It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

MPG a couple of decades later

page: 1
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 11 2012 @ 02:13 PM
link   
Good to see that we have this great hybrid technology out there that has helped us actually lose some mpg after a couple of decades of technology.





Top Ten High MPG Cars – 1990 Model Year:

Geo Metro XFI 3-cyl., 1.0 liter – MPG: 53 city / 58 highway
Honda Civic CRX HF 4-cyl., 1.5 liter – MPG: 49 city / 52 highway
Geo Metro 3-cyl., 1.0 liter – MPG: 46 city / 50 highway
Suzuki Swift 3-cyl., 1.0 liter – MPG: 46 city / 50 highway
Geo Metro LSI 3-cyl., 1.0 liter – MPG: 46 city / 50 highway
Chevrolet Sprint 3-cyl., 1.0 liter – MPG: 46 city / 50 highway
Pontiac Firefly 3-cyl., 1.0 liter – MPG: 46 city / 50 highway
Honda Civic CRX HF 4-cyl., 1.5 liter – MPG: 43 city / 49 highway
Suzuki Swift 4-cyl., 1.3 liter – MPG: 40 city / 44 highway
Volkswagen Jetta 4-cyl., 1.6 liter – MPG: 37 city / 43 highway

www.mpgomatic.com...



Forward a couple of decades:




Toyota Prius 4 cyl. 1.8 liter R (AV) Auto 51 48 Toyota Prius review
Lexus CT 200h 4 cyl. 1.8 liter R (AV) Auto 43 40
Mercury Milan Hybrid 4 cyl. 2.5 liter R (AV) Auto 41 36
Lincoln MKZ Hybrid 4 cyl. 2.5 liter R (AV) Auto 41 36 Lincoln MKZ Hybrid review
Ford Fusion Hybrid 4 cyl. 2.5 liter R (AV) Auto 41 36 Ford Fusion Hybrid review

www.mpgomatic.com...




posted on Jun, 11 2012 @ 02:24 PM
link   
I understand what your getting at but you have to realize the first list were nearly micro cars which offer little/no options, very much your bread and butter cars. The new list are full sized cars with many options which are much heavier. Not exactly apples vs apples



posted on Jun, 11 2012 @ 02:25 PM
link   
reply to post by interupt42
 


Que the choir, the Preacher is coming.

Sadly, who are we gonna bitch to? it's all about the benjamins.



posted on Jun, 11 2012 @ 02:27 PM
link   
Yeah but you can't really compare the 2 types you presented because all the newer cars have larger engines than the supermini's in the older category.

In order for it to be valid, you would be better comparing the supermini's of this year against the older supermini's.



posted on Jun, 11 2012 @ 02:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by Fitch303
I understand what your getting at but you have to realize the first list were nearly micro cars which offer little/no options, very much your bread and butter cars. The new list are full sized cars with many options which are much heavier. Not exactly apples vs apples


I hate when we get this kind of response. I don't want a heavier cooler car, give me a 1987 Honda CRX HF. Let the folks with $20's falling out of their pockets buy the guzzlers. We don't get to chose anything other than the friggin bag of oranges. I want my apple.



posted on Jun, 11 2012 @ 02:28 PM
link   
reply to post by interupt42
 


Everything is scam.

Gas mileage was deliberately destroyed by the introduction of ever increasing engine sizes. This was needed with the advent of modern distributors, which as Ive been told, drastically increased the efficiency an engine would get using a volume unit of gasoline. This obviously lowered gasoline sales, so engine sizes increased to compensate, lowering the efficiency.

Im sure theres more to it, but its all about the money. Always. Nothing else matters in this world of materialism and greed. Nothing.

Believe nothing that is told to you by those who stand to profit from you believing it. As a rule, suspect and expect deception.
edit on 6/11/2012 by CaticusMaximus because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 11 2012 @ 02:29 PM
link   
reply to post by mclarenmp4
 


show me a car on today's market that gets over 50MPG. Even the damn smart car only gets just over 40MPG, and it's a half of a car. We don't get a choice at all.



posted on Jun, 11 2012 @ 02:31 PM
link   
I always have to have a little laugh when people talk mgp, and consumer fuel consumption as though it makes ANY difference.

I hope people realize that civilians only make up about 30% of this country's oil consumption.

If MPG is the worry, perhaps we should start leaning on the dept of defense to develop more efficient vehicles-afterall, they are BY FAR the biggest user of oil in the world.



posted on Jun, 11 2012 @ 02:32 PM
link   
If you want a car with a tape player and no air conditioning, then sure the gas mileage is great.



posted on Jun, 11 2012 @ 02:33 PM
link   
It is all just a monopoly, i had a 72 ford ltd that had a 390 that got 25 MPG city, 40 highway, good car yes it was a FORD, would still have it if not wanted a 76 ford truck now matter what I did it had a 10 MPG.
some motors are good some are just hogs... when it comes to fuel, but if you stop and think all Vech's today should get 60 to 70 MPG.



posted on Jun, 11 2012 @ 02:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by Fitch303
I understand what your getting at but you have to realize the first list were nearly micro cars which offer little/no options, very much your bread and butter cars. The new list are full sized cars with many options which are much heavier. Not exactly apples vs apples


Most of us dont need much of a car. In fact i often ride a 600cc sport bike. 40 something mpg when im going fast and all. Accessories? Well it has a motor and a seat...and wheels.


How often do you see a huge suv with one person in it?

I have a huge 10mpg behemoth of a truck for when i really need it. I have a 24mpg crossover suv for normal use. Sure it could be smaller but its fun.

I was going to modify the truck with a gasifier to run on wood. But it doesnt run at all rigbt now



posted on Jun, 11 2012 @ 02:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by network dude

Originally posted by Fitch303
I understand what your getting at but you have to realize the first list were nearly micro cars which offer little/no options, very much your bread and butter cars. The new list are full sized cars with many options which are much heavier. Not exactly apples vs apples


I hate when we get this kind of response. I don't want a heavier cooler car, give me a 1987 Honda CRX HF.


I do agree with you on this one. I had an '89 crx si. All the bells and whistles. Car was FAST, too. And it averages about 35 per gallon. I miss that car.


I do love my mustang, too, though.



posted on Jun, 11 2012 @ 02:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by network dude

Originally posted by Fitch303
I understand what your getting at but you have to realize the first list were nearly micro cars which offer little/no options, very much your bread and butter cars. The new list are full sized cars with many options which are much heavier. Not exactly apples vs apples


I hate when we get this kind of response. I don't want a heavier cooler car, give me a 1987 Honda CRX HF. Let the folks with $20's falling out of their pockets buy the guzzlers. We don't get to chose anything other than the friggin bag of oranges. I want my apple.




You sure you don't want the 1 litre - 3 cylinder that the OP is quoting his post:



0-60 in a lightning fast 22 seconds.

I remember these things, they were terrible...



posted on Jun, 11 2012 @ 02:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by captaintyinknots
I always have to have a little laugh when people talk mgp, and consumer fuel consumption as though it makes ANY difference.

I hope people realize that civilians only make up about 30% of this country's oil consumption.

If MPG is the worry, perhaps we should start leaning on the dept of defense to develop more efficient vehicles-afterall, they are BY FAR the biggest user of oil in the world.


Amen.

Simple take off and landing by an aircraft probably uses more fuel than most people are going to use in a year or more...



posted on Jun, 11 2012 @ 03:19 PM
link   
reply to post by network dude
 


You won't, all the extra gizmo's like GPS, cruise control, AC, Multi CD all eat into the MPG. I'm all for small light cars but I can understand why people go for larger cars because of the perceived safety.
So the hybrids do give an alternative.



posted on Jun, 11 2012 @ 03:26 PM
link   
reply to post by boncho
 


You don't buy a Geo Metro to take to the track, .....but in retrospect, you do have to dance with the one that brought ya.



posted on Jun, 11 2012 @ 04:08 PM
link   
My Nissan Leaf cost me 22k, and 2k to install the 240 in my home.

24k to never have to put gas in my car?

Not bad.



posted on Jun, 11 2012 @ 04:31 PM
link   
reply to post by Furbs
 


Yeah, but can you drive from Arizona to Minnesota? Or from Montauk to New York City?

Practicality is not the aim of commerce.... sales are.



posted on Jun, 11 2012 @ 04:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by Maxmars
reply to post by Furbs
 


Yeah, but can you drive from Arizona to Minnesota? Or from Montauk to New York City?

Practicality is not the aim of commerce.... sales are.


I drove it from Portland to San Fran and it cost me 22 bucks round trip.

630 miles.

Not bad for early generation equipment.



posted on Jun, 11 2012 @ 04:44 PM
link   
reply to post by Furbs
 


Nice!
.... I thought they didn't have that much range....



new topics

top topics



 
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join