Big Engine vs Small Engine Fuel Economy

I can recall a test in Car & Driver, of an '80s-era Pontiac Bonneville * equipped with the 455 c.i. engine, and that giant mill was essentially just turning at idle speed once the car got up to expressway speeds.

By contrast, the Civics of that era were revving at more than 3k at expressway speeds, so it is believable that the Pontiac just might be more economical in that type of situation. And, of course, the Pontiac’s engine would be experiencing much less wear than the Civic’s engine at those speeds.

*In retrospect, I think it was a mid-70s Pontiac Grand Ville that they tested, something like this one:
https://www.hemmings.com/stories/article/the-forever-flagship-1972-pontiac-grand-ville#:~:text=Power%20was%20provided%20by%20a,of%20torque%20at%202%2C400%20RPM.

I always preferred a v8 for on th3 road travel. Less strain and less wear and would lope along at 70 mph at 2000 rpm. I rented a little four speed four cyl, at that car would be pushing 3000 rpm on the open road. Seemed to suck gas like crazy but it was liters and math is hard. I just filled up a lot.

… and things tended to get a bit “buzzy” with those little engines at very high speeds!

Running wide open throttle reduces pumping losses which improves efficiency. Your mpgs won’t crash but acceleration will reduce them.

I think you will be surprised that weight DOES have bearing on your hwy mpgs. You even pointed out why… drive train friction and tire rolling resistance. Both are affected by weight. Aero drag is the largest component, but rolling resistance is not zero.

Yeah, no, the S class Merc is 30 mpg, the Civic is 35. I don’t call 16% “nearly.” The Merc has more frontal area and a 9 speed box, the Civic has a CVT.

3000 rpms on a 6500 redline is nothing… They don’t start pulling hard until 3-4K sometimes…

My Accord had decent power at those revs, but it did get a bit… buzzy.

It was a Vauxhall and it did get buzzy.

My 2.0 liter 240 hp Honda S2000 didn’t wake up until 5500 rpm when the Vtec kicked in!

That car got 26-27 mpg highway no matter how hard I wailed on it.

1 Like

IMO you’d do best continuing to enjoy your Passat, and focus your efforts on keeping it well maintained and in good tune. An 11 second 0-60 is plenty good enough for keeping up with traffic.

If you’re still looking for something faster, and older, the UK publication “Practical Classics” has been running articles recently on cars from the 1995- 2005 era. Among the higher power, faster versions, they refer to these as worth considering in the UK market: Audi TT 3.2L V6, Rover 75 2 L V6, BMW Z3M 3.2L, Jaguar S Type 4.2 L v8, Alfa Romeo 166 3 L v6.

1 Like

My 2018 Nissan Versa 1.6L 5 speed manual turns 3000 RPM at 60 mph and gets over 40 mpg while doing it. It doesn’t really get into the power band until it reaches over 4000 RPM. It’s a little buzzy but not bad. Being a life long motorcycle rider I’m used to higher RPM engines. I’ve had bikes that turn 7500 RPM on the highway and were still running fine with over 100,000 miles.

I’m presuming you purchased your Versa new. I like that 1.6 L/5 speed configuration, same as my Corolla. Is it a turbo?. Being a 2018 model, I’ve already resigned myself that it has AC and power windows … lol … If you care to say, just curious, what appx price did you pay at the time?

Yes bought new cash $11,500 including all taxes and fees. Non turbo, has AC and power mirrors, crank windows, manual door locks, regular old fashioned key, radio/CD player, no touch screens or cameras.