It is about weight and safety, not technology. Our 1981 Toyota Starlet was EPA rated at 50 mpg at that time, and would get very close to that with two aboard. After replacing the original tires, which were designed for low rolling and wind resistance, with tires that would actually stop the car in a panic stop, our actual highway mileage, averaged on a cross-country trip with two adults and luggage, was 44 mpg. By the way, the rear wheel drive Starlet got better mileage than its front wheel drive twin, the Tercel. So much for the myth of FWD giving better mileage.
It was big enough to seat 4 and still carry significant luggage. With a 5-speed stick it would easily keep up with traffic and climb any hill at 60 mph. The bad news was that it weighted 1700 lbs, had no air bags and no safety cage around the passenger compartment. It was only a little safer than riding my motorcycle, and I brought my two newborns home from the hospital in that thing!
I drove it 275,000 miles with no engine repairs at all, and it looked good and ran perfectly when I sold it. But then, it was never in an accident…
I am anxiously awaiting the US entry of the Ford Fiesta. I don’t understand the delay, this car would sell well right now with gas prices on the rise. I have held off on buying any new cars as I need a commuter car that gets OVER 35 MPG. I am wondering how many of those Diesel engine options will be available in the US. I would settle for a nice 1.6L engine like the one in my 89 Mercury Tracer. I don’t know if the engine has much more than displacement in common, but my Tracer has over 374,000 one owner miles on it and has hit 42 mpg highway. The car is indestructible and has never had any work done on the engine. After all these years it uses 1 quart of oil every 2000 miles. I don’t mind that is a small and somewhat cramped as long it continues to get upper 30’s in mileage. I have owned a few 90’s Escorts and none of them could do better than 36 mpg max.
I think the main reason 40+ MPG cars are so rare is that, until about a year ago, nobody much wanted them. When gas was cheap, no one wanted to be seen in an econobox. Now that high-mileage cars are in demand, I’m betting there will be lot more of them on offer.
Everyone should take a minute to reflect on how much has been accomplished in terms of engine efficiency in the last 50 years.
The first car I drove was a mid 1950s Ford with a V8 and a 2-speed automatic transmission. No A/C or power anything. It got 15 mpg. My next car was a 40 hp VW beetle. 0-60 in 30 seconds with a top speed of 80 mph. It got 33 mpg. Its replacement was another beetle, this one with with 53 hp. 0-60 time dropped to 18 seconds, but gas mileage dropped to 30 mpg. We have a late 1960s Corvair that my wife inherited from her father. 0-60 in about 12 seconds. 18 mpg.
The early 1970s were a disaster for engine performance because emissions limits preceded the technology to implement them efficiently. Cars began getting only 10 or 12 mpg. I briefly rented a 1975 Ford Maverick with a 6-cylinder engine and automatic transmission. It got 13.5 mpg.
By the late 1980s, manufacturers were beginning to develop the technology needed for engines that were both clean and efficient. We had a Honda Civic that was as fast as the Corvair yet got the same gas mileage as my first VW beetle.
Computerized engine control and fuel injection made a huge improvment in efficiency. We have a 1998 Subaru all-wheel-drive wagon that is bigger than the Civic and weighs 50% more, does 0-60 in 8-9 seconds and gets 24 mpg. Cars like the Honda Civic and Toyota Corolla, which meet current emissions and safety requirements, are as fast as our Subaru yet get the same gas mileage as my gutless, tin box beetle did 45 years ago.
Last fall, I bought an Infiniti G37S coupe. 0-60 time is 5-6 seconds and top speed is limited by an electronic governor to 155 mph. In the real world, it gets the same gas mileage as the Subaru! Compared to the previous version of the same engine, it has the advantage of continuously variable valve lift and timing. The next step is direct fuel injection into the cylinders as is used for diesels. This should yield another 10% improvement.
You really think cars are deliberately designed to get low mileage? I disagree. The car manufacturers are under a lot of government pressure to raise MPG, both here and in europe. They would do anything to get an extra 5MPG. Plus an increase in sales.
It would take a global conspiracy to do that, and not one manufacturer to break the code? not possible, someone would blab so they could get an increase in business.
I think the next breakthrough will be camless electronically controlled intake and exhaust valves. No need for a throttle, the intake valve just closes when enough air has been sucked into the cylinder for the power needed. Without the engine having to suck air past a closed throttle, the pumping losses will go way down and idle fuel consumption should drop down to that of a diesel engine.
Variable cam timing kind of achieves a portion of this but still needs a throttle to control engine power.
It’s “Rocket Science” because a Saturn V rocket is both the Least and Most efficient vehicle. Three inches per gallon of fuel at lift off, Infinity MPG in space. (LOL)
I think the next breakthrough will be camless electronically controlled intake and exhaust valves.
It’s been tried…Several companies have been working on it for several years (first I heard about it was 15 years ago). The problem is reliability. They haven’t been able to make it reliable enough. The simpler the system the more reliable it is
As cited in other threads, my 1992 Honda Civic VX 4cyl 3 door (hatchback) drove great, was reliable, and got 39city/55 hwy (verified by me as driver), AND it went uphill in 4th gear (not necessarily in 5th/overdrive) AND it had AC that worked well. Yes it was small, light, low profile, but far superior mpg vs. current models with no hybrid magic. IMHO, supply and demand. If we as consumers demand more, we’ll get it. Auto company administrators are only responsible to stockholders, i.e. money talks.
Yeah, it was a miracle they didn’t fall apart on the dealer lot! I remember shopping for my first new car in '81, and looked at either the Horizon or its stablemate (the Omni). It was brand new and rusting to pieces right at the dealer. Needless to say, I didn’t buy it.
Interesting comments about NOx. Forest rot in Germany? Really?
Yes. Better known in the US as “acid rain”. Oxides of sulfur mix with moisture to form sulfuric acid, and oxides of nitrogen mix with moisture to form nitric acid. Both do nasty things to vegetation by upsetting soil chemistry, particularly in limestone-poor areas.
The domestic have to be careful that they don’t arrive just as the party is ending and everyone else is getting into the next thing.
Which is exactly what they will do. They’re not just lumbering dinosaurs – they’re already fossilized. Remember the late '70s when people were still smarting from the '73 Oil Embargo? What was GM pushing as a great development? CB radios built right into the dash! They’ll never learn.
I have a 2002 saturn SL (the last year they made them). Basic car with A/C, 5spd, 4 door and the single cam 4cyl engine. I drive mixed highway and higher speed rural roads… no real city driving. I consistently get 41mpg!
I paid $10,000 for the car NEW
I just passed the 100,000 mile mark with no major repairs necessary (just brakes, tune-up, etc.)
Its a crime that such a car is no longer available!!