Large cars

[adrive7]

I'll echo the Buick vote. My dad drives a LeSabre Custom with the 3.8L V6 and says he gets in the high 20s on the highway. It's a very comfortable ride, and plenty of power when you need to get moving, even with a loaded car.

[taco]

i beat the hell out of my camry and get 27-30sh on average, no hypermiling what so ever.
the avalon is a wider camry.

but i am bias. i am also six three 250lbs and fit comfortable in my car.

[fud2468]

Thanks again to all.
I don't need a lot more room inside as much as I want to have a much quieter ride. I do not want a softer ride if it's at the expense of good handling.
The Stratus would be OK for longer trips otherwise, seats are OK, holds the road well, etc.
I appreciate all your suggestions.
Ray Mac

[mavinwy]

If you are happy with all of the other aspects of the stratus other than the noise level, you would be much cheaper going to a good car audio installation shop and having them put sound deadening in. (or you can do it yourself). There is a type that comes as rolled sheets and can be put under the carpeting and behind the door panels, and the change is significant.

One other one that makes a big difference on our intrepid and neon noise level (cab forward like the stratus) is the type of tire. When we put the winter tires on, the cab volume goes up a LOT. The touring tires we run in the summer are extrememy quiet. So if you have all season tires on the car, you might consider a change to a touring tire.

Jim

[fud2468]

Interesting that you brought this up, Jim.
I woke up at 3 this morning, got up and began to look through old Consumer Reports mags that I've kept. I looked for specs of cars in the 1996 New Car Yearbook that I still have.
A couple of things:
Unless I go to a much larger and heavier car, I won't gain much more interior room or trunk space than the Stratus has.
The other surprise was in the comparison of the Stratus with its twin, the Chrysler Cirrus. The Stratus they tested had the 2.4 I4 like mine, and the Cirrus had the 2.5 V6.
Stratus and Cirrus both rated at EPA 29mpg highway.
However,
Stratus was 60 lb. lighter, yet got less mpg.
Cirrus observed mpg was 14/38.
Stratus was 12/36.
Extra weight of Cirrus may be at least partly due to sound insulation, which takes us back to your post, great suggestion!
Mystery is on the FE of the two. I'd guess that the V6, though a little bigger displacement, is a more efficient engine and/or the final drive ratio on the Cirrus is taller.
Noise level on the Cirrus was rated above average, Stratus was rated average.
Ray Mac

[Z man]

My grandma's over priced Mercedes broke down for the umteenth time and she got a 2005 Avalon to drive until it was fixed, well,

she said the Avalon was a much better car and wished she bought one instead.

[mavinwy]

No problem, and it is certain to be less $$$ than a new car.

The other reason, if I remember correctly, for the difference in MPG was the gear ratio of the transmissions. The 2.4 generally had a numerically higher gear ratio to account for the smaller motor moving a relatively heavy car. The 2.4 was originally designed for the neon after all <grin>.

One other MPG gain I have seen on my old neon, if you decide to keep this car, was an underdrive pulley. It reduces the load from the power steering, AC and alternator by effectively spinning them slower. The only downside to this is if you idle for long periods of time with all the lights, etc on. In which case the battery could run down. It is not generally an issue on highway or normal in town driving. I currently have one on order for the current neon (took me a bit to find one for a first generation).

The other advantage to keeping the car is that you know the history of this vehicle. That can often be priceless.

Jim

[mavinwy]

Oh yeah....and that you woke up at 3:00 thinking about this probably belongs in the "you might be an eco-modder if....) thread

Jim

[fud2468]

Thanks again.
I see I wasn't precise about noise level. I meant to say the Cirrus was quieter.
Re the 2.4, 3rd gen Caravans had a base 2.4 engine, not sure if it's the same as the Stratus engine. It must really have to scream.
At the local senior center today I noticed several Le Sabres parked and I was eyeballing them.
The jury is still out, I will continue to research.
Ray Mac.

[RH77]

If you don't want to sacrifice handling, then the 95% of the Buicks are out. The last gen Regal GS has a tighter suspension, but only comes with the 3.8L (some were supercharged).

If you're satisfied with the space of the Stratus, then maybe we're heading in the wrong direction with the "Large Car" segment -- maybe "Mid-Size" is the way to go (opens up a few more options)...

I searched around 1995-2002/Midsize and came up with...
(not a whole lot of Domestics that aren't "mushy")

A few Imports:
Acura TL (1998 and earlier avoids the transmission trouble) More luxury, so-so FE with smaller 2.5L, good handling
Volvo 850/S70 5-cylinder (turbo option), bank-vault safety, OK FE, luxury with good handling
Toyota Avalon As mentioned, a nice big car with Toyota reliability and reasonable FE -- good handling for its size, quiet

Notes: the Lexus (Toyota) brand tends to favor soft rides unless you get the GS300; Infiniti (Nissan) has some options -- but check reliability and ride quality.

RH77

[fud2468]

Thanks for the detailed reply. I had forgotten about the good things I'd heard about the Volvo 850.
Regarding ride quality--I want straight-line comfort, a little mushiness is OK as long as it tracks OK and doesn't require constant steering correction.
Ray Mac

[ALS]

The 850/S70 are not the greatest in fuel economy. Average is around 27-28 mpg highway. My brother owns a 99 S70 and I get 1.5 mpg better highway in my 960.
The fwd 3100 lb S70 has a 2.4L 160 hp I5 and is aero rated at .32 Cd. While my rwd 3550 lb 181 hp 2.9L I6 960 areo rated at .36 Cd.
Volvo is in trouble because their cars are not getting better mpg's
My 97 960 at .36 Cd gets the same mpg as a 08 S80 with a .28 Cd that replaced it.
This is the reason when I replace my 87 740 wagon DD, it will not be with a another gas hog Volvo.

[rkpatt]

I have an 1998 Olds Delta 88 3.8 ( inherited from an elderly relative in 2004 with 24 k miles ) that was getting 22 mpg city and 28 mpg hwy . The mileage has dropped considerably of over time down to 17-23mpg . The car has had regular maintenance . A full scan ( with a real sacantool ) showed everything functioning OK . A tune up did not help . I now have about 71K miles on it and wondering what I can do . Any suggestions to get that mileage back ? - Thanks

[mavinwy]

Rkpatt. If the mielage has dropped that much, there is something up. At only 71K on a 3.8 I would venture that it is a sensor out, and most likely one or more of the O2 sensors in the exhaust. There is a maintenance interval for these that (IIRC) is around 60K miles. They may still be "close enough" to not trip the scanguage.

That is assuming that you don't have a brake dragging or bearing going out that would not show up in a comuter scan anyway.

Back on topic....

Every vehicle that has been mentioned with good statements will not be too mushy on a straight drive, and bigger cars generally require less steering correction with their longer wheelbase on highway drives (I sometimes drive a jeep XJ and I see a LOT of steering correction ) Any of them are good, what it ultimately comes down to is drive what you are comfortable in, keep up on the maintenance and tune-ups, drive conservatively, and enjoy.

Jim

[bikin' Ed]

American cars with a mushy ride are perfect candidates for stiffer and lower suspension. It's like a twofer you get the handling and improved Cd both in the same package!

[Formula413]

Originally Posted by rkpatt

I have an 1998 Olds Delta 88 3.8 ( inherited from an elderly relative in 2004 with 24 k miles ) that was getting 22 mpg city and 28 mpg hwy . The mileage has dropped considerably of over time down to 17-23mpg . The car has had regular maintenance . A full scan ( with a real sacantool ) showed everything functioning OK . A tune up did not help . I now have about 71K miles on it and wondering what I can do . Any suggestions to get that mileage back ? - Thanks

You could always try the old reliable Seafoam treatment. If there is significant carbon buildup inside the top end this would certainly have some benefit. How much of the car's usage is city driving? I would think bad compression would be unlikely at 71k, but anything is possible.

[CraftyApe]

I took a 2000 Concord with the smaller six cylinder last year in part trade for a hotrod I had built and was selling off.
It is not what I would call an exciting car and normally I would not have considered it. The thing is I had just changed work circumstance and was going to be driving a sales route and occasionally sheparding around manufactures representatives to accounts. I am in the DFW area and have about 70 accounts all over the metro area and put about 150 miles a day on the car so I needed to get decent fuel milage obviously. But I also had to be able to pick up and carry around a few other sales weasels now and then, so I needed a fair amount of room. It turned out that the Concord was pretty much ideal.

Having had a Neon R/T and a PT Cruiser not long ago I was kind of luke warm on the Chrysler products, but the Concord has so far turned out to be a pleasant surprise. I am averaging just a whisker over 25mpg with combined driving and I can do 32-33 on the highway. Keep in mind that this is driving like a grandmother as opposed to my old leadfooted ways.

The car had about 110k on it when I got it and I have put another 25k on it in the months that I have had it so far. The only things that I have had to deal with are like another guy mentioned I replaced the crankshaft position sensor. I am told that this is not uncommon with these cars after a 100k or so. I also had some new brakes put on.... apparently the first set to be replaced as I have all the orginal records and they had never been touched.

While I know these things have very little personality and frankly look like the end of the probe an alien would use on you, the fact is that they are dirt cheap, get pretty good mpg for their size and they are pretty big. I look like a mountain gorilla that has been strategically shaven and jammed into business casual and I am quite comfy in it.

Would have rather had an Avalon I will grant, but given that I got it for the equivelant of 2k I think the car really has its points.


Just my two cents.

Funny that I have been lurking and reading forever and something like the Concord got me to start talking.

Cheers,

Crafty

[fud2468]

Yes, my daughter has a 2000 Concorde and it seems to be a good car.
When you say you have the smaller engine, do you mean the 2.7? I've read that the earlier ones had a design flaw that caused oil sludging and major engine damage. Hopefully if you have a 2.7 it's a later engine or one that's been taken care of (synthetic oil, etc.). The larger v6's did not have this problem and did pretty well on FE.
Ray Mac

[trikkonceptz]

I am close to inheriting a 2000 BMW 540. It is a large solid sedan V8 powered and very comfortable to drive. it is quiet and smooth. In fact with no alterations I had that bad boy doing 25mpg in the city and 32 on the hwy. It not only has a digital mpg meter on board but also has the vacuum meter in the console.

It feels and is a solid car and I am sure reasonably priced in todays market. I will be replacing my 4-runner with it asap. And for those who enjoy older technology still has a tape deck in it along with a cd player .. LOL

[CraftyApe]

Originally Posted by fud2468

Yes, my daughter has a 2000 Concorde and it seems to be a good car.
When you say you have the smaller engine, do you mean the 2.7? I've read that the earlier ones had a design flaw that caused oil sludging and major engine damage. Hopefully if you have a 2.7 it's a later engine or one that's been taken care of (synthetic oil, etc.). The larger v6's did not have this problem and did pretty well on FE.
Ray Mac

Yea it is the 2.7L, I don't know if there was trouble with the sludge building up in the first 100k miles. I was lucky enough to have gotten it after the original owner had gone through some kind of deal with a dealer where by he had a new crate motor installed. I got it at about 7500 miles after the install. So if the first motor had issues, the newer one does not seem to. I just do normal oil changes and have had the crankshaft sensor and the basic brake work done.... beyond that boring but dependable and a pretty good work horse.


Crafty