Jalopnik 
Enter your username and password.
Detroit, 1:33 PM
Thu Dec 3
36 posts in the last 24 hours
Tip your editors:
Editor-in-Chief:
Ray Wert | | AIM
Road Test Editor:
Wes Siler |
Weekend Editor:
Murilee Martin |
Associate Editor - Houston:
Associate Editor - Detroit:
Editor-at-Large:
Contributors:
John Krewson |
Original material is licensed under a Creative Commons License permitting non-commercial sharing with attribution.
11/18/09
I read that as "but when you leave out the obvious driver weight, the whole affair is suspect."
11/18/09
I either have to move down market to a much smaller Fit, or up to a CRV.
I don't want to do either. Nor is the lower gas mileage of a Matrix or Impreza very appealing despite the added safety features over my 1991 Civic. Nor do I want the added weight and complexity of a Prius.
I also don't need all of the supposedly "must-have" bells and whistles such as power windows. Give me something light, simple and versatile with gas mileage at least in the mid-30s -- without having to switch to a hybrid.
Please? #fueleconomy
11/17/09
11/17/09
Sorry, I am more interested in this. #fueleconomy
11/17/09
11/17/09
11/17/09
What I don't get are the differences in lineup between Europe and the US. In Europe you can get 5-10 different engines per popular model. Like the Opel Insignia. Some slow and frugal, others fast and thirsty. So consumers can choose. From reading this site I get the impression the (relatively) slow and frugal engines aren't even available in the US, so consumers have less to choose from. #fueleconomy
11/17/09
New hobby! #fueleconomy
11/17/09
I've been thinking about doing just that for a long time. Buying an early eighties/late seventies Citroën with a deceased engine, and replacing that engine with something very recent with 150% of the power and 75% of fuel consumption. Too bad my wrenching experience doesn't go much further than changing fluids, and my toolbox doesn't contain much more than a hammer. Luckily there's nothing you cannot fix with a hammer. #fueleconomy
11/17/09
Also, because gas is so cheap that it doesn't make any sense to buy an efficient vehicle. #fueleconomy
11/17/09
11/17/09
Also, "Honda is the most efficient manufacturer for both passenger cars." Really? Both passenger cars?
UBER FAIL #fueleconomy
11/17/09
That was just absolutely egregious, and really makes me think that the guy is truly just talking out of his ass in an utterly biased way.
I mean, seriously; you never use the first person in any professional paper. Isn't that the first thing that we learned inn 8th grade English class? #fueleconomy
11/17/09
11/17/09
How about:
"It can also be shown that once technological progress is considered, meeting the CAFE Standards..."
or
"This paper also identifies that once technological progress..."
Using the first person, even in an abstract, has a sophomoric feel to it. #fueleconomy
11/17/09
11/17/09
Americans are far too worried about 0-60 times and "merging on the highway". When's the last time anyone needed to go 0-60 in 4.5 seconds? #fueleconomy
11/17/09
11/17/09
However, let me ask you this: Would you rather have that 100hp jetta with 40+ mpg, and a cup of coffee to stay awake, or 200hp, 35mpg, and a lot of fun? #fueleconomy
11/17/09
11/17/09
11/17/09
11/17/09
I'm not saying HPs are not a pleasure, but there are so many other important variables. Light weight is almost always more important to driving enjoyment. It's not even going fast (in absolute terms) that's pleasurable, it's going fast in terms of the vehicle. More power than the chassis can handle, now that is fun! I assure you that the driver of a 35hp A-H Sprite is always grinning a lot more than someone in a 500hp übermobile with 19 inch wheels and electronics galore.
And, since traffic can accomodate lumbering buses and trucks, a merge in a well-driven Citroën 2CV is rarely a problem. The problem is the idiot in the AMG ML55 that won't use the go-pedal and is attempting to merge at 30mph lower than traffic.
11/17/09
If it weren't for the Porsche badge, I'd say a Mustang Mach III had a terrible reaction...possibly to production greenlights. #fueleconomy
11/17/09
Whats funnier yet is many of those cars don't weigh much more (some even less; see example above) than the current cars after you add the frilly heated seats, nav systems, stereos, airbags, power this and that.
People forget all those 'luxuries' and mandated safety items add weight and decrease gas mileage.
11/17/09
11/17/09
According to the IIHS, the driver of the Bel Air would've died instantly. The Malibu driver would've walked away. #fueleconomy
11/17/09
/ducks #fueleconomy
11/17/09
A brand-new vehicle with comparable interior room and luggage capacity to my dad's old Citation, bought new back in 1980, delivers both better fuel economy and a radically improved driving experience. To say that the cruise control, myriad airbags and magnitudes-different engineering that goes into the intrusion prevention door beams, traction control and brake lockup prevention don't keep the fuel economy down would be to look through the wrong end of the telescope. By that same token, to say the fuel economy would be so much better if it weren't for all that added weight, is to block the telescope before looking through it.
Things are better than they were, all around. Certain aspects could be much, much better, yes. But that would come at the expense of the improvement in other areas. This is the whole package. #fueleconomy
11/17/09
Look at the "unemployment number". Totally. Worthless. Statistic. #fueleconomy
11/17/09
And as I put the flame suit on...my daily driver is a far-from-stock Mustang GT that I beat the living crap out of with no regard for my "carbon footprint." I'm simply making the point that the general crux of the abstract presented is not baseless. #fueleconomy
11/17/09
Most of your argument is good but you probably should have left diesel pickups out of it.
EVERY single diesel pickup that is sold in the US is a Heavy Duty (one ton or better). These are WORK trucks that are supposed to be able to pull a house off its foundation or pull a fifth wheel or horse trailer.
The trucks that the rest of us "supposed" to use (I acknowledge that many folks buy more truck than they need) are all gas (petrol) fueled trucks. There is currently NO diesel option on any half ton or smaller truck.
From a truck perspective, I think the bigger problem is that Ford is the only manufacturer that offers a truly small pickup (Ranger) but even that is destined to die in the next year or so. Ford just announced that the international version of the Ranger (also a small pickup) is not coming to the US. All other so called "small" pickups have gotten so big that they are as large full size pickups from the '90s. #fueleconomy
11/17/09
I will respectfully, vehemently disagree with that statement. I live in Central Indiana (not terribly redneck), and the number of jacked-up, useless-as-work-vehicles 1-ton pickup trucks with rabbit-ear stacks and 36" Mickey Thompson's I see running around is amazing. None of these are used or useful for anything resembling work, few are taken farther off road than the front yard, and if any ever pull a trailer, they have to have a 12"+ drop for the hitch ball to keep the trailer bumper from scraping. As far as pulling houses off of foundations, I'm sure they have the torque, but the owners would never consider it because they may scratch the paint (truck, not house). #fueleconomy
11/17/09
11/17/09