Why does PT foglight come on with right turn signal?

wrote:

> Bill,
> I forgot to say that in all the talk about the PT Cruiser mileage, I
> went to a 65 series tire, the largest that would fit running it at 35
> lbs.

I have to ask you how you figured your fuel mileage with the larger
tires. You do realize that the odometer would not read correctly - that
with a larger OD tire you would have been getting better milage than you
would have read or calculated from any of the vehicle's milage
calculating systems or odometer?

Also, I don't know what the factory tire size was, but the 65 probably
wasn't more than a couple of percent different in OD and mileage effect
than the factory size tires.

Bill Putney
(To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
address with the letter 'x')

who cares what the overhead states. it is a average anyway
just filling the tank pulling out on the road and matting it throws milage out the
window by going with what the overhead reads! real is what i am all about

Bill Putney wrote:

> philthy wrote:
> > one thing i do see form time to time is somehow the pinion factor setting for
> > tire size gets changed in the pcm and that can affect milage and if you go to
> > a taller tire it will improve milage
>
> A taller tire will imporve *real* mileage, but not as *calculated* using
> the odometer or the overhead computer (if the pinion factor is not
> corrected for the tire size change).
>
> Bill Putney
> (To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
> address with the letter 'x')

In article <Pp7TT5WKBvRn-pn2-sGlB3Kz9mZ8j@localhost>,
> wrote:

> rented a 2007 PT Sedan, with the
> usual equipment, non-turbo, the highest we got was 25 on Interstate
> 10, driving a steady 60mph with the cruise control on. Coming back,
> we upped it to 65 with cruise and got 23mpg. That is not acceptable.
> As I stated, I love the car's design, the utility, etc.

I agree it's low, but I see one thing that could be a significant factor
in the low PT Cruiser MPG that appears common.
Poor streamlining; the front, steep rear and particularly the NON FLAT
sides.

BTW the EPA HWY mileage figures are measured at
much less than a steady 65MPH,
so poorer streamlining would show more difference at a steady 65MPH.

I consistently get 29MPG HWY at 65MPH with my '95 3.3L Concorde.

Just compare the VW new Beetle 2.5L 23/31 mpg
New Beetle Convertible 2.5L 22/30 mpg
of the same engine. The convertible has not as smooth a roof and is
likely slightly heavier, resulting in slightly lower EPA mileage. The
difference would be greater at a steady 65MPH.

The '07 PT Cruiser 2.4L I4 150HP is rated at 22/29 mpg.

How about this for an all around FAST compact car for $23k!
Caliber SRT4 2.4L turbo 285HP 22/28MPG.
0-60 = 6 sec.
http://www.allpar.com/cars/dodge/caliber-srt4.html

I agree that the overhead is not as accurate as the odometer in a given
situation with the correct tire size. But average over a tank would be
fairly consistent on a given vehicle. But yes - I agree that the
overhead is not the most accurate.

So you're saying you'd go by the odometer? It definitely would not
reflect any improvement in mileage from a larger OD tire without either
correcting the pinion factor or putting a correction factor into the
calculations. The odometer does not know the tire is bigger. Any
improvement in mileage from a bigger tire will not come out in the
calculations (and may even result in a decreased *calculated* mileage
due to the slight extra load - but only because the odometer reading
does not reflect the extra distance traveled due to the larger tire -
once that is factored in - yes - the calculation will reflect the
positive effect of the larger tire).

Bill Putney
(To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
address with the letter 'x')


philthy wrote:
> who cares what the overhead states. it is a average anyway
> just filling the tank pulling out on the road and matting it throws milage out the
> window by going with what the overhead reads! real is what i am all about
>
> Bill Putney wrote:
>
>
>>philthy wrote:
>>
>>>one thing i do see form time to time is somehow the pinion factor setting for
>>>tire size gets changed in the pcm and that can affect milage and if you go to
>>>a taller tire it will improve milage
>>
>>A taller tire will imporve *real* mileage, but not as *calculated* using
>> the odometer or the overhead computer (if the pinion factor is not
>>corrected for the tire size change).
>>
>>Bill Putney
>>(To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
>>address with the letter 'x')