Talk:Gas-guzzler
 | This article was nominated for deletion on 25 November 2022. The result of the discussion was redirect. |
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Gas-guzzler redirect. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||
More of a dictionary entry than an encyclopedia article. And it's not that accurate, since gas guzzler can refer to many things besides SUVs. The term is much older than that. I recommend deletion.
A low mpg car doesn't burn "fuel inefficiently". They take in a lot more air to burn a lot more fuel per unit time which is reflected in the power output of the engine.
A look at Vandalism upon gas-guzzlers
editSuggest revision of:
This is however very questionable action, seeing that it's illegal, and generally, burning for instance a Hummer H2 generates a lot more of smog-forming pollutants, such as nitrogen oxides than running the vehicle for a considerable amount of time.
Run-on with excessive commas. Also, not sure "such as nitrogen oxides than running the vehicle for a considerable amount of time" is a complete thought.
Proposal:
This is however a very questionable action, seeing that it's illegal. It also produces the opposite of the desired effect. For instance, burning a Hummer H2 would generate a lot more of smog-forming pollutants, such as nitrogen oxides, than running the vehicle for a considerable amount of time.
"Italian bread supercars"
editA car made out of Italian bread. . . now that would be super. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.19.15.94 (talk) 18:46, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
Small engine causing excessive fuel consumption
editI removed an unsourced bullet point claiming that too small a displacement causes excessive fuel consumption. Even if true -- which is highly doubtful (ICEs generally operate more efficiently at higher load) -- it is completely implausible that such a vehicle would be characterized as a gas-guzzler as a result. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.246.96.95 (talk) 03:08, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
- The current trend for small capacity highly turbocharged engines is specifically aimed at getting the vehicle into a lower emissions bracket. In the world outside the testing lab, however, you have to thrash the nuts off them to make any kind of decent progress, at which point the fuel gauge starts doing a realistic impression of a homesick rock. But that's the customer's problem, not the manufacturer's. In comparison with a suburban main battle tank such vehicles aren't gas-guzzlers per se, of course. Mr Larrington (talk) 20:00, 19 December 2020 (UTC)
- I drive 2.4 tonne 4x4 biturbo 2.0l diesel and it gets 24 mpg, which oddly enough is what my 767 kg Escort Mk I used to get back in 1978. I don't find your claim convincing. Greglocock (talk) 21:20, 19 December 2020 (UTC)
- Yebbut 1: it's a diesel and b) 2.0L isn’t what I'd call small. 1.0-1.3 turbocharged petrol engines are a different matter - small Fiats in particular have been on the receiving end of criticism in the UK. Mr Larrington (talk) 20:47, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
Reasons for bad fuel economy
editHow about stone-age era engines with low compression ratios and outdated cr*p like carburetors or mechanical distributor ignition? 46.115.118.127 (talk) 08:24, 5 April 2014 (UTC)