<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments for I Save U Gas</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.i-save-u-gas.com/comments/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.i-save-u-gas.com</link>
	<description>Helping you save money at the gas pump</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 18 Aug 2011 13:49:52 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Gas Saving Vehicles by Banger</title>
		<link>http://www.i-save-u-gas.com/hybrid-vehicles/gas-saving-vehicles/comment-page-1/#comment-1492</link>
		<dc:creator>Banger</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 18 Aug 2011 13:48:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.i-save-u-gas.com/?p=564#comment-1492</guid>
		<description>Get the new Ranger with the 2.3 Duratec four-cylinder and a five-speed.

I drive a 2006 Ranger XL daily-- looks like a parts runner truck from an auto parts store, only mine doesn&#039;t have the fleet numbers on the front fender. Typically, if I watch my speed and shift at the recommended intervals (10/20/30/40 mph shift points according to the owner&#039;s manual), I can get 28 mpg or better on the highway. If I stay at 55 or below, that number rockets up to 32-plus mpg. At times when I&#039;ve driven 55 on my commute and could go a week without running the air conditioner, I&#039;ve gotten all the way up to 38 mpg a couple of times. Of course, those couple of times are the definite exception, not the rule.

But I should probably qualify all of that by saying that 90% of my driving is on divided four-lane highway with no traffic lights.

Remember, you are the biggest variable in what kind of efficiency you&#039;ll get. Drive smoothly. Limit quick starts and stops. Using the brakes equates to wasted fuel, so try to coast up to stoplights and allow them time to change while you&#039;re still rolling if possible. Also, regular maintenance on your vehicle is key. I change my oil every 3,000 miles and always use factory-specified Motorcraft 5w-20 oil and FL400S filter. I also mind my tire pressures-- I run at 32 psi front, 36 rear. At an indicated 50,000 miles, the original Contitracs on the front are still in great shape-- but again, this probably has something to do with the majority of my driving being on straight highways with very little turning necessary.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Get the new Ranger with the 2.3 Duratec four-cylinder and a five-speed.</p>
<p>I drive a 2006 Ranger XL daily&#8211; looks like a parts runner truck from an auto parts store, only mine doesn&#8217;t have the fleet numbers on the front fender. Typically, if I watch my speed and shift at the recommended intervals (10/20/30/40 mph shift points according to the owner&#8217;s manual), I can get 28 mpg or better on the highway. If I stay at 55 or below, that number rockets up to 32-plus mpg. At times when I&#8217;ve driven 55 on my commute and could go a week without running the air conditioner, I&#8217;ve gotten all the way up to 38 mpg a couple of times. Of course, those couple of times are the definite exception, not the rule.</p>
<p>But I should probably qualify all of that by saying that 90% of my driving is on divided four-lane highway with no traffic lights.</p>
<p>Remember, you are the biggest variable in what kind of efficiency you&#8217;ll get. Drive smoothly. Limit quick starts and stops. Using the brakes equates to wasted fuel, so try to coast up to stoplights and allow them time to change while you&#8217;re still rolling if possible. Also, regular maintenance on your vehicle is key. I change my oil every 3,000 miles and always use factory-specified Motorcraft 5w-20 oil and FL400S filter. I also mind my tire pressures&#8211; I run at 32 psi front, 36 rear. At an indicated 50,000 miles, the original Contitracs on the front are still in great shape&#8211; but again, this probably has something to do with the majority of my driving being on straight highways with very little turning necessary.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Gas Saving Vehicles by Victor</title>
		<link>http://www.i-save-u-gas.com/hybrid-vehicles/gas-saving-vehicles/comment-page-1/#comment-1491</link>
		<dc:creator>Victor</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 18 Aug 2011 12:44:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.i-save-u-gas.com/?p=564#comment-1491</guid>
		<description>Which gas saving vehicles are the most comfortable for tall people such as myself (6&#039;5&quot;)?
No hybrids please and 4 cylinder models only.

I&#039;m 6&#039;5&quot; and in the market for a new vehicle. The only thing that matters to me is that it&#039;s a 4 banger that gets great gas mileage in the 25-30+ mpg range and no less. I&#039;ve test driven a lot of cars, but they just sit way too low to the ground for my liking. 

I feel like I have to crawl down into them and I don&#039;t like the way you have to literally reach for the wheel like it&#039;s 4 feet in front of you. A lot of people have mentioned the Ford Escape, but a co-worker had a 2wd 4 banger model as a rental car once and the best she got out of the thing was 22-23 mpg. 

I love Ford Rangers, but the last 4 cylinder model I had only got 22 mpg highway. I feel like I&#039;m in a rut here. Am I just gonna have to realize that there just aren&#039;t any comfortable non-hybrids for tall people that get 30+ mpg?
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Which gas saving vehicles are the most comfortable for tall people such as myself (6&#8217;5&#8243;)?<br />
No hybrids please and 4 cylinder models only.</p>
<p>I&#8217;m 6&#8217;5&#8243; and in the market for a new vehicle. The only thing that matters to me is that it&#8217;s a 4 banger that gets great gas mileage in the 25-30+ mpg range and no less. I&#8217;ve test driven a lot of cars, but they just sit way too low to the ground for my liking. </p>
<p>I feel like I have to crawl down into them and I don&#8217;t like the way you have to literally reach for the wheel like it&#8217;s 4 feet in front of you. A lot of people have mentioned the Ford Escape, but a co-worker had a 2wd 4 banger model as a rental car once and the best she got out of the thing was 22-23 mpg. </p>
<p>I love Ford Rangers, but the last 4 cylinder model I had only got 22 mpg highway. I feel like I&#8217;m in a rut here. Am I just gonna have to realize that there just aren&#8217;t any comfortable non-hybrids for tall people that get 30+ mpg?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Saving Gas Mileage and Saving Dollars by xgrendelxprimex</title>
		<link>http://www.i-save-u-gas.com/save-gas/saving-gas-mileage-and-saving-dollars/comment-page-1/#comment-1782</link>
		<dc:creator>xgrendelxprimex</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 18 Aug 2011 12:44:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.i-save-u-gas.com/?p=593#comment-1782</guid>
		<description>I guess the answer depends on what your husband&#039;s fleet of trucks is doing and how much mileage we&#039;re talking about. Proper tire inflation can reduce gas mileage regardless of what it is filled with. However, unless the nitrogen is free or comparable to running a standard air compressor, you may end up shifting the costs from the truck to the nitrogen tanks used to keep them up.

I included a link to a great article I read on it. However, note that the author cites that it would generally not be worth it as an individual, it may make some sense depending on the size of the fleet.

If anything, your husband may want to do some random testing by having some fill up with nitrogen and others use normal air and compare the results. It would be best if the drivers didn&#039;t know which ones were using nitrogen and which were using air.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I guess the answer depends on what your husband&#8217;s fleet of trucks is doing and how much mileage we&#8217;re talking about. Proper tire inflation can reduce gas mileage regardless of what it is filled with. However, unless the nitrogen is free or comparable to running a standard air compressor, you may end up shifting the costs from the truck to the nitrogen tanks used to keep them up.</p>
<p>I included a link to a great article I read on it. However, note that the author cites that it would generally not be worth it as an individual, it may make some sense depending on the size of the fleet.</p>
<p>If anything, your husband may want to do some random testing by having some fill up with nitrogen and others use normal air and compare the results. It would be best if the drivers didn&#8217;t know which ones were using nitrogen and which were using air.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Gas Saving Vehicles by mcguiver</title>
		<link>http://www.i-save-u-gas.com/hybrid-vehicles/gas-saving-vehicles/comment-page-1/#comment-1496</link>
		<dc:creator>mcguiver</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 18 Aug 2011 12:16:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.i-save-u-gas.com/?p=564#comment-1496</guid>
		<description>One great advantage of electric vehicles is that they can help balance electricity demand.  The demand for electricity cycles throughout the day, peaking during the day and dropping off at night.  It is hard for utilities to increase production during the day and scale it back at night.  As a result there is a lot of overproduction at night and a lot of electricity that gets wasted.  If people charged electric vehicles at night then the electricity demand curve would be flatter and utilities could run more efficiently and utility prices could drop.

Another advantage of electric vehicles is that after the batter packs are retired from cars they can be purchased by utility companies and used for grid storage.  This will help provide electricity during peak demand times.  The generators that are used to provide peaking power are expensive and raise utility costs.  Having grid storage allows the utilities to even further balance out their generation, thus reducing cost.  The battery storage would also help to open the door for renewables (wind/solar) to be used as part of the grid.

Another advantage of electric cars is to the drivers.  Electric cars do have limited range (though the limits are fairly high, the Tesla S is supposed to have the option of a 300 mile range batter pack).  Even with the limited range though, electric cars are convenient.  You can charge them at home at night and don&#039;t have to go to the gas station.  They also don&#039;t require oil changes, tune ups, or just about any other sort of maintenance.  Since they have so few moving parts they should last reliably for many years.  The battery pack is not an exception, what is considered end-of-life for a battery pack is when it can only has 80% of its original capacity.  It isn&#039;t like after 8-10 years when your battery pack is considered &#039;dead&#039; you will be stranded you will only have a 240 mile range instead of a 300 mile range.

Those are just a few ideas right off the top of my head.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>One great advantage of electric vehicles is that they can help balance electricity demand.  The demand for electricity cycles throughout the day, peaking during the day and dropping off at night.  It is hard for utilities to increase production during the day and scale it back at night.  As a result there is a lot of overproduction at night and a lot of electricity that gets wasted.  If people charged electric vehicles at night then the electricity demand curve would be flatter and utilities could run more efficiently and utility prices could drop.</p>
<p>Another advantage of electric vehicles is that after the batter packs are retired from cars they can be purchased by utility companies and used for grid storage.  This will help provide electricity during peak demand times.  The generators that are used to provide peaking power are expensive and raise utility costs.  Having grid storage allows the utilities to even further balance out their generation, thus reducing cost.  The battery storage would also help to open the door for renewables (wind/solar) to be used as part of the grid.</p>
<p>Another advantage of electric cars is to the drivers.  Electric cars do have limited range (though the limits are fairly high, the Tesla S is supposed to have the option of a 300 mile range batter pack).  Even with the limited range though, electric cars are convenient.  You can charge them at home at night and don&#8217;t have to go to the gas station.  They also don&#8217;t require oil changes, tune ups, or just about any other sort of maintenance.  Since they have so few moving parts they should last reliably for many years.  The battery pack is not an exception, what is considered end-of-life for a battery pack is when it can only has 80% of its original capacity.  It isn&#8217;t like after 8-10 years when your battery pack is considered &#8216;dead&#8217; you will be stranded you will only have a 240 mile range instead of a 300 mile range.</p>
<p>Those are just a few ideas right off the top of my head.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

