General physics apply to the sports car as well, though. The sports car still uses way, way, way more gas for a higher velocity.
My point is: gas usage is not proportional with speed. It is factor ^3. People underestimate that.
So when I cruise on a flat surface at 100kph, I use some 4.7 litres with my car. If I go 120kph, a lot of people would expect an increase of 20%, at max, so roughly 5.6 litres. But it gets to some 6.5 litres, an increase of almost 40%. And if I went 150 or above that shit gets crazy.
The same applies to the sports car. If people calculate “I drive twice as fast, it’ll cost me twice as much”, that’s a crazy miscalculation.
Nobody said that though. It’s just not always to the power of three. It can’t be, if you consider aerodynamics and the shape of the car. A pointy rocket doesn’t use the same amount of fuel to go at a certain speed as a G wagon, all other things remaining equal.
A sports car doesn’t have the same aerodynamics as a family hatchback though. You can’t compare them like this directly.
No, that’s why I didn’t.
General physics apply to the sports car as well, though. The sports car still uses way, way, way more gas for a higher velocity.
My point is: gas usage is not proportional with speed. It is factor ^3. People underestimate that.
So when I cruise on a flat surface at 100kph, I use some 4.7 litres with my car. If I go 120kph, a lot of people would expect an increase of 20%, at max, so roughly 5.6 litres. But it gets to some 6.5 litres, an increase of almost 40%. And if I went 150 or above that shit gets crazy.
The same applies to the sports car. If people calculate “I drive twice as fast, it’ll cost me twice as much”, that’s a crazy miscalculation.
Nobody said that though. It’s just not always to the power of three. It can’t be, if you consider aerodynamics and the shape of the car. A pointy rocket doesn’t use the same amount of fuel to go at a certain speed as a G wagon, all other things remaining equal.