"Martin Hotze" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 22 Apr 2005 17:11:04 -0700, Matt Barrow wrote:

the good thing is that I drive a car needing about 6 liters per 100
kilometers (the other car is a diesel needing about 4 to 5 liters per
100
kilometers). So I do care driving a fuelefficient car, because it
saves
me
money.

Somebody run the numbers. What is that in miles per gallon? Just
wanted to compare that to my F250 Diesel.

About 40MPG and 50MPG for the diesel.

btw my numbers reflect only my cars. this fuel consumption does not
reflect
fuel efficient cars. (IIRC this is something like 3 liters per 100
kilometers)

Such a car would likely be "useful"

it is always useful to save gas (and money). what is the difference in
driving 100 miles within a city or "out in the west"?

out in the west where distances are
measured in three or even four digits and those are MILES not klicks.

even in the city and on short distance your consumption is more than
average.
it was always weired to see those huge pickups in the city, only the
driver
and no passengers, the driver only has this car for ... eee .. no idea.
hopefuly for fun. no wonder that carpooling lanes can be used when the car
is occupied by at least _2_ persons.

But Martin is such a good little milch cow!! He'll do as ordered!

I don't get your point.

I am free to buy whatever car I can afford. But I'd be silly to buy more
than I would need.

Agreed Martin, I drive a Mercedes 220 CDI and I am getting on long journeys
on the motorway at 80mph about 50/52 miles per Imperial Gallon.

Generally with all the short stuff, I have averaged over the last year
42mpg.

Its not just a question of the price at the pump but the cost of the mile.
This goes a long way to redress the balance between the cost of petrol and
the taxes. Besides by using at a slower rate, perhaps fuel will be available
longer.