Content Wrapper

[Woodsman]

emu67 previously said:

Seems ridiculous to me that it only gets 40 to 45 mpg. About 30 years ago when the original Civics came out, didn't they get 50 mpg and they were slightly bigger? What's up with the lack of forward progress of more efficient gas engines??

X2 Your right. While I think this is a "neat" looking little car, I find it sickening how inefficient these small vehicles really are. You want me to explain ? OK. The Smartcar gets what 40mpg and is limited to two people and a bag of groceries. For how small they are and the small amount of "work" they are capable, they are terribly inefficient. A Mini when driven carefully can carry four people and/or some actual cargo and get nearly as good of mileage. The 1980s Chevy Cavaliers, Ford Escorts, and Dodge Omnis (which were the vehicles littering college campuses when I was in school) were all capable of getting upper 30s and could all carry four people and/or some cargo. They were all built light, had low power, and few luxuries.

Today, everyone expects a sh1tload of useless power, power everything, airbags out the a$$, and enough mass to take on a F350 in a demolition derby. Engines are actually better today but everything else more than overcome that additional efficiency.

I wish I still had my 88 hp 1984 Cavalier hatchback which would average 34-35 on the highway and would sometimes get 37-38 even when filled with college "stuff".

BTW, I am shopping for a Mini or Mini Clubman . . . but it will be with the 118hp stock engine. In a vehicle that size, anything more is just not necessary.