petrol prices

The price goes up at the pump as the fuel goes on the boat, dosen't get to the forecourt for another 8-12 weeks, dosen't do the same when it falls ;)
 
Muffin` said:
The price goes up at the pump as the fuel goes on the boat, dosen't get to the forecourt for another 8-12 weeks, dosen't do the same when it falls ;)
Click to expand...

The price goes up when the petrol station buys the more expensive fuel, well it should do anyway.
 
Third Opinion said:
Was your Mondeo uprated. Ford only list them at 136BHP. Not trying to be predantic but tuning usually nails fuel economy.
Click to expand...


you'll find that you are being pedantic splitting hairs between 136 and 140bhp, it's close enough......and no it wasn't tuned, that was what it output on the rolling road, and as everyone knows manufacturer figures are very rarely 100% accurate from car to car!
 
Third Opinion said:
Was your Mondeo uprated. Ford only list them at 136BHP. Not trying to be predantic but tuning usually nails fuel economy.
Click to expand...

Was completely standard bar an exhuast. Although to be honest I'm confident few petrol cars driven hard will average 35mpg. Including the Type-R's.

Anyone care to tell us what economy they get with their Type-R's?
 
I get about 22 mpg in my EP3 CTR, other owners seem to get 250-300 miles out of theirs, I get 200 ;). Thats from full, down to when the light comes on. It has circa 10L left at the light and the tank is 50L so I use around 40L till the red light comes on. Fill up a mount at the pump confirms this.

I drive 70% 60/70mph roads over my 8 mile one way run to work, rest are 30.
 
[TW]Fox;11696563 said:
Was completely standard bar an exhuast. Although to be honest I'm confident few petrol cars driven hard will average 35mpg. Including the Type-R's.

Anyone care to tell us what economy they get with their Type-R's?
Click to expand...

I've been getting 30-31MPG from mine. That's a combination of steady driving 60-70% of the time with some spirited drives mixed in. Been getting around 260-270 from a tank. driving it harder will see 200-230.

It's possible to get over 300miles but you'd never be over 6000rpm!
 
Yeh I only get 25-26mpg in my carisma :(. I hate having a heavy foot. I've always had bad fuel consumption in every car I've driven.

£90 to fill the van up yesterday 126.9p., thank heavens it's not my cash though.
 
Anybody read into Oil Shale, it could be a quick fix for some more oil but its hard to extract you have to burn the shale and you get a crude oil from the process.
 
Reality Bites said:
I've been getting 30-31MPG from mine. That's a combination of steady driving 60-70% of the time with some spirited drives mixed in. Been getting around 260-270 from a tank. driving it harder will see 200-230.

It's possible to get over 300miles but you'd never be over 6000rpm!
Click to expand...

I bet I could get 400 miles out of my tank if I went all the way to empty. Get about 360-370 on around 42 litres of fuel over 3 days of driving to work and general run about during the week. Thats driving at 60mph on the motorway for basically 95% of the time.

However at the weekend it goes to 200 miles per tank ;)
 
demon9k said:
I bet I could get 400 miles out of my tank if I went all the way to empty. Get about 360-370 on around 42 litres of fuel over 3 days of driving to work and general run about during the week. Thats driving at 60mph on the motorway for basically 95% of the time.

However at the weekend it goes to 200 miles per tank ;)
Click to expand...

my calculations are based on a 40ish litre usage. When the light comes on, i fill up.

using another 2 gallons and going down to fumes, i'm sure i could reach 350-400 driving at 65 everywhere. A type-r gets annoyed if you use it as a motorway cruiser at 65mph.
 
cheets64 said:
Anybody read into Oil Shale, it could be a quick fix for some more oil but its hard to extract you have to burn the shale and you get a crude oil from the process.
Click to expand...

Yep but new techniques produce about 1 to 3(3 units of energy out for everyone you put in)
Shell's method, which it calls "in situ conversion," is simplicity itself in concept but exquisitely ingenious in execution. Terry O'Connor, a vice president for external and regulatory affairs at Shell Exploration and Production, explained how it's done (and they have done it, in several test projects):

Drill shafts into the oil-bearing rock. Drop heaters down the shaft. Cook the rock until the hydrocarbons boil off, the lightest and most desirable first. Collect them.

Please note, you don't have to go looking for oil fields when you're brewing your own.

On one small test plot about 20 feet by 35 feet, on land Shell owns, they started heating the rock in early 2004. "Product" - about one-third natural gas, two-thirds light crude - began to appear in September 2004. They turned the heaters off about a month ago, after harvesting about 1,500 barrels of oil.

While we were trying to do the math, O'Connor told us the answers. Upwards of a million barrels an acre, a billion barrels a square mile. And the oil shale formation in the Green River Basin, most of which is in Colorado, covers more than a thousand square miles - the largest fossil fuel deposits in the world.

Wow.

They don't need subsidies; the process should be commercially feasible with world oil prices at $30 a barrel. The energy balance is favorable; under a conservative life-cycle analysis, it should yield 3.5 units of energy for every 1 unit used in production. The process recovers about 10 times as much oil as mining the rock and crushing and cooking it at the surface, and it's a more desirable grade. Reclamation is easier because the only thing that comes to the surface is the oil you want.

And we've hardly gotten to the really ingenious part yet. While the rock is cooking, at about 650 or 750 degrees Fahrenheit, how do you keep the hydrocarbons from contaminating ground water? Why, you build an ice wall around the whole thing. As O'Connor said, it's counterintuitive.

But ice is impermeable to water. So around the perimeter of the productive site, you drill lots more shafts, only 8 to 12 feet apart, put in piping, and pump refrigerants through it. The water in the ground around the shafts freezes, and eventually forms a 20- to 30-foot ice barrier around the site.

Next you take the water out of the ground inside the ice wall, turn up the heat, and then sit back and harvest the oil until it stops coming in useful quantities. When production drops, it falls off rather quickly.

That's an advantage over ordinary wells, which very gradually get less productive as they age.

Then you pump the water back in. (Well, not necessarily the same water, which has moved on to other uses.) It's hot down there so the water flashes into steam, picking up loose chemicals in the process. Collect the steam, strip the gunk out of it, repeat until the water comes out clean. Then you can turn off the heaters and the chillers and move on to the next plot (even saving one or two of the sides of the ice wall, if you want to be thrifty about it).

Most of the best territory for this astonishing process is on land under the control of the Bureau of Land Management. Shell has applied for a research and development lease on 160 acres of BLM land, which could be approved by February. That project would be on a large enough scale so design of a commercial facility could begin.

The 2005 energy bill altered some provisions of the 1920 Minerals Leasing Act that were a deterrent to large-scale development, and also laid out a 30-month timetable for establishing federal regulations governing commercial leasing.

Shell has been deliberately low-key about their R&D, wanting to avoid the hype, and the disappointment, that surrounded the last oil-shale boom. But O'Connor said the results have been sufficiently encouraging they are gradually getting more open. Starting next week, they will be holding public hearings in northwest Colorado.
Click to expand...
and are cost effective. Not only that but you don't get crude oil it comes out pretty much as you need it.
 
Last edited:
Reality Bites said:
my calculations are based on a 40ish litre usage. When the light comes on, i fill up.

using another 2 gallons and going down to fumes, i'm sure i could reach 350-400 driving at 65 everywhere. A type-r gets annoyed if you use it as a motorway cruiser at 65mph.
Click to expand...

Best of both worlds for me. :)
 
I get about 35MPG from my Mark 1 1983 1457 Golf.

Only 800Kg and urban 28 mile round trips to work I've got 35 give or take a MPG for the last 3 fill ups.

I want to put a 160-170HP Modern lump in there, 200BHP/Ton :DD Should still do 35-40...

says 48.1 in the manual for 55MPH... :o
 
On MarketWatch:
Goldman Sachs on Friday raised its forecast for the average price of West Texas Intermediate oil in the second half of 2008 by 32% to $141 a barrel from $107 a barrel.
"We believe that the market is not defying fundamentals but rather experiencing a structural repricing much like it did in 2004, searching for a new equilibrium against an uncertain long-term supply environment," the broker said.
Click to expand...

Goldman Sachs have been pretty much the only bank to get it right on oil over the last few years.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom