Cheap High MPG Cars: 1991

6 comments ↓

#1 Dave Coffey on 07.04.08 at 4:25 pm

Does anyone know why we can’t have these kind of mpg cars today?

#2 litesong on 08.04.08 at 1:13 am

Hi Dave…..A Toyota Yaris just past thru Yellowstone Nat’l Park, getting 60+MPG. One fellow is AVERAGING 48MPG with his Honda Fit. On 3 day trips to e. Washington & Mt. Rainier over 1400, 3000, two 4000 & 5500 foot mountain passes from sea level, I drove a Hyundai Accent to 41.5, 42.6, & 45MPG. Today’s small cars, driven with a feather foot, will exceed EPA highway estimates by 12+MPG. Start feather footing people. Lead footing is passe & never was taking care of our planet Earth, other citizens health or our balance of payments.

Besides, I still drive my 88 Ford Festiva that will probably last another 10 years. Last week, it got 51.8MPG while warming up 3 times over 3 days, & going over the 5500 mountain pass.

Yes, good high MPG cars are still made & ‘the oldies, but goodies’ are still providing good MPG. & you don’t have to pay high Hybrid costs to save gas money either.

#3 mike on 10.25.08 at 6:32 pm

Almost all cars get better gas mileage at higher altitudes because the air is “thinner” … many cars today cannot deliver high gas mileage because of “safety features” the manufacturers claim the public demands and that they have to include. The old geo metros did not have side curtain airbags, cruise control, electric windows, higher impact bumpers, alloy wheels, etc., and other features that add to the weight of current models and therefore which decrease mileage and increase cost of the vehicle and the cost to insure it.

#4 gary on 12.01.08 at 1:05 am

Mike all of what you say is true, but there are other reasons also. One is higher horse power. Most new cars have much higher horse power. Usually a complete waste for urban and subarban driving. Pickup trucks with 300 horse power is really quite stupid. If you take an analytical look at the rise in horsepower and the size of the vehicle along with the proposed function of the vehicle you will see a greater correlation between marketing and profit potential than any other factor. An SUV with 300 hp and a 5 passenger capacity hardly compares mileage wise to a sedan with 150 hp and 6 passenger capacity that was common in the late 1970s to mid 1980s. Essentially we have taken 5 steps backwards in effeciency so the US auto makers could increase profit margin per vehicle. The larger vehicles have historically higher profit per vehicle. I hate to say this but US consumers are easily manipulated. Some find it hard to accept, but the market place has us figured out. 30 years ago after the 1972 gas OPEC created crisis, there were so many vehicles with gas mileage in the 35 to 50 mpg range that the only problem was just figuring out which one to buy. In 1972 I purchased an Opel Manta 37 MPG with auto transmission. It actually achieved about 36 Highway driving the speed limit. 36 years later auto manufactures are using 30 mpg as selling point. When a 20 plus year old driver tell my his 4 passenger sedan achieves 24 mpg and adds that he thinks it is pretty good; I can only smile.

#5 Ken on 07.20.09 at 11:42 am

I don’t truly understand things today. Yes…I will admit that I have a decent MPG car in my Cavalier and a gas gulping Corvette. But..my 1991 CRX boasted 50 mpg. It was a solid car and I can’t understand why the so-called hybrid models of many…not all..cars today don’t even come close. I loved my CRX….bring it back Honda..BRING IT BACK!!!

#6 mpg-o-editor on 07.21.09 at 8:45 am

@Ken – Amen on the CRX! I owned an ‘86 CRX Si … what a great little car. It didn’t deliver nearly as many MPGs as the super fuel-efficient CRX HF, but it was an absolute blast to drive. The 1.5-liter engine in the Si put out a whopping 91 horsepower … roughly a 50% boost over the HF’s numbers.

Light weight is the key … the HF weighed in at just over 1,700 pounds, the Si at 1,950 or so.

Leave a Comment