Foo - fuel efficient cars

I've been thinking it might be time to trade-in my SUV and get a fuel efficeint car. I'm six feet tall, so the car would need to have sufficient head room. With the SUV, I just leave the back seats down and transport the bike inside. Any recommendations on a car and a good bike rack/hitch?

That box thing that LowCel got. Or the Honda version of it. Or whatever it is.

Oh nevermind. I have no idea what I'm talking about. :rolleyes:

What counts as fuel-efficient? What kind of car do you need?

I have a Subaru Outback with a Yakima rack, although it is not as fuel efficient as a front-wheel-drive car.

is living in yakima better than having a yakima rack

How fuel efficient is fuel efficent? This sort of is in the eye of the beholder. To me, anything more than 10MPG is efficient. To others, anything under 100MPG is considered a dino juice guzzler.

The Honda Element is decent, I'm guessing about 15-20MPG, although its sluggish compared to a V8 pickup or SUV.

I'm also looking at replacement vehicles myself, and what I think seems to fit the best is a Honda Ridgeline. It has more horsepower than my current pickup even with a V6 (although it gives the HP at 3-4k RPM instead of 2500), and supposedly the ability to shut down to 3, 4, or 5 cylinders will help MPG by a couple gallons here and there. For me, it seems to be the best all around combo of what I do both in town for driving, and when I have to haul/tow stuff.

I have a 2006 civic sedan and average 34mpg. I'm 6'2 and have plenty of headroom even with my massive melon. I have a hitch with a Saris Thelma 2-bike rack. It has been a great setup for me. My wife drives a 2006 Element and on average we get 24-25mpg in it

What I find funny is that even though Elements are ugly, they are decent vehicles. Should my next job not pay enough to afford a Ridgeline, I'd buy an Element instead, just because it can handle a lot of stuff all the time, as well as carry four people fairly comfortably.

Lightweight, fuel efficient Japanese cars can accommodate a 6' person better than most think. The issue will be that there won't be much (any) foot room for the passenger who gets to sit behind you but the driver will be accommodated. Those little engines run forever too. I had a 3 cylinder, 1000cc Diahatsu engine do 300,000 km (just shy of 200,000 miles) of trouble free miles and it was perfectly capable of long highway trips although maybe not in that much comfort. 1.5 litre 4 cylinder cars are perfectly capable of comfortable highway driving. EDIT, OK with a driver, one passenger and some luggage. 4 passengers + luggage is doable but not comfortably.

Regards, Anthony

Lightweight, fuel efficient Japanese cars can accommodate a 6' person better than most think. The issue will be that there won't be much (any) foot room for the passenger who gets to sit behind you but the driver will be accommodated. Those little engines run forever too. I had a 3 cylinder, 1000cc Diahatsu engine do 300,000 km (just shy of 200,000 miles) of trouble free miles and it was perfectly capable of long highway trips although maybe not in that much comfort. 1.5 litre 4 cylinder cars are perfectly capable of comfortable highway driving.

Regards, Anthony

My only complaint about the Japanese four-bangers is that they are skittish on power. With a V8 truck, you can keep your foot on the accelerator and it will accelerate or drop back very smoothly. The four cylinders are sort of erratic and slightly lurch forward or hang back -- its something to get used to, I guess.

you could always look at the civic si they good power

How about a turbo diesel European station wagon such as a Puegeot 407, Ford Mondeo, Audi/VW/Skoda. They would get very good mileage and should have plenty of space for carting stuff. I have no idea how reliable they would be and whether you can even get them in the states.

My next car will be a diesel/turbo diesel station wagon. Eventually. My current car is a 25 year old small Citroen that gets good mileage but is sulking right now with a hydraulic problem.

How about a turbo diesel European station wagon such as a Puegeot 407, Ford Mondeo, Audi/VW/Skoda. They would get very good mileage and should have plenty of space for carting stuff. I have no idea how reliable they would be and whether you can even get them in the states.

My next car will be a diesel/turbo diesel station wagon. Eventually. My current car is a 25 year old small Citroen that gets good mileage but is sulking right now with a hydraulic problem.

The only thing turbo diesel you can get in the US are heavy duty pickup trucks. Last cars that were turbo diesel that were in the US were the underpowered Mercedes in the mid 80s which everyone around hated because of the nasty smelling exhaust, so people don't think much of turbo diesels here unless they are buying a heavy duty 4x4 truck for hauling stuff.

I've been thinking it might be time to trade-in my SUV and get a fuel efficeint car. I'm six feet tall, so the car would need to have sufficient head room. With the SUV, I just leave the back seats down and transport the bike inside. Any recommendations on a car and a good bike rack/hitch?

http://tarmacphilosopher.files.wordpress.com/2007/11/fiat-500-d-family.jpg

Ha ha. Boxed out VW bug. ^^^

Smart?

40/45 City/highway. Can get a bikerack for the back.

as a six-footer, i can recommend the Smart - though i don't have one (yet), i fit just fine. plenty of headroom and comfortable.

I've been thinking it might be time to trade-in my SUV and get a fuel efficeint car. I'm six feet tall, so the car would need to have sufficient head room. With the SUV, I just leave the back seats down and transport the bike inside. Any recommendations on a car and a good bike rack/hitch?

If you truly want fuel efficient, you have to change not only your car, but your mentality altogether. People in the US, and I am one of them:rolleyes:, have been brain washed by advertisement. Most people want gigantic trucks and SUVS because they think they are safe (they are not), because they have a lot of room but never carry more than what can fit in most small cars, because it can carry many people but never have more than 1-2 more passengers onboard, and because it has more power that you really don't need.

Having said that, I have always liked small cars myself. I am currently driving a V-6 simply because of the luuxry it came with and nothing else. I still get 24-27 MPG, which is still pretty piss poor! My lease on it ends in a month, so it will be traded for a SmartCar.

As far as the bike transport issue, just get the car and later get a rack that fits it well. A bike can go on anything!!

is living in yakima better than having a yakima rack

no, it just means that all the racks around you are Yakima racks, even the Thules.

I've got an Escort station wagon. 30-36 mpg, and more than enough room for 3 broken down bikes in the back with 3 passengers.

Here is a story that I saw on CNN this week

http://money.cnn.com/galleries/2008/autos/0805/gallery.suv_alternatives/index.html?cnn=yes

I like the Scion, but it does not have leather, and the Mazda 5 impressed me when I test drove one back in 2005. Hithch mounted racks are nice, but entail the installation of a receiver hitch. Easily removed, most can fold down or out of the way, there are even tray style hitch mount racks.


Roof racks are a little harder to get the bike on, but offer you full access to all doors on the vehicle. Watch out for low overhangs on parking garages, etc. as one lapse in memory can ruin your bike.

I have a Hyundai accent 5-speed. 36-38mpg my normal driving, and 40+ mpg highway. Room for two adults comfortably, or four if needed (short people in back) or fold the seat down and can fit three bikes in the hatch with driver and passanger (not sure where the third person would go( :) I can even fit my recumbent and one other bike inside.

My only complaint about the Japanese four-bangers is that they are skittish on power. With a V8 truck, you can keep your foot on the accelerator and it will accelerate or drop back very smoothly. The four cylinders are sort of erratic and slightly lurch forward or hang back -- its something to get used to, I guess.

I suppose it is all what you're used to, as well as what you prefer and perhaps even where you drive.

I've lived in the mountains ever since learning to drive, and one annoying trait I've seen far too much of is something I call "V-8 Driving". This is where a driver slams on the brakes in every turn and accellerates in every straightaway (where the passing lanes are) just because they have the power to do so. Since no one can pass, traffic stays at the speed the obviously frightened or unskilled driver can maintain through the turns and will become a bunched up group, even harder to pass. The drivers behind the lead car can get annoyed and take risky pass attempts, putting everyone in danger.

When driving a decent handling 4-cylinder, one learns to conserve momentum through the turns, not relying on power to make up for poor driving skills. The lighter vehicle will usually handle the corners better anyway, and shifting technique has a much greater impact, both uphill and downhill due to the ability to engine brake.

I've also found that relatively underpowered FWD, AWD or 4WD vehicles can do much better in Winter driving conditions. Accelleration is inherently limited and the likelihood of spinning all four tires is lessened. A powerful engine that can break traction is next to useless on ice and snow...unless you're chained up and pushing a plow.

Just so you know, we own a V-6 Toyota T-100 pickup, a 4-cylinder Subaru Forester (with 4X studded tires for Winter) and up until last year a 4-cylinder Camry. While I find my truck perfectly adequate for hauling anything needed, I miss the Camry a whole bunch. It was a 5-speed manual and a perfect car for mountain passes. I really miss the 36MPG it got on the highway. I'm also looking for another economical car.

My dad has a Chevy Malibu and consistently gets around 35-38 MPG (and also drives like a maniac). There is tons of room in it. With that being said, however, you could try a hybrid version of a small SUV. I think the Ford Escape comes in a hybrid, though I am not sure about the cost.

If I had the cash, I'd consider the Tahoe hybrid which Chevy says gets over 22.7 mpg. Its a hybrid vehicle, so it passes the PC test. Perhaps if Chevy added plug-in capabilities, it would crack the 30 mpg mark on a 7100 pound vehicle.

As for "V8 driving", I notice that, but it seems to be with a lot of people who just have failed to learn basic driving, and end up slamming on brakes through a curve as opposed to slowing before it, then accelerating on through. I always find it ironic that I can safely push a pickup on a curve 10-15 mph faster than the brake-slammers who usually have far better cornering vehicles than mine. Shifting technique is also an art that few people have mastered. It seems common to see people fumble with the shifter for 3-5 seconds when the light changes, or just slowly drop back onto your bumper if its a hill.

My only complaint about the Japanese four-bangers is that they are skittish on power. With a V8 truck, you can keep your foot on the accelerator and it will accelerate or drop back very smoothly. The four cylinders are sort of erratic and slightly lurch forward or hang back -- its something to get used to, I guess.
You pay a lot for that power. A mini Cooper S can get 38mpg on the highway and goes from 0-60 in roughly 7 seconds -- a trick that few trucks can do. Handling is also much better.

I had a civic for long time and got over 40mpg, but it was fairly gutless. Now I drive an impreza and consistently get 28-29mpg (which makes it seem like a guzzler to me). Acceleration is very decent, and it handles, parks, and is great for all around use.

http://images.google.com/url?q=http://www.gopbc.org/bike_support/rhoades1.JPG&usg=AFQjCNHNY9dnUJs1Dsz1GL02iLmIT_worQ

Mazda 3 hatchback. The 2.3 liter engine that Mazda puts in there is a nice engine. It's very reliable, has a nice amount of low end torque, and gets decent gas mileage.

Aside from that the Honda Fit is a great vehicle.

I don't like most new vehicles. I've been told that the Honda Accord diesel is supposed to hit the US for the 2009 model year.

Mazda 3 hatchback. The 2.3 liter engine that Mazda puts in there is a nice engine. It's very reliable, has a nice amount of low end torque, and gets decent gas mileage.

Aside from that the Honda Fit is a great vehicle.

I don't like most new vehicles. I've been told that the Honda Accord diesel is supposed to hit the US for the 2009 model year.

I own the sedan version and I can fit my bike in, after removing the front wheel. But apart from that, of all the small cars that I tested, this one had the most pep and handling is flawless.

My only gripe is that my mpg is a tad low 25.Then again at least 1/4th of my commute is in a city like environment and my driving style isn't conducive to good mileage anyway :o.

I have a base model no option Ford Ranger pickup;
short bed, manual transmission, 4 cylinder- get about 32 mpg.
Filled it up this morning- had 401 miles on the trip odometer,
put in 12.3 gal of gas.
Keep a Thule instagator in the bed to carry my bike, (two will fit).
It is a good balance of big vehicle feel/comfort and small vehicle economy;
plus a new one is relatively inexpensive (as new vehicles go).

I've been thinking it might be time to trade-in my SUV and get a fuel efficeint car. I'm six feet tall, so the car would need to have sufficient head room. With the SUV, I just leave the back seats down and transport the bike inside. Any recommendations on a car and a good bike rack/hitch?

You think?

http://agentgenius.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/04/high-gas-prices-hurt-consumer-spending.jpg

'08 Toyota Prius. I don't have one but a friend of mine does. He is 52 mpg driving about 1/2 city and highway.

Another with a Toyota Camry Hybrid get 42 mpg on the highway running 65 mph

I had an '83 Mazda GLC that would get 35 to 42 mpg. You would think small cars would get better know. Our current '99 Olds 88 get 27 mpg most of the time and +32 on the highway if you keep it at 65 or less.

I have a base model no option Ford Ranger pickup;
short bed, manual transmission, 4 cylinder- get about 32 mpg.
Filled it up this morning- had 401 miles on the trip odometer,
put in 12.3 gal of gas.
Keep a Thule instagator in the bed to carry my bike, (two will fit).
It is a good balance of big vehicle feel/comfort and small vehicle economy;
plus a new one is relatively inexpensive (as new vehicles go).

How fast do you usually drive?

The only thing turbo diesel you can get in the US are heavy duty pickup trucks. Last cars that were turbo diesel that were in the US were the underpowered Mercedes in the mid 80s which everyone around hated because of the nasty smelling exhaust, so people don't think much of turbo diesels here unless they are buying a heavy duty 4x4 truck for hauling stuff.

I have a 2006 TDI VW Jetta. Sadly, diesel is now pushing $4.60 a gallon...

It has a small 1.9ltr turbo diesel engine with more then enough torque for any of the local canyon roads, even with 5 adults piled in.

With a roof top rack, my freeway mileage has gone down from 45mpg to 40mpg. City mileage is a lot lower, low to mid 30's.

'08 Toyota Prius. I don't have one but a friend of mine does. He is 52 mpg driving about 1/2 city and highway.

Another with a Toyota Camry Hybrid get 42 mpg on the highway running 65 mph

I had an '83 Mazda GLC that would get 35 to 42 mpg. You would think small cars would get better know. Our current '99 Olds 88 get 27 mpg most of the time and +32 on the highway if you keep it at 65 or less.

I'm slightly digressing here, but I'm wondering if cars have hit the milage cap, where they are as good as it gets for internal combustion engines, and any improvements in gas milage are either making the car more streamlined, have less mass, or find a replacement/supplement for engines as we have them today.

Can automakers improve MPG on existing cars without gutting horsepower, or making half-ass compact cars like was done in the 70s?

I have a 2006 TDI VW Jetta. Sadly, diesel is now pushing $4.60 a gallon...Come on out to California! It's an even $4.999 here, and will no doubt jump another ten cents next week.. And there really aren't even any diesel cars available here.

I'm slightly digressing here, but I'm wondering if cars have hit the milage cap, where they are as good as it gets for internal combustion engines, and any improvements in gas milage are either making the car more streamlined, have less mass, or find a replacement/supplement for engines as we have them today.Too bad the trend is the opposite. Pack in as much ridiculous excess as possible, either in the name of "safety" or for the sake of "luxury". I have no doubt that IC engines are getting much more efficient, but these big, fat-ass slugs of cars are negating any improvement with heated seat adjustment knobs, remote controlled air conditioner vents, and thirty-seven new airbags.

I've been thinking it might be time to trade-in my SUV and get a fuel efficeint car. I'm six feet tall, so the car would need to have sufficient head room. With the SUV, I just leave the back seats down and transport the bike inside. Any recommendations on a car and a good bike rack/hitch?


How about this?:) Just kidding. I am getting 16 mpg...but thankfully only the Wife drives it to and from work...ONLY.


http://www.f150online.com/galleries/images/10627-15012-204762.jpg

I have a 2006 TDI VW Jetta. Sadly, diesel is now pushing $4.60 a gallon...


That's cheap. Diesel here is about $6 per US Gallon with supplementary taxes on top of that. Our 91 Octane petrol is about $7.50 per US Gallon (it broke through the $2/l barrier this week). Premium petrol is between 5-10 cents per litre dearer than 91...:cry:

... and my car only runs on premium.:cry:

And our petrol prices are forcast to get to $3.00 per litre by the end of the year or early next year.:eek:

I have a base model no option Ford Ranger pickup;
short bed, manual transmission, 4 cylinder- get about 32 mpg.
Filled it up this morning- had 401 miles on the trip odometer,
put in 12.3 gal of gas.
Keep a Thule instagator in the bed to carry my bike, (two will fit).
It is a good balance of big vehicle feel/comfort and small vehicle economy;
plus a new one is relatively inexpensive (as new vehicles go).

those are great little trucks if you get them like you do.
rear wheel drive 4 cylinder single cab/short bed with a manual transmission.

I'm slightly digressing here, but I'm wondering if cars have hit the milage cap, where they are as good as it gets for internal combustion engines, and any improvements in gas milage are either making the car more streamlined, have less mass, or find a replacement/supplement for engines as we have them today.

Can automakers improve MPG on existing cars without gutting horsepower, or making half-ass compact cars like was done in the 70s?
Cars used to get better mileage than they did now. My last car was a 95 civic which made 40+mpg in mixed driving until we got rid of it last year. My previous car was a 88 Festiva which got 40+mpg in mixed driving until I got rid of it. Try finding anything that's not a hybrid that does that. My 93 toyota 1/2 ton still gets 28mpg in mixed driving.

They make the cars way too big and heavy now. Part of it is there is a lot of safety stuff that didn't used to be there. Part of it is emissions.

To get noticeably better mileage with the engines available today, they just have to make them smaller and lighter. I'm not sure what's going on. I would have bought a Smart car instead of an Impreza last year, but the Smart just doesn't make impressive mileage compared to what I was used to. If gas prices stay high, I expect car designs to start yielding better mileage, but performance will have to suffer.

'08 Toyota Prius. I don't have one but a friend of mine does. He is 52 mpg driving about 1/2 city and highway.

Another with a Toyota Camry Hybrid get 42 mpg on the highway running 65 mph

I had an '83 Mazda GLC that would get 35 to 42 mpg. You would think small cars would get better know. Our current '99 Olds 88 get 27 mpg most of the time and +32 on the highway if you keep it at 65 or less.

Magazine reviews consistently indicate lower actual mpg figures for the newer models you cited. There is no more greater area of myth and bullsiht than mpg numbers. Period.

Originally Posted by martianone
I have a base model no option Ford Ranger pickup;
short bed, manual transmission, 4 cylinder- get about 32 mpg.
Filled it up this morning- had 401 miles on the trip odometer,
put in 12.3 gal of gas.
Keep a Thule instagator in the bed to carry my bike, (two will fit).
It is a good balance of big vehicle feel/comfort and small vehicle economy;
plus a new one is relatively inexpensive (as new vehicles go).
How fast do you usually drive?

Mike

Varies-
About 180 mi was on the interstate at 65 or so,
balance of the 400 mi on dirt or rural paved roads 30-50,
plus some stop and go traffic.

Magazine reviews consistently indicate lower actual mpg figures for the newer models you cited. There is no more greater area of myth and bullsiht than mpg numbers. Period.
A lot of it is in how you drive. This year, they changed how the numbers are reported so that they are lower. This was done in response to complaints that the posted figures were higher than what people get.

I have always gotten at least what was claimed -- all you need to do is not be so heavy footed with the accelerator and brake. My wife says I drive like an old man and that riding with me is boring. I say being a passenger shouldn't be exciting unless you're paying for a NASCAR ridealong.

The truck I drive for work (5.6L V8) is rated at 13/17 under the new EPA ratings, and 14/19 under the old. I get 19-22 MPG out of it regularly, and a lot of the time, that's with several hundred pounds of stuff in the bed/cab.

So while the fuel economy ratings can be high, they can also be low if you don't drive like a crazy person.

Magazine reviews consistently indicate lower actual mpg figures for the newer models you cited. There is no more greater area of myth and bullsiht than mpg numbers. Period.

It depend on how you drive. I wish they would report the mileage on flat ground and various speeds. It drive me crazy. I get 50 to 52 mpg on my old 1983 Yamaha Seca 900 (93,000 miles). I will or may need to replace it in the next few years but looks like I will need to get a scooter. :)

The EPA updated there mpg test a few years ago so what is reported is usually low if you drive like you own it.

Oh. The guy with the Camry Hybrid said it is funny the mileage drops between 50 and 60 mph and then gets better until 67 mph then drops back down. He talking only a few mpg here.

I'm slightly digressing here, but I'm wondering if cars have hit the milage cap, where they are as good as it gets for internal combustion engines, and any improvements in gas milage are either making the car more streamlined, have less mass, or find a replacement/supplement for engines as we have them today.

Can automakers improve MPG on existing cars without gutting horsepower, or making half-ass compact cars like was done in the 70s?

I think there are a few more things that can be worked on. For modifications, I know that hydraulics are being looked into which should be a lot better than current hybrids if they get it all worked out.

Don't have much to add here, but my 92 camry still gives me about 27ish mph with city and highway driving.

My mom just bought a Civic Coupe and it's advertised as 30city and 35-40 highway (I think) and she doesn't get much better than the Camry (if better at all). She said the dealership said that it can take up to a year to get everything to break in and get the better MPG is there anything to this?

She said the dealership said that it can take up to a year to get everything to break in and get the better MPG is there anything to this?

Yes, but it won't be terribly significant, perhaps 5% at best. The dealerships say this to placate customers. She might have them check the systems out, but as they say, YMMV.

We've got to turn the corner where we start buying only enough vehicle to get the job done rather than buying whatever we think we can afford and strokes our ego the most.

- Mark

45 mpg plus saving on bridge tolls on my Ducati. :D

they are as good as it gets for internal combustion engines

No.