Mpg

[bitman]

@chatman

if you come from the west (bristol / bath) and need to go to the south of london take junction 10 on the m4. thats the a329 and go to the m3. than drive to the m25 and continue your travel. this way you cut that busy part of the m25 / heathrow. B)

[chatman]

@chatman

if you come from the west (bristol / bath) and need to go to the south of london take junction 10 on the m4. thats the a329 and go to the m3. than drive to the m25 and continue your travel. this way you cut that busy part of the m25 / heathrow. B)

Bitman...Thursday night when I was coming back I got off M4@Langley turn off...headed towards Ivor, then towards Chalfont St Peter, thenAmersham heading towards Chesham...then joined M25 after heading down the A41 joined a now clearer M25....

All of the M4/M25 junction 12 to 18 was jammed......

Just casually cruised along letting the others rush buy.....

[shcm]

Thanks, all good advice on economical driving especially about anticipation.

Back in the mists of time, I was going to add something to this thread, can't for the life of me thing what it was. :D

Oh, yeah I'd latched onto what NMaria had said about the indicated mpg.

This is what I'm banging on about:

Red trace is indicated mpg. Yellow trace is calculated mpg. Ignore horizontal yellow and red lines.

The calculated mpg stays reasonably constant (peak in June is some long distance cruising and it's also dropping a bit now with the cold weather), but the difference between indicated and calculated mpg is gradually getting bigger. This is what the earlier graph I posted was showing, the difference between the two.

Calculated mpg is done at each fill up and at the same time the average mpg on the trip is reset.

The actual fuel consumption of the vehicle is about normal, nothing changing alarmingly, it is the indicated mpg that is slowly climbing - that was what I was looking for a half plausible explanation for. Just a curiosity really.

You do wonder whether it has some "memory" of those higher mpg's in June, even though it is supposed to have been reset each fill.

Cheers

[anchorman]

Thanks, all good advice on economical driving especially about anticipation.

Back in the mists of time, I was going to add something to this thread, can't for the life of me thing what it was. :D

Oh, yeah I'd latched onto what NMaria had said about the indicated mpg.

This is what I'm banging on about:

Red trace is indicated mpg. Yellow trace is calculated mpg. Ignore horizontal yellow and red lines.

The calculated mpg stays reasonably constant (peak in June is some long distance cruising and it's also dropping a bit now with the cold weather), but the difference between indicated and calculated mpg is gradually getting bigger. This is what the earlier graph I posted was showing, the difference between the two.

Calculated mpg is done at each fill up and at the same time the average mpg on the trip is reset.

The actual fuel consumption of the vehicle is about normal, nothing changing alarmingly, it is the indicated mpg that is slowly climbing - that was what I was looking for a half plausible explanation for. Just a curiosity really.

You do wonder whether it has some "memory" of those higher mpg's in June, even though it is supposed to have been reset each fill.

Cheers

Looking at the rolling radius quoted for the tyre the calculated number of revs per mile is approx' 710. This increases to 730 for a fully worn tyre so the actual mileage used for your calculation is changing with tyre wear. You calculate your mpg from how many gallons you have added against the indicated mileage. I don't know what information it takes for doing the calculation but I wonder if it accounts for the difference.

http://www.bridgestonetire.com/tireselecto...Product_ID=1090

[dave.m]

The main ways to save fuel are (in my view):

1) Don't accelerate harshly unless necessary (welly it if you need to when pulling into a gap on a busy road, of course, but don't try to race away from lights, etc).

2) Remember that the speed limit is meant to be the fastest you go on the road, not the minimum or an average, so target 65-70 on a dual carriageway or 55-60 on a normal A road.

3) Use the gearbox to keep the engine in its most efficient rev range; on the D-4D I reckon that should be around 2000. I tend to run 1700-2500; it pulls easily from there but don't let the engine labour too hard.

My $0.02 worth.

Would add, even though its obvious, if you have cruise control USE IT ;)

[Steve@Aberdeen]

I'll add my voice to the extra rule - ANTICIPATE; it's necessary in driving as though you have a glass of water on the bonnet but well worth emphasising.

Hills will always knock fuel consumption as you will never regain on the downhill what you lost on the uphill; making full use of engine braking helps but there will always be losses - all we can do is minimise them. I always see my consumption take a hit on some of the routes I travel.

I've said this before but I'll repeat it here as it's relevant to the discussion:

a) My odometer reads low - checking against known routes and a GPS shows it to be about 3% low.

b) The meter on the forecourt fuel pump should be within 0.5% but you'll never fill to exactly the same point each time (unless you fill slowly and consistently, wait for all the air to come out and fill to the same point in the neck, take temperature in account, etc) - the best we can do for normal fills is to calculate over several fills (say five or more) to minimise the error.

c) My on-board computer reads high - the last time I checked it, taking the above into account, it was about 2mph high for values in mid 40's.

Looking at shcm's graphs, I can understand the movement and trend of the yellow trace but I'm just as puzzled over the increasing separation from the red. Tread wear can account for some change but I can't see it having the influence seen in the graphs. A puzzle to work on...

[Fujisan]

Hills will always knock fuel consumption as you will never regain on the downhill what you lost on the uphill; making full use of engine braking helps but there will always be losses - all we can do is minimise them. I always see my consumption take a hit on some of the routes I travel.

I hope you'll pardon a little aside to this interesting and useful discussion.

On the topic of engine braking, I was driving in the Rocky Mountains a few years back and on the downhill sections I would knock the auto - box out of Drive and select a more suitable gear for maximun engine braking and minimum Brake braking.

On one particularly long downhill road into a valley on the Wyoming side of the Rockies, I couldn't help but smile at the smell of burning Brakes coming from the cars in front of me, who had had their Brakes on almost constantly for a good number of miles!

[NMaria]

Thanks, all good advice on economical driving especially about anticipation.

Back in the mists of time, I was going to add something to this thread, can't for the life of me thing what it was. :D

Oh, yeah I'd latched onto what NMaria had said about the indicated mpg.

This is what I'm banging on about: (see graph above).

Red trace is indicated mpg. Yellow trace is calculated mpg. Ignore horizontal yellow and red lines.

The calculated mpg stays reasonably constant (peak in June is some long distance cruising and it's also dropping a bit now with the cold weather), but the difference between indicated and calculated mpg is gradually getting bigger. This is what the earlier graph I posted was showing, the difference between the two.

Calculated mpg is done at each fill up and at the same time the average mpg on the trip is reset.

The actual fuel consumption of the vehicle is about normal, nothing changing alarmingly, it is the indicated mpg that is slowly climbing - that was what I was looking for a half plausible explanation for. Just a curiosity really.

You do wonder whether it has some "memory" of those higher mpg's in June, even though it is supposed to have been reset each fill.

Cheers

I think I'm from the same planet as you, shcm. I reset the mpg indicator every time I fill the tank, and work out the actual mpg using my calculator (such an anorak!). I have not kept a graph of the error but it has definitely increased from 2-3 to 7-8, even taking into account the milometer error of 3%. This is borne out by the fact that, during the first few thousand miles, the indicator showed on average 46mpg or thereabouts, it's now regularly 55. I know that running-in will have accounted for some of this, but after 10k miles it's still rising, which is ridiculous. Tyre wear might account for some of it, but if, after 10k miles, the tyres are half-worn, that would introduce an deviation of ((730-710)/2)/730 which is 1.4% - much less than the error of around 13%.

The irritating thing is (like the other niggle, the thermometer which shows a temperature that is two degrees or so higher than the actual temp, which I think is dangerous in icy conditions), that it is probably unnecessary: I had a 4.2 VVTi previously, and its mpg meter was pretty accurate. Unless somehow the fuel type makes a difference?

My husband drives an Octavia 1.9 TDi which has done around 60k miles, and he is experiencing exactly the same thing. We wondered whether our dear friends, the oil companies, were bamboozling us somehow, but it is not that, either because feconomy is not deteriorating - it is the computer that is telling us porkies. Whatever widget measures the actual fuel being used seems to be falling asleep on the job.

Car is going in for its first service tomorrow, and I will ask the good people at Alexander Wallace, the dealer, if they have any ideas what might be causing it and whether it can be corrected.

By the way, I agree with all the good points made about driving for economy. Hills, accelerating, braking, towns, high revs, speed - all terrible. Anticipation, light feet, 2000 revs when working and less when cruising - all good. Must say, though, that when I had cruise control on my previous car, I found it made fuel economy slightly worse because it would push the car to maintain the same speed going uphill, whereas I ease it up hills and regain the lost speed going downhill. Even if it is just a few mph, it still makes a difference. Now I will get lots of responses telling me I am a danger on the road because I annoy the people behind me - but I try not to!

[chatman]

Now I will get lots of responses telling me I am a danger on the road because I annoy the people behind me - but I try not to!

You did say in a previous thread your approaching the old !Removed! stage.... :rolleyes:

May be the above is the start of it...

I just let all the other sales reps and other morons rush past me and overtake on bends (as one did this morning and almost put me and him in the hedge :censor: )...

Had an email from Ben Scammell the guy who runs the petrol card web site...I believe there is planned this Wednesday a fuel protest and go slow by the truckers to demonstrate against the fuel cost and government unsure of where but may be all different places to maximize disruption.... :thumbsup:

[Nightstalker]

Hey I also got that email today...

:D

It is a bit disgusting the amount of tax we pay on fuel...however do you think this protest will do owt?? The price is already over a squid (although I know of 2 stations here in Reading where its only 99.9 B) ) however still tooo much if you ask me.

Anywho, I do wonder what will happen if this protest goes ahead...I'll be stuck at work all day should be interesting following it on the news...

rgds

Rob

[NMaria]

I have greenish inclinations and am a firm believer that there is too much road transport. If it takes a severe disincentive like high tax on road fuel to reduce the the volume of vehicles and the pollution they produce, then so be it. BUT (before you all start bursting blood vessels!) what I do object to is the hypocrisy that lies behind these taxes. If they are at all green, the money thus raised should be spent on better public transport, energy conservation, better town planning, innovative ways of reducing carbon emissions and improving our quality of life. Until that happens, these are not green taxes but plain, ordinary, rob-you-blind-and-spend-the-money-on-the-undeserving taxes, and Mr Brown and his sidekick, Mr Darling, are no more popular with me than they are with you.

Now I sit back and wait to see if I have set off a good old political ding-dong...

[chatman]

Now I sit back and wait to see if I have set off a good old political ding-dong...

Take a look over at a different posting on RAV forum HERE as were all gona vote for Bothy as new PM....He has valid points and some not so :rolleyes: and takes us ages to decipher his rantings on here...so should be perfect for the job politics and all..but may need to do this behind a ruddy big wall and moat with gun turrets and special forces protection...or is that for us ;) ;)

Any way since when has the road tax we pay ever been put towards the roads we drive on in this country of ours :lol: :lol:

[anchorman]

Exactly Maria

A good example of being shafted by GB is this stupid air tax we pay on flights. What on earth is the point in taxing just us in the UK? Thats not a green tak its another slip one in the back tax.

Cretins

[bothwell_buyer]

I have greenish inclinations and am a firm believer that there is too much road transport. If it takes a severe disincentive like high tax on road fuel to reduce the the volume of vehicles and the pollution they produce, then so be it. BUT (before you all start bursting blood vessels!) what I do object to is the hypocrisy that lies behind these taxes. If they are at all green, the money thus raised should be spent on better public transport, energy conservation, better town planning, innovative ways of reducing carbon emissions and improving our quality of life. Until that happens, these are not green taxes but plain, ordinary, rob-you-blind-and-spend-the-money-on-the-undeserving taxes, and Mr Brown and his sidekick, Mr Darling, are no more popular with me than they are with you.

Now I sit back and wait to see if I have set off a good old political ding-dong...

Haha I remember the time not so many years ago when Royal mail shifted parcels by train. It was all very 'green' as we were shifting a well known green welly and jacket companies goods....well we were until British rail lost a number of wagons full of goods destined for shops at christmas time. We had tracked that the train had left Newcastle. However we lost the train somewhere down south...and paid a hefty penalty to the customer. The train with goods was found some weeks afterwards parked in a siding near milton keynes. Perhaps oor Train drivers will know whether the trains have satellite position/tracking now?? Until the rail service gets its act together, then massive amounts of goods will fly around; or trundle about in lorries.... and fuel gets burnt happily. We're daft enough to pay ridiculous prices for vegetables.........

[bothwell_buyer]

Now I sit back and wait to see if I have set off a good old political ding-dong...

Take a look over at a different posting on RAV forum HERE as were all gona vote for Bothy as new PM....He has valid points and some not so :rolleyes: and takes us ages to decipher his rantings on here...so should be perfect for the job politics and all..but may need to do this behind a ruddy big wall and moat with gun turrets and special forces protection...or is that for us ;) ;)

Any way since when has the road tax we pay ever been put towards the roads we drive on in this country of ours :lol: :lol:

If my RAV leaves the road (ie rises above it) a number of times, should I get a rebate on my road fund tax etc?? Or will I need to pay an airline charge?? :D

[shcm]

Phew, lots of stuff to comment on! :D

Looking at the rolling radius quoted for the tyre the calculated number of revs per mile is approx' 710. This increases to 730 for a fully worn tyre so the actual mileage used for your calculation is changing with tyre wear. You calculate your mpg from how many gallons you have added against the indicated mileage. I don't know what information it takes for doing the calculation but I wonder if it accounts for the difference.

Fair comment, I did also wonder about this. I can usually make a set of tyres last a while. Last set had done 60k with tread to spare when the vehicle was sold and I've done 9k on this set. I don't think it can be this and also for another reason below. I will check the wear out of curiosity though.

Looking at shcm's graphs, I can understand the movement and trend of the yellow trace but I'm just as puzzled over the increasing separation from the red. Tread wear can account for some change but I can't see it having the influence seen in the graphs. A puzzle to work on...

Steve, I've been impressed with your calcs from previous posts and I'm with you in the fact that it will always be difficult to get absolute accuracy for many of the reasons you've noted. Now, my logic may be flawed, but here goes:

For the manual consumption calculation and the "trip computer" consumption calculation both I and the vehicle need distance travelled and fuel used. For my calcs (I'm not using a gps) distance travelled comes from the "trip computer", which in theory should be the same value that the "trip computer" itself is using. Tyre wear etc, will affect the absolute accuracy of this distance figure, but we are looking at a difference between two calculations and the difference should not be affected by this I believe.

For the fuel used figure, I get that obviously from the pump at fill up and I expect the vehicle is getting it from integrating all the injector pulses. (Simplistically, if the fuel rail is at constant pressure, then, when opening an injector for a known period of time, you know how much fuel has been used). My conclusion is that either:

1. The vehicle is injecting more fuel each time than it thinks it is (injector or fuel system wear or higher fuel rail pressure? but wouldn't expect it this early)

2. There is a subtle bug in the instrument pack ("trip computer"). Stranger things have happened, is this a relatively new pack? Toyota seem quite good at reusing bits out of their "parts bin", but is this pack used elsewhere? I don't know.

I'm not really convinced by either of these arguments myself, but I'm not really that bothered by it either (the vehicle is not loosing fuel or showing "real" poorer fuel economy), it is just, as you say, a puzzle or curiosity. There is obviously tolerance on all of this and I expect it is still within its expected band.

On the topic of engine braking, I was driving in the Rocky Mountains a few years back and on the downhill sections I would knock the auto - box out of Drive and select a more suitable gear for maximun engine braking and minimum Brake braking.

On one particularly long downhill road into a valley on the Wyoming side of the Rockies, I couldn't help but smile at the smell of burning Brakes coming from the cars in front of me, who had had their Brakes on almost constantly for a good number of miles!

This obviously doesn't apply in North America, but I don't think it helps how they teach you to drive either. The examiner wants to be able to see you can get into all the gears, so people think they need to be in top all the time. If you do an advanced driving course, they will use (or did) the "brake to slow, gears to go" phrase, but I think what they are getting at there is don't come down the box when slowing up for a roundabout for example. Brake, then select the appropriate gear afterwards.

I think I'm from the same planet as you, shcm. I reset the mpg indicator every time I fill the tank, and work out the actual mpg using my calculator (such an anorak!).

NMaria, going on other bouts of lunacy on here, that must be planet sock! I know that is not the case, because Rosshire is one of my favourite parts of the world. I am extremely jealous of anybody living there! Which part if you don't mind me asking? Gairloch, Ullapool or over towards the East. (OK if you don't want to say). It's good to be an anorak!

The irritating thing is (like the other niggle, the thermometer which shows a temperature that is two degrees or so higher than the actual temp, which I think is dangerous in icy conditions)

Generally, my temp guage seems to agree within about 1 degree of my weather station. The weather station could be slightly out of calibration though. I'm sure you know, but it can be very wrong for a few minutes if the car has been standing in the sun etc.

when I had cruise control on my previous car, I found it made fuel economy slightly worse because it would push the car to maintain the same speed going uphill, whereas I ease it up hills and regain the lost speed going downhill. Even if it is just a few mph, it still makes a difference. Now I will get lots of responses telling me I am a danger on the road because I annoy the people behind me - but I try not to!

I agree and I know it sounds stupid, but you also get no feedback on how hard it is having to push, unlike when using your foot. I'll use it on long distance trips with quieter motorways, but that's about all. I know some people have to have it.

If they are at all green, the money thus raised should be spent on better public transport, energy conservation, better town planning, innovative ways of reducing carbon emissions and improving our quality of life. Until that happens, these are not green taxes but plain, ordinary, rob-you-blind-and-spend-the-money-on-the-undeserving taxes, and Mr Brown and his sidekick, Mr Darling, are no more popular with me than they are with you.

Now I sit back and wait to see if I have set off a good old political ding-dong...

Sigh, I agree. In your part of the world there is probably no alternative. In my part of the world they don't seem to be able to do "joined up" public transport. Good at talking about it though! Some routes will always make a loss, but surely it is firstly a service and the more heavily subscribed routes should be subsidising them.

I'd love to go to work by public transport. The times I have done it I feel less stressed. It takes so long though. If they want us out of our cars, it has to be affordable, very frequent, safe, clean, almost 24 hour, "joined up"............ Maybe they should do something extremely radical and make it all free for month and see what happens. The cost would be peanuts compared with some budgets.........

Cheers

[Steve@Aberdeen]

Whilst any error in the mileage reading should be the same for manual and computer calculations, you still need to correct for errors if you want to get an accurate answer. You can't say the computer is right or wrong comparing it to a wrong manual calculation.

First, the caveat: I don't have details of how the Rav4 system actually works - so this is purely guesswork and conjecture based on limited fact. As far as the computer is concerned, I'll take the word of others here in that it calculates fuel used from timing the injector pulses. So:

1) Any variation in pressure of the rail would introduce an error. There shouldn't be much variation - if there were, you should spot that in the performance.

2) Pulse timing will be finite, as in any digital system - the discrimination/accuracy will depend on the bit size; I don't know what this is but is going to be enough to control each injection cycle (which is probably not quite as accurate as is needed for the economy calculation: to calculate fuel consumption, these values will be added and compared to the interval mileage. There will be two types of error: random (which should be cancelled out during the summation process) and bias (which will be compounded).

This doesn't yet explain the drift, though, though it wouldn't surprise me if it came down to the injectors . As they're used they will gather crud - the engine management system will compensate for this (using other sensors). I wouldn't have thought it worth building correction into the economy calculations but, without correction, the drift would lead to the computer thinking more fuel is being used - the opposite of what we're seeing. However, if a correction were to be included, it would only be an estimate and, since this isn't a critical system, it doesn't surprise me that we see a drift.

I'm away for a day or two so I may not get back online until late Wednesday - I'll post this and run ;)

[chatman]

I'd love to go to work by public transport. The times I have done it I feel less stressed. It takes so long though. If they want us out of our cars, it has to be affordable, very frequent, safe, clean, almost 24 hour, "joined up"............ Maybe they should do something extremely radical and make it all free for month and see what happens. The cost would be peanuts compared with some budgets.........

Cheers

Public transport ha ha ha ha, old cramped, delayed, useless at any time especially peak periods, expensive, run by unions who decide when they want to work. Cant wait for the Olympics to come to town then were see how good the transport system is :lol:

For me to get to work at 9am would involve a 2 mile walk to nearest bus stop down dark single track country lanes (no rural bus service through village), bus into town then walk to train station, train (packed so no seat) into Liverpool Street, then wait for another train out to near office, then another ten minute walk to work.... Now I have no problem doing this and have done this in the SUMMER, but as this trip cost me £36 a day (that's Return) I could get 3 1/2 days travel out of the RAV for that, and a seat as well.....+ this journey would take 2 hours plus to do when In the RAV it takes me 45 minutes.... ;) ;)

If I'm travelling far on business then yes I drive to the station carpark (pay there charges) then travel to site using public transport to get me there.....(claim this bit back for travel expenses :D

) :)

[shcm]

Public transport ha ha ha ha, old cramped, delayed, useless at any time especially peak periods, expensive, run by unions who decide when they want to work. Cant wait for the Olympics to come to town then were see how good the transport system is :lol:

For me to get to work at 9am would involve a 2 mile walk to nearest bus stop down dark single track country lanes (no rural bus service through village), bus into town then walk to train station, train (packed so no seat) into Liverpool Street, then wait for another train out to near office, then another ten minute walk to work.... Now I have no problem doing this and have done this in the SUMMER, but as this trip cost me £36 a day (that's Return) I could get 3 1/2 days travel out of the RAV for that, and a seat as well.....+ this journey would take 2 hours plus to do when In the RAV it takes me 45 minutes.... ;) ;)

If I'm travelling far on business then yes I drive to the station carpark (pay there charges) then travel to site using public transport to get me there.....(claim this bit back for travel expenses :D

) :)

.........yep, all the things it shouldn't be, which is why both of us are still in our RAVs. :D

[shcm]

First, the caveat: I don't have details of how the Rav4 system actually works - so this is purely guesswork and conjecture based on limited fact. As far as the computer is concerned, I'll take the word of others here in that it calculates fuel used from timing the injector pulses. So:

Found out it uses the signal from no.1 injector. So while you'd expect similar timings for each injector for each engine rev, some room for errors there.

[NMaria]

NMaria, going on other bouts of lunacy on here, that must be planet sock! I know that is not the case, because Rosshire is one of my favourite parts of the world. I am extremely jealous of anybody living there! Which part if you don't mind me asking? Gairloch, Ullapool or over towards the East. (OK if you don't want to say). It's good to be an anorak!

Don't mind folk knowing where I live, shcm, it might even bring us some very welcome visitors! We're in Mid Ross, near where the river Conon emerges from Strathconon. It is indeed a very nice part of the world - not quite as spectacular as west Ross but with lovely countryside, only a quarter of the annual rainfall and not so many midges. Own transport is essential, though! Our bus service (it was one-da-day and it's a mile to walk to the nearest stop) has just been cancelled without notice, so now we have a five mile walk to the nearest train station. There is one train a day.

Some of the nicest people I have met have been from the Midlands - every place has its good points!

Yes, three cheers for all the anoraks in the world. Perhaps the difference between us and non-anoraks is that we try harder to think about things? Probably I am just flattering myself.

[Fujisan]

Don't mind folk knowing where I live, shcm, it might even bring us some very welcome visitors! We're in Mid Ross, near where the river Conon emerges from Strathconon. It is indeed a very nice part of the world - not quite as spectacular as west Ross but with lovely countryside, only a quarter of the annual rainfall and not so many midges. Own transport is essential, though! Our bus service (it was one-da-day and it's a mile to walk to the nearest stop) has just been cancelled without notice, so now we have a five mile walk to the nearest train station. There is one train a day.

Sounds wonderful. You are very lucky

Yes, three cheers for all the anoraks in the world. Perhaps the difference between us and non-anoraks is that we try harder to think about things? Probably I am just flattering myself.

I don't think you are flattering yourself, you just care and that's a good thing

[Fujisan]

I'd love to go to work by public transport.

Cheers

For me to get to work at 9am would involve a 2 mile walk to nearest bus stop down dark single track country lanes (no rural bus service through village), bus into town then walk to train station, train (packed so no seat) into Liverpool Street, then wait for another train out to near office, then another ten minute walk to work.... Now I have no problem doing this and have done this in the SUMMER, but as this trip cost me £36 a day (that's Return) I could get 3 1/2 days travel out of the RAV for that, and a seat as well.....+ this journey would take 2 hours plus to do when In the RAV it takes me 45 minutes.... ;) ;)

I have to agree with Chatman, as far as going to work is concern, Public Transport just isn't an option for me, in fact I'll go as far as to say I don't think it would even be possible. :(

The green alternative for me would be to get on my bike........and that ain't going to happen anytime soon!

[bothwell_buyer]

I'd love to go to work by public transport.

Cheers

For me to get to work at 9am would involve a 2 mile walk to nearest bus stop down dark single track country lanes (no rural bus service through village), bus into town then walk to train station, train (packed so no seat) into Liverpool Street, then wait for another train out to near office, then another ten minute walk to work.... Now I have no problem doing this and have done this in the SUMMER, but as this trip cost me £36 a day (that's Return) I could get 3 1/2 days travel out of the RAV for that, and a seat as well.....+ this journey would take 2 hours plus to do when In the RAV it takes me 45 minutes.... ;) ;)

I have to agree with Chatman, as far as going to work is concern, Public Transport just isn't an option for me, in fact I'll go as far as to say I don't think it would even be possible. :(

The green alternative for me would be to get on my bike........and that ain't going to happen anytime soon!

Try swapping yer engin wi a Prius lump? An pedals oan yer RAV!

[shcm]

We're in Mid Ross, near where the river Conon emerges from Strathconon. It is indeed a very nice part of the world

Ok, I'm with you I think. Been across the bridge @ Marybank a few times, which is the River Conon I think. All of the highlands are special IMHO, but some of the lowlands are quite good too. Not sure about that belt in the middle :D. I can imaging it would be extremely difficult without own transport up there.

Some of the nicest people I have met have been from the Midlands - every place has its good points!

Oh, get away with 'yer! :D .

Yes, three cheers for all the anoraks in the world. Perhaps the difference between us and non-anoraks is that we try harder to think about things? Probably I am just flattering myself.

No, not flattering yourself at all. The only way anybody makes progress is by thinking harder about things. :D

I have to agree with Chatman, as far as going to work is concern, Public Transport just isn't an option for me, in fact I'll go as far as to say I don't think it would even be possible. :(

What I'm saying is it is still a joke, even in areas of high population density. Perhaps I remember incorrectly, but I thought that when this lot came to power John (two jags) the Pie Man was going to sort transport out. Yeah, right, did that didn't he?

My brother doesn't drive. It's ten miles to where he works across Brum. On average it can take him about 1.75 hours by public transport, often 2 hours and this is supposed to be a well served population centre public transport wise. That's getting close to walking pace!