See we agree... I do for the same reasons... 2 - 3 seconds equals 100 - 200 feet of separation... at about 55 - 60 is right in the wake turbulence. Only when I go on the longer commute home, am I on off hours... All my other stuff is done on a normal commute.

 

"It wasn't a bowl of water but a Coleman 6-pack size cooler half filled with ice water"

Hot, you have me in stitches!!!

 

so is your gas quality, emissions that choke cars and reduce mpg, engine mapping, and overall engines setup that is not geared towards high end mpg. do quick search on European cars mpg. it's 30-40% overall better than even same models sold here.
no need to even mention domestic vehicles, that were supposed to be mpg killers, and never ended in mass production. say, a Ford Taurus that does over 60mpg?
problem is not that gas is kept low or high. problem is, it is done at will and consumer is nothing but a guided machine to make money off. makes on one end, gives all away and more on the other end. money bags have full and total power over the country, that's the problem.

 

In 2007:

28 fill-ups
9397.8 miles driven
329.266 gallons
28.54 MPG
980.90 dollars spent

2008:

21 fill-ups
9786.8 miles driven
272.431 gallons
35.92 MPG
897.34 dollars spent

2009:

17 fill-ups
9411.5 miles driven
238.495 gallons
39.46 MPG
608.97 spent

2010:

26 fill-ups
14764.8 miles driven
384.031 gallons
38.44 MPG
1195.80 dollars spent

I'd like to say it was worth it but I'm really really really cheap.

 

There is an easy way to calculate the "worth" of miles-per-gallon. I normally get about 35mpg without working at it. If I were to work at it, slow down, draft trucks, etc., I might be able to get about 40 mpg on my commute in this vehicle.

I drive about 16000 miles/year. Most of that is commuting. At 35 mpg, 16000 miles uses 457 gallons of gas. At 40 mpg, it would require 400 gal. The difference is 57 gallons per year. At current US fuel prices, the difference in cost would be about 57 x $4, or $228. At higher fuel prices, of course, the calculation changes.

I used to drive a 10 mpg truck. That required 1600 gallons to go 16000 miles, which would cost $6400/year at $4/gallon. The reduction from 1600 to 457 gallons per year, was huge -- 1143 gallons at $4, saved me about $4500 last year.

There is a "diminishing return" effect. (These calculations assume 16000 miles/year, at $4/gallon). Doubling fuel efficiency, from 10 mpg to 20 mpg, would save about $3200/year. But, doubling it again, from 20 mpg to 40 mpg, would only save half of the remainder, or about $1600/year. And doubling again, from 40 to 80, would save only $800.

That first 'doubling' is the big gain, and it is easy -- just buy a car instead of a truck or SUV. The second 'doubling' is obtained by choosing an efficient car. But getting one more mpg out of an already-efficient car, hardly saves any actual money at all.

I suspect most people simply do not realize how much money they spend on gas, or how much their choice of SUV vs CAR really costs.

 

that is why I drive the escalade hybrid 4wd more often now at 19 city and 25 highway vs the honda pilot 4wd that gets 13 city and 18 highway.

 

i finally said screw this and do not have "consumption" screen on anymore. hypermile only if situation behind me allows, otherwise, drive as a regular car. keep map up on nav display, the least boring out of all choices they have.

 

during my drive to sfo thru las vegas and back to AR as well as going to CT, NY and back, never saw a RR, RR sport, LR LR4, LX570, QX57, Cayenne S/turbo, etc. oh yeah, they get 15mpg tops in the highway! no wonder.