Thursday, June 19, 2014
When I am driving to work, I notice a sign on the side of the road END MEASURED MILE. Sadly, I don't recall ever seeing the BEGIN MEASURED MILE sign. Well, I saw the END MEASURED MILE sign yesterday and when I got to the interstate, I thought I'd follow those mile markers and see how the Ranger's odometer matched up.
So I looked at th eodometer at a mile marker, and after one mile on the interstate, the odometer moved 0.95 miles.
So if this is in fact true, when I go 95 miles on the odometer, I actually have gone 100 miles. It's a 5% difference. If my odometer is 5% short, and I'm actually going 5% more miles than I think I am going, then my mileage should go up 5% as well, so I'm possibly getting over 26.5 mpg.
Maybe some day I'll get the odometer and speedometer calibrated. Probably not, because I'm cheap.
Wednesday, June 11, 2014
I stopped before the fuel gauge got down to one quarter tank, because last time I put in more gas than the owner's manual said was possible and I was just barely below a quarter tank. So I ended up with 13.979 gallons on 355.1 miles, for a fuel economy of 25.40 mpg.
So on two tanks on the Ranger, I am averaging 24.96 mpg, and on the four tanks in the minivan when I drove that, I averaged 24.05 mpg.
The minivan was much faster and more powerful and got almost as good mileage. Probably this is the difference between 1995 truck engineering and 2008 minivan engineering.
But such is life. This is what I have done and now I am living with it.
In a couple of years, one child will go off to college, followed by the others two years later, so in four years everything will be changing again. Probably the car situation will shift around as well. In the meantime I am enjoying the Ranger.
Monday, June 2, 2014
The double bad news is that means I got only 24.52 miles per gallon.
The triple bad news is that I mostly was driving conservatively, and only had hard acceleration about 4 or 5 times.
The quadruple bad news is that when the pump stopped, I heard a splash and saw a little puddle underneath the filler nozzle area, and there wasn't any gas dripping off the side of the truck so I am a confused mess!
So now there's a baseline measurement on the mileage of the old Ford Ranger. It's about half a mile per gallon better than the 4 tanks of minivan gas from the time I drove the minivan to work. I was expecting better. I suppose I can do better.
I've got to stop trying to go 70 on the interstate. This poor little truck was giving its all to go that fast. And it's not the most aerodynamic thing out there.
Still, this is about a 32% decrease in mileage over the Mighty Corolla. Or, a 32% increase in my gasoline cost.
On the other hand, we made an easy trip to the dump, with a convenience factor there... But it will take regular trips to the dump in order for the value to make up for the difference in gas cost.
But now that we have the little Ford Ranger, it's in the fleet and who knows what will happen in a few years when the kids are out in colleges? Probably one of them will take the minivan, which will open up a slot in the garage, and my experience buying and selling on craigslist was so fun that I'm comfortable buying a used economy commuter from there in the future.
In the meantime, we will live with the Groovy Ranger, accept the negatives, and take advantage of the positives...
Wednesday, May 21, 2014
Yesterday, I used $1850 of that cash to buy a 1995 Ford Ranger, as shown in the nearby picture. It has a 4 cylinder motor, 5 speed manual transmission, and apparently an old smell of faint cigarette smoke (I can't smell anything, but my nose doesn't work as well as some of the women I am married to). It allegedly has a new clutch and timing belt and spark plug wires. The tires look good. It runs pretty good, too. The AC is not entirely working but seems to put out cool air about half the time. There's a junction in the exhaust pipe where a gasket is rotted out so under all but the mildest acceleration it sounds loud and obnoxious.
The Ranger still had the original window sticker that claimed 28 mpg highway. I refueled on my way home last night and reset the trip meter, so in a week or so I'll have my first piece of data to see how well this truck has held up.
We made the switch because we foresee the need to move large piles of mulch, dirt, rocks, and lumber in the near future. In a couple years we'll be taking kids to college. In the fall we'll have a third driver. Yes, much of this can be accomplished with the world's fastest minivan, but it's a pain to remove and re-install the heavy, awkward seats in the middle. Plus it makes a mess in the inside of the minivan. So somehow I convinced the family that this was a smart course of action.
Fun fact: this is the first vehicle in my married life that my wife specifically instructed me to leave her name off the title and registration.
Thursday, May 15, 2014
So the news generally doesn't report on bland daily activities. It reports things that generally happen to relatively few people but are so fantastic in nature it's obvious that the general public would want to know about it. Bank robberies, muggings, fires, thefts, crashes, strange achievements, and such. So the news, packed with so many interesting items, feeds our brains with these things so we begin to think that these uncommon occurrences are actually more prevalent in society than they actually are.
Then we lock our doors. We get security systems. We wonder what odd things we can do to get on the news, because obviously there's so much going on to everybody that there must be something we do that's newsworthy.
But the news reports on minority issues that affect a small subset of our population. We think it applies to us and it gets reported in such a way that we think that it could have happened to us, so we should be alert.
(This affects me to such extreme that one night I left the garage door open all night and the car doors unlocked and when I opened the door the next morning and saw straight outside and not the closed garage door, well I had a moment of chilling fear tingle up my spine followed by a wash of relief that the whole family wasn't raped and pillaged and murdered and killed overnight.)
And here we are, watching the news, thinking all of it in some way directly affects our lives. Our favorite TV and movie actors share their opinions about some of it, too. They support some things and oppose other things. And the news reports these famous opinions as if they are facts. The news cycle continues, and over the course of a few short months or years, the constant reporting of these uncommon activities and the vocal support or opposition of them by people we enjoy being entertained by, well, turns out that we start thinking that the opinions of these famous people are actual reflections of society in general.
So we think to ourselves, wow, my opinion must be so out of touch with the rest of the general public. Something is wrong with me that I don't see things the same way as these reporters and people I see on the TV and hear on the radio. Well, those people must know more than me, because why else would they be so rich and famous if they weren't more capable and knowledgeable than me?
Slowly, we find that our opinions and thoughts that are contrary to what the news reports as common and right, those opinions must be bad.
And when some personality on the edge of popular opinion opens up and says something to question this, perhaps the same way you may question things if you had the chance, well the media piles on this poor individual as an intolerant bigot racist who lives in the dark ages. He gets fined and suspended by his boss and the rest of the TV and radio people point to him as the worst kind of person. So you think to yourself, wow, I better keep my mouth shut, look what happened to that guy.
Yes, you still may have your opinion, and it still may be different than what the talking heads on the TV are reporting as common enlightened knowledge. But you had better not share it with anyone or else you will be seen as a hate and fear-filled ignoramus impeding the progress of the enlightened ones.
Remember, these enlightened ones are remarkably few in number. They have large soapboxes to stand on and are influential because we loved them in that movie where they pretended to be that character we love. Clearly their beliefs are more important than mine. Clearly those who disagree are wrong. Just look at what happened to those people who spoke up against the popular opinion. If such bad things happened to them (and they are FAMOUS!), imagine what terrible things could happen to us if we talk about our skepticism of what's going on? There would be no hope for us.
And this is how I am realizing that we are all free to say whatever we want, as long as it doesn't oppose what our news reporters and celebrities support.
Wednesday, May 14, 2014
So I listen to lots of books. I liked Steve Martin's autobiography, I disliked Roger Ebert's autobiography. I liked the Harry Potter books, I disliked the Maze Runner books. I liked Moby Dick and am currently enjoying 20,000 Leagues under the Sea. I liked Frankenstein and Dracula. I liked the Hunger Games and Ender's Game and most of the Dune books.
Recently I have noticed that in many novels, periodically a character will go on a long speech about a particular topic that's not entirely relevant to the narrative, but sometimes interesting to know. There are great examples of this in Moby Dick, as pages and pages are devoted to describing every part of the whale and the various uses of each part. While interesting to know, it just sort of slows down the whaling action and search for the great white whale.
I'm wondering if it's these "throwaway parts" of the novels that are the author's true intention and message. Did Melville draw us in with the promise of sea action so he could explain to us the inner workings of the whaling industry? Did Verne want to educate us about all the various classifications of sea life in 20,000 Leagues? Did Collins want to explain to us that not all boy/girl friendships have to be romantic or physical?
Maybe I am reading into this too much, but in my history of reading books and watching movies, it's becoming clear that the author/director wants to express something more to us than just the basic plot. Perhaps the layering of themes makes the narrative more enjoyable, or perhaps the writers are using the medium to get their viewpoints out there for the public to consume, in a subtle manner to further their own viewpoints.
On the other hand, Orson Scott Card wrote Ender's Game specifically towards a younger audience, but didn't overtly push any of his beliefs on the reader. Sadly, the general public went nuts talking about his personal views when the movie came out and a minor firestorm ensued.
So I guess I just contradicted my whole assertion that writers use their novels to advance their own agendas. Oh, well.