1984 MPG's

[urchin]

Frankly I was just old enough to drive when the first Jetta Turbo Diesel was available for sale back in the early 80s. While it wasn't fast it was not a slug and got amazing MPGs (about 57 mpg!)

It was German built, spartan but solidly built very comfortable not too noisy, and very safe it actually was ahead of its time in safety (structural integrity and crumple zones). It was very reasonably priced, and back during this time very reliable, and also important fairly cheap to maintain.


If I could get my hands on a new 1980 something Jetta Turbo Diesel today for about 10 k I would be a very happy camper.

 

[yaris0128]

Ive been complaining about that for years. People obviously think that 45mpg out of a hybrid is a big deal these days but back in the day that was common amoung all econoboxes. If my yaris weighed in at 1600pds like a Geo Metro instead of 2200 I might be doing better than low 40's. Same goes for the CRX another car that weights under 2k. Now heres the strange thing. The Smart Fortwo weights in at 1600pds and sports a 1.0L engine. Seems like we are going in the right direction. But only can get in the low 40's for mpg. Joke. If you want mpg at a low price dont buy a new car!

 

[Garak]

Originally Posted By: GMBoy
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.


That's the hard part. They have the meeting regulations part pretty much down pat, but they still make cars they think are wonderful ideas, yet they almost have to take a loss to move them.

 

[eljefino]

While VW and VWNA (separate entities) have some barges they also respect that people are out of money and cheapened the latest Jetta by four thousand bucks! They even have a special stripped model with no radio and no AC, the 2.0 engine, for $14k. It's not even in the brochure!

A cunning new car maker could make some conquest sales from cheap folks who always bought used, but can't see shelling out 97% of MSRP for a corolla with 55k miles on it.

 

[exranger06]

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.

And those cars all had about 70 hp and took about 15 seconds to go from 0-60. The modern buying public would find that absolutely unacceptable and would never buy one. MPG sells, but not as much as (and not at the expense of) speed/power.

 

[Spazdog]

Originally Posted By: eljefino
While VW and VWNA (separate entities) have some barges they also respect that people are out of money.....


...and that's why Mexico has literally double the choices that the US and Canada have? 'Cause Mexican citizens are even more out of money than US and Canadian citizens?

Okay, some of them are re-hashes. They have a "Yetta Classico" which looks exactly like a MKIV Jetta to me. The base on that has got to be less than the non-published stripper model you mentioned.

And they have what looks like a flat black armored version of the MKV Jetta. It has no text supporting it (or my computer did not load it) so I couldn't work out my barrio Spanglish translating it.

But they do have a lot more models that I have never seen before. Even in magazines. Who knew they made a pickup variant of the Touareg?

The coolest discovery I made from the Volkswagen do Brasil site is that if you can somewhat read Spanish, you can make a lot of sense out of Portugese. Sort of like Dutch and English. If you can read English, you can probably get the gist of Dutch text. Can't understand the language when spoken but when written, you can kinda' figure it out.

 

[KrisZ]

I just love "with today's technology" comments

If the same safety and emission regulations were applied to those 80's cars, they would not be drivable, and these cars passed as barely drivable back then.
Comments like these just show how disconnected people are with mechanical knowledge. Most think that since computers and electronics in general improved so much, then the same must apply to mechanical things.

I remember reading a post on Mazda forums, where the OP was asking how to "unlock" ABS in his car. He figured that since higher trims have ABS from the start, his car had that too, but it was locked out and the computer just needed a hack or jailbreak, just like some features are locked out in software programs or cell phones. He was dead serious.

Now, don't get me wrong, automotive technology improved tremendously IMO, but it did not improve to the point where automakers are simply holding out on us. Physics is still a [censored], just as it was back then.

 

[GMBoy]

Originally Posted By: 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!



Your flat out wrong. Whatever folks are telling you that they'd rather have a car with less content is the minority of the population. No automaker is going to support a non-profitable segment of the population - the majority of buyers want features and content. Whether this is because marketing ploys tell them or if the simply want it is not the point. Consumers want features in their lower priced cars that were once reserved for expensive cars.

How to prove MY point versus yours is easy - looks at car sales. The base models are not sold as much as midlevel and above. Most dealers won't stock base cars because they don't sell and besides its easier to sell a car with a feature the buyer may not have originally wanted...but you surely can't sell the car if it doesn't have a feature they are looking for....and that goes with larger wheels - which we all know you don't care for.

 

[rjundi]

If you look at fueleconomy.gov it goes back to 1984 with normalized epa figures. It compares apples to apples and you will find these bare bones cars that were slow, miserable, less safe compared to now achieve similar MPG.

Next you take a $5000 base Sentra in 1984 with that essentially gets the same MPG as a 2011 Versa with a base sticker of $11k. $5000 in 1984 in inflation equals about $11k.

However that $11k 2011 Versa gets you AC, ABS, Vehicle Stability, a passenger door mirror, rear defrost, AM/FM/CD etc its a far better buy.

 

[SteveSRT8]

X2^^^

The dealers would break down the doors of their parent company if the car would sell! If it don't sell then they don't want it.

Wheels are simply a styling issue.

 

[R2d2]

It all comes down to the weight of cars then versus today.

 

[LS2JSTS]

Originally Posted By: rjundi
If you look at fueleconomy.gov it goes back to 1984 with normalized epa figures. It compares apples to apples and you will find these bare bones cars that were slow, miserable, less safe compared to now achieve similar MPG.

Next you take a $5000 base Sentra in 1984 with that essentially gets the same MPG as a 2011 Versa with a base sticker of $11k. $5000 in 1984 in inflation equals about $11k.

However that $11k 2011 Versa gets you AC, ABS, Vehicle Stability, a passenger door mirror, rear defrost, AM/FM/CD etc its a far better buy.





Hey now, this isn't about the facts, it's about feelings, guesses and the manufacturers conspiracy to sell high profit cars...lol. Don't you know, it's the marketing department that decides what consumers want, not the consumer.

How dare you present facts that prove the folly of this thread?

 

[LS2JSTS]

Originally Posted By: GMBoy
Originally Posted By: 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!



Your flat out wrong. Whatever folks are telling you that they'd rather have a car with less content is the minority of the population. No automaker is going to support a non-profitable segment of the population - the majority of buyers want features and content. Whether this is because marketing ploys tell them or if the simply want it is not the point. Consumers want features in their lower priced cars that were once reserved for expensive cars.

How to prove MY point versus yours is easy - looks at car sales. The base models are not sold as much as midlevel and above. Most dealers won't stock base cars because they don't sell and besides its easier to sell a car with a feature the buyer may not have originally wanted...but you surely can't sell the car if it doesn't have a feature they are looking for....and that goes with larger wheels - which we all know you don't care for.


Exactly

 

[GMBoy]

Originally Posted By: rjundi
If you look at fueleconomy.gov it goes back to 1984 with normalized epa figures. It compares apples to apples and you will find these bare bones cars that were slow, miserable, less safe compared to now achieve similar MPG.

Next you take a $5000 base Sentra in 1984 with that essentially gets the same MPG as a 2011 Versa with a base sticker of $11k. $5000 in 1984 in inflation equals about $11k.

However that $11k 2011 Versa gets you AC, ABS, Vehicle Stability, a passenger door mirror, rear defrost, AM/FM/CD etc its a far better buy.





Very well said.

 

[urchin]

Originally Posted By: GMBoy



Your flat out wrong. Whatever folks are telling you that they'd rather have a car with less content is the minority of the population.


Nonsense, the marketing folks are ALWAYS trying to lead the consumer (market) by the nose, by telling them what they want, it has become increasingly obvious over the years this is their tactic. The SUV is one of the best examples out there of these people "inventing" niche and then pushing people to fill it.
You can fool a lot of gullible consumers but not all of us. The problem today is that most folks are literally BROKE, so selling expensive SUVs to a poorer middle class is not going to work.
Quote:


How to prove MY point versus yours is easy - looks at car sales. The base models are not sold as much as midlevel and above. Most dealers won't stock base cars because they don't sell


Again have you ever TRIED to buy a base model over the past couple of decades?

It is almost impossible, this isn't just about me though, I am in the automotive business at the dealership point and it isn't that a significant number of buyers don't come in looking to buy lesser trim levels, it is that the cars they want are not there on the lot.

Again the manufactures know that if they refuse to build lower profit cars then obviously folks will be forced to buy higher trim levels, it is that simple, and it is a bit of collusion by all of them.

AGAIN THE REASON BASE/LESSER TRIM MODELS DON'T SELL IS BECAUSE THE INDUSTRY REFUSES TO BUILD THEM IN SIGNIFICANT QUANTITIES, NOT BECAUSE THE CONSUMER DOESN'T WANT TO BUY THEM.

 

[andrewg]

Originally Posted By: urchin
Originally Posted By: GMBoy



Your flat out wrong. Whatever folks are telling you that they'd rather have a car with less content is the minority of the population.


Nonsense, the marketing folks are ALWAYS trying to lead the consumer (market) by the nose, by telling them what they want, it has become increasingly obvious over the years this is their tactic. The SUV is one of the best examples out there of these people "inventing" niche and then pushing people to fill it.
You can fool a lot of gullible consumers but not all of us. The problem today is that most folks are literally BROKE, so selling expensive SUVs to a poorer middle class is not going to work.
Quote:


How to prove MY point versus yours is easy - looks at car sales. The base models are not sold as much as midlevel and above. Most dealers won't stock base cars because they don't sell


Again have you ever TRIED to buy a base model over the past couple of decades?

It is almost impossible, this isn't just about me though, I am in the automotive business at the dealership point and it isn't that a significant number of buyers don't come in looking to buy lesser trim levels, it is that the cars they want are not there on the lot.

Again the manufactures know that if they refuse to build lower profit cars then obviously folks will be forced to buy higher trim levels, it is that simple, and it is a bit of collusion by all of them.

AGAIN THE REASON BASE MODELS DON'T SELL IS BECAUSE THE INDUSTRY REFUSES TO BUILD THEM IN SIGNIFICANT QUANTITIES, NOT BECAUSE THE CONSUMER DOESN'T WANT TO BUY THEM.

Good post Urchin. I pretty much agree that the consumer is lead by the manufacturers as well. I know many folks that would buy a low cost QUALITY economy car without all the bells, whistles, and powerful engines....as long as it was reliable and got around 50 mpg or more. Marketing is a science....and part of that science is to CREATE a culture of consumers that THINKS they need or wants a particular product. No, I'm not saying that car buyers are complete zombies....just saying that many types of vehicles are created, marketed, and sold when no real need exists. How many dolts drive huge 4X4 Pickups and SUV's that NEVER see dirt or heavy payloads? Millions. Consumers want them because of a culture created by the vehicle manufacturers. Once they create that culture, sales rise until that particular product has run it's course...then on to the next marketing ploy.

 

[Rand]

The fiat 500 Base curb weight: 2,363 pounds not 3000.
3000 is the GVWR.

I'd buy a base stick shift the problem is sometimes you want something like.... tilt steering. and you cant get it.

no reason you shouldnt be able to order a base vehicle with what you want on it. The problem is they want to charge you 500$ for cruise control.. which is just a set of switches.. that probably cost 3$. In this day of throttle by wire there is really nothing extra to hookup after the switch. etc etc

I looked at a 2009 elantra blue stickshift.
the problem was it came without a radio and AC.

IF it had the AC I would have gotten it. call me soft but If its 115 at my work parking lot.. I dont feel the need to get heat stroke to save a buck of gas and 1000$ on my car.

 

[urchin]

If you want to know a large part of the reason why VW is so successful in other markets and not so much in the US one huge issue is the complete refusal of VWoA to offer the a la carte ordering system that they do in most of Europe and many other countries. If you want a fairly basic car with sports seats, you got it, if you want tricked out car with stick yep, you can get it. Of course you have to order the car specially and you might have to wait a couple of months to get it but hey if you are spending a huge chunk cash most folks would probably be willing to wait if they could get their car just the way they want it. Especially the VW buyer in the US.


Personally I like a high quality platform (say Ford Fiesta HB) with just the essentials, perhaps A/C and power locks with a stick. If you try and find a vehicle like this in the USA it is impossible.

One of the most annoying things is the insistence of car makers pushing a darn sunroof constantly. My dad recently was looking to buy a 2011 Subaru Outback this year. He has never been interested in this option and has always avoided them because of the problems many people seem to have with failures and leaks. Well the sales people tried mightily to get him to budge but no doing No, sunroof ever for him, I say bravo!

Sure enough just recently Subaru of America has recalled almost every 2011 Outback with a sunroof because the glass panel can literally fall off into the passenger compartment.

 

[JTK]

I dunno. I can't buy that people don't want'em.

Things are totally different today.

With everything WAY up in cost I'd think that a total bare-bones, econo-box would sell like crazy if the price was right. Say under $10K.

Problem years ago was the auto makers couldn't make enough money on econo-cars to justify building them.

Joel

 

[hattaresguy]

Modern cars are fantastic, you can buy a 500hp Corvette that will crack 30mpg on the highway.

Remember back in the 80's 250hp was considered quite a lot. These days most family sedans have that.

Lots of glossing over the past. How many people hear have driven even older cars with bias ply tires and none power drums all around? Even the fastest muscle car of the 60's would be left in the dust by a V6 powered Accord.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1_ptUrQOMPs

In the 59 you die, in the 09 your a bit sore.