Volvo Improve Mileage with Common Sense
by Matthew Sparkes, London, UK on 08.24.07
We often feature advances in motoring technology here on Treehugger - electric, solar, hybrid, plug-in hybrid, hydrogen and all sorts of things designed to improve mileage. However, cars still aren't as efficient as they should be. We've talked about the reasons why before, and it seems that Volvo must have listened. They've announced that their new C30 will have far better fuel efficiency, all thanks to a few common sense, low-tech design features.
The diesel C30 will be unveiled at the Frankfurt Motor Show in September, and is claimed to achieve an impressive 52.26 mpg. In order to get this figure that high Volvo used low-friction transmission oil, tweaked the engine management software, added higher gearing in 3rd, 4th and 5th, fitted low rolling resistance tires and aerodynamically smoothed all parts of the body. In essence, they didn't do much at all. Every car manufacturer could, and should, be doing this to every single car they make. ::Auto Blog
I wouldn't say these are things every car could aspire to achieve. What they don't say here that the engine has only 105 horsepower and an unknown amount of torque (probably in the 200 lb-feet range). So the engine by itself is pretty efficient, but this car is no speed demon. The smoothing of aero parts et al is really not all that amazing and probably doesn't add more than 1mpg at best at highway speed.
Any car can get better mileage with skinnier and harder tires, a very small displacement engine (sacrificing the unneeded power us Yanks think we need), and surely a smaller vehicle all around.
To wit, my 1991 Honda Civic wagon gets 40 mpg almost all the time. It's small, light, has no power accessories, and just enough power to get it to move itself.
The big rub for US cars is size/weight and unnecessary power doodads. Strip down any car and it'll get better mileage.
Those are very impressive figures, 'for an internal combustion engine'. The 150 (est) year old internal combustion engine is still a great energy waste, due to the massive amounts of heat it produces (wastes). I am still holding out for the technology that lets a vehicle run down the road without leaving a trail of heat behind it. Idling at stops generating even more wasted heat energy.
Kinetic energy can ,and has been ,produced with minimum heat lost. Minto was on track many years ago with the 'Freon' engine. We know where that went didn't we? The fact is that 'Freon' is only a gas. Many other types of 'gas' can be used. Allow the obsessive Legal restrictions to be relaxed and see what comes up in the inventors laboratories. Until then, only band-aids are to be applied to old technology because the liabilities are more comfortable to deal with.
When I first read about the new GM large hybrid SUVs, I noticed that nearly all of their highway fuel mileage improvements relied on things that could be applied to the regular trucks: smooth underbody panels, a new hood design, and just basic aerodynamics provided something like a 15% reduction in drag, which at highway speeds means close to a 15% reduction in fuel burned. Seems a pretty obvious way to improve things to me...
It's incredible how much you can improve the gas mileage of a car just by some simple common sense modifications.
I just removed the large extra lights i had on the front of our car and immediately gained 2 mpg due to better aerodynamics.
Simon
MilesGallon.com
And what would the MPG have been if this wasn't a diesel?
First, it is a nice looking car and its efficient by today´s standards, and I can imagine that they could easily increase that efficiency if it were a hybrid electric. It is at least a start and I hope to see a hybrid electric of this car very soon.
Nice move Volvo, but I still say, hydrogen is the way to go, all this hybrid stuff is a waste of time, energy and effort. Just my $.02
Battery powered cars are losers - more energy to produce the battery than fossil fueled and hazardous waste when dead in 5 years.
Hybrids fare little better.
You can tell by looking that diesels pollute MORE than gas-powered anything (Yes! the EPA is WRONG!)
So i say we figure out how to make gas cheaper, and mopeds more weatherproof!
Chris, your 1991 Honda may have good fuel economy, but it is a VERY dirty car in terms of emissions compared to any newer car, even ones with worse fuel economy.
5.25 litres per 100 kilometres? You have to fucking kidding me. Even my old Talbot 1510 GLD was able to do that, easily.
How about a VW Lupo with 3 litres per 100 kilometres? And yes, I've noticed that the treehugger wants to use the imperial (US) units, so apparently my comment is therefore completely unnecessary and you should just forget about it completely. Sorry for the inconvenience.
I agree with the original poster and although the car may only have 105hp, it's the torque you really feel in most daily driving. Because of that, this car will feel quite a bit more powerful than most standard engines that come in cars today.
Aerodynamics are a way to go, you get a faster, greener AND more economic vehicle, what else could you want?
Using things like thin tires could compromise your security, so I think it's best to opt for something safer
Sad thing is that they measured it only for on-the-road usage, I really doubt that this car is much more efficient than the others at urban usage
Twit, my 1994 GMC Suburban gets 13.7 mpg almost all the time. It's freaking huge, heavy, has ALL power accessories, and just enough power to cause CO2-delusional, algor-obsessed weenies to poop in their hemp panties.
50 mpg diesel is about the same as a VW TDI. Pretty good, but not revolutionary. Diesel engines have a lot more torque than gasoline engines and 200 lb-ft can be pretty fun at low rpms. Just don't expect to set any land speed records or pass highway traffic with ease. Hopefully, Volvo will release the electric C-30 some time soon, and I can garage my beloved 850 turbo for all but long trips.
n8