Joined
·
9,869 Posts
What a$$holes! I thought cars were supposed to get better mileage not worse!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y5czISjX ... re=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y5czISjX ... re=related
56 mpg wtf?
1 - 18 of 18 Posts
Joined
·
4,236 Posts
WTF? my 2001 escprt only get's 30ish. Those bastards! And all this time they keep saying it's going to take time to improve fuel efficiency. Bullshiot! you just rehash a car you made years ago with new panels and modern safety equipment like stability control and air bags and you have it in less than a year!
Joined
·
192 Posts
Is it possibly one of those diesel escorts? I can't really see any badging due to the crappy quaility.
Joined
·
4,236 Posts
I just read an article saying that Detroit is going to use smaller engines with turbos to replace larger v8 engines so the fuel efficiency improves while the power stays about the same. Those a$$holes, they could have used off the shelf components to save us money and they didn't? [email protected]#$ them! I hope they all go bankrupt and get taken over by the government so they can see how it feels like to be screwed over just like they have been doing to us for years!!! Fuel economy hasn't improved at all in the last 30 years. In fact, it's gotten worse. And they knew this whole damn time gas prices were going to shoot through the roof and kill the economy. The Arab Oil Embargo was a huge wake up call. Fvck those a$$holes for putting their greed over our nation’s wellbeing. We're even more dependant on terrorist supporting nations oil because of them. They should all be thrown in jail treason.
Joined
·
6,177 Posts
http://greenhome.huddler.com/wiki/epa-f ... my-testingDave94LX said:
Joined
·
4,236 Posts
The 84 and my 01 are governed by the same formula and test... why does my car get 29mpg combined while a car fifteen years it's elder gets 25% better mileage?
People don't believe me that older cars are the way to go when after fuel efficiency.
My blazer (on a good week) got around 17-20mpg mostly city. I didn't race the damn thing, it just loved gas. A bigger vehicle with a motor that (I thought) wasn't powerful enough, at least from the factory.
Bought my '89 GT, it get's around 30mpg city, and about 35-40 on highway. Which makes sense, damn near a ton lighter and a lot smaller motor. Yet I was talking to a Prius owner and she said she gets around 40mpg with mostly highway; I looked at her in shock when she said that. I told her I would sacrifice the interior components (new vs. old) for a car that looks better, costs less to buy and maintain, and got damn near the same gas mileage.
It's all of the add-ons with cars. My grandpa's '52 ford gets 34mpg. He doesn't have power brakes, steering, a/c, anything. His car weights about 1,000lbs more than my escort, and gets better. I bet if we grabbed a newer car and ripped off all the shit it didnt need; we'd boost the mpgs some.
My blazer (on a good week) got around 17-20mpg mostly city. I didn't race the damn thing, it just loved gas. A bigger vehicle with a motor that (I thought) wasn't powerful enough, at least from the factory.
Bought my '89 GT, it get's around 30mpg city, and about 35-40 on highway. Which makes sense, damn near a ton lighter and a lot smaller motor. Yet I was talking to a Prius owner and she said she gets around 40mpg with mostly highway; I looked at her in shock when she said that. I told her I would sacrifice the interior components (new vs. old) for a car that looks better, costs less to buy and maintain, and got damn near the same gas mileage.
It's all of the add-ons with cars. My grandpa's '52 ford gets 34mpg. He doesn't have power brakes, steering, a/c, anything. His car weights about 1,000lbs more than my escort, and gets better. I bet if we grabbed a newer car and ripped off all the shit it didnt need; we'd boost the mpgs some.
Joined
·
4,236 Posts
a/c and power steering maybe not, but i'd gladly give up power windows, door locks, mirrors, etc. for better gas mileage... especially when gas starts creeping back up to $5/gallon again. It's already halfway there. It won't be long. Once a economic recovery starts, OPEC will bend us over once again. They'd do it now in the recession if they could but they can't cut production fast enough. Those countries don't care about the common good of the planet. All they care about is greed.
Joined
·
56 Posts
You think $5 a gallon is bad? Try getting stationed in Italy! It's 1.80 Euro a liter! Average exchange rate is 72 cents on the dollar. 1.8/.72=$2.50. $2.50*3.8L/gal= $9.50/gal! I got a 10 speed bike for on base running. I only use the car for trips and it's half a tank of gas to venice!pos_clunker said:
Joined
·
4,236 Posts
$9.50 a gallon? Is the gas attendant lady sucking your **** while she fills your gas tank up with that liquid gold she's selling? That's straight up rape at those prices.Jimbobalioni said:
Also look at the motor; it's a diesel, granted the ad itself says you'll probably get lower gas mileage; it's not that much lower.Cymmantix said:
Diesel's the way to go in my book, less refining = cheaper fuel, the motors are built stronger to prevent constant upkeep/maintenance (gas mechanics are more common than diesel, equaling a higher cost), diesel burns slower helping fuel economy, and it's actually cleaner; not to mention you can get biodiesel if you want.
If you look at the majority of the diesel trucks on the road, they have the motor to get upper 30's in mpgs, however they're geared for towing usually. We have a guy who comes down to the dragstrip I work at towing his Cobra Jet with a '03 F350. After a visit to Smokin' Performance, they tuned his truck and changed the gearing on it so he could have 3 different settings. 1, a power/speed package, 2, a fuel economy package, 3, a custom setting he can adjust as he goes. He showed me the onboard computer's rating for fuel economy, as well as a log he's been keeping. 37mpg with a loaded trailer.
Unfortunately whenever the average american thinks of diesel; they think black smoke, trucks (personal or big rigs), and things they don't understand; so they're naturally a bit hesitant to invest in them.
Just throwin that out there.
Joined
·
99 Posts
It's comparing apples and oranges... the '84 Escort had little power from the 1.6 CVH engine and had to meet much less severe crash standards, therefore the car was lighter. ...the 50+ mpg claim might refer to the Mazda (non-turbo) diesel that was available in the escort. How much power did that make, 55-58 HP ??
I regularly got 44-46 mpg in my '91 Escort LX with the 1.9 CVH and 5 speed. That cae was better than the '84 (I drove a few but never owned one.) but my '97 ELX and '00 ZX2 S/R both have considerably more power and drive better at highway speeds.
If a manufacturer stripped a car down to 2100 lbs and installed a small engine choked down to about 60-65 HP, fuel economy in the 50+ mpg range should be possible. Of course, no one would want to buy such a car, and for that matter, a new '84 escort would be a hard sell in todays market.
I regularly got 44-46 mpg in my '91 Escort LX with the 1.9 CVH and 5 speed. That cae was better than the '84 (I drove a few but never owned one.) but my '97 ELX and '00 ZX2 S/R both have considerably more power and drive better at highway speeds.
If a manufacturer stripped a car down to 2100 lbs and installed a small engine choked down to about 60-65 HP, fuel economy in the 50+ mpg range should be possible. Of course, no one would want to buy such a car, and for that matter, a new '84 escort would be a hard sell in todays market.
My first car was an '88 Escort GL, 4door 3spd auto. Had it dynoed at 60hp to the wheels. It wasn't fast by any means (when interior was gutted it ran a 18.75 down the 1/4), but it didn't really struggle to get to speed and wasn't bad to get up and go. I'd easily drive another one primarily for the fact that it got 35mpg.JonsZX2SR said:
1 - 18 of 18 Posts
Join the discussion
