What's wrong w/ this mpg ?

[Tommy Gun]

Our SHO is advertised as getting an estimated 17 city/25 highway (AWD).

Taking it easy on the way to Florida we put on over 900 highway miles driving at about 70 mph average.

By the time we got her we only made it up to 19.0 mpg?

What would make it so much lower than the advertised 25 mpg?


In comparison I got about 21 mpg in the GT500 going to Orfstock, bigger motor, traveling through the mountains?

.

[Boston Mike]

well, it's AWD vs. RWD, so the mileage is split evenly??? :haha:

[Tommy Gun]

well, it's AWD vs. RWD, so the mileage is split evenly??? :haha:


Okay, thanks.



.

[Tommy Gun]

:hey2: Wait a minute! :trouble:



.

[Joe G]

I suggest you just turn up the radio. :dj:





:haha:

[tekheavy]

I suggest you just turn up the radio. :dj:





:haha:

:goodpost:

[Boston Mike]

:hey2: Wait a minute! :trouble:



.

admit it, it at least made you chuckle a little bit. :grin:

[Gr8snkbite]

Revert back to your factory tune....:tease2:

[68fastback]

...might take 4-5K miles of break-in before the mileage picks up a bit ...that and a steadier right foot on cruise? :shades:

[Black Vert SS]

Next time drive the Shelby! :boink:

[Tommy Gun]

...might take 4-5K miles of break-in before the mileage picks up a bit ...that and a steadier right foot on cruise? :shades:


Good point.

I think we have about 3000 miles at the minute.


.

[HSURB]

I don't think the motor is considered past the break-in point. Wait until that hits. Also, going from a 89 Octane to a 93 Octane can add 4 to 5 mpg to the average.

Just guessing.

By the way, the 5.4 in my Platinum is suppose to get 21 mpg. The best I've ever been able to get is 16. Go figure.

HSURB®

[VaporDude]

I don't think the motor is considered past the break-in point. Wait until that hits. Also, going from a 89 Octane to a 93 Octane can add 4 to 5 mpg to the average.

Just guessing.

By the way, the 5.4 in my Platinum is suppose to get 21 mpg. The best I've ever been able to get is 16. Go figure.

HSURB®

Does it sit in the garage like the Shelby? Maybe you need to drive it more. Just sayin............:grin:

TG needs to get the junk out of the trunk. He carrying too much excessive weight with all those bags he drives around with. :tease2:

[68fastback]

...but that's agood point, VD ...with three people in the car (dunno how many) and a trunk full for vacation, could easily be adding 700-900# to the SHO's 4300# weight (that Haldex AWD does add some real weight) for a rolling weight of 5000-5200#.

...for reference, an 18.5' 1988 Cadillac Brougham 'cruise-ship' (lol) weighs in at 42xx#

...but you can drive the SHO into a wall at 55 or an offset crash or drop it on it's roof ...and probably walk away with barely some scratchs.

I guess it's all a series of tradeoffs?

[Tommy Gun]

Does it sit in the garage like the Shelby? Maybe you need to drive it more. Just sayin............:grin:

TG needs to get the junk out of the trunk. He carrying too much excessive weight with all those bags he drives around with. :tease2:



I do have a lot of baggage. :shades:

We have used 93 octane since we bought the car.

.

[Tommy Gun]

...but that's agood point, VD ...with three people in the car (dunno how many) and a trunk full for vacation, could easily be adding 700-900# to the SHO's 4300# weight (that Haldex AWD does add some real weight) for a rolling weight of 5000-5200#.

...for reference, an 18.5' 1988 Cadillac Brougham 'cruise-ship' (lol) weighs in at 42xx#

...but you can drive the SHO into a wall at 55 or an offset crash or drop it on it's roof ...and probably walk away with barely some scratchs.

I guess it's all a series of tradeoffs?


2 people in the car and not a lot of luggage. A suitcase, couple of lawn chairs and some misc small stuff.

.

[68fastback]

ok, maybe 4700#

I'm assuming Tim was kidding on 93 vs 87 ...imo, not going to get any different mileage with 93 vs 87 ...just +/- 4 or 5 more HP/Tq which, if you use it, will just lower your mileage a tiny bit more. That said, I'd use 93 in the SHO too but no prob mix-matching with what's available.

[Johnny Dangerously]

Even though the Feds revised the method for determining the average mileage, it still is only an average.

There are other factors that can screw with mileage.

Was there a headwind or crosswind? This can cut ~5 mpg.

Was the interstate unusually rough?

Were the tires inflated properly?

Did TG have a lead foot?


`

[68fastback]

Even though the Feds revised the method for determining the average mileage, it still is only an average.

There are other factors that can screw with mileage.

Was there a headwind or crosswind? This can cut ~5 mpg.

Was the interstate unusually rough?

Were the tires inflated properly?

Did TG have a lead foot? Bingo!!


`

:rofl3:

[Tommy Gun]

Even though the Feds revised the method for determining the average mileage, it still is only an average.

There are other factors that can screw with mileage.

Was there a headwind or crosswind? This can cut ~5 mpg.

Was the interstate unusually rough?

Were the tires inflated properly?

Did TG have a lead foot?


`


No lead foot, it was windy, not heavy traffic, tires inflated right and w/ nitrogen.

.

[HSURB]

...but that's agood point, VD ...with three people in the car (dunno how many) and a trunk full for vacation, could easily be adding 700-900# to the SHO's 4300# weight (that Haldex AWD does add some real weight) for a rolling weight of 5000-5200#.



Dan - you're forgetting to factor in the weight of eight coats of wax he applied as he was on his hands and knees saying "Yes Co-Pilot, Yes Co-Pilot, anything for you Honey." :haha::haha:

HSURB®

[Gr8snkbite]

:goodpost:

[68fastback]

Dan - you're forgetting to factor in the weight of eight coats of wax he applied as he was on his hands and knees saying "Yes Co-Pilot, Yes Co-Pilot, anything for you Honey." :haha::haha:

HSURB®

:spitcopy: ...yup, forgot that heavy wax!!

...also TG could have eaten just before leaving -- whoa!! :haha:

---

...AC eats some mpgs too ..but beats sweating

[HSURB]

Yes, there is nothing worse than arriving at your final destination with swamp balls.

Just sayin'

HSURB®

[Birdman]

:doh2:.....:spitcopy:

[Joe G]

Yes, there is nothing worse than arriving at your final destination with swamp balls.

Just sayin'

HSURB®

:tmi:

[Tommy Gun]

We're dying over here!! :rofl3:



:sherriff:

.

[Joe G]

We're dying over here!! :rofl3:



:sherriff:

.

Need an ambulance?

http://smileys.on-my-web.com/repository/Transports/ambulance-016.gif

[Tommy Gun]

:doh2:

[Gr8snkbite]

You said it dufus......:tease2:

[Alloy Dave]

I don't think the motor is considered past the break-in point. Wait until that hits. Also, going from a 89 Octane to a 93 Octane can add 4 to 5 mpg to the average.

Just guessing.

By the way, the 5.4 in my Platinum is suppose to get 21 mpg. The best I've ever been able to get is 16. Go figure.

HSURB®

:haha: that's a good one Tim.

[Alloy Dave]

TG, the only thing I can think of is if the trans was not going into OD for some reason. I'd try this....

Get on the highway about 60 mph or so. Manually move the transmission into the next lower gear from "D". This may be "3" if you have a 4 speed auto trans. If you cannot feel/see a difference in RPM when doing this, then you may have a transmission problem.

I do agree with VD that the stated MPGs are only estimates..but that's really far off. :wow2:

[68fastback]

...if that's ok, possibly it's going into OD but not locking the Tq-converter ...dunno how to check that since some of the newer trans designs lock the converter in multiple higher gears. I'm also wondering if it's in 'sport mode' and if that calibration affects mileage.

...prolly the heavy way tho. :tease2:

[Johnny Dangerously]

My money is on the engine not being broken in yet.


`

[68fastback]

+1

...and right-foot 'tip-in' ;)

[Tommy Gun]

TG, the only thing I can think of is if the trans was not going into OD for some reason. I'd try this....

Get on the highway about 60 mph or so. Manually move the transmission into the next lower gear from "D". This may be "3" if you have a 4 speed auto trans. If you cannot feel/see a difference in RPM when doing this, then you may have a transmission problem.

I do agree with VD that the stated MPGs are only estimates..but that's really far off. :wow2:




Um, it's a "6-speed electronically controlled automatic overdrive with paddle activation ". :shades:


.

[Birdman]

With the added weight the car is carrying + running the AC + it's a new engine + driving style, you could easily be off at least 5mpg or more from it's best capable fuel milage. :shades:

[68fastback]

...what birdy said :biggrin:

...plus TG just ate ...that's gotta be good for -2 mpg :giggle:

[Tommy Gun]

:sherriff:

.

[68fastback]

I see Fox claims their actual mileage for 2010 SHO (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,539185,00.html)was:

The front-wheel-drive Taurus models, fitted with normally aspirated 263 hp V6 engines, get an even more respectable 18 city/28 highway.
With this in mind I can't say I was too impressed with my personal average of 18 mpg in the SHO, especially since most of those miles were of the highway variety. In a front-wheel drive Limited model on a similar route I managed 22 mpg. It's a good thing the SHO has all that power to make the pain at the pump go away.

TUJEFE on 2010 SHO MotorTrend blog (http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/sedans/112_0909_2010_ford_taurus_sho_test/index.html)(at bottom) says he's seeing 18.9.

So, your 19 mpg seems about par for a new SHO, though I suspect all the above numbers will likely improve over time as the engine loosens up.

[Gr8snkbite]

he hasnt figured out the paddle shifter yet.....:doh2:

[Joe G]

he hasnt figured out the paddle shifter yet.....:doh2:

You think he drove to Florida without shifting out of first gear?!? :yikes:







:giggle:

[Birdman]

:spitcopy:

[Tommy Gun]

:doh2:




The highest I have noticed on the trip was 19.6 mpg.

We have gone 1200 miles so far this trip. :faint:

.

[Gr8snkbite]

should have bought a KIA.....:haha:

[68fastback]

lol -- from the Kia forums:

..."Kia Rio RX with only 65000km (45000miles) and found that my gas consumption is about 12L /100km which is far from good for a small car (http://www.kia-forums.com/1g-2g-2001-2005-rio/42531-my-fuel-mileage-terrible.html#). I've since changed the plugs with Bosch platinum plugs and the air filter with an aftermarket filter. This made very little differenc to the poor gas millage. Can anyone suggest what i might do to improve the gas millage to what this car should get (8.5L/100km) ...".

That's about 19.6 mpg.

TG, did you check under the hood? Maybe you have a...













... Kia :rofl:

[Alloy Dave]

:doh2:




The highest I have noticed on the trip was 19.6 mpg.

We have gone 1200 miles so far this trip. :faint:

.

That's a lot for a trip to South Carolina, I'd suggest buying a BillBill. :popcorn:

[Alloy Dave]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mEJL2Uuv-oQ

[Alloy Dave]

That's a lot for a trip to South Carolina, I'd suggest buying a BillBill. :popcorn:

My mistake, I meant North Carolina. :tease2:

[Tommy Gun]

We're in Georgia for the night.

Traffic held us up a couple times today.

Outside of Savanna. :grin:

.

[Joe G]

Is it raining?

[HSURB]

We're in Georgia for the night.

Traffic held us up a couple times today.

Outside of Savanna. :grin:


.

Such a historic place. Go stay on the Westin Resort on the island off downtown. Awesome facility.

HSURB®

[Tommy Gun]

Is it raining?



Not yet.

Haven't seen any rain except for one short burst earlier this morning.

[Tommy Gun]

Such a historic place. Go stay on the Westin Resort on the island off downtown. Awesome facility.

HSURB®



Only stopping for the night.

Supposed to rain pretty good here tomorrow, so we are heading home....9 hours to home.

.

[Joe G]

Haven't seen any sex except for one short burst earlier this morning.

That'll happen at your age. :doh2:

[Tommy Gun]

That'll happen at your age. :doh2:


Definitely not this week! :faint:


.

[Joe G]

:webers:

[68fastback]

wonder if you'll get pooer mileage going back...



















...because you'll be going uphill...














... on the globe :giggle:

2857

:haha:

[Gr8snkbite]

welcome home to all the rain w're having....:tease2:

[Tommy Gun]

Our SHO is advertised as getting an estimated 17 city/25 highway (AWD).

Taking it easy on the way to Florida we put on over 900 highway miles driving at about 70 mph average.

By the time we got her we only made it up to 19.0 mpg?

What would make it so much lower than the advertised 25 mpg?


In comparison I got about 21 mpg in the GT500 going to Orfstock, bigger motor, traveling through the mountains?

.



By the time we got home we were getting 20.6 mpg. :wtg:

.

[Gr8snkbite]

so the storms wind was pushing you back......cool.....:tease2:

[Tommy Gun]

yup. :grin:

Left Florida just in time.

And it was clear long enough when we got home to unload all of Alloy Daves stuff and our stuff. :look:

We didn't have to unload any koozies though. :wtg:

.

[68fastback]

By the time we got home we were getting 20.6 mpg. :wtg:



.

...leeeeetle by leeeeetle it's gettin' better...

...by next year: 25 (with a strong tailwind and an egg under your foot ;-))

[Tommy Gun]

:groan:

.

[Birdman]

By the time we got home we were getting 20.6 mpg. :wtg:

.

What happened ? Did you leave CoPilot behind in FL......:spitcopy:

[Gr8snkbite]

:ohsnap:


she's gonna Keel you.....

[HSURB]

TG - you need to be out getting the bugs off the front of the SHO.

HSURB®

[Tommy Gun]

What happened ? Did you leave CoPilot behind in FL......:spitcopy:



:ohsnap:

.

[Tommy Gun]

TG - you need to be out getting the bugs off the front of the SHO.

HSURB®


We had one downpour on the way home that cleaned the car up pretty good. :grin:

.

[Joe G]

TG - you need to be out getting the bugs off the front of the SHO.

HSURB®


As soon as we got home I made CP start working on it. She cleaned the car up pretty good. :grin:

.

:nonono:

[Tommy Gun]

:look:

.

[Gr8snkbite]

:tease2:

[Tommy Gun]

:boink:

[Tommy Gun]

Still just got 20.6 mpg when traveling this time.

Maybe it's because we are loaded down w/ luggage and stuff.

.

[68fastback]

...maybe it's because pooches don't have opposable thumbs :giggle:

...maybe not. :biggrin:

[Birdman]

Still just got 20.6 mpg when traveling this time.

Maybe it's because we are loaded down w/ luggage and stuff.

.

Are you still allowing the cruise control to drive the car, milage is not optomized using cruise control..:nonono:

[Gr8snkbite]

Are you still allowing the cruise control to drive the car, milage is not optomized using cruise control..:nonono:

nope...he was doing 90 the whole way.....:doh2:

[Tommy Gun]

Are you still allowing the cruise control to drive the car, milage is not optomized using cruise control..:nonono:



We hardly use cruise control.

We are averaging about 80 mph though. :look:

.

[Tommy Gun]

nope...he was doing 90 the whole way.....:doh2:


70 to 90 :hiding:

.

[68fastback]

70 to 90 :hiding:

.

90 90%, 70 10%? :grin:

[Tommy Gun]

Yes, Co Pilot drove some. :grin:

.

[VaporDude]

Yes, Co Pilot drove some. :grin:

.

I bet she got about 25MPG. :grin:

No wonder your mileage is not getting what was advertised. Since you are averaging 80MPH, test are conducted at around 55-60MPH for highway averages. I know in the Ratpor, if I go 70MPH, I get 15.5MPG. If I go 80MPH, I get about 13.5MPG. Slow down a little to get your MPG's up.

[Tommy Gun]

I bet she got about 25MPG. :grin:

No wonder your mileage is not getting what was advertised. Since you are averaging 80MPH, test are conducted at around 55-60MPH for highway averages. I know in the Ratpor, if I go 70MPH, I get 15.5MPG. If I go 80MPH, I get about 13.5MPG. Slow down a little to get your MPG's up.



Would it really make that much difference?

I don't particularly care about the mileage, I was just wondering.

I would rather get there 2 hours earlier and spend an extra $6 than drive 55 and be there the next day.

The speed limit 90% of the way there is 70 MPH, not 55.

.

[Joe G]

Would it really make that much difference?

I don't particularly care about the mileage, I was just wondering.

I would rather get there 2 hours earlier and spend an extra $6 than drive 55 and be there the next day.

The speed limit 90% of the way there is 70 MPH, not 55.

.

Ok. I'll delete this thread then.


:cop2:

[68fastback]

Would it really make that much difference?

I don't particularly care about the mileage, I was just wondering.

I would rather get there 2 hours earlier and spend an extra $6 than drive 55 and be there the next day.

The speed limit 90% of the way there is 70 MPH, not 55.



.

It will be more noticeable on the Raptor (like my old 4x4 van) which has the aerodynamics of a brick compared to the SHO, but speed makes a huge difference since, if I recall, aerodynamic drag varies as a cubed function of speed so, for example, an increase in speed of just 19% doubles the energy required to maintain that speed -- JUST THE AERO DRAG COMPONENT. So the aero drag at 80mph consumes 2.8x the energy of the drag at 60 mph ...of course, there's other variables like engine/tranny/DS/diff/axle-bearing/lubrication/tire frictional losses that likely have different characteristics, so the drag component is just part of the total energy expended but surely dominates the equation at higher speeds especially. It may only take 12HP to cruise at 60 but a 500HP car with decent aero might run out of HP at 150 because it consumes 39x the energy (2.5^3 x 12 = 468HP) in this arbitrary example.

[Tommy Gun]

It will be more noticeable on the Raptor (like my old 4x4 van) which has the aerodynamics of a brick compared to the SHO, but speed makes a huge difference since, if I recall, aerodynamic drag varies as a cubed function of speed so, for example, an increase in speed of just 19% doubles the energy required to maintain that speed -- JUST THE AERO DRAG COMPONENT. So the aero drag at 80mph consumes 2.8x the energy of the drag at 60 mph ...of course, there's other variables like engine/tranny/DS/diff/axle-bearing/lubrication/tire frictional losses that likely have different characteristics, so the drag component is just part of the total energy expended but surely dominates the equation at higher speeds especially. It may only take 12HP to cruise at 60 but a 500HP car with decent aero might run out of HP at 150 because it consumes 39x the energy (2.5^3 x 12 = 468HP) in this arbitrary example.




I was just thinking the exact same thing Dan.


















:groan:
.

[Johnny Dangerously]

Would it really make that much difference?

I don't particularly care about the mileage, I was just wondering.

I would rather get there 2 hours earlier and spend an extra $6 than drive 55 and be there the next day.

The speed limit 90% of the way there is 70 MPH, not 55.

.
There is a sweet spot when it comes to the best speed/mileage combo & it varies by vehicle &, of course, road conditions. For my Mustang, 75-80 mph yields the best gas mileage for me (28+ mpg). When I'm doing the posted speed limit, my mileage is 25-26 mpg.

The next long trip you take, vary your mileage in increments of 5 mph. You can use the on board computer to get instant mileage estimates over 5-10 miles to get you a good reading.


`

[VaporDude]

It will be more noticeable on the Raptor (like my old 4x4 van) which has the aerodynamics of a brick compared to the SHO, but speed makes a huge difference since, if I recall, aerodynamic drag varies as a cubed function of speed so, for example, an increase in speed of just 19% doubles the energy required to maintain that speed -- JUST THE AERO DRAG COMPONENT. So the aero drag at 80mph consumes 2.8x the energy of the drag at 60 mph ...of course, there's other variables like engine/tranny/DS/diff/axle-bearing/lubrication/tire frictional losses that likely have different characteristics, so the drag component is just part of the total energy expended but surely dominates the equation at higher speeds especially. It may only take 12HP to cruise at 60 but a 500HP car with decent aero might run out of HP at 150 because it consumes 39x the energy (2.5^3 x 12 = 468HP) in this arbitrary example.

Now that explains everything........:doh2:

[Joker]

At 80 in mine I get about 19 MPG. If I slow down to 70, I get about 22.

[68fastback]

I was just thinking the exact same thing Dan.

:groan:
.


Now that explains everything........:doh2:

dufi! :biggrin: ...just trying to help explain it -lol

[68fastback]

At 80 in mine I get about 19 MPG. If I slow down to 70, I get about 22.

...that makes sense to me :yes:

[Birdman]

Still just got 20.6 mpg when traveling this time.

Maybe it's because we are loaded down w/ luggage and stuff.

.


We hardly use cruise control.

We are averaging about 80 mph though. :look:

.

:doh2:the vacation might have helped to give you rest but..... still a dufus I see.....:rofl3:

[Joe G]

..... still a dufus I see.....:rofl3:

:iagree:

[CH53Driver]

:doh2:the vacation might have helped to give you rest but..... still a dufus I see.....:rofl3:


:iagree:

:goodpost:

[68fastback]

http://stangsunited.com/images/smilies/Smilies2/SU%20favorites/iagree.gif :giggle:

[Tommy Gun]

At 80 in mine I get about 19 MPG. If I slow down to 70, I get about 22.

:wow2:You have 80 mph areas in your state?

I know an official like you wouldn't break the law ? :shades:
.

[Tommy Gun]

There is a sweet spot when it comes to the best speed/mileage combo & it varies by vehicle &, of course, road conditions. For my Mustang, 75-80 mph yields the best gas mileage for me (28+ mpg). When I'm doing the posted speed limit, my mileage is 25-26 mpg.

The next long trip you take, vary your mileage in increments of 5 mph. You can use the on board computer to get instant mileage estimates over 5-10 miles to get you a good reading.


`



We find fast moving traffic.

We get a car moving good about 1/8-1/4 mile ahead of us and try to keep someone a little behind us.

In theory, the guy in front would get radar gunned first and we would slow down....or the guy behind us.

Of course depends how the other traffic is moving. We never run 15-20 mpg faster than he traffic around us or go in and out of any traffic.

.

[Joe G]

We find fast moving traffic.

We get a car moving good about 1/8-1/4 mile ahead of us and try to keep someone a little behind us.

In theory, the guy in front would get radar gunned first and we would slow down....or the guy behind us.

Of course depends how the other traffic is moving. We never run 15-20 mpg faster than he traffic around us or go in and out of any traffic.

.

:iagree: I do the same.

[Joker]

:wow2:You have 80 mph areas in your state?

I know an official like you wouldn't break the law ? :shades:
.

That was on my track day :tongue:

[HSURB]

We find fast moving traffic.

We get a car moving good about 1/8-1/4 mile ahead of us and try to keep someone a little behind us.

In theory, the guy in front would get radar gunned first and we would slow down....or the guy behind us.

Of course depends how the other traffic is moving. We never run 15-20 mpg faster than he traffic around us or go in and out of any traffic.

.

I just run everyone on my Driveway over and dominate the entire space. Works every time.

HSURB®

[Tommy Gun]

That was on my track day :tongue:


Okay :rolleyes:

.

[Tommy Gun]

On the way home we hit 21 mpg.

To Florida was 15 hours

On the way back was 14 hours 15 mins., so we were moving a little better w/ much less traffic.

Only clocked/saw 2 cops in South Carolina. The rest of the almost 1000 mile trip we never saw another . :grin:


Also, on the way there the temps were 60-70 degrees. On the way home temps were 36-48 degrees.

.

[VaporDude]

Usually with the colder denser air, there would be more drag on to the car. I guess that colder denser air gave you a few more horses thus better MPG but the drag of the cold air should have off-set the MPG increase.

[68fastback]

...and going north is uphill :rolleyes:

[Tommy Gun]

...and going north is uphill :rolleyes:


I knew it! :wtg:


I told Co Pilot that and she said I was stupid.

Women! :rolleyes:

.

[68fastback]

:biggrin:

[Joe G]

http://i218.photobucket.com/albums/cc289/JoeG_09/Emoticon/RTFM.gif

[Tommy Gun]

http://i218.photobucket.com/albums/cc289/JoeG_09/Emoticon/RTFM.gif



Read the Ford Manual?


OK

.

[Joe G]

Exactly. :shades:

[Tommy Gun]

:sneaking2:

[Alloy Dave]

On the way home we hit 21 mpg.

To Florida was 15 hours

On the way back was 14 hours 15 mins., so we were moving a little better w/ much less traffic.

Only clocked/saw 2 cops in South Carolina. The rest of the almost 1000 mile trip we never saw another . :grin:


Also, on the way there the temps were 60-70 degrees. On the way home temps were 36-48 degrees.

.
What happened, did you get lost again and somehow circle through Minnesota? :wow2:

[HSURB]

What happened, did you get lost again and somehow circle through Minnesota? :wow2:

Arkansas had a cold snap.

HSURB®

[Tommy Gun]

Surby is right, it was Arkansas. :nonono:

.

[Joe G]

Yeah. He'll never visit me in Minnesota. :nonono: