quote:

Originally posted by Lt CHEG:
I firmly believe that the disappearance of rear wheel drive has definitely contributed to the move away from cars. If a car is going to suck to drive, plow into corners with serious understeer, and suffer from torque steer then you might as well have a crossover SUV that exhibits all of those traits but can haul more stuff, and is easier to get in and out of.

I agree with this completely.

18DAI, you could easily locate a 1 year old or last year made Crown Vic with only a years milage on the clock. What would be wrong with a 1 year old ? Also, I view vehicles like Suburban and Tahoe as big cushy and useful station wagon like trucks. Those ride and handle as nice if not nicer than most sedans. Every day drivers for many people. Those would be a nice option for you. They would make for very comfortable travel.

quote:

Originally posted by David Lee:
18DAI, you could easily locate a 1 year old or last year made Crown Vic with only a years milage on the clock. What would be wrong with a 1 year old ?

Crown Vic/Grand Marquis production ended in 2011. Most 8+ year old models are getting trashed out. The car that had one of the highest depreciation rates in the car world is now one of the most sought after for Uber drivers. Around New England, a mint condition Crown Vic/Grand Marquis is going for $9-10K.

Tell it to obama, he signed the 50mpg order, not Ford...I would guess however, that the Ford family supported obama for the presidency.

They had nothing and no way to get to an average of 50mpg average for their cars, so they just stopped making most of them. That might coerce the govt to try to change that order??

quote:

Originally posted by Aquabird:
Tell it to obama, he signed the 50mpg order, not Ford...I would guess however, that the Ford family supported obama for the presidency.

They had nothing and no way to get to an average of 50mpg average for their cars, so they just stopped making most of them. That might coerce the govt to try to change that order??

Ethanol and emissions control have crushed mileage capability.
One buddy in High School had an 89 Honda CRX 1.5L maybe and that thing got dang near 50mpg all day long.
Another had a 1997 Honda Civic that was close to 40 mpg and my 1992 4cylinder Mustang would get close to 30 mpg if I worked at it.
Here we are almost 3 decades later and we’re lucky to get those numbers from hybrid vehicles.

OK, maybe a Cadillac sedan. They got a lot of on board tech, great looking car, quite well made and would make a beautiful ride for travel.

Ha, I just bought a 2009 Crown Vic from the city I work for today for $2k. I know the whole history, and there are a lot of new parts, including a factory rebuilt trans with 6k miles on it.

I'm stoked.

I was the purchasing director for a county. We kept our Crown Vics for 350k miles unless wrecked. As long as maint performed, they lasted.

Hey FORD, I don't want a damn thing you build...…...

quote:

Originally posted by Black92LX:

quote:

Originally posted by Aquabird:
Tell it to obama, he signed the 50mpg order, not Ford...I would guess however, that the Ford family supported obama for the presidency.

They had nothing and no way to get to an average of 50mpg average for their cars, so they just stopped making most of them. That might coerce the govt to try to change that order??

Ethanol and emissions control have crushed mileage capability.
One buddy in High School had an 89 Honda CRX 1.5L maybe and that thing got dang near 50mpg all day long.
Another had a 1997 Honda Civic that was close to 40 mpg and my 1992 4cylinder Mustang would get close to 30 mpg if I worked at it.
Here we are almost 3 decades later and we’re lucky to get those numbers from hybrid vehicles.

Safety/features and horsepower have way more to do with it. Safety and features have made cars way heavier and the average 6 cylinder Camry probably has close to 4 times the hp your Civic example had.

quote:

Lt CHEG
Member

posted February 21, 2019 07:11 AM Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by shovelhead:
Guess I could add "Hey GM, I don't want a AWD SUV, give me a REAL 4WD SUV.


Completely agree. I've had more GM trucks than any other maker and I can honestly say that the only SUV from them that I would consider is a Tahoe or Suburban.

I need to clarify, a REAL 4WD SUV, not an Acadia/Traverse/Evclave/Equinox/Terrain and now the "new" Blazer. A real selectable 4WD on a midsize chassis that is a RWD in 2WD mode. Since GM left that market in 2009 with the end of the Trailblazer and Envoy the next place for me to go was to FCA for Jeeps. In fact 2012 we bought two, a Liberty and a Wrangler. Best part, from 1970 to 2017 I had worked in GM dealerships, mainly in parts departments but at various times at smaller dealerships I also ran dealership collision and service departments and dabbled in sales of both new and used vehicles. Got so fed up with the product line I jumped ship and never looked back.

Lt.CHEG, no argument from me and GM's ability to make a great truck based SUV like Tahoe/Yukon/Suburban but they were more vehicle than we needed, 1-2 occupants and very rarely more.

quote:

Originally posted by bubbatime:
Them Taurus cars were bitching dude.

Taurus wagon. Built for road-tripping.

quote:

Originally posted by Black92LX:

quote:

Originally posted by Aquabird:
Tell it to obama, he signed the 50mpg order, not Ford...I would guess however, that the Ford family supported obama for the presidency.

They had nothing and no way to get to an average of 50mpg average for their cars, so they just stopped making most of them. That might coerce the govt to try to change that order??

Ethanol and emissions control have crushed mileage capability.
One buddy in High School had an 89 Honda CRX 1.5L maybe and that thing got dang near 50mpg all day long.
Another had a 1997 Honda Civic that was close to 40 mpg and my 1992 4cylinder Mustang would get close to 30 mpg if I worked at it.
Here we are almost 3 decades later and we’re lucky to get those numbers from hybrid vehicles.

'Hybrid' vehicles that are incredibly expensive and complicated. The vehicles you noted were within the scope of the everyday buyer and were simple to maintain and repair. As with most everything today, government is the problem given they've mandated an incredibly complicated and expensive solution as opposed to a common sense approach.

quote:

Originally posted by 1s1k:

quote:

Originally posted by Black92LX:

quote:

Originally posted by Aquabird:
Tell it to obama, he signed the 50mpg order, not Ford...I would guess however, that the Ford family supported obama for the presidency.

They had nothing and no way to get to an average of 50mpg average for their cars, so they just stopped making most of them. That might coerce the govt to try to change that order??

Ethanol and emissions control have crushed mileage capability.
One buddy in High School had an 89 Honda CRX 1.5L maybe and that thing got dang near 50mpg all day long.
Another had a 1997 Honda Civic that was close to 40 mpg and my 1992 4cylinder Mustang would get close to 30 mpg if I worked at it.
Here we are almost 3 decades later and we’re lucky to get those numbers from hybrid vehicles.

Safety/features and horsepower have way more to do with it. Safety and features have made cars way heavier and the average 6 cylinder Camry probably has close to 4 times the hp your Civic example had.

I found Black's observations interesting since I had a 1986 CRX DX that had a 76hp 1.5 liter engine. It weighed less than 2,000 lbs and got mileage in the low 40s. I looked for a modern day equivalent and most cars weigh substantially more including the Moats, FRS and FIT. Then I stumbled across the Mitsubishi Mirage. It weighs in at 2,000 lbs, has a 78hp 1.2 liter motor and gets mileage in the low 40s. It also has a back seat and four doors which the CRX lacked.

For all of the focus on fuel economy we seem to have had, here we sit 32 years later and two cars of the same weight and horsepower get about the same fuel economy. I guess so laws don't change to suit the government.

quote:

Originally posted by Black92LX:

quote:

Originally posted by Aquabird:
Tell it to obama, he signed the 50mpg order, not Ford...I would guess however, that the Ford family supported obama for the presidency.

They had nothing and no way to get to an average of 50mpg average for their cars, so they just stopped making most of them. That might coerce the govt to try to change that order??

Ethanol and emissions control have crushed mileage capability.
One buddy in High School had an 89 Honda CRX 1.5L maybe and that thing got dang near 50mpg all day long.
Another had a 1997 Honda Civic that was close to 40 mpg and my 1992 4cylinder Mustang would get close to 30 mpg if I worked at it.
Here we are almost 3 decades later and we’re lucky to get those numbers from hybrid vehicles.

I bought a new Hyundai Elantra (1.8L) in June 2012. It just hit 73K miles gets 35 MPG in town, and well into the "40s" on the road. I love it. Wife has a 1999 Buick that she loves. I like the car, too. but rather drive my Elantra.

My 20 year old Silverado is considered "low mileage", only has abut 135K miles on it. The 5.3 liter engine is plenty strong and gets good mileage.

I have seen news articles that indicate that this BS of ethanol actually reduces MPG by 15%.

But, of course, stopping that shit would be a negative impact on the corn lobby to the feds.

If a truck with 125K miles on it is considered "low mileage", then what is the expected mileage lifespan for a commuter car?

Back when I sold cars, 1990-1992, cars were expected to average 15K per year. A car with over 100K was a "sled" that was worth $2500 and went directly to the wholesaler. What is the expectation today? Thanks! Regards 18DAI