Mine gets great milage..... Until I put the accelerator into the firewall.
Posted on 07/14/2008 6:09:19 AM PDT by wolf78
I bought a 1992 Jeep Cherokee with the 4.0 six. It needs about $1,000 for it to be where I want it ($280 to just get it running again - computer). Paid cash. Am now trying to sell my 1 year old Elantra.
Funny I didn't put any down on it and it shows that private party value is more than I owe, so, I'm ahead of the game. It gets great mileage, but with payment, insurance, and fuel, it costs me between $445 and $470/month. The jeep will cost me between $190 and $200 for just gas and insurance... I can use the difference for something else, like corn on the cob.
I agree with that. I’m at 218,000 on my 15 year-old Honda Civic.
“Poor timing? Improper boost? Wrong rear end?”
Both cars!? Not even. I repeat my previous commentary:
“The Pro’s I’ve mentioned are a single Volvo/SAAB auto clinic (not a chain) that is rated amongst the top 20 repair facilities across the Nation by AAA. I have to believe they know what the “H” they are doing. Besides we have had our cars serviced by them since 1988.”
I’ll add to this that they are Swedish and speak Swedish as well are factory experienced and trained on these automobiles. The cars are OEM, not altered in anyway.
This week I will check mileage on our third SAAB which is a 9-5 six cylinder turbo automatic. I’ll followup this discussion if another thread about cars, or Ethanol allow a segue.
I rechecked mileage on the four cylinder cars first as this 9-5 will get less than I want to know about lol. (shaking head)
- 91 Integra, we got 341,000 miles, no drive train or body problems ever, other than timing chain (belt). Great Great auto.
You are absolutely right about 100k. And turbo-charging, from my experience, is a long term insidious problem.
My vote for diesel.
I'm trying to get over something that was trained into me. My dad has gone through more cars in a single year than some do in a lifetime.
I'm trying to unlearn that. So, to me 100,000 miles is a lot (given that I pack on between 7,500 and 8,500 a year - it would be around twelve years for me to see 100,000 miles (in my old days, that would be 5 or so vehicles).
So, from my perspective, that was a lot.
I'll agree that 100,000 is throw-away mileage, the jeep I just bought has 200,000 on it and seems to only need a computer (ran fine when it worked, no smoke).
Automobile names are frequently chosen for some psychological effect. Think of the connotations: (Mustang) a wild horse, (Pinto) a little Mustang, (Pacifica) the churning ocean, (La Sabre) obvious, (Expedition)(Explorer)(Denali) rugged outdoors, (Vega) (Corvette) sleek, fast ships or plans, (Eldorado) etc. Make your list but you can also see the West Coast influence, no more Chrysler New Yorker or Plymouth Belvedere.
Yeah, I used to shift that 327 at about 6,800 rpms when racing, missed a few shifts before getting the tranny rebuild (had a nasty little habit of not actually going into second gear, thought it was the linkage, but was an internal problem - it was a twenty-year old transmission).
I sold it and the guy who bought it from me raced it as well. About ten years or so after my dad and I built that motor, the new owner tore it down, other than a single broken piston ring, it went back together without any machine work being needed.
If the cars are OEM, did they come from the factory tuned for ethanol?
My 1980 Fairmont used to get better mileage than that, the problem was I’d only get two and a half miles out of the NOS bottle. Of course, I only ran high 11s. Yours appears to be a touch faster, I could only get the left front off for the first 10 feet or so.
Mine gets great milage..... Until I put the accelerator into the firewall.
You have some stake in Ethanol, or what? Look at the overall conversation thus far.
One is a ‘99, and the other car is a 2001. “Tuned for Ethanol”? Perhaps they would be if they were 2006 or newer.
My point is that not everybody has brand new cars and I believe by my experience that Ethanol is robbing us all of our hard earned money fore and aft and NOT achieving the purpose of its mandate as well. I’m also asking all to check their MPG to see how the claims of mileage are holding up in reality.
It doesn’t matter what car, whether it’s turbo, or not, or engine size etc. Those are options. We haven’t the option when it comes to Ethanol, and I believe my fuel mileage checks are telling me something about Ethanol, and I simply want to pass that on to others to check for themselves.
We’ve had it in the 9’s but our current combo is a low 10 second setup.
401”Windsor, C4 trans w/brake, 4.57 gears, 13:1 comp ratio, camshaft is an Extreme Energy street grind custom ground on a billet core with mid .637/.646 lift
Still currently licensed for the street as well.
I can’t read the advert. Is that the supercharged Regal?
Nope, turbocharged 3.8 L
Your latest question: “Why do you think your car is flex-fuel, or otherwise ethanol tuned, to begin with?”
My previous post: “One is a ‘99, and the other car is a 2001. “Tuned for Ethanol”? Perhaps they would be if they were 2006 or newer.”
“tuned for Ethanol?” Please note the ?, then I said “Perhaps they would be if they were 2006 or newer.”
I also mentioned my point being...as in the previous post.
Thanks for the input, but seems I’m not able to get my point across. Gotta run. Long day ahead.
“It got 8 miles to the gallon of premium gasoline.”
LOL
I got about the same mpg in my Plymouth GTX with 440 cid engine, and that was when I kept my foot out of it.
Can you imagine the cost of feeding those beasts today?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.