The Public Opinion Soapbox

mrh717 · Joined: 12 May 2008 Posts: 2 Location: 17202

Just to get someone's thoughts on this-
Is it me or are the "economy" cars of today not as fuel efficient as the cars 10+ years ago?
Case in point: In 1992 my father bought a Honda Civic VX and acheived an average of 60 mpg on the highway with variable valve timing.
In 1998, I bought a 1996 Saturn SL. It had 79,000 miles on it and today I have 174,000 miles on it and wouldn't trade it for any new car out now. I average about 42 mpg an the highway, and 36 mpg around town.
There is nothing special about my car. It is not a hybrid, it has no variable valve timing, only a 1.9 liter single OH cam engine that runs just as smooth today as the day I rolled it off the Saturn of Carlisle Pike lot 10 years ago.
Why is it today there is not a vehicle to be found that can match the kind of fuel economy I am getting, without it being a hybrid, or being the size of a roller skate or taking premium gas to operate (which completely negates the point of saving money on gas if you just have to pay more when you fill up).
Take for instance the recent SMART car. Tests show an average of 40-32 mpg for a car that only seats 2 and can hold a bag of groceries and gallon of milk at best?
And what of other compact models? Others I have seen average around 35 mpg highway and 28 around town. The best I have found is the Ford Focus averaging 35 mpg highway. The new line of Saturn cars do not even come close to what they used to get, which is too bad because they have come a long way in styling, but seem to have forgotten the reasonable pricing of yesteryears car (due to importing the new Opel based Astra and the weakness of the dollar in today's market).
Have we become so used to the poor economy of the SUV and sports cars that have been marketed to us over the past 12 years that we have forgotten that we used to have some cars that were real gas misers and were mechanically uncomplicated, were affordable to buy and own and held 5 passengers reasonably comfortable?
And now we are willing to accept less that what we had because 35 mpg looks great against 17 to 20 mpg?

Let me know your thoughts!

M of 17202

Coppy · Joined: 28 Oct 2007 Posts: 2267 Location: Chambersburg

I never would have thought that an economy vehicle of 10 years ago was more fuel efficient than those today.... did your '92 Civic really average 60 MPG? That's crazy...

Honestly, I don't know much about variable valve timing or anything like that; it does seem like even sub-compact cars today are bigger than compact cars from 10 years ago.

My S-o has a Fit that averages between 35-40 highway and I thought that was about as good as it gets.

I'm with on your last statements though. Seeing people in Hummers literally makes me a nauseous now; not to mention ridiculously oversized SUV's and trucks like Suburbans, Excursions and F-350's. They ARE the reason gas is expensive, you can cite all the numbers you want about oil supply and refining capacity. It's our demand and refusal to participate in any sort of conservation that makes you gas $4/gallon.

Oh well, I suppose you have your boat, camper and snowmobiles to tow Confused

cookieclaygirl · Joined: 03 Dec 2007 Posts: 1805 Location: shippensburg

one comment on the 'that's why gas is so expensive'...

could it also be ppl are paying by their charge card and don't care what the price is? they'll grumble grumble, but they'll whip out their plastic to pay for it while their debts accumulate.

our government, while they are aware of our grumbles, are aware of it BUT since we keep dishing out the dough via plastic or what have you...why would the fix it? we just keep paying for it so they keep charging us.

we need it to get to work, we need the work to pay for our bills and gas so we keep paying the high fees and so the vicious cycle continues.

they're making money i'm sure. so why would they complain?

Coppy · Joined: 28 Oct 2007 Posts: 2267 Location: Chambersburg

I don't think it has anything to do with charge cards. I never carry cash anymore and I can tell you that I am just as sensitive to price as I would be if I were handing over cash.

In fact, cash tends to burn a hole in my pocket and I end up spending more than I normally would if I happen to have a couple of 20's in my wallet.

ZiggyStardust · Joined: 07 Nov 2007 Posts: 55 Location: Chambersburg

I've been ranting about this topic in much the same way as you a lot very recently.

I had an '02 Ford Focus that I got rid of a few months back. It got OK gas mileage, but nowhere near as good as the newer ones.

For the past year I've been driving a '97 Nissan truck with a four-banger. While it gets good mpg for what it is, it's still not that great.

I recently acquired an '86 VW Golf from a friend for very, very cheap. I'm getting between 35-40 mpg.

I rest my case.

anonymous_coward · Joined: 24 Oct 2007 Posts: 490

its because even the fuel efficient cars have been made more and more powerful in the past 10 - 15 years at the sacrifice of fuel economy. everyone feels like they need to be able to accelerate from a stop light at 0 - 60 in 8 seconds.

Mister Me · Joined: 23 Mar 2008 Posts: 212

Buy a Moped while the price is still low.

koozie · Joined: 27 Oct 2007 Posts: 122

I think that we are gonna see more and more mopeds and scooters in the near future. I was actually thinking about purchasing one for myself to get back and forth to work, but that would be driving on 11 and I think I would fear for my own safety.

paul_milander · Joined: 16 Mar 2008 Posts: 552 Location: Shippensburg, PA

My wife in her old job had a 2007 Ford Taurus and when her job was elimated it left us with our 2001 Honda Civic. When she came out to PA to find work she bough a old 96 4 door Honda Civic DX with 110K miles on it but is averaging almost 38mpg where the ford was getting about 22-24. Now the 2007 Ford had a lot more pickup and she now drives 98% of her miles are on 81.
_________________
I am having brain surgery on 09/26/08 please read my blog to help ease my mind.

http://ggchamplin.blogspot.com/

mrh717 · Joined: 12 May 2008 Posts: 2 Location: 17202

Actually displacement of engines in compact cars have decreased. 1.5 liters seems to be the norm for the subcompact. You should not have to decrease engine size to increase fuel economy. This move is all about smaller capacities and making it a more enviro-freindly engine, while fuel consumption and size of the auto have decreased as well.
Advances in frame and material components can make it possible to develop a lighter, stronger automobile, all the while increasing it's efficiency.
If the India produced Tata Nano can be produced for the equivalent of $2,500 (USD) and be a safe alternative (compared to India's current offerings), other auto manufacturers could follow suit and find a design that does not compromise style and practicality for efficiency.