Originally posted by: vi_edit
Regular old auto civic gets better milage than the Fit.
http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/findacar.htm
Really though, the best milage car will likely be the new Diesel offerings from VW.
Originally posted by: MetalMat
Originally posted by: vi_edit
Regular old auto civic gets better milage than the Fit.
http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/findacar.htm
Really though, the best milage car will likely be the new Diesel offerings from VW.
I agree, plus it will be cheaper and easier to fix than a Hybrid.
Originally posted by: desy
I looked at the diesel thing too and a couple of issues
A You have to buy a VW, not known for a good dealer network or cheap to repair
B filling stations, ever notice at the pumps the slick on the ground, now on your matts?
C Even though the engine is supposed to last a long time, these are not the same quality of diesel engines in trucks where diesel gets its reputation.
Pros
Cheaper by 40-50 cents a gallon around here although sometimes it cycles as high as gas, and 30% better fuel economy
My selling price will be $26513 + $55 DOC fee + taxes and tags to wherever you live!
Originally posted by: Analog
Thanks for the responses...
Funny that with the revised EPA mileage, the 1988 CRX-HF gets 45 mpgs, (56 mpgs old) and the 1986 Chevy Sprint gets 48 mpgs (3 cyl engine).
Today's best cars don't even come close - the Prius hybrid gets a revised 45 mpgs. What gives? Why can't they make cars like those?
Originally posted by: alimoalem
Originally posted by: Analog
Thanks for the responses...
Funny that with the revised EPA mileage, the 1988 CRX-HF gets 45 mpgs, (56 mpgs old) and the 1986 Chevy Sprint gets 48 mpgs (3 cyl engine).
Today's best cars don't even come close - the Prius hybrid gets a revised 45 mpgs. What gives? Why can't they make cars like those?
people want power
Originally posted by: Gibson486
Corollas get, what...41MPG high way and 3x city? Even though it is only EPA estimates, it is what people are actually getting.
Originally posted by: Auric
There's diff'rent ways of looking at diesel. The initial cost is higher but the engine should last longer (diesel simply must be designed more robustly to begin with). Maintenance varies. Fuel cost varies generally opposite seasonally to petrol but generally should be lower. However, even if everything else is equal, there is no debate that a diesel will have more low-end torque and thus be peppier than the equivalent displacement petrol engine in the same market segment and also cruise at significantly lower RPM and thus be quieter (louder idle is hardly worth mentioning). Of course the requisite turbo charger also adds to the driveability and, if you like, safety when it comes to merging and such. With mods, fuel could potentially be free of cost other than a li'l of your time.
Originally posted by: redly1
Originally posted by: Gibson486
Corollas get, what...41MPG high way and 3x city? Even though it is only EPA estimates, it is what people are actually getting.
Drove both an 01 Civic and a 06 Corolla. On long interstate trips, I never managed to get better than 33MPG @ ~79MPH. Meh
Originally posted by: iamwiz82
I would suspect that the number of cars scrapped solely because of an engine failure is lower than cars scrapped for other reasons. Engines can and do outlive many many cars out there, so a diesel having a longer life won't mean that much when the transmission is on the highway behind you and the doors rust off.![]()