40 MPG Plateau?

With the New York auto show and all the new or redesigned small cars coming out lately I think everyone has seen 40 mpg taunted for a lot of models. Some fit the whole range (hyundai) some are just one certain models (fiesta).

My question is why are we stuck at 40 mpg highway? Shouldn't that be old news already?

For example the accent & elantra both get 40 mpg but are in different size classes. Heck even the sonata is pulling down 35 and its much bigger.

Ford and mazda are guilty too. I think the cruze and sonic aren't rated far apart either. In some cases the larger car is actually better on gas.

Nitroracer wrote: My question is why are we stuck at 40 mpg highway? Shouldn't that be old news already?

25 years ago some of them got 50 MPG. All this time, technology and expense later, we've gone down 10 MPG. That's progress!

Two things.

I think the testing methods have changed (and made the numbers lower), and cars have gotten much fatter.

My Canyon gets at least the same, and usually better MPG than any of my compact trucks from the 80's, and 90's, and does it in MUCH greater comfort, with double the horsepower. Would I prefer a smaller truck, with even better MPG? Sure I would, but nobody builds it here.

Diminishing returns. the extra 10MPG from 40MPG to 50MPG only saves the same gas/money as going from 14MPG to 15MPG. Not really worth it after that.

No help getting to Obama's 50 mpg too early, the powers that be will just move the target

Javelin wrote: Diminishing returns. the extra 10MPG from 40MPG to 50MPG only saves the same gas/money as going from 14MPG to 15MPG. Not really worth it after that.

I'm not good at the maths, but I can't see how that works. Damn. I'm going to have to do math now.

Okay. If I have a 15 mile drive to work, at 14 MPG, I use 1.07 gallons of gas. If I go to 15 MPG I use 1 gallon of gas. In 214 days I'll save enough for one "free" trip to work.

If I have a 15 mile drive to work, at 40 MPG, I use .37 gallons of gas. If I go to 50 MPG, I use .3 gallons of gas. In 214 days I'll save enough for one "free" trip to work.

Well I'll be damned. That's like one of those "Start with your birth date. Now add 100" deals. Wait a minute, this is one of those percentage deals, isn't it? There's a reason I'm not in accounting.

aussiesmg wrote: No help getting to Obama's 50 mpg too early, the powers that be will just move the target

Ooooh, I see what you did there. It seems kinda like it's on topic, but really...

I think a real 50mpg is really pushing it for a gas engine. Has there ever been a mass produced car that (assuming it was in like new condition) could be daily driven today that would regularly get over 40 mpg?

i've heard of some people getting their manual geo metro 3cyl cars to see over 50mpg. my bro managed to massage his saturn sl1 to almost 45mpg from NY to SC and back highway.

Travis_K wrote: I think a real 50mpg is really pushing it for a gas engine. Has there ever been a mass produced car that (assuming it was in like new condition) could be daily driven today that would regularly get over 40 mpg?

Honda CRX HF in the 80s and the Geo Metro. A Prius does it too. Probably others. Honda Insight, I think, got something crazy high.

Travis_K wrote: I think a real 50mpg is really pushing it for a gas engine. Has there ever been a mass produced car that (assuming it was in like new condition) could be daily driven today that would regularly get over 40 mpg?

Civic VX. No fun to drive, but...

Zomby woof wrote: Two things. I think the testing methods have changed (and made the numbers lower), and cars have gotten much fatter.

THIS. I sometimes wonder how much mileage one could get if they dropped a more modern engine into an old-school fuel miser like an Omni or Rabbit. I know Top Gear USA/MotoIQ dropped a modern TDI engine into a (aerodynamically modified) Rabbit and got over 80mpg. I was wondering more along the lines of a modern gas engine into an otherwise unmodified econobox (say, a modern Fiesta engine into a Festiva), then test it next to a stock Festiva and a stock Fiesta on the modern EPA cycle.

Magazine guys, are you listening?

I think a real 50mpg is really pushing it for a gas engine. Has there ever been a mass produced car that (assuming it was in like new condition) could be daily driven today that would regularly get over 40 mpg?

I do it EVERY DAY (2001 honda insight). Ac, airbags, ABS, etc. 305k miles and counting..

No help getting to Obama's 50 mpg too early, the powers that be will just move the target

CAFE was stagnant for WAYYY too long, and we paid for it in more ways than one. How'd you feel about bailing out the automakers with your money? There's a connection there.

I know Top Gear USA/MotoIQ dropped a modern TDI engine into a (aerodynamically modified) Rabbit and got over 80mpg.

A stock TDI vw Lupo almost gets that from the factory, but they dont sell it here.

I agree with the general mood that the MPG modern cars get is a bit pathetic, and thats even considering the significant improvements over the last few years. In places where fuel consumption has been prioritized (where $4/gal would be seen as a godsend), cars have been getting 50-70mpg for a decade or more.

Instead, we in america now have every midsize family sedan with a v6 running 14s and 0.5% of people actually caring or using it. And then when you get the throttle stuck open on your overpowered 25mpg camry people start dying. It really is a stupid, stupid situation we have here.

In reply to RexSeven:

Man, I'd love to try something like that. What about like a Spitfire or something. What did they weigh, like 1600 lbs? I know our old Tercel had 69 HP. There have to be some efficient engines that can do that. Maybe a bike engine? Maybe a small diesel if you want to wring some really high numbers out of it. Wonder what that would get you.

Travis_K wrote: I think a real 50mpg is really pushing it for a gas engine. Has there ever been a mass produced car that (assuming it was in like new condition) could be daily driven today that would regularly get over 40 mpg?

Honda CRX HF I believe.

Travis_K wrote: I think a real 50mpg is really pushing it for a gas engine. Has there ever been a mass produced car that (assuming it was in like new condition) could be daily driven today that would regularly get over 40 mpg?

You could easily do it in a 3cyl Geo Metro. I used to average 40mpg while delivering pizzas in one in college. Over 50mpg on the highway. Mine was completely gutted - but then again it wasn't in the best shape mechanically either. I'm sure they did even better when brand new.

In reply to fast_eddie_72:

Sounds like a cool idea! If a magazine or website were to take up such an undertaking, though, I would try to keep it as apples-to-apples as possible and keep the engine-swapping restricted from one manufacturer's current econobox into an 80s/early 90s econobox of the same make, drivetrain, and class (subcompact, compact, etc). The 80s and early 90s seemed to be the heyday of fuel-efficient penalty boxes. If nothing else, it will give a good idea of how far modern engine technology has come, and how heavy modern cars have become.

In reply to RexSeven:

Hum. Now I'll be up all night googling HP and MPG. The problem I have to get around there is finding an engine that is available in big numbers in the US that's designed just for MPG. With the cars getting heavier, they made more powerful engines too. So it's hard to find the combination. Like, a Honda Fit has 117 HP, but weighs 2500 lbs. We need like half a Honda Fit engine in a 1600 lb. 80s CRX.

fast_eddie_72 wrote: In reply to RexSeven: Man, I'd love to try something like that. What about like a Spitfire or something. What did they weigh, like 1600 lbs? I know our old Tercel had 69 HP. There have to be some efficient engines that can do that. Maybe a bike engine? Maybe a small diesel if you want to wring some really high numbers out of it. Wonder what that would get you.

someone please make a cummins triumph

Well, remember that larger engines can do very well if they are under little duress and the gear ratios are right (think 'vette). My buddy had a CRX w/ a modded b16 that could break the front tires loos in first or second quite easily. It could also do 40+ mpg easy with good throttle control.

The 80s and early 90s seemed to be the heyday of fuel-efficient penalty boxes.

And the 2000s were the heyday of fuel efficient NON penalty boxes (insight) but noone bought it. So i guess it wasnt much of a heyday..

I think people dismiss the insight 50+mpg as having something to do with it being a hybrid, but cruising on the highway the electric does NOTHING. It would get 50mpg if i unplugged the main battery.

You can talk about putting modern engines into old cars to get 50mpg, but the 1g insight is practically old already in and of itself! The future is 10 years ago!

Now, if you put a new Prius drivetrain in my insight, then you'd be talking crazy-ass mpgs.

In Europe the everyday car is much more efficient than it is here, the BMW 116d (diesel) gets a reported 62 miles to the gallon! No TDi does that!

Toyota has two different diesel Tacoma's both returning 30-35 mpg, neither are available in the US!

So frustrating!

No TDi does that!

Did you read what i said about the Lupo Tdi? http://www.nytimes.com/2001/09/16/automobiles/behind-the-wheel-volkswagen-lupo-a-thrifty-spin-in-a-99-mpg-car.html http://www.driveandstayalive.com/info%20section/news/individual%20news%20articles/x_031202_vw-lupo-sets-new-mpg-distance-record.htm http://ecomodder.com/forum/showthread.php/vw-lupo-1-2tdi-3l-112-mpg-16420.html

Zomby woof wrote: I think the testing methods have changed (and made the numbers lower), and cars have gotten much fatter.

So sad and so true. I can deal with different testing methods, but I really wish cars would start dieting. I understand that safety means weight, and comfort means weight, but I wouldn't complain about a little less safety and much less comfort. I don't even really care about MPG's (says the guy sadly trying to justify the mileage of his rotary) but I would love the improved performance. Sadly, the masses don't want rough, noisy cars that are fun to drive. Imagine the mileage of a 1.5l diesel in a stripped out Mazda 2! It would be fun, too, and conform to modern safety standards. And just think, with the peices of string to replace 'heavy' door handles, you could pretend you drive a Ferrari F40, or a Porsche Boxster Spyder!

We're also forgetting that manufacturers gear the crap out of cars today. Pretty much no one will buy a car that has a 10+ second 0-60 time.

Again, I drag out my '05 Scion xB as an example. In order to do that under 10 sec time, Toyota put in a 4.30:1 final drive. Change that to something like a 3.93, and it would be slower off the line, but probably get 10% better highway mpg.

When buyers would accept a 14+ second 0-60 time, cars could be (and were) more economical.