What am I missing?

On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 05:24:02 -0800, "Randy Maheux"
> wrote:

>In 5 weeks I will be moving from San Diego to the Daytona Beach area. My
>problem is getting my Miata back east. I could drive it in 4 - 12 hour days
>or pay Mayflower to haul it with my furniture. Nine years ago I was a
>zombie after driving a Ford Ranger from Tampa to San Diego in 4 days. Now,
>at age 60, I am really tempted to let the movers do it. Using Mayflower
>adds $600 to the cost but the thought of 45 hours in a car that I can't take
>a nap in seems daunting. I might even come to hate my dual exhaust by the
>time I got there!
>
>My thinking seems stuck on weighing the cost against the discomfort.
>Perhaps, someone in the group can give me other factors to consider or
>things to look out for if I decide to ship the car. I could really use some
>group wisdom on this....
>
>
If you were on vacation with plenty of time or retired and merely
messing around I'd say take plenty of time and enjoy the trip.

If the goal is to merely complete a move and do it in the shortest and
easiet manner than I would say it's $600 wisely spent.

At 56 I ain't up to beating myself up ....My sister's company moved
her back to West Palm Beach from Riverside a few years back and I
think Mayflower was the mover and all went well...with both the auto
and furniture.

She shipped me an old mercedes from Fl. using some fly-by-night auto
movers and it turned out to be a nightmare...wasn't worth the few
bucks she tried to save.

__________________________________________________ _____________________________
Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Accounts Starting At $6.95 - http://www.uncensored-news.com
<><><><><><><> The Worlds Uncensored News Source <><><><><><><><>

> 1/ Mine is an Automatic, which eats a lot of power and fuel

Yuk!!!! What'cha do that for??!! (Get an auto, that is!)

> 2/ I live in Athens, it's not uncommon for it to take 2 hours for the 30km
> journey to the office.
> 3/ It's Greece, my air-con is on nearly every drive during the summer, and
a
> fair bit in winter (de-fogging)
> 4/ I do tend to be a bit heavy with the right foot, those averages also
> included track days.
> 5/ On all the trips the car is pretty much fully loaded, suitcase on a
boat
> rack , the area between the windstopper and boot was chock bang full, as
was
> the boot.
> 6/ I very rarely put my top up, unless it's raining.

OK - all of those will definitely add substantially to your fuel
consumption.

> I don't know if anyone has every tested the wind coefficeancy difference
> between top up and top down, but I know I can consistently pull higher
revs
> in top gear with the top down, than with it up.

I haven't noticed that, but I definitely have noticed the fuel consumption
going up when the top is down.

> I roughly getting about 300km per tank.

I get 420km without the warning light coming on yet. I suspect I'd get about
450km.

> Is yours an Auto?

Good God no!!!

Honestly, why did you get an automatic?! I'm not being flippant, but did
your motorbike crash do some damage to one of your legs? Have you ever
driven a manual MX5? It's like night and day, and if you like the feeling of
a motorbike you'll definitely prefer a manual over an automatic.

And you take your automatic on a track? The mind boggles...

Eric

Hi Eric,

Yea the bike crashed paralysed me left arm, Brachial Plexus injury mate. so
an Auto it has to be.



"Eric Baber" > wrote in message
...
>> 1/ Mine is an Automatic, which eats a lot of power and fuel
>
> Yuk!!!! What'cha do that for??!! (Get an auto, that is!)
>
>> 2/ I live in Athens, it's not uncommon for it to take 2 hours for the
>> 30km
>> journey to the office.
>> 3/ It's Greece, my air-con is on nearly every drive during the summer,
>> and
> a
>> fair bit in winter (de-fogging)
>> 4/ I do tend to be a bit heavy with the right foot, those averages also
>> included track days.
>> 5/ On all the trips the car is pretty much fully loaded, suitcase on a
> boat
>> rack , the area between the windstopper and boot was chock bang full, as
> was
>> the boot.
>> 6/ I very rarely put my top up, unless it's raining.
>
> OK - all of those will definitely add substantially to your fuel
> consumption.
>
>> I don't know if anyone has every tested the wind coefficeancy difference
>> between top up and top down, but I know I can consistently pull higher
> revs
>> in top gear with the top down, than with it up.
>
> I haven't noticed that, but I definitely have noticed the fuel consumption
> going up when the top is down.
>
>> I roughly getting about 300km per tank.
>
> I get 420km without the warning light coming on yet. I suspect I'd get
> about
> 450km.
>
>> Is yours an Auto?
>
> Good God no!!!
>
> Honestly, why did you get an automatic?! I'm not being flippant, but did
> your motorbike crash do some damage to one of your legs? Have you ever
> driven a manual MX5? It's like night and day, and if you like the feeling
> of
> a motorbike you'll definitely prefer a manual over an automatic.
>
> And you take your automatic on a track? The mind boggles...
>
> Eric
>
>

Oh well Leon, I suppose it's a good work out for me good arm.
And it is very boring at work right now, and raining cats and dogs, so no
extended fishing trips.



"Leon van Dommelen" > wrote in message
...
> (BRUCE HASKIN) wrote:
>
>>WOW ! That is a lot of seat time !
>>
>>Let's see, If you drove 8 hr's a day 5 days a week, that's 2080 hours a
>>year and you needed to stop for gas, eat and pee, plus start and stop,
>>you needed to average 28.846153 miles per hour. [ it is hard to average
>>much faster than that, no matter where you drive ]
>
> With having to post 10 or so 10,000 word messages a day on at least
> this group, he must be averaging 50 mph at least.
>
> Leon
>
>
>> You must have a good
>>paying job on the week-ends to do that ! :-)
>>
>> Bruce RED '91
>
> --
> Leon van Dommelen Bozo, the White 96 Sebring Miata .)
> http://www.dommelen.net/miata
> EXIT THE INTERSTATES (Jamie Jensen)

"gixer" > wrote:

>Hi Eric, I think it's a few things,
>
>1/ Mine is an Automatic, which eats a lot of power and fuel
>2/ I live in Athens, it's not uncommon for it to take 2 hours for the 30km
>journey to the office.
>3/ It's Greece, my air-con is on nearly every drive during the summer, and a
>fair bit in winter (de-fogging)
>4/ I do tend to be a bit heavy with the right foot, those averages also
>included track days.
>5/ On all the trips the car is pretty much fully loaded, suitcase on a boat
>rack , the area between the windstopper and boot was chock bang full, as was
>the boot.
>6/ I very rarely put my top up, unless it's raining.
>I don't know if anyone has every tested the wind coefficeancy difference
>between top up and top down, but I know I can consistently pull higher revs
>in top gear with the top down, than with it up.

Mazda lists the drag coefficient as 0.38 top up and 0.42 top down,
IIRC. How that would allow you to pull higher revs with top
down is beyond me.

Leon

>Other than that I don't know mate, I have a Goodwin racing carbon filter
>kit, a custom exhaust, but I don't think they are going to affect the mpg
>either way.
>I roughly getting about 300km per tank.
>
>Is yours an Auto?
>
>"Eric Baber" > wrote in message
...
>>> Last year I did 99438 km (61744 miles)
>>> Used 12368 Litres (2720 uk gallons),
>>> Averaged 8.04 km/L (22.7mpg),
>>> Got a top fuel consumption figure of 9.97 km/L (28.16mpg)
>>
>> Looks like something on your car needs adjusting! The lowest I get is
>> around
>> 25/26mpg, average around 30/31, and best is 35mpg. I get the lowest fuel
>> consumption when going at a steady 65-70mph. Any idea what's pushing your
>> consumption up?
>>
>> Eric
>>
>>
>

--
Leon van Dommelen Bozo, the White 96 Sebring Miata .)
http://www.dommelen.net/miata
EXIT THE INTERSTATES (Jamie Jensen)

> Mazda lists the drag coefficient as 0.38 top up and 0.42 top down,
> IIRC. How that would allow you to pull higher revs with top
> down is beyond me.

No idea mate, but I have noticed that top down windows up, consistently
pulls higher revs in top gear, therefore faster top speed.
Tried lights both up and down, but got no consistent results.


"Leon van Dommelen" > wrote in message
...
> "gixer" > wrote:
>
>>Hi Eric, I think it's a few things,
>>
>>1/ Mine is an Automatic, which eats a lot of power and fuel
>>2/ I live in Athens, it's not uncommon for it to take 2 hours for the 30km
>>journey to the office.
>>3/ It's Greece, my air-con is on nearly every drive during the summer, and
>>a
>>fair bit in winter (de-fogging)
>>4/ I do tend to be a bit heavy with the right foot, those averages also
>>included track days.
>>5/ On all the trips the car is pretty much fully loaded, suitcase on a
>>boat
>>rack , the area between the windstopper and boot was chock bang full, as
>>was
>>the boot.
>>6/ I very rarely put my top up, unless it's raining.
>>I don't know if anyone has every tested the wind coefficeancy difference
>>between top up and top down, but I know I can consistently pull higher
>>revs
>>in top gear with the top down, than with it up.
>
> Mazda lists the drag coefficient as 0.38 top up and 0.42 top down,
> IIRC. How that would allow you to pull higher revs with top
> down is beyond me.
>
> Leon
>
>>Other than that I don't know mate, I have a Goodwin racing carbon filter
>>kit, a custom exhaust, but I don't think they are going to affect the mpg
>>either way.
>>I roughly getting about 300km per tank.
>>
>>Is yours an Auto?
>>
>>"Eric Baber" > wrote in message
...
>>>> Last year I did 99438 km (61744 miles)
>>>> Used 12368 Litres (2720 uk gallons),
>>>> Averaged 8.04 km/L (22.7mpg),
>>>> Got a top fuel consumption figure of 9.97 km/L (28.16mpg)
>>>
>>> Looks like something on your car needs adjusting! The lowest I get is
>>> around
>>> 25/26mpg, average around 30/31, and best is 35mpg. I get the lowest fuel
>>> consumption when going at a steady 65-70mph. Any idea what's pushing
>>> your
>>> consumption up?
>>>
>>> Eric
>>>
>>>
>>
>
> --
> Leon van Dommelen Bozo, the White 96 Sebring Miata .)
> http://www.dommelen.net/miata
> EXIT THE INTERSTATES (Jamie Jensen)

"gixer" > wrote:

>> Mazda lists the drag coefficient as 0.38 top up and 0.42 top down,
>> IIRC. How that would allow you to pull higher revs with top
>> down is beyond me.
>
>No idea mate, but I have noticed that top down windows up, consistently
>pulls higher revs in top gear, therefore faster top speed.

Hum.

>Tried lights both up and down, but got no consistent results.

Unlike the top, raising the lights can be done on the fly,
and others here have reported a significant slow down if they
raised their lights at high speed.

Leon

>
>"Leon van Dommelen" > wrote in message
.. .
>> "gixer" > wrote:
>>
>>>Hi Eric, I think it's a few things,
>>>
>>>1/ Mine is an Automatic, which eats a lot of power and fuel
>>>2/ I live in Athens, it's not uncommon for it to take 2 hours for the 30km
>>>journey to the office.
>>>3/ It's Greece, my air-con is on nearly every drive during the summer, and
>>>a
>>>fair bit in winter (de-fogging)
>>>4/ I do tend to be a bit heavy with the right foot, those averages also
>>>included track days.
>>>5/ On all the trips the car is pretty much fully loaded, suitcase on a
>>>boat
>>>rack , the area between the windstopper and boot was chock bang full, as
>>>was
>>>the boot.
>>>6/ I very rarely put my top up, unless it's raining.
>>>I don't know if anyone has every tested the wind coefficeancy difference
>>>between top up and top down, but I know I can consistently pull higher
>>>revs
>>>in top gear with the top down, than with it up.

--
Leon van Dommelen Bozo, the White 96 Sebring Miata .)
http://www.dommelen.net/miata
EXIT THE INTERSTATES (Jamie Jensen)