The new 2008 gets an astounding 28mpg we could drive forever

[Calavera]

The 1941 Nash 600 was the first mass-produced unibody construction automobile made in the United States. Its lighter weight compared to body-on-frame automobiles and lower air drag helped it to achieve excellent gas mileage for its day. The "600" model designation is said to have been derived from overdrive-equipped examples of this car's ability to travel 600 miles on a 20-gallon tank of gasoline. The design was improved by new front ends, upholstery, and chrome trim from 1942 to 1948.

30mpg in 1941, look at how far computers have advanced in the last 20 years. Very primitive machines that only the computer nerds used to the advanced computers of today capable of doing almost anything you could want. 66 years and fuel mileage has not improved at all. Fuel mileage should have kept going up with every new car. What the hell were they thinking in the 70s anyways with those gigantic 8mpg cars? Take a look at the all new 2008 Dodge Avenger.... 21 city, 30 hwy. If you knew nothing about cars and just looked at the numbers from 1941 compared to this 2008, you'd probably guess that the 2008 Avenger is a gas guzzling junk bucket. As the article states "excellent gas mileage for its day" exactly 30mpg was great in 1941 when gas was 11 cents a gallon. Today people think 30mpg is great for a new 2008, well it isn't, every car should get AT LEAST 100mpg no problem. It should be illegal to produce a car that gets less then 50mpg. I realize that it isn't necessarily the automakers as much as it is the oil companies, but it's just ridiculous. Everything has advanced over time, except fuel mileage.

[Roofus]

It's our patriotic duty to use more gasoline than the rest of the world combined. Anything else is supporting terrorism.

[Ex-Cyber]

There s a lot of truth to this - as far as I know there's nothing made for the US market today that matches the Geo Metro/Suzuki Swift without going hybrid or diesel. However I think the way to really be efficient is to not carry a half-ton of plastic and metal around with you everywhere you go. The (usually unspoken) assumption that everyone has a car seems to be to be a major cause of sprawl and just plain sloppy planning.

[hearld500]

I really do beleive it's possible for vehicles to get much better gas mileage then they're currently getting, its just a matter of the industry being forced to do so.
A friend of mine has a 05' Cheverolet fourdoor, longbox, 3/4 ton, diesel pickup. He gets 25mpg with it after he 'chipped' it, which is a large improvement over the 14mpg he was getting stock.

[Veggita2099]

In 1970 people didn't care about the mileage of a vehicle because gas was so cheap.

[APE]

I get 27 city 33 highway so long as it's the summer formula, I only use 76/conoco gas right now but during the winter it drops to 23mpg highway. Need to find a better gas.

[Code-Red]

Why work on better gas mileage when the automakers get a fat check from oil barons?

[SuperMegatron]

Why work on better gas mileage when the automakers get a fat check from oil barons?

That's not what is happening. US automakers can't make low mileage cars for the same price as toyota or honda. If our subcompacts cost more then theirs they dont sell and that makes them pointless to produce. Why build a ford that cost 20k and get 30 mpg when kia can do it for 16k?

[mkfreak]

Well, GM and some others recalled the electric cars which were fully functional and I know they got more than 50mpg.

[Covar]

Well, GM and some others recalled the electric cars which were fully functional and I know they got more than 50mpg.

funny, i would expect an electric car to get 0mpg.

[Lartrak]

I do find it amazing how few advances have been made in fuel efficiencies in the past 60 years. Most cars are like 20 and 28, plus or minus 3 MPG on each end. I'm curious if something is going on we don't know about in the way cars are designed.

On a side note, is there a difference in efficiency between leaded and unleaded?

[Code-Red]

I do find it amazing how few advances have been made in fuel efficiencies in the past 60 years. Most cars are like 20 and 28, plus or minus 3 MPG on each end. I'm curious if something is going on we don't know about in the way cars are designed.

On a side note, is there a difference in efficiency between leaded and unleaded?

There is nothing hidden going on, it's just North American pigheadedness working its magic. Why drive around in a 3 Cylinder 1.0L car that gets 40-60mpg, when you can cruise the suburbs in your Cadillac Escalade with its 6.2L V8 with 403hp. Not only do I see people using stupidly hardcore offroad vehicles for daily drivers, but it's only one person in them, and they arent towing anything. I see that countless times a day. That's the reason our gas prices are high.

That's not what is happening. US automakers can't make low mileage cars for the same price as toyota or honda. If our subcompacts cost more then theirs they dont sell and that makes them pointless to produce.

...... is that supposed to be a legitimate argument to my statement? Everyone knows good and damn well automakers are holding back on Hydrogen (going on 20 years now), like they have with electric for the past 40 or so years. I'm willing to bet my life that automakers receive kickbacks from oil companies for continuing to make them money. Not only would hydrogen/electric cars be much more reliable than gasoline/diesel, but they would be cheaper too because those energies are renewable and easy to obtain. They also involve less mechanical parts that a traditional engine does.

Why build a ford that cost 20k and get 30 mpg when kia can do it for 16k?

Why buy either of them when they both have terrible build quality? In the past 5 or so years, Ford has had to sell off numerous sectors (such as Aston Martin, although Volvo, Jaguar, and Land Rover are on their way too) because they don't make enough money. Why is that? Because everyone knows Ford makes terrible cars. Same goes for Kia. Fuel economy has ABSOLUTELY nothing to do with it.

[Ex-Cyber]

US automakers can't make low mileage cars for the same price as toyota or honda

Why not? Toyota and Honda aren't exactly based in the third world, and both have factories in the US.

edit: while I'm at it, does anyone happen to know what the efficiency is like for current engines? IIRC, heat engines can only be 50% efficient even in a theoretically ideal configuration, and I know a lot of work went into making more efficient engines during the 1980s; maybe the engine itself is as close to ideal efficiency as it's likely to get, and the main problems are now conventions and regulations opposing the adoption of lighter vehicles with better aerodynamics?

edit again: also, how does driving speed factor into this? From a physics perspective, driving at a car's top speed means that you're effectively wasting a ton of energy (net acceleration is zero, but you're still burning fuel at a maximum rate). I'm not a car expert, but I suppose that the "ideal" speed is something like wherever you get 0 acceleration at around 5000RPM. In any case, I wonder how changes in average driving speeds affect fuel efficiency. Anyone with some actual automotive expertise care to comment on this issue?

[SuperMegatron]

US automakers can't make low mileage cars for the same price as toyota or honda

Why not? Toyota and Honda aren't exactly based in the third world, and both have factories in the US.

The asian car makers just started manufacturing in the US and their workers are not unionized.GM and Ford have pension liabilities from decades ago. For instance a GM employee who retired in 1970 still draws funds from GM in the form of a pension and health care benefits, this cost is then passed on to the consumer when they buy a car. Toyota wasnt here at least in any real way until the 80's and even now they dont offer their workers any where near what the big 3 do in benefits thus they have lower overhead and can sell cars cheaper.

[Ex-Cyber]

US automakers can't make low mileage cars for the same price as toyota or honda

Why not? Toyota and Honda aren't exactly based in the third world, and both have factories in the US.

The asian car makers just started manufacturing in the US and their workers are not unionized.GM and Ford have pension liabilities from decades ago. For instance a GM employee who retired in 1970 still draws funds from GM in the form of a pension and health care benefits, this cost is then passed on to the consumer when they buy a car. Toyota wasnt here at least in any real way until the 80's and even now they dont offer their workers any where near what the big 3 do in benefits thus they have lower overhead and can sell cars cheaper.

This is plausible in the broad outlines, but do you have any numbers?

[Code-Red]

US automakers can't make low mileage cars for the same price as toyota or honda

Why not? Toyota and Honda aren't exactly based in the third world, and both have factories in the US.

edit: while I'm at it, does anyone happen to know what the efficiency is like for current engines? IIRC, heat engines can only be 50% efficient even in a theoretically ideal configuration, and I know a lot of work went into making more efficient engines during the 1980s; maybe the engine itself is as close to ideal efficiency as it's likely to get, and the main problems are now conventions and regulations opposing the adoption of lighter vehicles with better aerodynamics?

Efficiency of thermal (gas based) engines IIRC is somewhere around 25%. The engine burns 75% in order to turn heat into kinetic. The main problem with increased efficiency, it decreases power. Like I stated above, no one wants a 25whp 1.0L engine. People want/need merging power, pep, hauling power (whether its used or not...). I could get technical on how/why engines work, and the difference between smaller and larger motors, but I'd start leaving people behind. So I'll leave this paragraph at that.

edit again: also, how does driving speed factor into this? From a physics perspective, driving at a car's top speed means that you're effectively wasting a ton of energy (net acceleration is zero, but you're still burning fuel at a maximum rate). I'm not a car expert, but I suppose that the "ideal" speed is something like wherever you get 0 acceleration at around 5000RPM. In any case, I wonder how changes in average driving speeds affect fuel efficiency. Anyone with some actual automotive expertise care to comment on this issue?

This is a bit of a misnomer. Ideal speed is generally 2000 rpm, but this is generally only ideal while the car is cruising. Many different factors determine the cars effectiveness, mainly powerband. When you start accelerating a solid mass of 2500+lbs, its generally more efficient to run the car at a higher rpm.

It's hard to explain. There is a lot of science, physics, technical math, mechanical know how to explain. I could write an entire book on this topic, but that's not why I'm here. I'm here to dispel most myths that cars cannot be economic. They can be, it's just that the consensus is that no one has ever wanted/needed something like it....until now.

Car makers are withholding technology. Oil companies will run petrol into the ground, and we will end up with billions of unusable vehicles.

[Ex-Cyber]

Car makers are withholding technology.

What technology, though? Hydrogen has issues with large-scale production (think of the demands on the grid if it were produced locally) and storage (it's an extremely small molecule so it will leak from a lot of "airtight" vessels/pipes). For electric the problem has always been with energy:weight ratio, and any major breakthrough addressing that is likely to be screwed over (in terms of price, availability, or both) for 20 years or more because of patents. I don't think there's any need for car makers to conspire to bring these alternatives down when they have their own major problems.

[Covar]

US automakers can't make low mileage cars for the same price as toyota or honda

Why not? Toyota and Honda aren't exactly based in the third world, and both have factories in the US.

The asian car makers just started manufacturing in the US and their workers are not unionized.

i'm going to go ahead and call bullshit on this one seeing how my aunt works at a toyota plant and is most definitely unionized.

[SuperMegatron]

US automakers can't make low mileage cars for the same price as toyota or honda

Why not? Toyota and Honda aren't exactly based in the third world, and both have factories in the US.

The asian car makers just started manufacturing in the US and their workers are not unionized.

i'm going to go ahead and call bullshit on this one seeing how my aunt works at a toyota plant and is most definitely unionized.

They do have 3 union plants, but usually when one goes union they leak a document about the powers that be wanting to close it. I believe thats what is happening in Georgetown,KY.

For years now, we've heard General Motors complain that it's being lapped in the United States by Toyota because it's got five retirees in the back seat for every two people actively building its vehicles, while Toyota's U.S. operations are virtually retiree-free. GM is weighed down by heavy "legacy costs" for pensions and health care, while Toyota has no pension plan, and its health care costs per vehicle are barely a tenth of GM's.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/stor ... Id=5062797
http://www.enquirer.com/editions/2004/0 ... z1toy.html
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 01328.html

[Code-Red]

Toyota is unionized here in Kitchener. And this plant isn't new either, it's been here at least a decade, if not more.