Gas mileage

DrPizza

Administrator Elite Member Goat Whisperer
Mar 5, 2001
49,601
166
111
www.slatebrookfarm.com
I heard something similar to this on NPR the other day, and thought it was worth repeating here. Ultimately, I find that the problem relates to people going with their intuition, rather than their desire to do the math (and often, a lack of mathematical ability.) And, unfortunately, "uninformed" public opinion sometimes drives political policy making, which often overlooks more important sides of issues.

This concerns gas mileage: (I remembered this in a furnace efficiency thread where 80% may be cheaper in the long run than 95% efficient)

Suppose a married couple has two vehicles; and each is driven about the same number of miles each year - 12,000 miles. The husband drives (and requires) a truck; and his only gets about 15mpg. The wife has a nice smaller car that gets about 27mpg. The couple decides that they can afford payments on one new vehicle, thus they'll be able to replace only one of the two that they currently own. The choices are to replace the 15mpg truck with a 21mpg truck, or to replace the 27mpg car with a 39mpg car. And, they realize that for just a little bit more money, they might even be able to swing the payments on a 51mpg hybrid, rather than a 39mpg car. What should they do?

Well, most people's intuitions would tell them, "get the hybrid you idiots, that's 23mpg more!" And, while some of you might have done the math in your heads, I'm sure that some of you realize that the hybrid people are wrong, else I wouldn't have written this thread. Thank you for your trust.

Ask this question of most people though, and they'd think it was a no-brainer. You only gain 6mpg with the truck, compared to gaining 12mpg for the car. Or, gaining 23mpg for the hybrid, almost doubling the current mpg!!!

The math: For 12,000 miles, the amount of gas each uses in a year:
15mpg: 800 gallons
21mpg: 571.4 gallons
27mpg: 444.4 gallons
33mpg: (I know, this wasn't an option) 363.6 gallons
39mpg: 307.7 gallons.
45mpg: 266.7 gallons
51mpg: 235.3 gallons

Notice: there isn't a linear relationship between the mpg you gain, and the gallons you save. Going from 15mpg to 21mpg saves 228.6 gallons (This is what upgrading the truck gets you.) Going from 21 to 27 (which wasn't an option) saves only 127 gallons. Going from 27 to 33 saves even less: 76.4 gallons, and 33 to 39 saves only 55.9 gallons. From 39 to 45: 40 gallons, and from 45 to 51: 31.4 gallons.

So, switching from a 15mpg truck to a 21 mpg truck makes much more sense (saves 228.6 gallons) than going from 27mpg to 39mpg (saves 136.7 gallons) And, it still makes more sense than even switching from the 27mpg car to the 51mpg hybrid (which would save 209.1 gallons)

Also worth noting: The difference between a 51mpg hybrid, and a magical 100mpg dream vehicle would "only" save 115.3 gallons of gas a year. That's less gas savings than going from 21mpg to 27mpg. Going from that magical 100mpg vehicle to the absolutely insane 12,000mpg vehicle would save 119 gallons of gas. And, that's even less than the savings in going from 21mpg to 27mpg.

For those of you who drive trucks, large vans, SUV's, etc., (many not because they have a choice of what type of vehicle they own) realize how much of an effect 2 or 3 mpg due to better maintenance can have on your mileage. As a nation, we'd probably save more gas by encouraging the owners of "gas guzzlers" to maintain their vehicles better, than by mandating some arbitrary increase in required average gas mileage by the manufacturers.
 

MrMaster

Golden Member
Nov 16, 2001
1,235
2
76
www.pc-prime.com
Why didn't you just list the numbers as percentages? I think that would have made more sense in your justification. Going from 15 to 21 is a 40% increase while going from 39 to 51 is only a 31% increase.

Just makes it easier to follow your argument.
 

darkxshade

Lifer
Mar 31, 2001
13,749
6
81
Originally posted by: MrMaster
Why didn't you just list the numbers as percentages? I think that would have made more sense in your justification. Going from 15 to 21 is a 40% increase while going from 39 to 51 is only a 31% increase.

Just makes it easier to follow your argument.

Would've made for less paragraphs
 

RagingBITCH

Lifer
Sep 27, 2003
17,618
2
76
Originally posted by: MrMaster
Why didn't you just list the numbers as percentages? I think that would have made more sense in your justification. Going from 15 to 21 is a 40% increase while going from 39 to 51 is only a 31% increase.

Just makes it easier to follow your argument.

Because actual numbers get the point across. Percentages are overrated, depending on the context.
 

Engineer

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
39,230
701
126
Going from a 15mpg SUV to a 51mpg hybrid saves 564.7 gallons too. Sure, going from one to class up to another might not be as much as going from 45 to 51, but remember, they are still getting above 45 and you're now getting 21. Unless somebody comes up with something quick, we're still running out of the stuff at some point (the algae that shits crude oil looks nice though! :D ).

It makes sense to save as much as you can as long as you're purchasing a vehicle anyway. It does not make sense to rush out and buy a car (usually) just to save gas.
 

DrPizza

Administrator Elite Member Goat Whisperer
Mar 5, 2001
49,601
166
111
www.slatebrookfarm.com
Originally posted by: MrMaster
Why didn't you just list the numbers as percentages? I think that would have made more sense in your justification. Going from 15 to 21 is a 40% increase while going from 39 to 51 is only a 31% increase.

Just makes it easier to follow your argument.

Since you used the word "only" in front of 31% increase, it's apparent that you didn't understand the argument either. Going from 27 to 51 is a 67% increase, while going from 15 to 21 is "only" a 40% increase. That's what people see and think, and they're absolutely wrong. That 40% increase saves more gas than that 67% increase.
 

Engineer

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
39,230
701
126
Originally posted by: DrPizza
Originally posted by: MrMaster
Why didn't you just list the numbers as percentages? I think that would have made more sense in your justification. Going from 15 to 21 is a 40% increase while going from 39 to 51 is only a 31% increase.

Just makes it easier to follow your argument.

Since you used the word "only" in front of 31% increase, it's apparent that you didn't understand the argument either. Going from 27 to 51 is a 67% increase, while going from 15 to 21 is "only" a 40% increase. That's what people see and think, and they're absolutely wrong. That 40% increase saves more gas than that 67% increase.

It saves more going from one class to the next, but it "still" uses more than those in the upper mpg classes.
 

DrPizza

Administrator Elite Member Goat Whisperer
Mar 5, 2001
49,601
166
111
www.slatebrookfarm.com
Originally posted by: Engineer
Going from a 15mpg SUV to a 51mpg hybrid saves 564.7 gallons too. Sure, going from one to class up to another might not be as much as going from 45 to 51, but remember, they are still getting above 45 and you're now getting 21. Unless somebody comes up with something quick, we're still running out of the stuff at some point (the algae that shits crude oil looks nice though! :D ).

It makes sense to save as much as you can as long as you're purchasing a vehicle anyway. It does not make sense to rush out and buy a car (usually) just to save gas.

I haven't seen an 51mpg hybrids. My point is that people take the percent increase in gas mileage out of context. They don't understand percents or statistics.
{edit: I meant 51mpg truck hybrids}

Originally posted by: darkxshade
Would've made for less paragraphs

Yes, it would have. But, then, it wouldn't have made sense - the conclusion would have been incorrect.
 

BoomerD

No Lifer
Feb 26, 2006
65,460
13,805
146
Originally posted by: RagingBITCH
Originally posted by: MrMaster
Why didn't you just list the numbers as percentages? I think that would have made more sense in your justification. Going from 15 to 21 is a 40% increase while going from 39 to 51 is only a 31% increase.

Just makes it easier to follow your argument.

Because actual numbers get the point across. 75% of Percentages are overrated, depending on the context.

Fixed that for ya...;)

We've kicked around the idea of selling the Expedition and getting something that gets better mileage, but we've had the truck for 3 years and have only put 24K on it...or about 8000 miles per year. Even if we tripled our gas mileage, the savings wouldn't offset the cost of the new vehicle, even though we'd be using less gas/generating less CO2, etc.
 

Engineer

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
39,230
701
126
Originally posted by: DrPizza
Originally posted by: Engineer
Going from a 15mpg SUV to a 51mpg hybrid saves 564.7 gallons too. Sure, going from one to class up to another might not be as much as going from 45 to 51, but remember, they are still getting above 45 and you're now getting 21. Unless somebody comes up with something quick, we're still running out of the stuff at some point (the algae that shits crude oil looks nice though! :D ).

It makes sense to save as much as you can as long as you're purchasing a vehicle anyway. It does not make sense to rush out and buy a car (usually) just to save gas.

I haven't seen an 51mpg hybrids. My point is that people take the percent increase in gas mileage out of context. They don't understand percents or statistics.

Originally posted by: darkxshade
Would've made for less paragraphs

Yes, it would have. But, then, it wouldn't have made sense - the conclusion would have been incorrect.


I used the word hybrid out of habit, 51mpg "insert car type here" (usually, hybrids are the only vehicles that are rated for that high of mileage or at least they were last year).


Originally posted by: BoomerD


We've kicked around the idea of selling the Expedition and getting something that gets better mileage, but we've had the truck for 3 years and have only put 24K on it...or about 8000 miles per year. Even if we tripled our gas mileage, the savings wouldn't offset the cost of the new vehicle, even though we'd be using less gas/generating less CO2, etc.

Same here with the 2003 Durango...has 40,000 miles and we drive it for hauling items or trips where the space is just needed.
 

vi edit

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Oct 28, 1999
62,484
8,344
126
People are really, really dumb when it comes to gas prices and overall costs to them. I know a number of people that went out and dumped a truck or a an SUV for a shiney new $25,000 hybrid.

Instead, they could have gone out and gotten something used(or new even) that got them 30MPG for $10,000-$15,000 and banked the difference for the better part of 7 years.
 

oznerol

Platinum Member
Apr 29, 2002
2,476
0
76
www.lorenzoisawesome.com
Originally posted by: DrPizza
Originally posted by: MrMaster
Why didn't you just list the numbers as percentages? I think that would have made more sense in your justification. Going from 15 to 21 is a 40% increase while going from 39 to 51 is only a 31% increase.

Just makes it easier to follow your argument.

Since you used the word "only" in front of 31% increase, it's apparent that you didn't understand the argument either. Going from 27 to 51 is a 67% increase, while going from 15 to 21 is "only" a 40% increase. That's what people see and think, and they're absolutely wrong. That 40% increase saves more gas than that 67% increase.

It's actually an 89% increase. It must be better!
 

Gibson486

Lifer
Aug 9, 2000
18,378
1
0
Originally posted by: Engineer
Going from a 15mpg SUV to a 51mpg hybrid saves 564.7 gallons too. Sure, going from one to class up to another might not be as much as going from 45 to 51, but remember, they are still getting above 45 and you're now getting 21. Unless somebody comes up with something quick, we're still running out of the stuff at some point (the algae that shits crude oil looks nice though! :D ).

It makes sense to save as much as you can as long as you're purchasing a vehicle anyway. It does not make sense to rush out and buy a car (usually) just to save gas.

Once again, the engineer exposes the mathamatician's flaw;)
 

Engineer

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
39,230
701
126
Originally posted by: Gibson486
Originally posted by: Engineer
Going from a 15mpg SUV to a 51mpg hybrid saves 564.7 gallons too. Sure, going from one to class up to another might not be as much as going from 45 to 51, but remember, they are still getting above 45 and you're now getting 21. Unless somebody comes up with something quick, we're still running out of the stuff at some point (the algae that shits crude oil looks nice though! :D ).

It makes sense to save as much as you can as long as you're purchasing a vehicle anyway. It does not make sense to rush out and buy a car (usually) just to save gas.

Once again, the engineer exposes the mathamatician's flaw;)

LOL, I see exactly what DrPizza is saying and he's right in what he's stating...but the 21 mpg vehicle still uses more. Saves more but uses more....OMG!!! :shocked:
 

Aikouka

Lifer
Nov 27, 2001
30,383
912
126
You could just say that since the formula involves division and the variable is the divisor, it cannot be linear :p. If the variable were the dividend, then it would be linear (so long as the divisor was constant).
 

aigomorla

CPU, Cases&Cooling Mod PC Gaming Mod Elite Member
Super Moderator
Sep 28, 2005
20,968
3,422
126
:p

i guess the high gas prices have people getting erked.

Personally, i want higher prices. Why? i live in a uber croweded city where even the Dogs would have cars.

The number of cars isnt the only rant, but, i'll see a lot of cars on the street with expired TAGS. This pisses me off. Means they dont have INS.

You cant renew your regs without proof of ins.

High prices would mean more public transportation and less idiots like that on the road.
 

DrPizza

Administrator Elite Member Goat Whisperer
Mar 5, 2001
49,601
166
111
www.slatebrookfarm.com
Originally posted by: Engineer
Originally posted by: DrPizza
Originally posted by: MrMaster
Why didn't you just list the numbers as percentages? I think that would have made more sense in your justification. Going from 15 to 21 is a 40% increase while going from 39 to 51 is only a 31% increase.

Just makes it easier to follow your argument.

Since you used the word "only" in front of 31% increase, it's apparent that you didn't understand the argument either. Going from 27 to 51 is a 67% increase, while going from 15 to 21 is "only" a 40% increase. That's what people see and think, and they're absolutely wrong. That 40% increase saves more gas than that 67% increase.

It saves more going from one class to the next, but it "still" uses more than those in the upper mpg classes.

I agree with you that everyone should work on saving gas. However, not everyone can give up their truck or vehicle in certain classes in favor of vehicles in other classes. A family with 3 children isn't going to have a family car that gets 51mpg. My point is simply that people can't deal with numbers and can't rank the gas savings relatively.

Assuming 12,000miles per year, I think a lot of people would have a hard time believing that going from 15mpg to 30mpg saves more gas than going 30mpg to 12,000 mpg.
(29.9625mpg is the even point, if my math is correct.)
 

spaceman

Lifer
Dec 4, 2000
17,616
183
106
i dont really understand, but if you do Dr Pizza, that's enough for me.
btw: got a 4lber the other day on a baby bass 4" senko.
hows your year been? :)
 

Engineer

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
39,230
701
126
Originally posted by: DrPizza
that going from 15mpg to 30mpg saves more gas than going 30mpg to 12,000 mpg.
(29.9625mpg is the even point, if my math is correct.)


Whoa, you're got your math wrong there!!! :p


 

TheTony

Golden Member
Jun 23, 2005
1,418
1
0
What the OP boils down to is that, in terms of pure savings, gallons per mile is a more accurate measurement than miles per gallon.

It's probably worth noting that the comparison of which vehicles would generate more savings is subjective, and therein heavily influenced by assumptions that might be unique to each person's needs (ie a truck must be replaced with a truck, etc).
 

chuckywang

Lifer
Jan 12, 2004
20,133
1
0
Originally posted by: MrMaster
Why didn't you just list the numbers as percentages? I think that would have made more sense in your justification. Going from 15 to 21 is a 40% increase while going from 39 to 51 is only a 31% increase.

Just makes it easier to follow your argument.

Going from 51mpg to 100 mpg is close to a 100% increase. Going from 21mpg to 27mpg is a 28.6% increase. OP already argued that 21 -> 27 is a better choice.

He already wrote in the OP that the relationship is not linear ... listing an increase in percentage would be assuming a linear relationship.
 

DrPizza

Administrator Elite Member Goat Whisperer
Mar 5, 2001
49,601
166
111
www.slatebrookfarm.com
Originally posted by: Engineer
Originally posted by: DrPizza
that going from 15mpg to 30mpg saves more gas than going 30mpg to 12,000 mpg.
(29.9625mpg is the even point, if my math is correct.)


Whoa, you're got your math wrong there!!! :p

Really? 12,000miles divided by 15mpg = 800 gallons per year
12,000 miles divided by 30mpg = 400 gallons per year.

That saves 400 gallons per year.

12,000 miles divided by 12,000mpg = 1 gallon per year (obviously) - a savings of only 399 more gallons. So, the 15 to 30mpg jump saves more gas than a 30 to 12,000mpg jump would.