legacycentral bbs

passing emissions tests?
HA HA HA HA HA! SUCKERS!!!!!!!

evolution, you're right about the NiMH. i would never pay to recycle that, almost every city has
some sort of organized "hazardous waste disposal week/day" where you could drop that off.

and i'm excited about writing off my mileage, i was a delivery driver (which by the way eats ass) and put like 70 on per day....blarg i know.
i am excited to write off all of my miles though, its going to be like 7k.
i'm also crossing my fingers that i get all my state and fed back


how does that work "writing it off" though evolution?
like what do i have to do?

I'm on a 1099 as a contractor. I'm not sure in your case, but you might be able to do it not being on a 1099 if you keep a log and such (I'm supposed to as well). I didn't even pay taxes for half the year and that's how much I got back. Buying a house helped, but my accountant told me the mileage made me the money where the rest just saved me from owing.

sweet!
i'll have to ask around about working that out then

I agree about recycling the batteries, I'm just saying what the dealers will do when you have your Prisus towed in for dead batteries. most shops, even Walmart, do it with lead/acid batteries now, check your bill next time you have one swapped out.

I haven't bought a new battery in about 3 years now. I get good ones at the wrecking yard for $10-15 (have my own load tester), and have only had a couple of those fail in the first couple of months. I also recycle all my old batteries. I even got 3 900 CA(1050 CCA) batteries late time I went "shopping".

The Subie is my primary transportion when the weather is bad, but I ride my bike when I can (1981 Honda CX 500, 46 mpg in town). I also use a 3 hp Briggs push mower instead of using my 18 hp Riding mower to cut my 1.3 acres. I'm doing what I can to reduce my "footprint" without going overboard.

MSN smartypantses wrote: — Avoid jackrabbit starts.

Ehh, sorta. Don't do them constantly, but every once in a while won't really change any mileage figures that much. Plus, Italian tune-ups keep the engine running optimally, and an optimal-running engine is a fuel-efficient engine.

MSN smartypantses wrote: — Shift into neutral when going downhill.

As Steve said, I disagree completely, at least if it's a manual. The engine uses a little gas to idle, the engine uses no gas when it's braking. Plus, shifting into neutral downhill is a bit unsafe if you don't know what you're doing.

MSN smartypantses wrote: — Drive 5 mph below the speed limit, but stay in the right lane.

I disagree with this also. I don't have any scientific evidence to back it up, but in my opinion, if you add significant time to your trip, that's extra time that your engine is running. I say get there in a prudent, but quick, manner. Don't drive like a rabid orangutang, but do scoot a little bit.

MSN smartypantses wrote: — Coast to a stop at red lights.

Again, if 'coasting' means shifting to Neutral, no, sorry. See above.

MSN smartypantses wrote: — Shut off the air conditioner.

Only if you're in town. On the highway, it's actually more efficient to run your air conditioner than roll the windows down. The aerodynamic drag on the car from the windows being down at highway speeds is greater than the parasitic drag of the air conditioner.

MSN smartypantses wrote: — Monitor your mileage on a real-time gauge and adjust as you go.

I don't. I check my mileage every time I fill up. It's consistent every time. Always between 26 and 27 mpg. My mileage has actually gone UP a single mpg average, and I've had a lot to be angry about, so I've been driving more like an asshole.

Granted, I do highway driving almost exclusively, and my A/C doesn't work, so I never use it obviously.

But I'm basically getting mileage that's slightly better than the EPA estimates for my car.

Aerodynamic drag increases at the square of speed, so the faster you go the far greater the drag on the car, but you also have to take into account the engine's efficiency and rpm/gear. Generally around 55 or so is the most efficient range for most cars, but you might as well ride a bike if you're willing to go that slow to save a couple dollars. The car I'm building I'm trying to maximize its aerodynamic efficiency for around 80.

Our legacy's are pretty aerodynamic you know!

They actually are. I often wonder how great they could be with underbody covers and the smaller panel gaps of new cars. My guess is you could get a sedan down to around .31 without mirrors. Plugging in that over the stock number, guessing frontal area (26 ft^2 ?), and using an S2000's gear ratios married to a Goldwing rear end (.81 6th gear and 2.83 because I'm too lazy to change my 3-wheeled car speed calculator page) gives the need for just 71 instead of 76 HP to pull 97 mph. The under body panels are something people could do on their own (though I'd recommend smaller mirrors over no mirrors). Anyone got a CFD program?