it make how long I coast before stepping on the brake?  In fact, if I expect the light might turn green before I get there, I might even save gas if I don't brake gradually, because then I wouldn't have as far to go to get back up to speed.

The efficiency gains from coasting and braking vary from model to model because they depend on how deceleration fuel cutoff is programmed, how the transmission behaves when the throttle is closed/the accelerator pedal position sensor tells the PCM driver power request is nil, etc.  As an example, some economy car automatic transmissions (Saturn SL2, Honda Fit, etc.) stay in lockup in the lower gears, so DFCO is usable without stalling the engine and compression braking is readily available, while the Toyota corporate approach to transmission design is to provide one-way gearing in the lower gears for D (not L3, L2, etc.), so that when you take your foot off the pedal, the engine goes straight to an idle and there is no compression braking.  (Compression braking for hill descents etc. is still available, but the transmission actually has to be put in a L range.)

As a very broad generalization, foot off gas = throttle closed = minimum amount of air getting into the engine = less fuel to make a stoichiometric mixture = less fuel consumed.  But, as is the case with acceleration, the effect is subtle enough that it doesn't really show up in tank averages.

Quote from: Max Rockatansky on May 09, 2017, 01:47:21 PMEven the 2017 Malibu I had as a loaner recently showed under 300 miles on a full tank.  The most I got it up to was about 330 after some back country driving.  The tank had to be less than 12 gallons, I noticed GM in particular is getting stingy on gas tank size as of late.  Even my 2014 Sonic has a 12 gallon tank which shows empty after 11.

1994 Saturn SL2 (my daily driver) has a 12.5-gallon tank and could get 400+ miles pretty consistently on almost pure highway trips; in city service I break 300 miles about half the time.

2005 Toyota Camry XLE V6 (roadtrip car) has a 18.5-gallon tank and gets 500+ miles reliably on almost pure highway trips absent heavy headwinds; MPG wasn't tracked when it was in city service, but I think it got refueled around the 300-mile mark.

These ranges are all with a nominal amount of fuel left in the tank (usually at least a gallon) so as not to compromise fuel pump life.
"It is necessary to spend a hundred lire now to save a thousand lire later."--Piero Puricelli, explaining the need for a first-class road system to Benito Mussolini

Max Rockatansky

I've noticed that the extra gallon in the tank or more will vary by automaker.  Fords usually would let you go much further down into that last gallon before the gauge would go to E or the range meter would display empty.  The estimate on a tank really varies depending the automaker as well. Both Ford and GM vehicles seem to base the estimate off the last fuel run whereas Chrysler cars seem to change during the tank you're on wildly depending on how you drive. 

J N Winkler

In the case of the Toyota, which is the only car I drive regularly that is equipped with a trip computer, the following appears to be its behavior as fuel runs low:

*  Low-fuel light comes on:  4 gallons to true empty

*  Fuel gauge needle pins past E:  2 to 2.5 gallons to true empty

*  Indicated range goes to zero:  50 miles to true empty (estimated using the prevailing average MPG)

If average MPG is quite high (due e.g. to a heavy tailwind or less dense air in the mountains), the gauge may have been pinned past E for many miles before range goes to zero.  Last winter, when returning east from Tucson along an indirect route involving the Mogollon Rim and the high plateau country in northern Arizona and New Mexico, I stopped for a fillup in Texhoma, Oklahoma, 559.8 miles after the last fillup, the low fuel light having been on since shortly before Dalhart (52 miles earlier).  I had had an earlier refueling opportunity in Stratford, Texas, that I blew past because the fuel gauge was still not pinned past E and I knew Texhoma would have a gas station.  I think both this range and the corresponding 33.3 MPG tank average are records for this car, but the latter was also significantly lower than the indicated average MPG, which started in the high twenties/low thirties in a snowstorm on US 60 between Show Low and Springerville, climbed to 35 or so under clearing skies on NM 117 past El Malpais National Monument (speed limit 55), kept on increasing to really ridiculous values (I think it topped out at 36.9 MPG) on I-40 (speed limit 75) (even as it got dark and temperatures dropped like a rock), and gradually floated down to 35.4 MPG or so by the time I left the Texas Panhandle the next day.  (I stayed for the night in Santa Rosa, so this tank reflects warmup from one cold start on a winter morning, as well as a modest amount of city driving from hotel to restaurant and vice versa.)

The funny thing?  After that fillup, I hit the highway immediately on a fully warmed-up engine, so indicated average MPG went really high (39+ MPG!) before it started to float down to realistic values.
"It is necessary to spend a hundred lire now to save a thousand lire later."--Piero Puricelli, explaining the need for a first-class road system to Benito Mussolini

slorydn1

Quote from: Max Rockatansky on May 09, 2017, 10:13:09 PM
I've noticed that the extra gallon in the tank or more will vary by automaker.  Fords usually would let you go much further down into that last gallon before the gauge would go to E or the range meter would display empty.  The estimate on a tank really varies depending the automaker as well. Both Ford and GM vehicles seem to base the estimate off the last fuel run whereas Chrysler cars seem to change during the tank you're on wildly depending on how you drive. 

In my Mustang my 50 to go warning comes on at an indicated 12.3-12.5 gallons used (16 gallon tank).

This past weekend on was on one of my road trips and it said I was bone dry empty with 6 miles to go to my desired exit. Knowing what my cars actual consumption usually is I was not worried, and I was right, it only took 14.8 gallons to fill it back up again.

I miss that 27 gallon tank in my F150. Yeah, I was only getting 18-19 mpg on the road, but 450-475 miles between fuel stops was nice.
Please Note: All posts represent my personal opinions and do not represent those of any governmental agency, non-governmental agency, quasi-governmental agency or wanna be governmental agency

Counties: Counties Visited

J N Winkler

http://www.tankonempty.com/

Some of the margins quoted are quite conservative.  I try to be kind to people who say they sweat bullets when estimated range approaches zero, since at least they are being responsible with regard to fuel pump life, but everything I have read says that it is fuel actually running through the pump that provides the essential cooling and lubrication, so it will remain in good health as long as it never actually runs dry.

A good rule of thumb is that fuel supply is reliable in any town that has a population of 1,000 or greater.  Smaller towns are also likely to have some fuel availability (e.g. I have refueled in Leon, Kansas, population 704, and also in Lamont, Oklahoma, population 417), but quite often it will be at a farm cooperative off the main road.

I tend not to push range in unfamiliar areas because of rural gas station closures (ten years of economic stagnation, meth/opioid epidemic, etc.).  Service desert signing is not guaranteed and even signed deserts are starting to crop up east of the frontier-tier states (e.g. I-49 between the Many/Natchitoches and Coushatta/Pleasant Hill exits in northwestern Louisiana).
"It is necessary to spend a hundred lire now to save a thousand lire later."--Piero Puricelli, explaining the need for a first-class road system to Benito Mussolini

kalvado

Quote from: J N Winkler on May 10, 2017, 11:15:19 AM
http://www.tankonempty.com/

Some of the margins quoted are quite conservative.  I try to be kind to people who say they sweat bullets when estimated range approaches zero, since at least they are being responsible with regard to fuel pump life, but everything I have read says that it is fuel actually running through the pump that provides the essential cooling and lubrication, so it will remain in good health as long as it never actually runs dry.

A good rule of thumb is that fuel supply is reliable in any town that has a population of 1,000 or greater.  Smaller towns are also likely to have some fuel availability (e.g. I have refueled in Leon, Kansas, population 704, and also in Lamont, Oklahoma, population 417), but quite often it will be at a farm cooperative off the main road.

I tend not to push range in unfamiliar areas because of rural gas station closures (ten years of economic stagnation, meth/opioid epidemic, etc.).  Service desert signing is not guaranteed and even signed deserts are starting to crop up east of the frontier-tier states (e.g. I-49 between the Many/Natchitoches and Coushatta/Pleasant Hill exits in northwestern Louisiana).

There are different situations. Once upon a time I found myself on I-88 at 2 AM with "refuel" light  coming up.
Two closed stations at nearest exit (so it wasn't true middle of nowhere). Next exit featured a 24/7 Dunkin Donuts. A very nice lady served me coffee,  and once I asked replied:
-are you heading East or West?
-huh????
-east it is 32 miles to next 24/7 station, and west it is 26 miles. Or you can sleep in our parking lot (it was fairly warm summer night), Mobil across the street opens at 6. 

I ended up putting 13.48 gallons in nominally 13.5 gallon tank 32 miles east. Running on fumes? Sure, been there and done that. I kept that receipt for a few years...

Max Rockatansky

Quote from: slorydn1 on May 10, 2017, 05:36:52 AM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on May 09, 2017, 10:13:09 PM
I've noticed that the extra gallon in the tank or more will vary by automaker.  Fords usually would let you go much further down into that last gallon before the gauge would go to E or the range meter would display empty.  The estimate on a tank really varies depending the automaker as well. Both Ford and GM vehicles seem to base the estimate off the last fuel run whereas Chrysler cars seem to change during the tank you're on wildly depending on how you drive. 

In my Mustang my 50 to go warning comes on at an indicated 12.3-12.5 gallons used (16 gallon tank).

This past weekend on was on one of my road trips and it said I was bone dry empty with 6 miles to go to my desired exit. Knowing what my cars actual consumption usually is I was not worried, and I was right, it only took 14.8 gallons to fill it back up again.

I miss that 27 gallon tank in my F150. Yeah, I was only getting 18-19 mpg on the road, but 450-475 miles between fuel stops was nice.

Apparently the fuel tank size is 18.5 gallons in the Challenger which I think is pretty generous.  Granted I was averaging under 300 miles a tank for most of the life the car, most of my economy runs fall under 15 MPG.  The best I ever did was 27.4 on a 700 mile trip from Phoenix, that should have gave me about 506.9 miles on a tank!  I don't get what the think is giving any car above a compact less than 15 gallon capacity...it must be a packaging thing.



Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.