Archives

"Obama said a couple of days ago that we all should inflate our tires. I don't disagree with that. The American Automobile Association strongly recommends it." - John McCain (http://www.newsweek.com/id/153140)

http://www.cleanmpg.com/photos/data/501/Filling_Tires_with_Air.jpgNewsweek - August 14, 2008

How on earth did tire inflation become election-year politics?! - Ed

Summary: We are issuing a split decision in the Obama vs. McCain dispute over whether proper tire inflation could save as much oil as expanded offshore drilling is likely to produce.

We find that proper tire inflation could save more than a billion gallons of fuel per year and do it several years sooner than expanded drilling could produce a single drop. McCain has exaggerated by representing Obama's suggestion as a silly notion or implying that it constitutes his entire energy policy.

But we also figure that expanded offshore drilling is projected to produce far more oil eventually than can be saved by proper tire inflation – nearly three times as much even by the conservative estimate of government experts, and more than 10 times as much if an industry-endorsed estimate is correct. And even taking into account additional fuel savings from tune-ups, which Obama also mentioned, he greatly exaggerated.… http://www.newsweek.com/id/153140

Read through the article and something caught my eye from the Newsweek article...
(http://www.newsweek.com/id/153140/page/4)

It's true that any individual motorist might be wasting a lot of fuel because of improper auto maintenance. Driving with a badly clogged air filter, for example, can cut mileage by as much as 10 percent, according to the government's Web site FuelEconomy.gov

and here's the source the Newsweek article is using on air filters from Fueleconomy.gov:
(http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/maintain.shtml)

Check & Replace Air Filters Regularly

Replacing a clogged air filter can improve your car's gas mileage by as much as 10 percent. Your car's air filter keeps impurities from damaging the inside of your engine. Not only will replacing a dirty air filter save gas, it will protect your engine.
Fuel Economy Benefit: up to 10%
Equivalent Gasoline Savings: up to $0.40/gallon



but I recall a few months ago...

http://money.cnn.com/2008/05/12/autos/ways_to_not_save_gas/index.htm?postversion=2008051515

#2. Change your air filter
Maintaining your car is important, but a clean air filter isn't going to save you any gas. Modern engines have computer sensors that automatically adjust the fuel-air mixture as an increasingly clogged air filter chokes off the engine's air supply.

While engine power will decrease slightly as the air filter becomes clogged, a lack of performance or an increase in fuel consumption will be negligible, Consumer Reports says.


and there is this as well from Consumer Reports:
(http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/cars/tires-auto-parts/car-maintenance/get-the-most-mileage-for-your-fuel-dollars-406/)

A dirty air filter. Our tests show that driving with a dirty air filter no longer has any impact on fuel economy, as it did with older engines. That's because modern engines use computers to precisely control the air/fuel ratio, depending on the amount of air coming in through the filter. Reducing airflow causes the engine to automatically reduce the amount of fuel being used. Fuel economy didn't change, but the Camry accelerated much more slowly with a dirty filter.


Not sure but maybe Factchek.org should be a little more scrupulous when they slide things like that without some key details (ie. older cars and dirty air filters not same as newer cars and dirty air filters). Just a thought.

Not sure but maybe Factchek.org should be a little more scrupulous when they slide things like that without some key details (ie. older cars and dirty air filters not same as newer cars and dirty air filters). Just a thought.

I just love it when those 'thats just something everyone know' facts are challenged.

I like how neither candidate is talking about more real ways to save gas such as slowing down a little bit. If everybody drove 60 instead of 70+, then we would really see gas savings. There is this common idea that Americans cannot adjust to their environment (such as making any type of behavior change) but that Americans must alter their environment when things get rough (such as drilling). When will this manifest destiny end!

Well that was the thing -- it really caught me off guard wading through the article and trying to figure out if the numbers they were throwing at me added up and then... air filters???

The article compares guesses about peak production to efficiency improvements that can continue indefinitely. Also seems to assume placard pressures as the goal.

The article compares guesses about peak production to efficiency improvements that can continue indefinitely. Also seems to assume placard pressures as the goal.

For real, let's compare the savings from proper inflation from now until we no longer use pressurized rubber tires.

Throw in our notion of "proper inflation" and the numbers gotta be huge.

He completely screwed up the delivery of the tire pressure thing. Is this his best idea on the subject?
Neither candidate has a clue, whichever one wins the presidency will most likely be out in 4 years and someone will have to rescue us from the damage they will do.

Anybody remember the OPEC embargo and gas shortages some 30 yrs ago? it resulted in 55mph speed limits which have been slowly removed since then. If it worked then to get our consumption down why aren't we doing it again?!?!?!?
Yes, tire pressure, clean air filters, SC-II, et al help... But how much national savings would we achieve if there was a federal 55(maybe 60) MPH limit?
my $.02

-Spase

ps- long time viewer-1st time poster. (i love this site!!)

I like how neither candidate is talking about more real ways to save gas such as slowing down a little bit. If everybody drove 60 instead of 70+, then we would really see gas savings. There is this common idea that Americans cannot adjust to their environment...

So how about adjusting to your environment? Or perhaps I should say learn from experience? This country tried 55 mph speed limits, just like it tried Prohibition. They didn't work - people soon ignored the laws. So you want to try them again?

Even if lower speed limits did work, the savings are marginal. If Joe Average drives his 15 mpg guzzler at 55 instead of 75, how much does his mpg improve? To 20 mpg, maybe? If instead he drives something that gets even 30 mpg at 75, he cuts his gas use in half. And with a decent advertising & PR campaign, you can get him to make the switch willingly, instead of spending billions on more speed cops and traffic courts.

Here's a thought...

Lower the national speed limit to 55mph, saving gasoline for everyone.

ENFORCE the speed limit, creating a newfound source of income which could ease some tax increases. Some will call it a "tax on speeders", but that would be OK since they would be breaking a law...

Did either one of them mention driving more fuel-efficient vehicles? You could put 100 psi in your Tahoe tires and still be wasting $$$'s worth of gasoline since you are still driving a gas hog.

The vehicle you choose to drive has the biggest effect on fuel economy, and that's why CAFE standards with teeth are required.

Harry

The funny thing about people blasting tire pressure and maintenance advocacy (or at least blasting Obama on it) is that they're usually the ones who oppose "nanny state" policies. It's very strange that they're blasting one of the things that the individual can do regardless of what the powers that be end up doing.

No matter who says it, tire pressure and regular maintenance work. So do driving more smoothly and calmly and slower. Better still, no one has to pass a law or build anything new or spend money on a new vehicle or wait for anyone else to do anything at all. As much as I want a better energy policy, and to go away from gas and oil and toward clean energy, it's simply not going to happen for a long time, partly from startup delays but largely from market inertia and legacy. Even if we fast-track every great energy idea tomorrow, we're still stuck in a gas-based economy and not everyone can afford to give up their FSP for quite some time. The current situation doesn't just go away because you don't want it to apply. That said, there's a lot that can be done in the current environment to improve things, and I think we have to take them. Straw-manning these ideas does little except generate hot air, air which, unfortunately, would not be going into tires.

Peter and James bring up the two most valid points in this discussion thus far. You guys do a great job of analyzing and bring about what happens when you think a bit more deeply into what you are actually saying.

If either of the candidates advocate lowering the speed limit to 55, his %age chances of being in the office reduces jokingly by that amount, but more seriously by a larger or smaller amt.

We will not be rescued by "GOD" in 2012, we decide how the economy runs as a country. The gov't can only do so much about it. That's why we have an election where we select a public figure who we think share our views the most and then work unendingly towards that goal as individuals.


Not everyone is able to switch from a 10mpg truck to a 40mpg economy car. Like james mentioned above, some incentive with the extra money (to be used for speed cops and traffic court) would help considerably. Let's say gov't intervenes and hands Joe public a check valid on cars over certain limit in FE. That is pretty much a generalization and can be modified to fit each scenario and I wont bother to get into all that as I figure I'm conversing with Individuals with some level of intellectual capability.

Obama put you in control and says, you can do these things, you do your part, I'll do what I can, together we can.
Regardless of even if he does his part or not, don't whine because he hasnt had a chance to do what he says he can do, but pick yourself up from your rear end and fulfill your half of the deal, it can only do YOU good. YOU getting less gas mileage only puts more money in the gov'ts hand when you buy more gas than you really need. Do the math.

The fact of the matter is that we don't have to do "either/or". If we are smart we will do both AND increase the amount of biofuels we produce AND cars to use them AND develop a synchronized traffic signal system AND convert /manufacture more cars to use natural gas and on and on. Its totally ridiculous for us to fall into the trap of thinking that just one thing can get us out of this mess and keep us out of it!

As for the editors note How did tire inflation become election-year politics? Easy, politicians are full of hot air, haha.

Nevertheless, regular AND proper maintenance is a key factor in FE, vehicle life, and lifetime cost of ownership. All of these affect the wallet.

As for God rescuing us, He sent his Beloved Son to do that some 2000 years ago.

But I agree that we don't need no stinking nanny state. It would be far better to do what we're supposed to do because we want to do the right thing rather than have some legislator dictate it and then begrudge those laws. Yikes, we have too many laws now.

Faithful and True

ps- long time viewer-1st time poster. (i love this site!!)

You are no longer a lurker! :P Congrats! :woot: hehe

...Even if lower speed limits did work, the savings are marginal. If Joe Average drives his 15 mpg guzzler at 55 instead of 75, how much does his mpg improve? To 20 mpg, maybe? ...

Actually, pushing an existing FSP from 15 to 20 mpg is a huge fuel savings. This saves as much fuel as pushing an already-existing hybrid up from 45 to 180 mpg. Best of all, it is not restricted to just the 15 million new vehicles that Detroit/Japan/Germany/whoever can provide to the U.S. market each year.

But the Prohibition/55MPH limit compliance issue you mention is a whole 'nuther can of worms.