all-new 2021 GMC Yukon and Yukon Denali released (they're gorgeous!)
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
So, the cheap privates? |
Anonymous
If you have to ask, you either can't afford or are unwilling to expend the gas. They get shitty gas mileage and are bloated and ugly. They serve their purpose but hard to characterize them as "gorgeous". |
Anonymous
I find it entertaining that you think a jet is more efficient than an SUV, yeah. That sh!t's hysterical!!! So I currently fly a King Air 200. Twin engine turboprop general aviation aircraft. 8 seats, plus pilots, set up in business aircraft trim. It's a toy, I'm a fractional owner, I fly a it couple times a month as an instructor for pilots working on their multi-engine rating, and use it for vacation trips or long weekends 4-5 times a year. . A turbo prop is basically a jet engine turning a propeller. The prop does the work of moving the aircraft rather than the jet exhaust itself, and as such, it's about 10% more efficient than a comparable jet powered aircraft would be, up until about 300 knots, at which point it can't go any faster, whereas a conventional business jet with similar engines could, up to about 450-500 knots. I also have a Chevy Silverado pick up truck, which is basically a Chevy Suburban, but with a bed instead of a closed SUV body. Otherwise pretty similar. I get about 18-20 mpg highway with this truck. So at highway speed, it burns about 3 gallons of gasoline per hour. About 18 pounds of gasoline, at 6 pounds per gallon. Keep this figure in mind. It's important. The King Air engines (two of them) require a minimum fuel flow of 1.8 pounds per minute each, at high idle. So it's burning 3.6 pounds of fuel per minute just to idle, sitting on the ramp getting ready to taxi and take off. At 85% throttle, sufficient for cruise, the fuel flow jumps to about 225lbs/hr/per engine, or about 450lbs fuel per hour. The truck burns 18 lbs of fuel per hour while cruising. The plane burns 450 lbs of fuel per hour while cruising. And the King Air series is one of THE most fuel efficient aircraft for it's size that has ever been designed. Meaning nearly all other aircraft larger than it are less efficient, until you reach something the size of an Boeing 777 or Airbus A380, where the efficiency curves intersect again. Now let's do some math. Let's say the pick up truck is actually a Suburban, since it's the same vehicle anyway. And let's say I needed to take 5 people on a 280 mile trip to Nags Head, NC. That's about a 6 hour drive. During that drive the Suburban burns about 18 gallons of gasoline. So that works out to 21.6 pounds of fuel per person for the trip. Now let's use the King Air for the same trip, with the same 5 people, leaving from Manassass Airport. Distance is a little less, 250ish miles, total engine time (start up, idle, taxi, take off, cruise, land, taxi, park and shutdown) is about 90 minutes. Total fuel burn would be about 600 lbs of fuel, or about 120 lbs fuel per person. A Suburban is 6.6 times MORE efficient than one of THE MOST efficient multiple passenger aircraft available. So yeah, that's why I laugh at you people who say SUVs are killing the earth, then hop on a plane a dozen times a year for pointless business travel that could just as easily be done by Skype. Or because you simply MUST go to St Kitts for a long weekend to get away from the dreary D.C. winter, or Vail to go skiing. You can't math. |
Anonymous
|
It's nice about your airplane, but most people when they fly, don't fly in 8-seater airplanes.
Also, even better than driving an SUV but avoiding pointless business travel and trips to St Kitts is: NOT driving an SUV and avoiding pointless business travel and trips to St. Kitts. |
Anonymous
So in addition to not being able to understand math, you also don't do so well with reading comprehension, either. Since you seem to understand the part about larger planes being even less efficient per person than the '200, until you get to the size of the absolute largest planes in the world. And most people aren't flying those, but rather small and medium sized jetliners like the 737/757/767, A300/320, EA125, etc. But you ARE a climate expert, and an expert in telling others what they should be allowed to drive, in spite of not mathing or reading. Ok. |
Anonymous
Nice. I like you. We should go flying sometime. |
Anonymous
Nobody has said anything about what people should or should not be allowed to drive. The fact is that vehicles like the Yukon and the Denali are 1. deadly to others on the road 2. terrible for the climate What you do with that knowledge is up to you - at least currently. |
Anonymous
|
I would be embarrassed to drive that around. It’s
like wearing a sign in public saying “I don’t care about my kids future, the planet, your safety, or anything else but my ego.” Just cringe. |
Anonymous
I don't own one and wouldn't simply because they are too big and get terrible gas mileage. But I wouldn't fault someone for buying a car that makes THEM safer in a crash vs. the other vehicle. |
Anonymous
Yes, it's a rational decision on a personal level. But on a societal level, it's terrible. |
Anonymous
General Motors is on the record saying they want these all-new Yukons/Tahoes/Escalades to have best in their class MPG. That would be somewhere around 25 to 27 MPG highway. That's not terrible at all. |
Anonymous
| Wow, they’re boxy and ugly. The Costco furniture of cars. Gorgeous!?! Total click bait! |
Anonymous
That's better than my Outback. 
|
Anonymous
And yet moms near me will be rushing out to spend $70k on one! |
Anonymous
| Handsome re fresh! Not my bag but I think is handsome design. |