Posted on 01/20/2006 10:58:08 AM PST by RWR8189
In a number of states, you're not allowed to buy a diesel passenger vehicle, thanks to federal mandates.
How did you manage 46-50 mpg with your '89 Civic Si? I could only manage 36 or so highway with mine. That was still better than what the EPA sticker said, however.
Alas, they're not as fuel-efficient as you think. Remember, those cars have pretty ancient engine technology with carburetors and not really that high compression ratios, and as such you'll be lucky if you can get 33+ mpg unless you drive with a really light foot on the accelerator. The 2006 Honda Civic, on the other hand, has a modern engine with very precise fuel delivery, electronic trottle controls, variable-timing four-valve per cylinder heads, and electronic control of spark timing. As such, 35+ mpg is easily achieveable on steady freeway driving on a much bigger car with way more interior space than the cars you described.
I have owned all the cars I named, and many more.
They were what I drove during the phony "oil crises" of '74.
The Bug-Eye and Fiat 850 got the best mileage, real world, not some contrived EPA estimate.
Whatever shortcoming they may have had verse the modern econo-box's they more than made up for in fun driving.
I filled my tank at least 1/3 less often than anybody else in town.
Currently have a Spitfire as our economy car.
Fascinating. Makes perfect sense. Thanks for the explanation.
I agree. But the same moonbat shriekers who want to pollute my rural countryside so they can feel good about driving in their lesser polluted cityscape in their hybrid cars won't let the Feds approve any more nuke plants.
I wish they would keep their pollution in theur own back yard or just stay out of the whole energy policy discussion.
Also, Arianna Huffington, Bill Maher, Norman Lear, Robert Redford and all can kiss my butt on this subject. I get extremely angry when that type preach hybrids but don't consider who's sucking down their pollution a few hundred miles away on their behalf.
My hybrid has a 110 outlet in the console.
"But if you plug it in to charge it up, aren't you displacing the pollution rather than eliminating it? Displacing it to the predominantly rural areas where power plants are located.
Why should those folks breathe the additional pollutants to reduce the same in the more urban area?"
"How much does it cost to replace the batteries? What price would you pay for a used hybrid knowing that you soon had to replace its batteries?"
What cost? The batteries are warranteed for eight years or 100,000 miles. I doubt I will have it that long anyway; already having owned 54 cars in my lifetime. But in any event, I studied this matter and they simply are not failing. And if they are not failing, they would be dirt cheap in the scrap yards. I saw one on ebay and it sold for $455 with 4 miles on the odometer. And with costs coming down they are likely to become cheaper yet.
"The Accord Hybrid one seems awfully low. They also managed something like 18 mpg with a Jeep Liberty CRD. Maybe they test cars with the parking brake set."
The CU results may in fact be correct if, as I believe, the Accord is not a "true hybrid." There is a big distinction. Only a true hybrid can run solely on the electric motor. My Escape has a 94 hp electric motor that can actually run up to 20 miles before the battery is discharged. Sometimes the gasoline engine doesn't kick in until it is going about 38-40 mph if the grade is downhill. Typically, it comes on at about 25 mph. But I just drive it like my old 2003 Escape. If I do not eventually achieve 40 mpg I will be surprised. If I eventually achieve 50 mpg in the mountains (coming down), I won't be surprised.
Anyone knocking this technology is blowing smoke. They simply don't know what they are talking about.
But remember the key words, "true hybrid." There is a difference. A puny 15 hp motor coupled to a gasoline engine is not a "true hybrid." It is a marketing ploy.
Cool. Can you plug it in to recharge the batteries from utility power overnite if you choose to?
Mea culpa. I was reading regarding plans for hybrids to become plug-ins in the near future. Seems as though that is the direction the cars may be going soon.
I typed that assuming that was common knowledge. After more research, it seems that may not be the case.
The 46-50+ MPG with the '89 Civic SI was at the 55-60MPH range. It dropped closer to 42 when I cruised at 75 and hit the high 30s at higher rates. It was a sweet running car and would cruise at 95 all day, if you could find a place to do it, like northern highway 65 in Alabama after dark. When I souped it up (cam/header/k&N air filter and a performance chip) it would really scoot, but the highway mileage started averaging in the mid to upper 30s. I got rid of it at 178,000 and I still trusted it at red-line and a tad above. The guy who bought it moved from S. MS to the northeast and put another 72,000 on it before selling it again. The '89s were one of the best, all-around Civic hatchbacks they made.
Performance is optional if I know that the people whom I am buying my fuel from (indirectly) are the same people who want to kill me.
"Of course, since the Japanese did it, nobody says a word"
No, our own EPA puts the bogus mpg ratings on vehicles
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.