View Single Post
Old 05-18-2009, 12:42 AM   #19 (permalink)
Frank Lee
ooo ooo ooo ah ah ah
 
Frank Lee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: up north
Posts: 7,357

Blue - '93 Tempo
Last 3: 27.29 mpg (US)

ShWing! - '82 gold wing Interstate
90 day: 33.65 mpg (US)

F150 - '94 F150 XLT
90 day: 18.5 mpg (US)

Sport Coupe - '92 Tempo GL
Last 3: 69.62 mpg (US)

Moon Unit - '98 Sable LX Wagon
90 day: 21.24 mpg (US)
Thanks: 636
Thanked 848 Times in 591 Posts
My full size '94 V8 4x4 truck gets better than 16... last tank was 22... as you can see, it ain't any newer than the Exploder. BTW, it's parked unless something big needs to be hauled. I think that is the role of the large truck in this world. 20... well in this day and age, that's a pretty low bar for a dd unless you are hauling great gobs of stuff.

You sayin you couldn't find a nice GM sedan with the 3800 for cheap? Lotsa room, lotsa comfort, lotsa SAFETY SCHMAFETY, and up to 30 mpg to boot. Did you even look for something like that? Ya know, buying a vehicle cuz this or that "might" happen in the future ie carting a brood around is PRECISELY the reason we have millions of doofs in this country commuting in full-size 4x4s... they think that maybe, someday, perhaps, there's a chance that, oh i don't know but maybe, ya think? possibly... they'll need that capability someday. In the meantime they are quite happy to rack up hundreds of thousands of miles without using that capability in the least. It's kinda like bringing a Sherman tank to a knife fight.

I agree with you re: used cars. Nothing saves more money than keeping an old car on the road vs getting a new one. That 28 mpg Ranger- now that's more like it.

Last edited by Frank Lee; 05-18-2009 at 03:13 AM..
  Reply With Quote