Gas prices are fueling demand for smaller vehicles.

[Shinova]

I was expecting a more sophisticated and technical reason why but that's it!? Suddenly a lot of things fall into place.

[Sam Or I]

I don't understand how these American cars have such poor performance compared to cars from other countries.


Totally different segments I know, but Benz has AMG cars with 6 litre turbocharged V12 with 604hp and around 700 lb lb-ft of torque with a fuel economy of 11 city and 17 highway. That's stil bad, but compared to that Dodge Challenger's stats it's a lot more power for just a little less fuel economy. I'm sure the turbocharger has much to do with the added power, which begs the question why American companies don't do the same and instead make oversized, poor performance engines.


Someone mentioned that it's cause bigger engines run longer, but does that extra longevity really make a difference unless you're owning that car for years and years?

Well Dodges have always had shitty MPG. But you are comparing a very expensive car to a consumer car.

GM is a different story. Look at the Corvette. 430 HP (6.2L V8), 17 mpg in the city, and 26 on the highway, compared to a little honda S2000 which gets 237 HP (2.2 L i4), and gets 18 city and 25 on the highway.

These engines are not poor performance, they just have a different methods of making power. The pushrod V-8 shines with the drivability, cost, and weight. Again going back to the Honda S2000 comparison, the little high revving 2.2L 4 banger only weighs about (last time I checked) about 30 lbs less than the 6.2 L V-8.

[Sam Or I]

Its kinda ironic, I am biking to work, to save money on gas. To make a down payment on a V-8 muscle car.

I am looking at a 2010 Dodge Challenger. (Hopefully they have a T/A edition.)

No offense, but I hope that car gets better mileage than the 2008 model:

With all of the spy shots, leaked covers and embargoed images of the 2008 Dodge Challenger on the web already, we're not sure how Chrysler feels about any more information getting out on its modern muscle car. Some information, however, is public access, like fuel economy ratings and other specs that are posted by the EPA on its website, fueleconomy.gov. The 2008 Dodge Challenger has already been added to the site and is reported to get 13 mpg city and 18 mpg on the highway. Since the 2008 MY Challenger will be just the SRT8 model with the five-speed automatic, these figures are for the familiar 6.1L HEMI V8 used in other SRT products like the Dodge Charger SRT8 and Chrysler 300 SRT8, both of which also achieve the same fuel economy numbers. According to the EPA, driving the Challenger SRT8 a distance of 25 miles will cost you around $5.50, and you'll be spending around $3,302 per year on gas.

[Source: fueleconomy.gov]

13-18 mpg. That's just... horrible. I don't know, if I were looking at a new car, it would be one with the best mileage I could afford, right up there with safety considerations.

It will. That is the massive 6.1L model. The tamer 5.7L (15/23 375 HP). Dodge has always got poor gas milage though. I know it still is not great, but Chrysler plans to discontinue most of the V-8's in 2011 (Due to law). It is the last chance to get a new V-8 (With a lifetime power-train warranty. The only reason I would consider a new car.)

[Shinova]

Hmm? What law?

[Gerald Tarrant]

I was expecting a more sophisticated and technical reason why but that's it!? Suddenly a lot of things fall into place.

A similar explanation covers why Europe has a much better public transit system. The low gas prices have made car trips competitive or better than a comparable public transit alternative. Add in the fact that cars are a little more convenient for all sorts of things ("I can get right there, versus having to walk a few blocks", it's easier to grocery shop with a car, etc.) Now the rising fuel prices should probably get people looking at substitutes (moving out of the suburbs, biking, busing, carpooling, etc.). We might start to see some improvements in public transit, sort of along the lines of the renewed interest in Railroads in the U.S. Link. These changes are exactly what should be expected from higher prices. It's too bad the Federal Government couldn't have started the trend prematurely by making higher gas taxes Link

[Sam Or I]

Hmm? What law?

The fleet average of a car company has to meet a certain goal, (I think it is 25/35, not sure though) by 2011. There will sill be V-8's but not nearly as many, and only in limited production vehicles.

[tim31]

Almost relevant to this thread, I just finished watched Bender's Big Score, and howled with laughter at that Al Gore moment:

GORE: Dammit. That hundred bucks could have bought me(ominous music) ONE GALLON OF GAS.

[PeZook]

And behold, that warm fuzzy feeling I got buying my hybrid car is even more warm and fuzzy.. Over three hundred kilometers I've put on it and the tank is still almost still full.

Huh?

My little Opel Astra with its 1.4 litre 80 HP engine gets that kind of mileage easily. I was really expecting hybrids to work much better

Also, engine-braking causes over-revving, which goes right back to the engine running faster than it needs to run, ergo fuel wastage (also, additional wear on the clutch and synchros). Brake pads are supposed to be worn down, that's why they're easily and cheaply replaceable.

It depends on how, exactly, do you engine-brake. My car cuts off the fuel flow automatically if you take your foot off the accelerator. You don't even need to downshift: I can come to a nice, slow stop with minimal use of brakes.

In fact, the owner's manual recommends it. Although it may simply be a trick to force drivers to change their synchros and clutches early

[Dahak]

Got any tips for me? I only learned how to drive a manual back in December, and I'm still not set in my ways, so I'm hoping I can learn a few good habits when it comes to shifting. I know how to make it go fast (R is for Race!), but how do I make it go efficient?

The general tips are:
Shift gear as soon as possible (around 2000RPM at the latest). Use the highest gear you can (You can go at around 50km/h in the 5th without stuttering ).
If you come up to a red light, don't use the clutch, but let the car coast as long as possible in gear (will also save a little fuel).
Try to avoid braking and excessive speeding-up when you can. Try to be anticipatory.
Don't drive around with stuff in your car you don't need. Every bit of it increases fuel usage.
Increasing the tyre pressure slightly (0.1-0.3 bar) also decreases fuel consumption.

[His Divine Shadow]

Huh?

My little Opel Astra with its 1.4 litre 80 HP engine gets that kind of mileage easily. I was really expecting hybrids to work much better

I got a 1.6 Astra myself and I get 525 kilometers out of one tank, or there abouts, I gas up every week around 40 liters and I got a 50 liter tank, so thats around 7.6 liters per 100km. I want to get an Auris though, or Yaris diesel that do around 4 liters per 100 instead.

Fuck hybrids, there are so many small and good looking diesels around now there is no reason to get a hybrid. The new 2008 Honda Civic is probably the best looking small diesel yet. The Toyota Auris is also really hot.

[Dahak]

Also, engine-braking causes over-revving, which goes right back to the engine running faster than it needs to run, ergo fuel wastage (also, additional wear on the clutch and synchros). Brake pads are supposed to be worn down, that's why they're easily and cheaply replaceable.

You should use engine-braking in situations like long downward tracks. If you continue to keep braking when driving down long slopes (like some Alpine pass), your brakes will overheat and they drastically decrease efficiency. Which is kinda bad in those situations...

[PeZook]

I got a 1.6 Astra myself and I get 525 kilometers out of one tank, or there abouts, I gas up every week around 40 liters and I got a 50 liter tank, so thats around 7.6 liters per 100km. I want to get an Auris though, or Yaris diesel that do around 4 liters per 100 instead.

With a 1.4, I get 600-650 kilometers out of a single tank, so it's slightly better. We actually wanted to get a diesel, but our budget was limited at that point.

Just FYI for Americans, I spend about 75 dollars a week for gas and drive between 500-600 kilometers on that.

Fuck hybrids, there are so many small and good looking diesels around now there is no reason to get a hybrid. The new 2008 Honda Civic is probably the best looking small diesel yet. The Toyota Auris is also really hot.

I actually hate how the Civic looks. Perversely, I love the new Ford Mondeo, but it's a gas-guzzler and a huge motherfucker to boot. My Astra is easy to park in the city.

If I'm changing cars, I'll probably still buy an Opel, but a diesel one

[His Divine Shadow]

I'm tired of Opels myself, rust buckets. We have a saying here that goes "Köp en Opel och se naturen igenom plåten" - which means if you buy an opel you'll see the idyllic scenery through the metal, because o fall the rust holes.

Also what joy to drive later this summer when I fire up the trans am with it's 5.7 liter V8

[PeZook]

I'm tired of Opels myself, rust buckets. We have a saying here that goes "Köp en Opel och se naturen igenom plåten" - which means if you buy an opel you'll see the idyllic scenery through the metal, because o fall the rust holes.

They actually spent a lot of money to improve that ; There's been plenty of uproar over a moto magazine here which drove an Opel Astra and a VW Golf for 200 thousand kilos and compared the results.

Whereas older Astras pretty much rusted like you described, the new one didn't have a spot of rust after 200 thousand.

This article was what sold me, really

Plus, they just keep going. My wife's family had a Kadet which went through 500k kilos over five years or so, and only started breaking down in the last month of his life

Also what joy to drive later this summer when I fire up the trans am with it's 5.7 liter V8

It's a guilty pleasure. You know you are ruining the environment, but damn if it doesn't feel good. Kinda like hamburgers

[Sea Skimmer]

I don't understand how these American cars have such poor performance compared to cars from other countries.

Your assuming everyone’s published horsepower figures have something to-do with reality, they often do not. The verification procedure for those figures, if the company has one at all, will consist of nothing more then a single representative from an industry organization (the society of automotive engineers for cars marketed in America) watch while a couple factory employees run a factory selected and tuned engine on a factory dyno. In reality American manufactures, especially General Motors, have a long history of significantly understating engine power. This saves the buyer a great deal of money on insurance, and makes the cars track performance numbers seem even better. Japanese and European manufactures (Toyota is by far the worst, and it pushes its engines hard as hell in newer models) meanwhile are much more prone to overstate power.

[The Grim Squeaker]

Also, engine-braking causes over-revving, which goes right back to the engine running faster than it needs to run, ergo fuel wastage (also, additional wear on the clutch and synchros). Brake pads are supposed to be worn down, that's why they're easily and cheaply replaceable.

You should use engine-braking in situations like long downward tracks. If you continue to keep braking when driving down long slopes (like some Alpine pass), your brakes will overheat and they drastically decrease efficiency. Which is kinda bad in those situations...

Best is to shift to a lower gear (Yes, even in an automatic) and to apply the brakes for short periods, sparingly to prevent overheating.

(Oh, and VW Golf, about 60-130$ a month in fuel, with European level gas taxes. Lovely little thing, just wish there was a hybrid diesel model with a larger engine, I push it a bit too fast for a 1600cc)

[Broomstick]

No offense, but I hope that car gets better mileage than the 2008 model:

With all of the spy shots, leaked covers and embargoed images of the 2008 Dodge Challenger on the web already, we're not sure how Chrysler feels about any more information getting out on its modern muscle car. Some information, however, is public access, like fuel economy ratings and other specs that are posted by the EPA on its website, fueleconomy.gov. The 2008 Dodge Challenger has already been added to the site and is reported to get 13 mpg city and 18 mpg on the highway. Since the 2008 MY Challenger will be just the SRT8 model with the five-speed automatic, these figures are for the familiar 6.1L HEMI V8 used in other SRT products like the Dodge Charger SRT8 and Chrysler 300 SRT8, both of which also achieve the same fuel economy numbers. According to the EPA, driving the Challenger SRT8 a distance of 25 miles will cost you around $5.50, and you'll be spending around $3,302 per year on gas.

[Source: fueleconomy.gov]

13-18 mpg. That's just... horrible. I don't know, if I were looking at a new car, it would be one with the best mileage I could afford, right up there with safety considerations.

Holy shit! My fuckin' truck gets at least 23 mpg!

[Alferd Packer]

Back in February, my wife and I put a deposit down for a new 2009 Jetta Diesel. Come this fall, we'll be driving arguably the most fuel efficient car easily purchased in the United States. It's a large purchase, but we'll make it up in fuel costs, certainly.

[Admiral Valdemar]

Fiesta Flight '01 model with a 1.3 litre Endura gets me good mileage. I use about $20 a week doing about 100 miles.

[Chardok]

It still hurts just to fill up my little Sentra. My GF gets all over me for demanding that it be 88 F or higher before we use the A/C at all And even then only at highway speeds. (50MPH and up) other than that, it's 4/40 AC (that's all 4 windows down at 40 MPH - heh) But, as a result we're making 33-34 MPG.

However, I will say that it's insane to me that I'm paying ~40 dollars to fille up a little 4-banger when for 20 bucks in High School I could fill my 1976 Pontiac LeMans from EMPTY.

[Broomstick]

Someone mentioned that it's cause bigger engines run longer, but does that extra longevity really make a difference unless you're owning that car for years and years?

I own my cars for "years and years" - so far the record is 14 years and 140,000+ miles/225,400 km on a Ford Festiva. Funny, though - that was a cheap-ass 4 cylinder engine. My truck has a 6-cylinder, which everyone said was way too small for a pickup, but it's going on 10 years with no sign of trouble (knock on wood)

You don't need a big engine to last a long time. You DO need to perform routine maintenance, stuff as basic as regular and appropriate oil changes, changing parts as appropriate due to wear/time, and so on. I know many people who can't even be bothered with the damn oil changes - c'mon, there are business that do nothing but oil changes, they'll have you in and out in 20 minutes, and you won't even have to get your hands dirty. No excuse.

The notion you need a big engine for it to last is, as far as I can see, a cultural myth.

As if you needed another nail in the coffin of that myth - airplane engines for small airplanes are smaller than automobile engines in any way you care to measure them (actual weight, physical size, horsepower, etc.) yet they often last 20 years while operating under harsher conditions and with fewer engine accessories to coddle them. Then again, they usually have an oil change every 50 hours of operation and a mandatory annual inspection by a licensed mechanic to detect and correct problems early. If you want your engine to last maintenance, along with proper operating procedures, are the key, not the overall size of the engine.

[TheMuffinKing]

Kind of off topic, but I'm driving my wife's 89' VW GTI. I don't know the engine size off hand, but I'm sure its a four cylinder and regardless of that I get about 400Km a tank. Just thought I join the small car club conversation.

[Patrick Degan]

Someone mentioned that it's cause bigger engines run longer, but does that extra longevity really make a difference unless you're owning that car for years and years?

I own my cars for "years and years" - so far the record is 14 years and 140,000+ miles/225,400 km on a Ford Festiva. Funny, though - that was a cheap-ass 4 cylinder engine. My truck has a 6-cylinder, which everyone said was way too small for a pickup, but it's going on 10 years with no sign of trouble (knock on wood)

You don't need a big engine to last a long time. You DO need to perform routine maintenance, stuff as basic as regular and appropriate oil changes, changing parts as appropriate due to wear/time, and so on. I know many people who can't even be bothered with the damn oil changes - c'mon, there are business that do nothing but oil changes, they'll have you in and out in 20 minutes, and you won't even have to get your hands dirty. No excuse.

The notion you need a big engine for it to last is, as far as I can see, a cultural myth.

Yeah. For ten years, I had an old 1970 Ford F-100 pickup truck with a 300 cu in inline-six and 3-speed stick. Great truck and I drove it everywhere. I had to have only one engine rebuild in the whole time I had it, and sundry carburettor rebuilds but that was alright (put at least one new one on myself at one point) and a clean engine bay; I could get to everything on that engine with room to spare. Stingy on gas but it had power when I needed it. The only reason I ditched it was because the front end started getting a bit too shaky for my liking and it would have cost me more than was worth to rebuild it. But that engine was still going very strong. Maybe I might have had the front end rebuilt if I'd had the money at the time for it, because otherwise it was still in good shape. I miss that truck.

[McC]

My parents live in a very hilly suburban/rural area that gets a lot of snow. As such, they have two Jeep Grand Cherokees to handle bad driving conditions. They didn't purchase them for "luxury" or any of the bullshit reasons for which SUV owners are often maligned.

Given what's happening with gas prices, though, they're dumping a lot of money into filling these things. And if no one is buying used SUVs, trying to off these to get a hybrid or some other vehicle -- the snow performance of which I, personally, know nothing -- that places them in a tough spot. My dad's going to retire soon, to boot, so it's not as though the cash flow is going to remain present for much longer.

I've been trying to come up with some good advice for them, but I just don't know enough. Anyone have any thoughts?

For my part, I drive a '02 VW Jetta, which averages (based on my own tracking of gas and mileage in Excel) about 25 MPG; I live in the Boston area, so most of the driving I do ends up being commute-style, which is murder on gasoline engine's road efficiency. I've been mulling over the idea of getting a hybrid for a while -- not that I can really afford to right now, but then again, how much longer can I afford gas prices like these? -- but I'm not sure if I should pursue that now, or if I should look into something else. Thoughts for that one?

[aerius]

My parents live in a very hilly suburban/rural area that gets a lot of snow. As such, they have two Jeep Grand Cherokees to handle bad driving conditions. They didn't purchase them for "luxury" or any of the bullshit reasons for which SUV owners are often maligned.

Do they really need two Jeeps? When my parents retired they went from 2 cars to 1, since my dad doesn't need a car for work anymore they can schedule and share the remaining car.

They could trade-in one of them for a hybrid which gets used when the roads are good, and the remaining Jeep only gets used when the roads are truly crap. Instead of putting 10,000 miles on the Jeep every year, it ends up being maybe 2000 or so a year and the rest of the miles are done by the fuel efficient hybrid.