3 ms·
Perhaps there's something here I'm missing, but this doesn't make sense to me at all: "Going from a 14 mpg car to a 17 saves exactly as much fuel (and carbon) a
by geuis 14y ago
Perhaps there's something here I'm missing, but this doesn't make sense to me at all: "Going from a 14 mpg car to a 17 saves exactly as much fuel (and carbon) as going from a 33 to a 50."
As the driver of a car, I want to go more miles on less gas.
If the car uses 1 gallon of gas to go 50 miles, and another uses 1 gallon to go 30, then it seems obvious that the first car is much more gas efficient. More miles on less fuel.
If car A gets 17 miles to the gallon, then it will take ~2.94 gallons to make 50 miles.
If car B gets 50 miles to the gallon, then it takes 1 gallon of gas to drive the same distance.
So comparing 13mpg to 17mpg and saying that its the same as the difference between 33mpg and 50mpg just doesn't make any sense at all.
- othermaciej 14y agoTry doing the rest of the math. 33mpg -> ~1.52 gallons 50mpg -> 1 gallon for a 50 mile trip So going from 33mpg to 50mpg saves half a gallon. 13mpg -> 3.84 gallons for a 50 mile trip 17mpg -> 2.94 gallons for a 50 mile trip .9 gallons saved. So in your scenario, going from 13mpg to 17 saves more gas than switching from 33 to 50.
- geuis 14y agoIf you're just comparing percentages, then yes 0.9 > 0.5. However, overall the comparison doesn't stand up. 1 gallon for 50 miles vs 2.94 gallons, the 50 mpg is what is saving more gas, therefore it wins.