a person driving a suburban by themselves is getting less passenger-mpg than a concorde

[AccruedExpenditure]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: Pacfanweb
So by the OP's own idiotic logic, everyone should be riding in 747's, since no car on the road today gets 100 mpg.

Even if the Suburban got 25 mpg, it would still be worse than the other two planes.

And my Suburban gets over 15 mpg even with my leadfoot wife driving and 99% of her miles are city.

what idiot logic? i posted a fact. do you dispute that concorde could achieve better passenger-mpg than a suburban with just the driver?

And a single person driving a concorde gets worse mileage than one person driving a hummer...

Logic?

 

[olds]

Originally posted by: Zebo
This thread lowered my IQ by 17 points.

You got off easy.

 

[bctbct]

Originally posted by: weadjust
My concorde flies like crap when I'm towing my boat.

I'll stick with my SUV

This is the logic that sold me that a SUV was more practical than the Concorde, I saw the first commercial flight BTW and always loved that plane so it also killed a childhood memory.

 

[Pacfanweb]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: Pacfanweb
So by the OP's own idiotic logic, everyone should be riding in 747's, since no car on the road today gets 100 mpg.

Even if the Suburban got 25 mpg, it would still be worse than the other two planes.

And my Suburban gets over 15 mpg even with my leadfoot wife driving and 99% of her miles are city.

what idiot logic? i posted a fact (one that i thought was somewhat surprising). do you dispute that concorde could achieve better passenger-mpg than a suburban with just the driver?

Yes, I do. Suburban's get better mileage than that.

And it's idiot logic to compare a vehicle with one passenger to one with many.

It's idiot logic to compare any car to any plane, regarding gas mileage.

 

[skyking]

Originally posted by: RossMAN
Phew that means I can still keep my G550.

Keep those seats full and you'll be OK

I'll keep flying the Old Iron

 

[newParadigm]

Originally posted by: oldsmoboat
Cool. I'll take the Concorde to work tomorrow.
:roll:

lol

 

[halik]

Originally posted by: Tom
But the Suburban is actually more fuel efficient than any of those planes if you bring along 8 passengers.

I've never seen a suburban with more than 5 people in it...

 

[LordMorpheus]

Originally posted by: Zebo
This thread lowered my IQ by 17 points.

Holy crap! We're in the red!

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: Pacfanweb

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: Pacfanweb
So by the OP's own idiotic logic, everyone should be riding in 747's, since no car on the road today gets 100 mpg.

Even if the Suburban got 25 mpg, it would still be worse than the other two planes.

And my Suburban gets over 15 mpg even with my leadfoot wife driving and 99% of her miles are city.

what idiot logic? i posted a fact (one that i thought was somewhat surprising). do you dispute that concorde could achieve better passenger-mpg than a suburban with just the driver?

Yes, I do. Suburban's get better mileage than that.

And it's idiot logic to compare a vehicle with one passenger to one with many.

It's idiot logic to compare any car to any plane, regarding gas mileage.

Not idiotic at all. Just something for all the single person/gas guzzlers to consider.

 

[rh71]

I think the Suburban can do a little more than the Concorde. At any rate, you pay for its practicality and the mpg is the tradeoff. A single bachelor-guy living in the city is not going to purchase a Suburban while a family with kids is more likely to.

They don't have to be using it to its fullest potential all the time... just like JulesMaximus doesn't do 0-60 in 5 secs with his WRX at every stoplight. Dang haters.

 

[letdown427]

Originally posted by: Pacfanweb
And my Suburban gets over 15 mpg even with my leadfoot wife driving and 99% of her miles are city.

Over 15mpg? Nice.

18.8mpg much?

I know how I'd rather piss away gas money

 

[rh71]

Originally posted by: jagec

Originally posted by: Tom
But the Suburban is actually more fuel efficient than any of those planes if you bring along 8 passengers.

Yup, which is why there's nothing wrong with using an SUV for its intended purpose. I just wish that people would stop buying them to be trendy, or out of a mistaken belief in additional safety.

But it's all been said before...

Hahaha and people buy sports cars and bikes for much more honorable reasons and useful purposes. Instead of "trendy" you can be "highschool cool" tearing out of corners while everyone focuses their attention on you.

I got a better idea... how about we become less judgmental about why people choose their particular vehicles... ? I'm sure that's been said before too.

I'd start an anti-hater brigade but I guess those aren't popular around here... everyone has to be special.

 

[lokiju]

Originally posted by: FoBoT
yeah but you can put 12 people in a suburban

More like 18 if you know how to stack them or went to clown school!

 

[SeminoleMarine]

Originally posted by: halik

I've never seen a suburban with more than 5 people in it...

Then you need to get out of NYC more often.

 

[j00fek]

Originally posted by: cherrytwist
Holy crap! You mean SUVs use a lot of gas?

:laugh:

 

[Triumph]

Originally posted by: rh71I got a better idea... how about we become less judgmental about why people choose their particular vehicles... ? I'm sure that's been said before too.

The tolerance police meet the enviro-nazi's. They're both on the left, but you can't practice both at the same time.

I say screw tolerance, if you are 1 person and you're driving around in a Suburban, you're being incredibly wasteful. That's a simple fact.

 

[ballmode]

i wanna fly

 

[Tom]

I bet if you compare efficiency fully loaded, the Suburban is more efficient than say a WRX or Mazda 3, which people hear think are wonderful choices.

 

[kmrivers]

Get a bike you fat McDonalds eating SUV driving bastids!

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: AccruedExpenditure

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: Pacfanweb
So by the OP's own idiotic logic, everyone should be riding in 747's, since no car on the road today gets 100 mpg.

Even if the Suburban got 25 mpg, it would still be worse than the other two planes.

And my Suburban gets over 15 mpg even with my leadfoot wife driving and 99% of her miles are city.

what idiot logic? i posted a fact. do you dispute that concorde could achieve better passenger-mpg than a suburban with just the driver?

And a single person driving a concorde gets worse mileage than one person driving a hummer...

Logic?

ok... that doesn't change the fact.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: Pacfanweb
Yes, I do. Suburban's get better mileage than that.

And it's idiot logic to compare a vehicle with one passenger to one with many.

It's idiot logic to compare any car to any plane, regarding gas mileage.

a) not in the city they sure as hell don't.
b) the comparison is just for fun, why are you getting your panties in such a twist?

 

[archiloco]

SUV for Life!!!

 

[thawolfman]

Originally posted by: letdown427

Originally posted by: Pacfanweb
And my Suburban gets over 15 mpg even with my leadfoot wife driving and 99% of her miles are city.

Over 15mpg? Nice.

18.8mpg much?

I know how I'd rather piss away gas money

Best 18.8mpg ever

 

[Ameesh]

Originally posted by: ElFenix
concorde got 14 passenger miles per gallon, according to wikipedia.
an A380 gets 80 passenger miles per gallon.
a 747-400 can get over 100 passenger miles per gallon! (using a 2 class seating arrangement for 524 passengers and using the quoted optimum 5 gallons per mile)

what if you only put 1 person in the planes? then what is your passenger mile per gallon for those planes?

you need to compare apples to apples. a suburban can hold between 8-10 people pretty easily. it gets like 10 mpg i think but with 8 passengers riding in it thats between 80-100 passenger miles per gallon.

 

[crystal]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: AccruedExpenditure

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: Pacfanweb
So by the OP's own idiotic logic, everyone should be riding in 747's, since no car on the road today gets 100 mpg.

Even if the Suburban got 25 mpg, it would still be worse than the other two planes.

And my Suburban gets over 15 mpg even with my leadfoot wife driving and 99% of her miles are city.

what idiot logic? i posted a fact. do you dispute that concorde could achieve better passenger-mpg than a suburban with just the driver?

And a single person driving a concorde gets worse mileage than one person driving a hummer...

Logic?

ok... that doesn't change the fact.

What happen to this fact from Wikipedia that you based your comparsion?
Fuel consumption: 46.85 lb/mi (13.2 kg/km)