Question of the Day: Can an MPG War be as Sexy as a Horsepower War?
Getting great gas mileage has historically been the purview of cars that many find, well, a bit boring. From an enthusiast point of view prodigious power figure has been much more exciting than fewer trips to the pump, but as the man said, the times they are a changin’. As automakers attempt to about face into building lighter, greener, and less thirsty vehicles, we wonder if high MPG numbers will ever be able to raise the same sort of fervor that huge horsepowers have. Give us your take, in comments.
Comments
Trinks
Currently only outrageously high numbers (in the 100mpg range) tend to attract real interest. Then again, incrimental mpg numbers are about as boring as incrimental horsepower numbers. I think seeing output and fuel economy rise as engine size and displacement falls is the next big thing. 350 horsepower 4 cylinders that achieve 35mpg? Sign me up.
Ray
Hello out there!!
How about 4.2 Supercharged litres..400 Caballos..32 valves...and....34.7 mpg on the M1 last week at my normal 70 mph cruising speed...yes officer...Honest!!!.....Mind don't know what mpg I was getting last week Porche racing at 150 mph???....The S Type R Jag is an incredible...incredible machine...cruises at 90 at less than 1800 revs...covers 30-50 and 50-70 faster than most supercars in around 2-2.5 seconds...and that supercharged rush and noise is intoxicating...want to buy it????...see yah!
Regards to all PetrolHeads and VW tdi owners...now theres a diesel engine to be admired...good for a million miles ..literally!..and infinitely tuneable..I'm aiming at 200 bhp and 75 mpg...must get it done sometime...
Ciao Amigos!!
greg
MPG is absolutely interesting. The trick for the manufacturers is to make cars that are enjoyable to be in and that handle well. Anticipate a strong shift (already begun, I think) towards defining sporty in terms of handling and cornering rather than horsepower; think auto cross rather than drag racing. Now the auto industry has good reason to spend whatever is required to "add lightness" which is always good for performance.
Richard
Bang on, Greg! There will always be a small minority that crave mega-power no matter what the cost, but the vast majority prefers cars that are easy on the environment and wallet while stylish, practical and enjoyable to drive and ride in.
slk23
There's already a precedent for that: the Volkswagen GTI. In the early '80s it launched the hot-hatch phenomenon. Now we have more choices (MazdaSpeed 3, Civic Si, Mini) and hopefully more are on the way.
Reilly Brennan
People fail to realize this, but motorsports has always been a MPG war, but motorsports never gets a bad wrap from the anti-efficiency clan. Given that, I'd love to see both -- best HP/MPG!
Ken Scott
I bought a 2001 Z06 rather than a Viper due to gas mileage and skid pad. It was totaled (rear end collision) after I tuned it to 440HP. After that I decided to purchase a low mileage 2001 Z06 with a Pro Charger system. Since it has 620 Hp and still gets 21 mpg around town and averages over 26 on the Hwy, I am pleased. OH yes, the price was under 30K. Must admit that when one floors it, the mileage goes to 5 mpg...but hey, how long can you smoke tires and skid sideways???? Great car...0-60 is under 3.6 sec and top is around 200...skid pad over 1.0
Ducati Minor
Yes...if Adriana Lima is the director of the EPA.
The Man
No. Never. Not in a million years. The reason? It should be obvious to any true enthusiast, but probably not to posers. Cars appeal to men specifically for two reasons. They appeal to our violent nature, and they appeal to our sexual nature. Can anyone with a schlong explain with a straight face how fuel efficiency appeals to either of these natures? Yes, it may be a smart purchasing decision, but it is emphatically NOT sexy. It only appeals to someone with a pocket protector or a tree-hugger, neither of which possesses sexual or violent appeal. 'Nuff said.
Don
Well now, hold on there a sec...
Since you brought up the sex thing, how's this...
In comparing sex to MPG... My Passat, at 32 MPG highway (and I've gotten better than that too) can go a whole lot longer than say, a Mustang GT. So the Mustang definitely has a bigger schlong (as you put it), but the Passat (1.8T 5-spd) can go a lot longer...
So what's better? Getting it quick or going the distance? :-) I think the only thing that is better than sex is sex that lasts a while.
So in my opinion, MPG is DEFINITELY higher on my list than outright brute horsepower. I would trade my Passat in a heartbeat for the same car as a TDI. Or better yet: The Mini Cooper S is currently top on my car-lust scale... turn that into a diesel and I'm all over that. My other wishlist cars include a GTI TDI or Jetta GLI TDI, or other small sporty car with a diesel & 45+ MPG.
"Your Mileage May Vary..."
Thanks,
Don
Blk N Wht GT
I think your interpretation of his sex analogy was kinda off but anyways.. a Mustang GT is sexier by all means than a Passat. If I put a larger fuel tank in my Mustang then it would "go a lot longer..." too, with the power to please. Miles per tank is a lot different than mpg because every car has a different sized fuel tank
Darnell
Pretty good analogy Don. I understand exactly what you're saying, yet I completely disagree. You CAN have your cake and eat it to. Most people have this illusion that big horsepower equals terrible gas mileage. Yes, that is indeed a factor, but not as big a factor as most people would think. It's all about how you use it.
Here's a link to an interesting challenge: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N8XDscWleKw. It pits a 2008 BMW M3 with a 4.0 litre, 414 horsepower high-revving 8 cylinder engine against everybody's environmental hero, the lovable Toyota Prius, which packs a 1.5 litre hybrid engine with roughly 110 horsepower, in a fuel challenge. They do 10 laps around a track, and at the end see who averaged better fuel economy. The Prius, with way less than half the power and way less than half the motor averaged 17.2 mpg. Shockingly, the M3 averaged 19.4. Kinda defies logic huh?
Not at all. Just because the M3 has the additional power equivalent to 2007 Mustang GT over the Prius doesn't mean that if driven conservatively, it won't reward you. It's all about how often you accelerate hard, brake hard, corner hard and shift hard that's going to kill your wallet at the pump. So as far as the sex example goes, you can have a huge schlong like the M3. Just take slower strokes and you'll last just as long, and enjoy it a hell of a lot more ;-)
Anonymous
Perhaps it is sexier to do doughnuts and smoke tires, but to whom? If it is sexier to one another, as a man I could care less. Most women that I would care to associate with would also not find the above sexy, they would find it juvenile. To me it is much sexier to save my money and spend it visiting Paris or Rome in the spring or in December than literally burning it up. By my logic, admittedly different from many, it is a more exciting and more memorable experience to see the world, period. We must agree to differ on this point, but this is why I am interested in fuel efficient vehicles.
Our family sports car is a Miata, fun and entertaining to drive, but not exciting at all. That is the price I pay for my personal choices.
Jeff
I think economy mixed with driving appeal is the way to go. Heck, if you use cars as sexy, meaning you think it does something to attract the opposite sex, than true performance means little. That part is all about looking good! I know lots of women that find some of the "worst" cars sexy! As far as a balance, I'd rather drive a sport package 3 with a stick than a Mustang GT. Yea, the 'Stang will smoke it in the quarter, but the 3 is much more satisfying to drive from a true balanced performance point of view, will return better MPG daily, and the above mentioned ladies will mostly find that more "sexy".
"Just because you read the manual doesn't mean you can drive the car."
Rajesh
Rather than concentrating on horse power and MPG there should be an effective alternative for something like methanol and high power fuel which can be generated from non polluting products. At the same time it should be futuristic and cost effective.
David Lundin
Right... violence and sex. Sure, if you buy cars because you have tiny equipment. If you actually buy a car to DRIVE, because you like a car with good handling and you like speeding around corners, then while MPG sure might not be what you look for, the effect of making lighter cars which have a better MPG numbers, will usually translate to better handling as well.
So while not directly related, indirectly the quest for MPG can surely lead to better handling and therefore interest by car enthusiasts.
driving courses
No, I don't think MPG will ever be as sexy as BHP but I see many more young people who are generally less interested in cars than earlier generations so I think there will be increasing numbers of drivers who will buy a car for economy rather than speed.
Russ Bellinis
#1-I haven't seen a single road test in any mag that complained of the Mini Cooper being boring.
#2-Weight =horsepower. Significant reductions in weight is as good as adding horse power, and it makes the car handle better as a bonus.
Enthusiasts won't look at the fuel economy figures first when buying a car. They won't buy a car because it gets 1 or 2 mpg better when the car getting 1 or 2 mpg less is more fun, but there is no reason why good fuel economy can't go with fun. For the guys asking for 350 hp with 35mpg, not unless someone invents a more efficient fuel than anything we have now! Number of cylinders has nothing to do with fuel economy. A Zo6 with 500 hp may get 26 mpg but only when it is not developing 500 hp (part throttle). A 350-400 hp base model ay approach 30 mpg on the highway at part throttle, but it probably won't get to 35 mpg. On the other hand, if a car weighs closer to 2000 lbs than 3000 lbs, it doesn't need nearly as much hp to get the job done and the mpg will follow.
D Moran
Absolutely, but not in the traditional sense of appreciation used for power consumption today
Instead we need to start measuring in terms of overall efficiency; design, package, powertrain etc and energy reclamation technology.
I'm already there, personally. I saw a Land Rover and a Honda Fit parked nose to bum across the road, and I couldn't stop staring at the Honda. (2500lbs, manual transmission and a truly useful shape (new idea?)
kurtcira
It could be. I frankly am getting tired of reading about 400+ HP cars and SUVs. Speed becomes a relative thing, and ofter more HP doesn't help. Better MPG always helps my bottom line. I have a 2006 Civic Si and have averaged 31.2 overall for the first 50,000 miles. On the highway I can easily get 34 mpg at 70 with AC on. It's plenty entertaining when revved up on the right section of road. Let's make the next war a battle for lightweight efficiency in a sexy package.
Kurt
Blk N Wht GT
If you're averaging 31.2mpg for 50k miles?!?! on your Civic Si, then why didn't you just get a regular civic and get even better gas mileage? If you're getting that good of an mpg figure on an Si then you aren't Vtec-ing it (hence the purpose of buying the Si...) and using what the Si was built for. My friend has an Si and gets about 22mpg on spirited tanks, 24 on avg tanks, and 26-28 on more mild driving.
The Man
David, you just like many of the others here, have not taken the time to read the question. However, to hold your hand and walk you through it, the question was "Can an MPG war be as SEXY as a horsepower war?" It had nothing to do with the weight, handling, or cornering. Point - try explaining what you just said to a woman (any woman) and see if she thinks you're sexy...
Trinks
You seem to be under the impression that these are the FHM or Maxim forums. Perhaps your preoccupation with compensating for certain... deficiencies, may be more appropriate there.
To get back on topic, you should consider reading a post beyond the title. The question restated is if high MPG can get enthusiasts as excited and interested as high horsepower figures.
Mena
MPG isn't sexy to me. That's just one aspect of a car. Big hp is not sexy either unless it's combined with fast acceleration. A big hp, slow car is not sexy. Reference the new Escalade. It has 400 hp but it's still slow. A car that excels in multiple areas is sexy. A car that sounds fantastic while excelling in those areas is even sexier. Reference a Ferrari F430. No a F430 does not get good gas mileage but it gets good everything else.
Bernard Freiwald
At last, car magazines are genuflecting less often to high horsepower and low mpg vehicles and the asinine reviews which those Gods have generated.
If there was ever a time that even middle America and Detroit listened to the drumbeats of changing consumer attitudes somewhat out of necessity toward efficiency, environmental imperatives, quality and design.
With encouragement, Detroit had efficiency, design and quality in its grasp within its European models but lacked the guts to bring those models to the States. In my humble opinion, American car companies ought to be exactly where they are and that is down an abyss from which they need to emerge or go out of business. If they do the latter, there will be others like Toyota and Honda in the place in a flash.
You know the American Auto companies might not even be missed by most of us though a heck of a lot of people will experience dislocation.
Anonymous
I recently went to the Palo Alto Concours. I lusted after the high performance exotics and checked out the green cars. What I found was one car that fit nicely into both categories: the Tesla. It was greener than any of the other green cars at 135 MPG. And it was able to smoke any of the cars in the high performance exotics. Quite a dicotomy.
Yes, an MPG war can be quite sexy.
Thomas
No way will practicality ever displace power and handling. Nothing wrong with wanting at least one practical car, but it wouldn't be the one I'd dream about!
Melchior
To nit-pick Anonymous above, the Tesla can't compete in the MPG competition since the calculation (infinite/zero)is irrational.
But my question is, why is it that all the neat high mpg turbo-diesels that appear in Europe, and get written up in the automotive press, NEVER appear in the U.S.???
Michael
Melchior:
The European Turbo-Diesels haven't been able to make the TIER 2/BIN 5 Emissions Standards common for California, New York and one of two other states which are important to automakers. The inability to meet the requirements has kept most of the European diesels completely out of the American markets since 2006. I'm sure you'll be glad to know that, because of a cooperative program between Chrystler, Mercedes and Volkswagen, European Turbo-Diesels which meet the TIER 2/BIN 5 Requirements are being brought to the American market and available for purchase now:
Diesels Feature: Cars on Sale Now
http://www.automobilemag.com/features/0707_diesels_on_sale/index.html
And, More will be brought to the American market within the next few months, starting with the 2009 VW Jetta Diesel TDI (available Sept., 2008):
Diesels Feature: Cars on Sale Soon
http://www.automobilemag.com/features/0707_future_diesels/index.html
The BMW 330d has been replaced with the 335d with an est. 33 mpg Highway, 23 mpg City.
Michael
HEL.I.E.V.
We are specialist in the organization of motorsport events in which the driver is not fighting against the clock but against the consumption meter. We can assure that these kind of events are very interesting, are friendly to the society and they offer a new and attractive way to make tourism by car to join new friends and to educate yourselve to respect the physical resourses and the environment. Special rules for these kind of events are prepared by the Alternative Energies Commission of the International Federation of Automobile - FIA. Contact us for more info
Anonymous
I guess the answer is NO
Oguard
MPG is really a false and truly misleading number.
On the surface it seems you are really saving a lot of fuel by switching from a 25MPG to 50MPG vehicle; certainly more than moving from 12MPG to 18MPG.
But in Canada, and most of the rest of the World, we use Litres (this is the correct spelling according to the Systeme Internationale) per 100 kilometres. So let's take another look at the above numbers....
100 kilometres is ~62 miles. 3.8 litres is ~1 US gallon. In my neighbourhood gasoline is currently selling for $1.349 per litre ($5.13 per US gallon)
25MPG means you would burn 2.48 gallons in 62 miles.
50MPG means you would burn 1.24 gallons or save 1.24 gallons of fuel ($6.34) over 62 miles.
12MPG means you would burn 5.17 gallons in 62 miles.
18MPG means you would burn 3.44 gallons or save 1.73 gallons of fuel ($8.84) over 62 miles.
So adding ONLY 6MPG saves you more money than adding 25MPG!
How about another illustration?
40MPG (Imperial) (4.55 versus 3.78 litres) is 7l/100km and 46MPG (Imperial) is 6.2l/100km or 0.8 litres difference in 100 kilometres; or $1.08 over 62 miles OR 1.74 CENTS per mile!
Now I drive a 2002 Jetta TDi diesel with 360,000 kms, I am paying $1.428/litre ($5.43 per US gallon) but am only using an average of 4.3l/100km (54.4MPG US) so it only costs me $6.14 for the same 62 mile trip or 10 cents per mile.
Therefore, MPG is misleading, CAFE really means nothing and let the dollars talk.
Blk N Wht GT
I really like your explanation of how MPG isn't THAT big of a difference. Obviously, if you're pinching every penny, then it is worth it but driving my 17mpg Mustang GT isn't that much of a difference over my friend's 20mpg Audi A4 3.0. Also, getting 20 more miles on my tank adds 1.5mpg (220 miles @ 14.5 gals is ~15mpg where as 240 miles @ 14.5 gals is ~16.5mpg). And if I compare my driving habits to achieve 16.5mpg vs. 15mpg, I have a lot more fun at 15mpg and its only 20 miles difference per tank which, to me, is worth it.
Anonymous
Some of us have always been enthralled with issues of design, efficiency and sensibility over the mega madness of horsepower that seems to have dominated gear-box thinking since the 60s.
Paul C.
Let me translate Oguard's comments above:
Since expressing MPG is a logarithmic relationship, when you increase and already high MPG figure, you are spreading that increase over more miles, so the gain per mile is less.
About sexy: sexy is a perception, and while the macho thing is to see power as sexy, women tend to be a bit more complex and the complete package - strong, protective, competent and stylish, is important. So perhaps the question is 'Sexy to whom?'
lukespack
Large horsepower by itself has never been sexy. A car's handling and looks are what makes a car sexy. In today's world mpg is not sexy either, but throw in handling and good looks and a high mpg car can be sexy.
I never found an SUV to be sexy. Before high fuel prices, it was the practicality of an SUV which made them so popular. I suspect the high mpg cars will become very popular especially if they become practical.
Richard
I'm with you, Luke. Good news is that we're getting much more choice these days, so everyone is better able to achieve what they're looking for in a car. Even diesel seems to be drifting to our shores in larger numbers going forward.
Boy USC
The Tesla is sexy and probably faster and more fuel efficient than any other car in this blog and is in current production. Of course, it doesn't use Gas. Check it out at www.teslamotors.com.
This is the technology we should move towards along with "home" hydrogen generators that can provide electricity.
john b
Many of us in our 50's (I'm 53) grew up enthralled with motor vehicles, hot rods, etc. I went through the hot rod phase for 10 years, but then bought a GTI. Wow - that car and subsequent 635CSi and SAABs taught me about handling, balanced performance, quality, and most importantly - "road feel". I have been dismayed to see the emphasis in the past 10 years on heavier and more thirsty vehicles, especially with the oil situation. Especially SUV's - ugh - what a waste. I get so much satisfaction from my current SAAB - 30mpg at high road speeds, great road feel, a sumptous interior and one hell of a kick when the turbo comes on - that I do not remotely desire a 400 hp V-8 car. Four cylinder turbos in a nice chassis are awesome and I think many of us would welcome a return to a more balanced perspective in the vehicles reviewed and the ratings thereof.
Ed in Austin
They are two entirely different things - one targeted at the pocketbook and the other at personality enhancement. One targets bravado and the other intellect. No gas mileage will never be in the same classification as horsepower.
Tequila Brad
The "quest for mileage" is a farce. I have an original 1968 Austin Healey Sprite, that, driven properly, will yield 40 mpg. This is a car, whose engine was designed in the 40's, and merely bored out to larger and larger sizes to increase HP. Two carbs, 4 speed manual transmission, and a whopping 67 HP stock. Ok, it isn't a 0 to 60 dream, but it does as well as most current econoboxes today.
If a 40 year old car, with NO frills, can exceed the mileage of the economy cars, made with the "best technology" available today, who is really getting screwed here??
Mileage AND HP ARE available, our government will NEVER allow it, due to the pressure from the oil lobbyists. How come the Smart, available in Europe for over a decade, gets over 80 mpg on their soil, yet will barely reach 40 mpg here?
We don't have to give up gas, we just need to flush out our government, to get a newer mindset, that isn't entrenched in their own greed. Perhaps if enough new faces are installed, SOMETHING might be done, to benefit US, the American people.
At least, IIRC, that IS the job they are supposed to accomplish.
Ed
Spot On!
Though I disagree as to the root cause of our current motoring problems. The enemy is not so much Big Oil as it is Big Gummint; that source that decrees that every car must have airbags a'plenty, produce less emissions than the average housecat and inform the owner of every motor malady via computer codes. All this has added weight which has necessitated power steering and powered brake assist; yet more weight and parasitic energy consumption. Just consider the irony of someone driving to a 'Fitness Center', when the 'drive' is made less onerous by P/S. Of course, I grew up in a time when Porsches weighed well short of 3 thousand pounds. Responsive, yet delightfully unhomogenized!
Ed
Michael
Brad,
Some of the reasons Economy Cars get the same MPG as your Sprite, or little better than your Sprite, are the following: 1) Safety Req's; 2) Emissions Req's; 3) Customer demands for Comfort Features and Improved Handling and NVH; and 4) the Increased BHP needed to deal with the increased weight of the car and demands on the engine. Remember, the average "Econobox" now has a curb weight of 2,650-3,000 lbs., has a payload capacity of 900 lbs., and an engine that produces 120-140 bhp & 120-136 ft-pounds of torque.
The first two, plus the threat of litigation, keep many cars from being imported to the States. Blame the greed of plaintiffs and plaintiffs' lawyers - Automobile Corporations make money by selling cars, NOT by not selling cars. It's not as simple as you seem to think it is.
Michael
Mark Christie
As I near the end of my 20's, the huge horsepower claims of magazine covers no longer draw my attention. After all, by reaching Porsche 917 territory, hasn't the Veyron won? Now I actually find myself eager to see what direction new technology might take the automobile as we face environmental challenges. I have become more interested in MPG cover stories than HP battles. But just like I enjoy a BBQ steak once in a while (despite recent claims that it can be carcinogenic), there's something about a 1965 GTO rumbling past me on the street that makes me smile.
LightSpeed
Re: Oguard's mpg comparison, 25-50mpg vs 12-18mpg. That's like comparing a 150 lb. person eating 1/2 lb. at dinner vs 1 lb. and a 400 lb. person eating 5 lbs. vs 10 lbs. Yes, a 5 lb. difference is substantially larger than a 1/2 lb., but the fat guy is still fat!
There are several affordable supercars that have 340 - 820bhp, 0-60 in 3.5 to 2.6 seconds and get > 30 mpg on the highway. What do they have in common? They all weigh less than 2000 lbs.
It seems to me that a high tech engine in a very light car could perform well AND get 75 plus mpg.
One size fits all regulation in this country stifles technological innovation. How about the government offering a multi-million/billion dollar reward (our money, of course) to the company that can produce a 100 mpg, 0-60 in < 6 seconds, no regulations attached, car for less than $25k? The 100mpg alone might make it cleaner than anything around?
silver92
Good handling and exiting cars to drive always have decent or indecent amounts of horsepower. Anemic, poor acceleration is a huge turn off for someone who wants a high performance car. By the way, you need power for good handling if you think you don't need power for autocrossing or road racing, you probably don't know what you are talking about.
High horsepower does not equal high fuel consumption. My C6 Corvette gets 22 mpg in city and 30 mpg in the highway and will absolutely blow the doors off almost any other car you put it up against, let alone some boring stupid Japanese or Euro sedan which can't handle, accelerate or look as good. And for what? maybe the 6 cyl sedan gets 2 or 3 more miles per gallon. Big whoop.
MPG is important and reducing the use of fossil fuels is a worthy goal. However, giving up driving a fun car for a marginal gain in fuel economy does not make much sense. When the exciting high performance turbo charged cars which are available elsewhere in the world become available to us in the USA, I'll look into getting one for everyday driving. Other wise, I'll continue to enjoy my C6 and just curtail unnecessary driving.
Michael
Silver92:
Are you sure that you're getting 30 mpg Highway & 22 mpg City in your Corvette C-6? I ask because I looked the C-6 up on Consumer Reports - EPA - 26 mpg Highway, 16 mpg City; Consumers Reports - 28 mpg Highway, 13 mpg City, 19 mg Overall & 22 mpg 150 Mile trip...
Meanwhile, the MINI Cooper S costs $40,000 less, gets EPA - 36 mpg Highway, 29 mpg City; Consumers Reports - 38 mpg Highway, 22 mpg City, 30 mpg Overall and 36 mpg 150 Mile trip. At the same time, Avoidance Maneuver Corvette C-6 - 56.5 mph, MINI Cooper S - 57.5 mph, and MINI Cooper has that rear sear for use in emergencies...
And, The Volkswagen GTI also costs over $40,000 less than the C-6, gets EPA - 32 mpg Highway, 23 mpg City; Consumers Reports - 32 mpg Highway, 19 mpg City; 25 mpg Overall & 29 mpg 150 Mile trip... Avoidance Maneuver GTI - 57.0 MPH, and the GTI has a usable rear seat and usable cargo space.
Both the MINI and the GTI are cheaper by buy and cheaper to drive - That keeps more money in your wallet. Last time I looked, being smart with your money was sexy. And, as proven by the Avoidance Maneuver Results, both cars handle well, which means you don't have to spend a lot of money on the car or pour a lot of money into the gas tank for a good handling car. That's smart, and sexy, too.
Michael
Griff
In the early seventies I bought my first car, a 1966 Chevy SS 396. Several months later the oil crisis hit and long lines at the gas station were the norm. That gas and oil hog had to go so I migrated to a VW Beetle to survive. So jump ahead 25 years and we're once again looking for economical cars to drive. Although I can afford a car with a huge ass engine I chose to buy a car (Audi A4) with 4 cylinders that puts out 200+ HP (chipped), gets 34 highway, and in my opinion, looks better than most other cars. It cost under $30K (base model), has a better than average interior, and the manual transmission just makes it simply fun to drive. I also feel like I'm being environmentally responsible by buying a car with a smaller engine. I'm kind of over the - must have a bigger engine to prove my masculinity thing. Having a huge gas sucking engine doesn't mean you're any good in bed either. Some of you guy's out there need to turn down the testosterone knob a few clicks and get real. Think with your brain and not your johnson.
Ed
DUHHH!
Anyone out there as old as me recall the Mobil Gas Economy Runs of the Fifties? Ton-Miles-Per-Gallon? OK; maybe not as glamorous as the infant NASCAR, but still in the Public Eye.
William J Toensing
I have been an auto buff all my life(I am now 75)& MPG has always had a higher fasination for me than zero to 60 time in seconds. I would gladly accept zero to 60 in 30 seconds in exchange for 50 MPG, or more. What good is zero to 60 in 4 seconds if you can't afford the gas to feed it? Gas will go to $7 a gallon or more in 2 years & there is nothing we can do about it except buy more fuel efficient cars. Please pressure our government (USA) to be allowed to buy the more fuel efficient cars Europeans can. They have over 100 cars that can get at least 50 MPG & several 70MPG or more. Example: VW Polo TDI diesel. This is an election year. For more info, go to .
Post new comment