I know where you can park that hybrid...

[Lonewolf-McQuade]

Hey it's so awesome that all these people are rushing out to pay up to $23,770 for a Toyota
Prius and comparable 'hybrids' to save fuel when the 1991 GEO Metro was getting similar mileage while listing at about 9k! Thanks to CNN's Mallory Simon for pointing out this scam to the general misinformed public. Apparently the Metro sub-compact is making a comeback in the used market, and there's no doubt why.

The sad thing is all the people who, after being brainwashed by Al Gore, rushed out to save the world with their pricey hybrids. Guess you shoulda looked 'old school' first! So what exactly is the benefit of hybrids? emissions alone? Can't we just mod better emissions on the old subcompacts? With the big oiltards screwing us over for insane profits I'm starting to wonder where that old 97 honda civic hatchback went to?

PS: I'm guessing they didn't run the mileage on this metro:

Sources: Gizmodo.com / Mudvillemagazine.com / Ohio-state.edu / CNN

[[JiF]Mike]

I can't remember where I read it..some government type website I am sure....but hybrids actually pollute the earth more than a hummer. When you take into account all the chemicals and stuff that go into building the battery and other components, it's pretty nasty. Sure it's better on gas....but they need to work on the manufacturing process. I'm loving my Honda Civic with it's 32mpg average.

[Lonewolf-McQuade]

There she is...

[[JiF]corn]

I had a 82 Honda Civic years ago and i remember getting 28-29 mpg easy in city.

[[JiF]Mike]

I picked up a Scan Gauge 2 and have been using the last few days. I've been able to get my average mpg to 35.4 in the city, and from what I have read these things are pretty darn accurate. I'm of course hoping to at least double this soon.

[[JiF]Lonewolf]

I had an old boat a 68 Chrysler New Yorker with a 440 in it and I averaged 28 city 35 hwy with it. My dad had to get rid of his 74 New Yorker a few years ago and it had the 400 and got around the same as mine did and now he has a mid 90 something Dodge Neon and when he went on vacation last fall he averaged 48 hwy with it and his fairly new one or it was when he got it but its a 2004 that had 60,xxx miles on it they got 45 hwy with it last month when they went south. My step-mom drives it to work which is about 15 miles round trip and it has been averaging 39 I guess you could say city as she only drives about 5 miles total on the hwy.

I have a 04 Ford Explorer XLT with the V6 and when we go down to my moms by Cinncy we get 34 hwy and its a 4x4 auto. when I went to my moms last week I took my old 93 Jeep Grand Cherokee Limited 4.0 in-line 6 I got 29 hwy and its all wheel drive.

I belong to a few old car clubs and right now most of the states are trying to pass laws that a car over 10 yrs old can't be plated. The gov is trying to force everyone into buying new cars to cut down on the pollution but what they don't tell you is that 98% of the classics and streetrods that have been redone get better emission ratings then the new cars. I know my 68 Camaro that I had put a custom built motor in that I done could pass the emissions control test easier then most new cars. Now I know I don't get the mileage out of my Camaro that the new cars do but I also didn't expect 750 hp to get 35-40 hwy, right now I'm probably getting about 700,000 city as I have the motor on the engine stand while I'm redoing my Camaro from the ground up.

What needs to be done is they need to go back and rethink all of their emissions crap they are putting on the new cars by scraping it and going back to the way things were in the 50's and 60's or even earlier and just use that old school tech to get the mileage and emissions control from back then. I'm also sure that if they needed help they could contact some of these old car clubs and see what a lot of them do to get the mileage and emissions control on them.

[[JiF]Djsmg]

I may be way off the mark but it seems the lobbyists for these changes are given this information by the major auto manufacturers rather than the general public. I'm sure most of the tests and reports are done by the manufacturer's and look prettier than the information that the average user might possess. Who else would lobby to take the older vehicles off the road when more than likely all you need is another part replaced or installed. It's all in the presentation, and if prepared properly, even crap can look good...

[[JiF]rIot]

On the news last night they also mentioned that ridiculous amounts of magnetic radiation are given off from hybrids, I believe because of the battery and a few other things...sounds safe

[[JiF]rIot]

Although you seem to be a pretty credible source I cannot believe 28-35 mpg w/ a 440, my 360 gets 9 mpg

I had an old boat a 68 Chrysler New Yorker with a 440 in it and I averaged 28 city 35 hwy with it. My dad had to get rid of his 74 New Yorker a few years ago and it had the 400 and got around the same as mine did and now he has a mid 90 something Dodge Neon and when he went on vacation last fall he averaged 48 hwy with it and his fairly new one or it was when he got it but its a 2004 that had 60,xxx miles on it they got 45 hwy with it last month when they went south. My step-mom drives it to work which is about 15 miles round trip and it has been averaging 39 I guess you could say city as she only drives about 5 miles total on the hwy.

I have a 04 Ford Explorer XLT with the V6 and when we go down to my moms by Cinncy we get 34 hwy and its a 4x4 auto. when I went to my moms last week I took my old 93 Jeep Grand Cherokee Limited 4.0 in-line 6 I got 29 hwy and its all wheel drive.

I belong to a few old car clubs and right now most of the states are trying to pass laws that a car over 10 yrs old can't be plated. The gov is trying to force everyone into buying new cars to cut down on the pollution but what they don't tell you is that 98% of the classics and streetrods that have been redone get better emission ratings then the new cars. I know my 68 Camaro that I had put a custom built motor in that I done could pass the emissions control test easier then most new cars. Now I know I don't get the mileage out of my Camaro that the new cars do but I also didn't expect 750 hp to get 35-40 hwy, right now I'm probably getting about 700,000 city as I have the motor on the engine stand while I'm redoing my Camaro from the ground up.

What needs to be done is they need to go back and rethink all of their emissions crap they are putting on the new cars by scraping it and going back to the way things were in the 50's and 60's or even earlier and just use that old school tech to get the mileage and emissions control from back then. I'm also sure that if they needed help they could contact some of these old car clubs and see what a lot of them do to get the mileage and emissions control on them.

[[JiF]KellysHero]

I'm with you rIot, those seem awfully high. Here's a Time article from 1973, I was barely 7 months old at the time, but they listed a series of cars and their gas mileage...there are a couple with 440's in the list too, all single digit gas mileage.

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/artic ... 90,00.html

Oh, and if you are old enough, which I am you'd know Datsun is now Nissan

Datsun 1200 (71.5-cu.-in. engine, manual transmission), 28.7 m.p.g., the best performance of any auto tested.

Volkswagen Sedan (96.6-cu.-in. engine, manual transmission), 23.6 m.p.g.

Chevrolet Vega (140-cu.-in. engine, manual transmission), 21.5 m.p.g.

Ford Pinto (98-cu.-in. engine, manual transmission), 21.4 m.p.g.

Toyota Corolla (97-cu.-in. engine, manual transmission), 20.8 m.p.g.

American Motors Gremlin (232-cu.-in. engine, manual transmission), 18 m.p.g.

Dodge Charger (318-cu.-in. engine, automatic transmission), 12.2 m.p.g.

Chevrolet Impala (454-cu.-in. engine, automatic transmission), 10.1 m.p.g.

Chrysler Imperial (440-cu.-in. engine, automatic transmission), 9.2 m.p.g.

Plymouth Fury (440-cu.-in. engine, automatic transmission), 8.7 m.p.g.

Oldsmobile 98 (455-cu.-in. engine, automatic transmission), 8.9 m.p.g.

Cadillac Eldorado (500-cu.-in. engine, automatic transmission), 8.1 m.p.g.

Ferrari 365 GTB (268-cu.-in. engine, manual transmission), 6.3 m.p.g., the worst figure for any car.

Although you seem to be a pretty credible source I cannot believe 28-35 mpg w/ a 440, my 360 gets 9 mpg

I had an old boat a 68 Chrysler New Yorker with a 440 in it and I averaged 28 city 35 hwy with it. My dad had to get rid of his 74 New Yorker a few years ago and it had the 400 and got around the same as mine did and now he has a mid 90 something Dodge Neon and when he went on vacation last fall he averaged 48 hwy with it and his fairly new one or it was when he got it but its a 2004 that had 60,xxx miles on it they got 45 hwy with it last month when they went south. My step-mom drives it to work which is about 15 miles round trip and it has been averaging 39 I guess you could say city as she only drives about 5 miles total on the hwy.

I have a 04 Ford Explorer XLT with the V6 and when we go down to my moms by Cinncy we get 34 hwy and its a 4x4 auto. when I went to my moms last week I took my old 93 Jeep Grand Cherokee Limited 4.0 in-line 6 I got 29 hwy and its all wheel drive.

I belong to a few old car clubs and right now most of the states are trying to pass laws that a car over 10 yrs old can't be plated. The gov is trying to force everyone into buying new cars to cut down on the pollution but what they don't tell you is that 98% of the classics and streetrods that have been redone get better emission ratings then the new cars. I know my 68 Camaro that I had put a custom built motor in that I done could pass the emissions control test easier then most new cars. Now I know I don't get the mileage out of my Camaro that the new cars do but I also didn't expect 750 hp to get 35-40 hwy, right now I'm probably getting about 700,000 city as I have the motor on the engine stand while I'm redoing my Camaro from the ground up.

What needs to be done is they need to go back and rethink all of their emissions crap they are putting on the new cars by scraping it and going back to the way things were in the 50's and 60's or even earlier and just use that old school tech to get the mileage and emissions control from back then. I'm also sure that if they needed help they could contact some of these old car clubs and see what a lot of them do to get the mileage and emissions control on them.

[[JiF]Lonewolf]

The thing with most gas mileage test back then is that they were done at the speed of 50mph. In the 60's and early 70's Chrysler had based their gas mileage at 70mph and it would fair better then at 50mph. I don't use any mechanical or electronic devices to figure my mileage, I figure mine the old fashion way with pencil and paper. Today the auto industry figures gas mileage at 55 and it is still off by a long shot. I usually lose about 5 miles a gallon on my mileage in my Explorer when running 55mph then I do at 70mph. If ya notice when the commercials come on about saving gas they tell ya to drive 55 to save lives and gas. Also the auto industry didn't use cruise control when testing gas mileage (not sure if they do now or not) but everyone knows that you will always get better mileage on cruise then you will on foot. I'm also not sure if they have increased their driving distance when figuring mileage but it use to be figured off a total of 100 miles round trip and you can't get an accurate figure in that short of a distance to make a rating for all cars of that make and model.

And one last little thing not all of the same make and model of auto will get the same mileage. My wifes cousin had bought an Explorer same year and everything as ours except hers is white, I seen her last night at the park during a softball game and was curious so I asked her what kind of mileage she got with hers and she said if she had know the mileage was going to be so bad on it she would have gotten a car instead. Her Explorer has 58,xxx miles on it and ours has almost 80,000 but she said she uses about a half tank of gas to go to Indy and back so I know she is getting poor mileage because we can go to Cinncy and back on a half tank of gas. (both explorers have the same size gas tank)

[[JiF]Sgt. hUTCHIE]

In my opinion the Prius is not as good as it is made out to be.

I know someone who has one and although the economy is good, it's not anything like what is advertised.

I drive a Ford Mondeo 130 tdci and get an average of 48 mpg, consisting of mainly motorway driving at 70-80 mph. However you must remember than US gallons are smaller than uk gallons - hey not everything is bigger in amercia...

I beleive this would equate to 36 mp (us) g

[[JiF]Sly Gambit]

I get around 19 mpg (~24 this weekend cruising 80/76 at 75mph). I'm starting to enjoy the higher gas prices. Sure it means I'm out $10-$20 a week, which sucks, but there seem to be fewer and fewer people on the highway. Rush hour is no longer a giant frustration anymore. Nice to have enough of the highway to keep my car going at speed and saving a few gallons from the stop&go that normally ends up happening with rush hour.

[Bonedaddy]

The MPG rating on a Hybrid is far from stellar. Furthermore I have issues with rolling the mileage achieved under electric power into an MPG calculation. Two different fuel sources require two different calculations. If the MPG were calculated on gas consumption alone the rating would be even lower.

What a lot of Hybrid owners fail to realize is that eventually the battery packs, like all rechargeable batteries, have to be replaced. The latest price I've seen is $3000. This isn't milk money. On top of that a hybrid owner loses the "green" high ground since these types of batteries can't be processed through the existing battery recycling programs. And when it comes to repairs you have no choice but to go to a dealership. You cannot take a hybrid to your local (ie trusted) mechanic.

When I see the Hybrid ads tout the high MPG I just scratch my head. My VW is a diesel and gets 43 MPG city and thats with an automatic trans. If I had a manual trans my MPG would be even higher. The engine break-in is 100,000 miles and for a $250 DIY conversion kit I could run waste vegetable oil.

My previous vehicle was a V10 Ford Excursion which got 11.5 MPG and although diesel is really pricey now, I'm still laughing all the way to the bank with my VW TDI.

[[JiF]corn]

I just purchased a KIA Rio LX.
I'm getting 32mpg.It is a little cramped.
My wife owns a V10 4x4 Ford Excursion.(9 to 12mpg)