FEB 22

It's hard for me to buy it, but there it is in the 1975 Guinness Book of World Records, a 1959 Opel T-1 with a documented fuel efficiency of 376.59 miles per gallon. Now, let's all rush to the presses with lots of rhetoric on how "if we could do it in 1973, why can't we do it now?"

And now let's actually answer that question. First, the car is efficient because it's extremely light. In fact, there's nothing inside it. One tiny plastic seat, no dashboard, no passenger seat, no back seat, no trunk. There aren't even headlights. The rear wheels have been replaced by a single, ultra-hard wheel and the drive-train is just a bicycle chain.

All of this weight saving does wonders for a car's gas mileage, especially at relatively low speeds. Aerodynamics really only start to matter at speeds above 30 mph, which is why the Opel drivers stayed constantly at 30 mph throughout the entire test.

Push this thing up to 60, and I guarantee you'd see sub-30 mpg ratings. But the conditions of the test also leave something to be desired. Driving a car at a perfectly constant speed for 300 miles is a lot different than actual driving. The one bit of technology that seems could be transitioned into modern cars is a heating of the fuel before it's injected into the cylinders. This guarantees a more complete burn of the fuel.

Indeed, we have no idea where that technology went and why it wasn't incorporated into today's vehicles. Anyone with any insights on that, I'd love to see the comments.

Via TreeHugger

Comments (8)

Subscribe to this comment's feed

...
written by steve, February 23, 2008

All of these articles about how lighter cars or cars with lighter loads doing better makes me think. I've seen tips for years advising people not to leave junk in their cars. I also have to wonder if the obesity epidemic isn't driving some of the environmental problems. In addition to lower gas mileage I've had a suspicion that people like SUVs because they are easier to get in & out of when you are heavy.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

Sigh
written by Dyea, February 23, 2008

Push this thing up to 60, and I guarantee you'd see sub 30 mpg ratings.

Does that even make sense? This site needs editing if its serious about succeeding.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

yes
written by def, February 23, 2008

Yes, this site is a little fast and loose. Oh wait, here's another article. Never mind.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

It's a good start, and something worthwh
written by Shu, February 24, 2008

Most inner city driving doesn't need to be much faster than 30~40mph. And if people were smarter drivers it would help. I see many drivers accelerate and get dangerously close to the car in front, or when the traffic light is already red. This lack of foresight, seems to very much reflect the mess we got ourselves into.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

the same car today
written by Adam, February 24, 2008

You've likely seen this already, but here is a website that shows the current state of the original Shell car. http://www.race-cardrivers.com/Shell Opel.htm

I remember reading about this as a kid. For the milage test, they wrapped the engine in asbestos blankets to drive up the thermal efficiency. I think they also used a pulse-and-glide technique, where they'd run the car up to about 30 mph, then shut off the engine and coast.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

...
written by Joseluz, February 25, 2008

There are too many reasons why energy efficient vehicles went out the door in America and the world.
The automobile industry could go as large as they wanted because the price and effects of gasoline were never an issue.
The american people demanded luxury. And luxury has never equated with a slim vehicle.
NOt too mention that the proliferation of vehicles themselves has alot to do with how cars have evolved. The fact that there are so many cars on the road warrants more mass between you and death. More mass means heavier vehicles. ;)
And finaly the reason I think that we left lighter and "lesser" cars behind is because we need to sport vehicles that match our egos.

• 
• +1
• 
• 

Seriously,
written by Israel Walker, July 16, 2008

As speed increases linearly, wind resistance increases exponentially. As wind resistance increases, so does the HP to maintain speed. Say the engine makes 8HP to push the car at 30MPH. To double the speed you have to increase the horsepower to the square. It doesn't take 16 HP to go 60, it takes 64 and that means the fuel consumption increases by 8 as well. 1/8 of 350 is 43 MPG, about what a Geo metro of the about the same weight and HP got in 1990's.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

TOO BAD.......... modified now ...not a
written by OldSchool Restorations, November 03, 2008

Unfortunately, the buyer who purchased the vehicle from us was more interested in making the car driveable, than preserving history. Now that it has been modified, the historical scientific value is gone....Like if the first Wankel engined car, now has a Mazda engine !!! ...TOO BAD, what's gone is gone...... "restore " means to return to 'as original'...and does not tolerate changes ........

• 
• +0
• 
• 

Name

Email

Website

Title

Comment

smaller | bigger

Subscribe via email (registered users only)

Write the displayed characters

Add Comment