cool. i have no doubt that clean, unmolested, owned-by-a-granny-who-hardly-drove-it cars exist. it's just that seattle seems to be second only to california in the density of idiots who like to massacre cars to make them more "JDM"...
the alternative personal transportation thread
I learned to drive on a tercel like that. '89 baby. That thing was only six years younger than me.
Portland has a whole different level of stupid. Mostly JC Whitney bolt on goodies, unpainted body kits and vinyl stickers from hell.cool. i have no doubt that clean, unmolested, owned-by-a-granny-who-hardly-drove-it cars exist. it's just that seattle seems to be second only to california in the density of idiots who like to massacre cars to make them more "JDM"...
hmm, what about the Geo Metro? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geo_Metro
1.0 liter inline 3 with 55 hp, 49 hp (extra fuel efficient model), or a 1.3 liter inline 4 with 70 hp. highway mpg of 49, 58, 35 mpg, respectively. that it only had a 3 speed automatic is ridiculous, but the manual is a 5 speed. it's also kind of shocking that the 4 cylinder would reduce mileage so drastically in such a small car. the 3 cylinder got to 60 in 10 and change seconds, which is adequate in my opinion.
seeing that i have no shame
i'd drive one, especially a Geo Metro XFi with the 58 mpg trim. that trim was offered between 1990-1994. below is the 1996 trim, the "new" generation.
1.0 liter inline 3 with 55 hp, 49 hp (extra fuel efficient model), or a 1.3 liter inline 4 with 70 hp. highway mpg of 49, 58, 35 mpg, respectively. that it only had a 3 speed automatic is ridiculous, but the manual is a 5 speed. it's also kind of shocking that the 4 cylinder would reduce mileage so drastically in such a small car. the 3 cylinder got to 60 in 10 and change seconds, which is adequate in my opinion.
seeing that i have no shame
i'd drive one, especially a Geo Metro XFi with the 58 mpg trim. that trim was offered between 1990-1994. below is the 1996 trim, the "new" generation.
^^No
American cars aren't supposed to last that long. It's a 4 wheel death trap.
American cars aren't supposed to last that long. It's a 4 wheel death trap.
but it's not american. it's a suzuki swift in geo guise, much as the prizm was a toyota corolla.
They cursed it when they sold it under an American badge, then. A guy I worked with at Intel had a convertible that was a bucket. This was in '94, I can't imagine how bad they would be now.
<edit> I would get a Swift before a Geo.
ok, point taken. food for thought: the 2000 honda insight is down these days to ~$6k private party pricing according to edmunds. hmm. the 2001 prius is down to ~$8k and change according to that same measure.
the insight: 49/61 mpg under new epa measures.
the old-gen prius: 42/41 mpg.
maybe we do need two cars in Long Island...
the insight: 49/61 mpg under new epa measures.
the old-gen prius: 42/41 mpg.
maybe we do need two cars in Long Island...
:biggrin:
a toyota 2nz will go 200k+ miles before a rebuild if taken care. my sisters got 180psi compression all around after 105k miles. same numbers i get with 20k miles.
brake pads and all 4 shocks can be replaced in 2-3 hours, and they ridiculously cheap.
besides that, its maintenance-risk is very little compared to a hybrid.
am still not quite convinced of the green or cost advantage of hybrids over high-mpg regular cars. i blame maddox on that.
a geo metro with this?
am in dire need of a big block.... if i only had a spare $14k laying around to buy/ship/duty it.....
am in dire need of a big block.... if i only had a spare $14k laying around to buy/ship/duty it.....
the problem is that there are no equivalent high-mpg cars in the same age ranges except for the Civic HX.
non-hybrid camp:
Geo Metro XFi
43/51 mpg, built until 1993 (?). tiny. old. probably a POS. can't be too safe, but would be safer than a scooter no doubt. like the fabled E30 BMW M3, a unicorn.
Honda CRX HF
40/47 mpg in 1991, 41/50 in 1989, built 1989-1991. also tiny. old. really old. hard to find. abused and swapped and bondoed and who knows what else.
Honda Civic VX
39/50 mpg, built 1992-1995. small but usable. old. hard to find. ricers have abused and swapped out many of these hatchbacks.
Honda Civic HF
31/40 mpg, built 1996-2000 and 2001-2005 (initially offered concurrently with and ultimately replaced by the Civic Hybrid). decent sized. actually might be a reasonable option! had both CVT and manual options, with the manual doing better as one would expect. review at edmunds.com.
cheap, used hybrid camp:
Honda Insight
49/61 mpg, built from 2000-2006. really tiny inside and out! the problems with both this and the Prius are untested long term reliability of the battery/hybrid system, possible higher repair costs for the same, and inflated resale values (a la the Integra Type R: make something japanese, rare, and good and people will hang on to it).
Toyota Prius (gen1)
42/41 mpg, built from 2001-2003. good interior room albeit not capacious like the current Prius (which is retaining value absurdly well).
non-hybrid camp:
Geo Metro XFi
43/51 mpg, built until 1993 (?). tiny. old. probably a POS. can't be too safe, but would be safer than a scooter no doubt. like the fabled E30 BMW M3, a unicorn.
Honda CRX HF
40/47 mpg in 1991, 41/50 in 1989, built 1989-1991. also tiny. old. really old. hard to find. abused and swapped and bondoed and who knows what else.
Honda Civic VX
39/50 mpg, built 1992-1995. small but usable. old. hard to find. ricers have abused and swapped out many of these hatchbacks.
Honda Civic HF
31/40 mpg, built 1996-2000 and 2001-2005 (initially offered concurrently with and ultimately replaced by the Civic Hybrid). decent sized. actually might be a reasonable option! had both CVT and manual options, with the manual doing better as one would expect. review at edmunds.com.
cheap, used hybrid camp:
Honda Insight
49/61 mpg, built from 2000-2006. really tiny inside and out! the problems with both this and the Prius are untested long term reliability of the battery/hybrid system, possible higher repair costs for the same, and inflated resale values (a la the Integra Type R: make something japanese, rare, and good and people will hang on to it).
Toyota Prius (gen1)
42/41 mpg, built from 2001-2003. good interior room albeit not capacious like the current Prius (which is retaining value absurdly well).
modern small not-really-economy cars for comparison (all manual transmission, 2008 model year):
Kia Rio/Hyundai Accent
27/32 mpg for the 2008 model. (how?!)
Toyota Yaris
29/36 mpg
Nissan Versa
27/33 mpg (CVT beats the 6 speed, which is 26/31)
Honda Fit
28/34 mpg
Chevy Aveo
24/34 (abysmal considering its size)
(i'm certainly getting my govt dollar's worth out of fueleconomy.gov!)
Kia Rio/Hyundai Accent
27/32 mpg for the 2008 model. (how?!)
Toyota Yaris
29/36 mpg
Nissan Versa
27/33 mpg (CVT beats the 6 speed, which is 26/31)
Honda Fit
28/34 mpg
Chevy Aveo
24/34 (abysmal considering its size)
(i'm certainly getting my govt dollar's worth out of fueleconomy.gov!)
wow, the fuel economy on the aveo sucks balls.
it seems we are back the "are the extra (realistically?) 15mpg worth the costs?" questions over the hybrids.
i really dont know much about hybrids and their reliatibilty. i have seen ONE prius (and a private import to boot, we dont sell those) coming in to the dealership i work at, out of the 3500 cars i´ve seen coming in last month. so am pretty much clueless, besides internet reading. i actually went down to the shop to see the prius :biggrin:, the poor thing had an spoiler (huge aluminum, as in fia-gt trim, installed) lol. take that fuel efficiency!.
i´d be impulsively scared of buying one. i know a regular high mpg toyota or honda will need little work, and whatever consumables it needs are plenty and wont take more than an afternoon to fix, plus the risk of catastrophically expensive failure is minimal. but then again, being in the states, spares wouldnt be so difficult to find for a hybrid, though probably not cheap.
the echo fuel economy is higher than the yaris. virtually the same engine, but the echo is a good 100-150kg lighter than the yaris... and you since have stated you have no shame, and since i´ve owned an echo as well, i´d suggest one of those, or a newish geo metro.
interesting point about the Echo and lack of shame. okay, let's look at 2001 non-hybrid economy models then. (the not-so-economy car figures were all from 2008.)
2001 Honda Civic HX (from above)
31/39 mpg for this particular year. (a non-HX non-EX/non-VTEC civic from this year gets 28/35 mpg.)
2001 Suzuki Swift aka Geo Metro
31/38 mpg.
2001 Toyota Corolla (my girlfriend's car)
28/37 mpg.
2001 Toyota Echo
29/37 mpg (how does the corolla match this?!).
2001 Mitsubishi Mirage
28/35 mpg
and now for the underperformers:
2001 Nissan Sentra
23/32 mpg for the 1.8L 5-speed. again, wtf?! it's a SMALL CAR. why is it getting 23 in the city?
2001 Mazda Protege/Ford Focus
25/31 mpg.
2001 Dodge/Plymouth Neon
24/30 mpg.
2001 Kia Rio/Hyundai Accent
24/29 mpg. how?!
2001 VW Golf
21/28 mpg, with that legendary VW reliabilty. the TDI isn't really an option since they hold their value absurdly well and emissions for this era were not on the same order as those of gas cars, although i suppose i shouldn't rule it out immediately.
okay, let's look at 2001 non-hybrid economy models then. (the not-so-economy car figures were all from 2008.)2001 Honda Civic HX (from above)
31/39 mpg for this particular year. (a non-HX non-EX/non-VTEC civic from this year gets 28/35 mpg.)
2001 Suzuki Swift aka Geo Metro
31/38 mpg.
2001 Toyota Corolla (my girlfriend's car)
28/37 mpg.
2001 Toyota Echo
29/37 mpg (how does the corolla match this?!).
2001 Mitsubishi Mirage
28/35 mpg
and now for the underperformers:
2001 Nissan Sentra
23/32 mpg for the 1.8L 5-speed. again, wtf?! it's a SMALL CAR. why is it getting 23 in the city?
2001 Mazda Protege/Ford Focus
25/31 mpg.
2001 Dodge/Plymouth Neon
24/30 mpg.
2001 Kia Rio/Hyundai Accent
24/29 mpg. how?!
2001 VW Golf
21/28 mpg, with that legendary VW reliabilty. the TDI isn't really an option since they hold their value absurdly well and emissions for this era were not on the same order as those of gas cars, although i suppose i shouldn't rule it out immediately.
ok, to examine the TDI proposition:
2000 VW Golf TDI 5-speed
~$6k private party value per edmunds.com, but sell for more like $12k locally.
35/44 mpg
$2.62 to drive 25 miles assuming $3.99 diesel as does fueleconomy.gov
5.6 tons of CO2/year assuming 15k miles
can't really argue that it has better emissions than a comparable era gas car
2000 Honda Civic HX 5-speed
~$5k private party value, craigslist-confirmed to be in the ballpark
30/39 mpg
$2.47 to drive 25 miles assuming $3.26 regular
5.6 tons of CO2/yr
advantage: gasoline. sad but true given my biodiesel fantasies.
Yes, but with the TDI, you have some options. Greasecar conversion, commercial bio, and home made bio.
I am still strongly considering an 80's 300SD Mercedes. I still need to haul motorcycles, though.
I am still strongly considering an 80's 300SD Mercedes. I still need to haul motorcycles, though.
Now that would end the discussion for me right there. Why are you still searching Toshi?
And why don't they make that CRX anymore. That was such a fun car to drive. Its not like Honda has a car that competes with the CRX. So many car companies and so few cars I would want to buy.
a few weeks ago, a report on a 2007 corolla with around 3500 miles arrives to my hands.
says "owner is pissed. claims car gets only 19mpg. owner says the computer must be defective and wants the car inspected and warrantied".
i was like wtf. first 19 mpg?, and for a close 2nd, i chuckle.... a gem in our hands, this guy already mcgyvered-diagnosed the problem in his garage!. awesomest.
then, the funny. report continues.
"owner complains there is vibration on the car at speeds over 110mph".... "owner complains sometimes there is a buzzing sound at over 5000rpm"... the inventory of the car spells "non-oem 18" wheels on 2xx wide tires", "two 15" subwoofers and 2 amps", "gasoline is of a red shade" (that means the gas has an octane equivalent to 87 in the US scale).
i just imagine the face of the guy who took in the car as he controlled the urge to go rolfcoptering around guy. retards.
also, i had this conversation with a shop boss the other day. he told me he gets 30-31 mpg from his yaris. and his wife got around 33mpg in the city.
i was like, wtf?. i had to match that.
drove until i had less than 1/2 gallon of gas in my car (gas light goes with 2 gallons in the tank, the light went on and i drove about 50 miles). filled up with gasoline equivalent to 90-91 US oct, drove home, took the airbox out, cleaned the throttle body with carb cleaner, q-tipped the maf housing, took the efi fuse out, shot compressed air thru the air filter and put it all back together.
drove and shifted under 3000rpm and was very careful with the throttle and tried to coast to redlights and stuff... got 34mpg over the whole tank. new record.
i think the us spec yaris cuts off the injectors when you are coasting, the peruvian spec yaris doesnt. extra mpg right there.
here's why: http://money.cnn.com/2007/12/17/autos/honda_civic_hf/index.htm
not to say that they were much worse or better than other 1990-era cars, but there's a reason cars are heavier.CNN said:
CRX:
1992-1995 Civic hatchback:
combine that with the sparse availability of clean, unmolested models and the question of reliability on a near-20 year old car and it's not such an easy question.
any documentation to support this? afaik all fuel injected cars shut off the injectors when coasting in gear above idle speeds.
and to counter your anecdote
: we got 37 mpg _combined_ out of the corolla last tank. 366.5 miles, 9.7xx gallons.
i just don't think the TDI value proposition adds up at the moment when you include the inflated prices in the pac nw thanks to us pseudo-hippies/mileage geeks.
the Mercedes diesel option is an interesting thought: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercedes-Benz_300D
the turbodiesel was offered starting in 1981 on the wagon, 1982 on the sedan. (the non-turbo diesel available earlier is supposed to be horrifically slow: imagine a full size/midsize car with 80 hp.)
looks like there were also 190D diesel models, and of later generations, too, not just the old school early 80s 300D that i see around seattle. mercedes diesels of many flavors are available on craigslist, too, some at decent prices: http://seattle.craigslist.org/search/car?query=mercedes+diesel&minAsk=min&maxAsk=max&addTwo=
the catches:
1) mercedes parts are expensive, and specialized labor is as well. one of my classmates had a non-turbo 300 wagon from the early 90s and sold it after finding out that replacing the shocks would cost several $k.
2) automatic only
3) mileage isn't/wasn't that great considering they're diesels:
1988 MB 190D 2.5L turbodiesel
26/31 mpg, $3.56 to drive 25 miles (compare with $2.47 for that 2000 Honda Civic HX)
1985 MB 300TD 3.0L turbodiesel
19/23 mpg, $4.75/25 mi
doesn't add up.
I was looking at manual trans and adding a turbo. If I go diesel, I will either buy B25 from the local commercial fuel station (they sell bio to non-commercial customers who open an account), or make my own.
I would love a wagon, but they can be tough to find. One advantage of the Mercedes diesel engine is the longevity. It is not uncommon to get 500k miles (I have heard of 800k wen maintained). If you get one with manual trans, manual windows, then most everything else is reliable.
So $1500 for a Mercedes allows for some dough for replacement/upgrades. It would also NOT be my daily driver, so overall reliability is not my major concern.
<edit> Although a E320cdi would be pimptastic
I would love a wagon, but they can be tough to find. One advantage of the Mercedes diesel engine is the longevity. It is not uncommon to get 500k miles (I have heard of 800k wen maintained). If you get one with manual trans, manual windows, then most everything else is reliable.
So $1500 for a Mercedes allows for some dough for replacement/upgrades. It would also NOT be my daily driver, so overall reliability is not my major concern.
<edit> Although a E320cdi would be pimptastic
Definitely go with the merc turbodiesel.i just don't think the TDI value proposition adds up at the moment when you include the inflated prices in the pac nw thanks to us pseudo-hippies/mileage geeks.
the Mercedes diesel option is an interesting thought: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercedes-Benz_300D
the turbodiesel was offered starting in 1981 on the wagon, 1982 on the sedan. (the non-turbo diesel available earlier is supposed to be horrifically slow: imagine a full size/midsize car with 80 hp.)
looks like there were also 190D diesel models, and of later generations, too, not just the old school early 80s 300D that i see around seattle. mercedes diesels of many flavors are available on craigslist, too, some at decent prices: http://seattle.craigslist.org/search/car?query=mercedes+diesel&minAsk=min&maxAsk=max&addTwo=
the catches:
1) mercedes parts are expensive, and specialized labor is as well. one of my classmates had a non-turbo 300 wagon from the early 90s and sold it after finding out that replacing the shocks would cost several $k.
2) automatic only
3) mileage isn't/wasn't that great considering they're diesels:
1988 MB 190D 2.5L turbodiesel
26/31 mpg, $3.56 to drive 25 miles (compare with $2.47 for that 2000 Honda Civic HX)
1985 MB 300TD 3.0L turbodiesel
19/23 mpg, $4.75/25 mi
doesn't add up.
+1 it's german
+2 it's diesel
+3 it's a shaggin' wagon
+4 it's diesel
lol...Toshi you're making this far to complicated...D
DFCOany documentation to support this? afaik all fuel injected cars shut off the injectors when coasting in gear above idle speeds.
and to counter your anecdote
http://yarisworld.com/forums/showthread.php?t=4248
not that the toyota yaris is the only car in the market to have it.... but mine doesnt, and the US spec has it.
how can you tell that your car doesn't have it? did you shut off the ignition while coasting?
but i enjoy spending money in my head. has far less repercussions than spending it willy-nilly in the real world. also, this thread's point is to explore all the options and figure out which ones make sense and which ones don't. i wouldn't have guessed that the mileage was so poor (accounting for fuel cost) in the MB turbodiesels, for instance.
That's sort of like the Dodge Hemi MDS. I was shocked to see the Magnum RT average 27mpg.
no, no, it's not turning cylinders off: that's pretty cool tech, parking valves in the closed position iirc to let the air act as a spring.
instead it's just saying that when you're not at idle and are coasting in gear the injectors are shut off with the valvetrain acting normally, etc.
idle: say, 5% injector duty cycle (that is, squirting 5% of their max), just to keep it ticking over
wide open throttle: 85% injector duty cycle
coasting: 0% injector duty cycle, as in if you weren't coasting in gear with the car's momentum pushing it along the engine would just stop
i don't know where you got this 27 mpg figure from, btw
. 2008 Dodge Magnum: 6.1L V8 gets 13/18 mpg, 5.7L V8 = 15/23, 3.5L V6 = 17/24, 2.7L V6 = 18/26.
When Joe drove from Arizona to Oregon with his Magnum RT fully loaded with ALL his Army gear and a bike on the roof, he averaged 27mpg. I didn't notice any lag in the MDS, it's a bad ass system.i don't know where you got this 27 mpg figure from, btw
The worst he got on a full tank was 24mpg average. That's the 5.7L RT. He is getting between 24 and 27 in his 350z (traded the Magnum in last year).
An older one with a newer diesel in it converted to grease....
Airbags are an easy way around expensive shocks.
This is one of my favorite threads.
I was looking to do that to the 300SD. Upgrade the turbo, then bag it and drag it!
I miss my bags
i alluded to this issue before, but today i thought i'd take a look at car safety. much as fueleconomy.gov has been instrumental in finding mpg stats, safercar.gov looks to be the place for crash test results. they list cars going back to 1990. awesome.
1993 Geo Metro. needless to say this one is now permanently out of the running in my mind. i like my legs as they are.
1991 Honda Civic sedan (CRX wasn't listed). still a lot of load on the driver's right leg. ouch.
1995 Honda Civic 2 door. not bad! (actually better in terms of protecting the legs than the Accord that year, although the accord had a lower head injury score. also note that the photo is of an Accord coupe -- someone at safercar.gov screwed up.)
2000 Honda Civic 2 door coupe. not bad, with definite improvements in the 1996-2000 generation from the previous 1992-1995 iteration. around the time when side impact testing became in vogue. it's notable that the 4 door sedan did poorly in the rear seat side impact test, leading to probably pelvic injury to the dummy.
2000 Honda Insight. appearance isn't everything, and the Insight does quite well despite being well under 2000 lbs.
2001 Honda Civic 2 door coupe with optional side impact airbags. does awesome throughout.
2001 Toyota Corolla 4 door sedan with optional side impact airbags. okay generally, but watch your head if you're sitting in the rear in a side impact.
2001 Toyota Prius. not bad, not great. side impact not tested.
2004 Toyota Prius. optional side impact airbags not tested. performs awesomely.
finally, my current ride for comparison:
2004 Mazda RX-8. standard side curtain airbags. does very well overall.
1993 Geo Metro. needless to say this one is now permanently out of the running in my mind. i like my legs as they are.
1991 Honda Civic sedan (CRX wasn't listed). still a lot of load on the driver's right leg. ouch.
1995 Honda Civic 2 door. not bad! (actually better in terms of protecting the legs than the Accord that year, although the accord had a lower head injury score. also note that the photo is of an Accord coupe -- someone at safercar.gov screwed up.)
2000 Honda Civic 2 door coupe. not bad, with definite improvements in the 1996-2000 generation from the previous 1992-1995 iteration. around the time when side impact testing became in vogue. it's notable that the 4 door sedan did poorly in the rear seat side impact test, leading to probably pelvic injury to the dummy.
2000 Honda Insight. appearance isn't everything, and the Insight does quite well despite being well under 2000 lbs.
2001 Honda Civic 2 door coupe with optional side impact airbags. does awesome throughout.
2001 Toyota Corolla 4 door sedan with optional side impact airbags. okay generally, but watch your head if you're sitting in the rear in a side impact.
2001 Toyota Prius. not bad, not great. side impact not tested.
2004 Toyota Prius. optional side impact airbags not tested. performs awesomely.
finally, my current ride for comparison:
2004 Mazda RX-8. standard side curtain airbags. does very well overall.
Cliffs Notes for the crash test results:
think Geo Metros seem unsafe? you're right.
there's a steady progression in safety visible in the test results for the different generations of Honda Civics: 1987-1991, 1992-1995, 1996-2000, and 2001-2005. the 2001-2005 model is particularly safe, actually.
hybrids are about on par with their counterpart non-hybrids of the same vintage, except for the 2004+ Prius, which kicks ass and takes names.
moral of the story: i really should be in a 2004+ Prius, and would be except that they're still too expensive. the rational/prudent choice considering price, fuel economy, and safety probably would be a 2001-2005 Honda Civic HX coupe.
irate2:
think Geo Metros seem unsafe? you're right.
there's a steady progression in safety visible in the test results for the different generations of Honda Civics: 1987-1991, 1992-1995, 1996-2000, and 2001-2005. the 2001-2005 model is particularly safe, actually.
hybrids are about on par with their counterpart non-hybrids of the same vintage, except for the 2004+ Prius, which kicks ass and takes names.
moral of the story: i really should be in a 2004+ Prius, and would be except that they're still too expensive. the rational/prudent choice considering price, fuel economy, and safety probably would be a 2001-2005 Honda Civic HX coupe.
irate2:
Civic HX would be sweet. Much like the CRX HF, they are less ghetto makeovers due to the lack of "tuner" allure.
I haven't seen many of them, but that's not to say they aren't out there.
I haven't seen many of them, but that's not to say they aren't out there.