1984 MPG's

[andrewg]

When I was a younger fella I remember driving many economy cars made by Toyota and Honda that EASILY got 40mpg. Specifically the Honda CRX, base Civic, and Toyota Tercel, Starlet, Corolla. These days they make a big deal when a car gets mpg's into the high thirties. I find that strange. You would think that with today's technology and abilities to use light materials etc. that a simple and affordable compact car could get well over 50mpg....wouldn't you? I mean 1984 was a LONG time ago. I certainly realize that current compacts are far ahead in performance and technology than back then....but why not produce a simple, affordable, quality economy car that gets over 50 to 60mpg's without going hybrid????

 

[renegade_987]

Im with you.

 

[simple_gifts]

Not enough people want to buy a simple economy car, because other stuff trumps it. Appearance, size, etc.

Toyota sold 5000 !echoes! the last year produced, it was rated @ 43HWY on the "old" rating system. I run about 46-48 summers.

 

[SS1970chrysler]

I used to have an early 80's Ford Escort diesel that got 50+mpg on the highway. Had heck of a time finding parts for it even then.

 

[dishdude]

All of those cars you listed also weighed half of what their modern day equivalents do, they had no creature comforts and minimal safety equipment. They were noisy, uncomfortable and would never sell today.

 

[spasm3]

A lot more electronic junk, more auto transmissions than in the eighties.

 

[urchin]

Originally Posted By: andrewg
When I was a younger fella I remember driving many economy cars made by Toyota and Honda that EASILY got 40mpg. Specifically the Honda CRX, base Civic, and Toyota Tercel, Starlet, Corolla. These days they make a big deal when a car gets mpg's into the high thirties. I find that strange. You would think that with today's technology and abilities to use light materials etc. that a simple and affordable compact car could get well over 50mpg....wouldn't you? I mean 1984 was a LONG time ago. I certainly realize that current compacts are far ahead in performance and technology than back then....but why not produce a simple, affordable, quality economy car that gets over 50 to 60mpg's without going hybrid????


I agree. Nothing but excuses from the car makers too. NO reason a subcompact today should not get at least 50 mpg.

 

[musicmanbass]

Originally Posted By: dishdude
All of those cars you listed also weighed half of what their modern day equivalents do, they had no creature comforts and minimal safety equipment. They were noisy, uncomfortable and would never sell today.


Bingo.

That is the equivalent argument of the "I remember when a gallon of gas was 25¢" crowd. Yea, and you only made 30¢ an hour back then, too!

 

[Spazdog]

Originally Posted By: dishdude
All of those cars you listed also weighed half of what their modern day equivalents do, they had no creature comforts and minimal safety equipment. They were noisy, uncomfortable and would never sell today.
the national speed limit was 55mph.

If I "hypermiled" my car up to 55mph and held that on level pavement, I'm sure I would be well above 35 mpg fwy with a V6. And it has about 100 more hp than a 1984 midsize V6.

 

[urchin]

No reason why a small diesel couldn't be offered in the US, in a subcompact. It would get at least 50 mpg maybe more.


Excuses, excuses, and more excuses, the reason why smaller cars haven't been selling they way they should is because the MPGs suck compared to a size or two up.

I have a feeling this is done deliberately in order to sway potential buyers into something more profitable ( larger models) for the car makers.

 

[Kestas]

Originally Posted By: andrewg
You would think that with today's technology and abilities to use light materials etc. that a simple and affordable compact car could get well over 50mpg....wouldn't you?

It is because of today's technology that cars don't get the gas mileage they used to. Meeting federeal mandates for safety and emissions, together with meeting consumer demands for all kinds of new automotive technology have resulted in vehicles that are now heavy, expensive, complicated, and difficult to repair.

Automotive technology hasn't improved that greatly in the past 20 years. We're still driving electronically controlled piston V6 engines. It's been refined somewhat, but no great advancements yet.

 

[JasonC]

I would guess that every car that was around in 1984 that now has a current model with the same name weighs at least 500lbs heavier than a comparable 1984 model. These new cars need to be put on a diet big time. Compare a 1984 Mustang Coupe to the current model. A 2012 Mustang Coupe downright makes a 1984 Mustang Coupe look like a toy car. I myself owned a 1989 5.0 Coupe that weighed 3000lbs with my 175lb self in it. I just got rid of an 07 GT Coupe that weighed over 3500lbs by itself.

 

[GMBoy]

As a few have stated, there are a lot of reasons why we don't have as many 40mpg cars as in the 80's...

1. Safety features and crash performance - this adds weight and todays cars are much safer.

2. Today's market doesn't want Escort Ponys or Chevettes and other stripped down clunky cars. The post about the low sales of the Echo prove that.

3. People want more creature comforts and power - there's more weight and power usually costs some economy.


However - given all the gov't mandates and consumer wants, I don't think the automakers did too bad. We have more power, luxury and safety than every before. I know I'd rather get high 30's to low 40's in a nice riding Cruze or even Corolla over a tin can 1980's Escort, Chevette or Echo, etc,

 

[andrewg]

Originally Posted By: musicmanbass
Originally Posted By: dishdude
All of those cars you listed also weighed half of what their modern day equivalents do, they had no creature comforts and minimal safety equipment. They were noisy, uncomfortable and would never sell today.


Bingo.

That is the equivalent argument of the "I remember when a gallon of gas was 25¢" crowd. Yea, and you only made 30¢ an hour back then, too!

Not the same thing at all. I don't buy it. A safe and comfortable vehicle that meets ALL required NTSB criteria AND the required EPA garbage can be built in my opinion. It's not rocket science in the slightest. I think the makers are actually fearful perhaps of producing a car that COULD potentially label them an 'economy car' maker or somehow inferior. I think that automobile media outlets such as Car and Driver, Motor Trend,etc. would slam them for not being 'advanced'. My mid-80's Civics weren't bad driving or uncomfortable at all anyway. And as for being noisy? Not what I drove. I think there is some truth (per the Echo) to the consumer not buying them in quantity may be another factor. Peer pressure and the 'cool' factor is still a big deal I suppose.

 

[Shannow]

1948 Holden seated 5, did the speed limit and got 30MPG (Oz)...2011 Commodore seats 5, does the speed limit (*), and gets 30MPG.

yeah yeah, safety and comfort cost weight..blah blah.

Holden made an announcement with the current generation that they had worked with BHP and developed a new super steel and structural design that shaved 35% off the weight of the passenger cell of the chassis while increasing torsional rigidity by a factor of 3. Really exciting news.

But the new model weighs nearly half a tonne more than the model that it replaced.

(*) one thing that does amaze me is the number of times the speed limit that a family car is capable of doing, and what effect that must have on underlying economy at human speeds.

A standard V6 can do 2.3 times the legal maximum, and even a hatch can double it...why ?

 

[mpvue]

this argument comes up often and what I see is that everyone wants something a little bigger, a little quieter, and faster. cars today have a LOT more horsepower than before; an '84 corvette had what, 225hp? that's less than a typical V6 sedan now!a new base corvette has over 400hp now, AND is heavier, AND safer.
saturn SOHC S series manuals got 40mpg easily in the mid '90s, but they did it by weighing 2400lbs and 100hp.
to get great mpgs, people need to be content w/ simplicity, but everyone always wants 'more'. on the mazda5 forums, everyone always wants it to be a 'little' bigger and a 'little' more power.
well, you do that it'll be like every other bloated minivan.

 

[Propflux01]

Originally Posted By: andrewg
.... I mean 1984 was a LONG time ago.


Hey!!! That was the year I graduated High School! I'm not THAT old!!

 

[GMBoy]

Originally Posted By: andrewg
Originally Posted By: musicmanbass
Originally Posted By: dishdude
All of those cars you listed also weighed half of what their modern day equivalents do, they had no creature comforts and minimal safety equipment. They were noisy, uncomfortable and would never sell today.


Bingo.

That is the equivalent argument of the "I remember when a gallon of gas was 25¢" crowd. Yea, and you only made 30¢ an hour back then, too!

Not the same thing at all. I don't buy it. A safe and comfortable vehicle that meets ALL required NTSB criteria AND the required EPA garbage can be built in my opinion. It's not rocket science in the slightest. I think the makers are actually fearful perhaps of producing a car that COULD potentially label them an 'economy car' maker or somehow inferior. I think that automobile media outlets such as Car and Driver, Motor Trend,etc. would slam them for not being 'advanced'. My mid-80's Civics weren't bad driving or uncomfortable at all anyway. And as for being noisy? Not what I drove. I think there is some truth (per the Echo) to the consumer not buying them in quantity may be another factor. Peer pressure and the 'cool' factor is still a big deal I suppose.



1. - I agree and the cars are being built today.

2. - Not rocket science? Maybe not, but let's see you design and build something better yourself in this day of unending government regulations, safety regulations and fickle consumer tastes. Oh and it must "sell" too.

 

[urchin]

I DO NOT see most consumers today wanting more and more content in their new cars .

I see marketing folks trying to "tell" consumers they do though.

Most of the car sites I visit overwhelmingly want much better MPGs and they want cars to stop growing bigger with each model refresh!

repeatedly I hear folks saying they want the bloatmobile mentality at the car makers to STOP NOW!

As it is the prices for new cars today increasingly are making them UNAFFORDABLE!

 

[eljefino]

A car without carpets sounds nice and buzzy at 55 MPH and one doesn't want to go faster.

Modern cars are so well sealed against noise, it gets boring going that slow. So people push it to 75 so they feel something.

Ride a motorcycle and realize how much wind resistance picks up once you go past 40 MPH.