Things never said by roadgeeks

[Brandon]

^^ Regardless, follow your owner's manual.

[PHLBOS]

^^ Regardless, follow your owner's manual.

That's just it.  A fair amount of those list 87 as the minimum recommended octane; when in reality it should list a higher octane rating.  Maybe not a premium (93) octane, but definitely higher than 87.  We're not in 1982 anymore.

[Brandon]

^^ Regardless, follow your owner's manual.

That's just it.  A fair amount of those list 87 as the minimum recommended octane; when in reality it should list a higher octane rating.  Maybe not a premium (93) octane, but definitely higher than 87.  We're not in 1982 anymore.

If they required a higher octane, they'd mention it, as my mother's 300M (2003) does.  There is a recommendation for 89 octane in it.  Again, follow your owner's manual.  Higher octanes do not provide better mileage or performance unless the manufacturer specifies it.  I really hate seeing this higher octane equals better performance/mileage myth.  It's false, false, false.   

[thenetwork]

Out in the higher elevations (i.e. Colorado), "Regular" octane is 86, with mid-grade at 87 octane.  My car does just fine with the 86 in the tank, even though the manual says 87.  I'm not going to spend the 15-20 cents difference for the 87.

[Scott5114]

° Oh crap, my GPS took me all the way to 1351 N. Birch instead of S. Birch. Now I have to drive... wait, how many blocks are in a mile?

I've never lived in a city where "blocks" are a meaningful concept–the arterials form a grid of square miles but these "blocks" are not subdivided uniformly–so I tend to use miles or fractions thereof rather than blocks, and couldn't say how big a standard block is in the cities that use them.

[slorydn1]

It would cost me less that now in my Mustang, especially if I opted to use 87 instead of the 93 octane I normally feed it.

Side bar: most of today's cars have higher engine compression ratios than their 20-to-30 year old predecessors.  As a result, many of today's vehicles not only run better with the higher octane gasolines; but they usually get better mileage with the higher-grade fuel on top of it, thereby compensating for the price difference at the pump (especially on longer drives).

One needs to remember that 87 octane unleaded came into the market (early 1980s) when the average engine compression ratio on new cars was 7-to-1 or 8-to-1 (and their overall performances reflected such).  Most if not all of today's new gasoline-powered vehicles have a compression ratio of 9-to-1 and higher.

In short, 87 octane gasoline is realistically obsolete in today's market.  While knock engine knock sensors can hide knocks; they can't hide performance and fuel economy.

My 2007 Mustang with the 4.0L V6 has a 9.7-to-1 compression ratio.  According to my brother, who knows more about cars than I do, 90 octane would be the ideal fuel for my car.  Since such isn't readily available (and the 89 mid-grade being disproportionately-priced in most instances); I just mix the 87 & 93 grades (at different times) when refueling.

I do similar with my '97 Crown Vic (which has the 4.6L V8 and a 9-to-1 compression ratio) as well.

This is very true.


My 2014 5.0 is rated at 420hp on 93 octane and 410hp on 87. It's PCM is designed to allow the car to run on either. I prefer 93 and that's all my car has ever ingested since new. We tried 87 a couple of times on my wife's 2012 and we didn't like the performance decrease-it even sounds different somehow. I have thought about, however, on Interstate only trips when I'm going to burn through a tank in 5 hours if it wouldn't be worth it to save the $0.40-$0.50 per gallon by putting 87 in it. Invariably I go back to the "nothing but the best for my baby" mode and put 93 in it.


Someone else mentioned the owners manual, that's absolutely great advice. My manual calls for either, with the proviso that there will be a performance decrease when 87 is used. My F150 explicitly called for 87, and even had a note in the manual that it would actually be wasteful to put 93 in it.


I too had a Grand Marquis, a 2001. We offloaded it when we got my wife's Mustang, it was a great road trip car, too

[J N Winkler]

° Oh crap, my GPS took me all the way to 1351 N. Birch instead of S. Birch. Now I have to drive... wait, how many blocks are in a mile?

I've never lived in a city where "blocks" are a meaningful concept–the arterials form a grid of square miles but these "blocks" are not subdivided uniformly–so I tend to use miles or fractions thereof rather than blocks, and couldn't say how big a standard block is in the cities that use them.

In Wichita and rural Sedgwick County, which is where Kphoger is talking about, the rule of thumb is 8 blocks per mile in the north-south direction and 16 blocks per mile in the east-west direction.  (BTW, there is actually a Birch in Wichita, but it runs east-west, and has extent in only one quadrant of the city, so addresses on it do not need a compass-point prefix.)  The block spacing rule and the road naming conventions that follow from it are not necessarily followed in the smaller towns far outside the Wichita urbanized area, such as Clearwater, Cheney, Garden Plain, etc.

It is in Butler County (next one east) where things get really confusing.  Andover is essentially contiguous to Wichita on the far western fringe of the county, so it borrows the east-west element of the Wichita street grid.  As a result, Butler SW 70th St. abruptly becomes 21st St. at the approximate point where it crosses the Turnpike (part of the Turnpike interchange trumpet is an Andover exclave although 21st St. is not entirely within Andover, and thus signed as crossing the Andover city limits, until nearly a mile west).  In rural Butler County, however, the rule is 10 blocks per mile north-south, with the dividing line being Parallel St., the extension of 77th St. N. from Sedgwick County east into Butler County.  US 54-400 overlaps 100th St. for much of its length between east Wichita and Augusta.

[jwolfer]

I'm lost

[SSOWorld]

MUTCD Sucks.

Actually, I say this quite often. I think the document is too rigid and inflexible in many instances, does not allow states to make their own determinations on how to mark or sign highways, etc.

It's not so much "it sucks", but that it is a set of guidelines, whereas we have some folks here that assume it's essentially Article VIII of the United States Constitution. Otherwise, it should be open to some interpretation for useful, concise, and consistent regional differences.

Sorry that was my point.  It is a great guide, but not the rule of law.

Right - here are a few examples:
* Left exit tabs - well adapted for what?
* FYA's - Whatever happened to the rules of the road?
* Wisconsin adapting FIB Poles in their traffic lights (overkill)

FHWA seems to treat it like it's law and push state DOTs into it (as stated before)

I'm lost

[vtk]

° Oh crap, my GPS took me all the way to 1351 N. Birch instead of S. Birch. Now I have to drive... wait, how many blocks are in a mile?

I've never lived in a city where "blocks" are a meaningful concept–the arterials form a grid of square miles but these "blocks" are not subdivided uniformly–so I tend to use miles or fractions thereof rather than blocks, and couldn't say how big a standard block is in the cities that use them.

Furthermore, in many places there's no easy relation between address numbers and counting blocks from the zero point. Some people might say the address above is "in the 1300 block" of Birch, but around here the physical block more likely has an address range like 1335—1383, and the next block 1391—1439, then 1447—1495... and that's if the blocks are at all regular, which they often aren't.

[J N Winkler]

There are indeed plenty of cities where one block represents other than 100 units of address space--50 being not uncommon as an alternate--but my impression has been that this is largely an "Old Northwest" problem.

[Brandon]

There are indeed plenty of cities where one block represents other than 100 units of address space--50 being not uncommon as an alternate--but my impression has been that this is largely an "Old Northwest" problem.

Most places in Illinois have 100 units of address space to the block, with a typical 8 blocks to the mile.  A good example is the Chicago grid.

[SSOWorld]

You can use "blocks" easily in larger cities that are grid style (Chicago, Milwaukee), but then there are different formats: Rectangular (NYC: Manhattan particularly), angular with changing patterns (Twin Cities, LA, SF, StL)  Confusing.

Smaller towns vary

As you get further out from downtown and the lot sizes increase, the block system gets crazy.  The neighborhood I'm in process of buying a house in has two 100 blocks between streets in the E-W format and very little N/S (given that the lots are 2 by X in the E-W grid)  The city limit lines the northern part of the lots on the street I'm on.

[KG909]

"Roads are gay"

[jwolfer]

You can use "blocks" easily in larger cities that are grid style (Chicago, Milwaukee), but then there are different formats: Rectangular (NYC: Manhattan particularly), angular with changing patterns (Twin Cities, LA, SF, StL)  Confusing.

Smaller towns vary

As you get further out from downtown and the lot sizes increase, the block system gets crazy.  The neighborhood I'm in process of buying a house in has two 100 blocks between streets in the E-W format and very little N/S (given that the lots are 2 by X in the E-W grid)  The city limit lines the northern part of the lots on the street I'm on.

Jacksonville is  nearly all of Duval County Florida. Near downtown, address grids are more consistent. Farther out its less consistent. But still patterned. Its interesting that on different sides of the St Johns  river the address grid is different even though the same distance from downtown. West side of river has addresses around 8000, east side is 10900 at the Buckman bridge( i295)

Clay county has no rhyme nor reason. My neighborhood as addresses below 1000 but next neighborhood is 2300 ish

[J N Winkler]

Even in Wichita, the 8/16 rule breaks down for the low-numbered blocks.  The 16 progression does not become regular until Hillside (3100 block) on the east and West (3900 block) on the west, and the 8 progression is not regular until 13th Street (1300 block) on the north and Harry (1500 block) on the south.  Out in the rural county, where Wichita names tend to be suppressed in favor of numbers, a trip south to north crosses 23rd S. (Pawnee), 15th S. (Harry), 2nd S. (Maple), 4th N. (Central), and 13th N.  Similarly, west to east crosses 39th W. (West), 24th W. (Meridian--still more likely to be signed by name in rural areas because it is the actual sixth principal meridian), 10th W. (Seneca), 2nd E. (Broadway), 16th E. (Hydraulic), and 31st E. (Hillside).

[Zeffy]

"Roads are gay"

Nobody should say this, because its offensive and roads don't have genders anyway.

[The Nature Boy]

"Roads are gay"

Nobody should say this, because its offensive and roads don't have genders anyway.

They could be implying that the roads are happy.

But roads don't have emotions either.

[Pete from Boston]

"Roads are gay"

Nobody should say this, because its offensive and roads don't have genders anyway.

They could be implying that the roads are happy.

But roads don't have emotions either.

But people do, so the original comment is not helpful.

[The Nature Boy]

"Roads are gay"

Nobody should say this, because its offensive and roads don't have genders anyway.

They could be implying that the roads are happy.

But roads don't have emotions either.

But people do, so the original comment is not helpful.

Yeah, I was hoping that we had advanced past the age where calling inanimate objects "gay" as a casual insult was a socially acceptable thing to do. I guess a better way of phrasing that would've been "roads are lame" since I remember "gay" being a 2000s synonym for lame when used in that context.

Not that it has ever been right to use that phrasing.

[NE2]

But that's offensive to cripples

[The Nature Boy]

But that's offensive to cripples

Road geeks would never say:

"Roads are incredibly uninteresting and should be considered subpar entertainment."

[english si]

If anyone wants to find out which roads were gay in the early 90s, watch the first 15 seconds or so of this (satirical news show*).

*I can't work out what exactly its satirising - the separate gay counter culture, the ever-changing fashion trends within it, the homophobic nature of the media, or all of the above.

[english si]

Yeah, I was hoping that we had advanced past the age where calling inanimate objects "gay" as a casual insult was a socially acceptable thing to do. I guess a better way of phrasing that would've been "roads are lame" since I remember "gay" being a 2000s synonym for lame when used in that context.

Try an 80s synonym - I remember using it in nursery school. And in the early 90s when I was about 6, it was most commonly used in phrases like "kissing girls, that's gay". In fact, IIRC, older people have told me that they used it on the playground before the homosexual community used it for themselves.

But the fascist language police must clamp down those who use the word to mean something different (and often, as they are very young, totally unaware of the other meaning) because some people have decided to define themselves by that word and might be offended! I'm offended by their bigotry!

[1995hoo]

I knew a fellow whose last name was "Gay." He was having a really tough time deciding whether to change his name. He felt changing it dishonored his family and his parents, but he was utterly fed up with having his name mocked all the time. Good thing for him he was just old enough that he was not a kid when the homosexual community decided to adopt that word–as a kid, that'd be brutal.

I can relate to having your name made fun of because my last name is the same as a particular (now deceased) TV personality and my first name is the same as a cartoon character (to make the latter weirder, my PARENTS' first names are the same as said cartoon character's parents' first names). But I've never thought about changing either name–I feel like I've been made fun of my whole life and by now it pretty much rolls off. I guess for the guy I knew named "Gay" he hadn't grown up hearing it, so maybe that was the difference.