must be a government conspiracy
 

I cant for the life of me figure out why there isnt a decent but cheap fuel efficient vehicle made today. There are either efficient, or cheap, but never the 2 put together. All economy cars are looking like that's what they were: built for people who care about $$ and mpg more then mph. Why not build a sporty looking econo-box? one peopel might actually like?

I love the old mini coopers. bit better looking then the regular cooper and even if it had the same powertrain, it would look somewhat cooler.

the old turbo firefly, sprint, etc of the same line: looked infinitely better then the regular ones. I dont know if economy or the extra 20 ponies made a difference, but I think it would be a big seller with some decent rims.

the honda CRX I had kicked butt. looked waaaay better then the regular civic, yet looked the same.

lots of newer cars out there, but almost as if they make the
car just a tad cheaper thenit shouldbe, hoping people wont buy it.

That's why I'm still driving a 92 Honda Civic hatchback rather than buying something new. Since the late 90's, cars have either been inexpensive with so-so mileage and high highway rpms, or pricy hybrids with reasonably good, but not great mileage. But now, with all of the aeromods I have installed on it, there isn't any new vehicle currently being sold that can come close to matching my mileage at highway speeds.

being a mechanic tortured,not just a consumer with 18 road going machines..

I beelined to a 1987 3 main boxer, the last carbed. Welded till I hurt myself saving the body, and going to do some more today..the fourth year going into some good looking finale if all goes well. I like seeingpeople hangonto stuff, learn allthe good and bad and hang onto what they got with reasons that cannot be beat. Not enough people do this. Inlines have never been a choice for me, but I do see both of your reasonings for missing the old school.

the boxer in all facts compared is completely extinct in comparison to what you are longing for...and worlds better...extreme paradox..absolutely bizarre.. Gov't really does have something to do with it... equalizing markets. The real (3 main) boxer would just crush it if it returned. It would not even need marketing to take over the whole retarded stampede of what people think was and is good in econo and fun and truly powerful enough to be useful. I am at 1781cc playing with prius as an only comparison...23 years apart and lacking complexity. I could tow the prius with a 90hp subaru..but the prius will not be towing me...absolutely freaksihly bizarre. I could squeeze right up into the 50s mpg this very moment.. I could drive right by an engineer ready to change the world.. and he'd continue to babble about some new economical inline four without even acknowledging the best invention ever low rpming right by..possibly towing a ton in real weight:rolleyes:

early morning rant over..

87 3main boxer??? subaru

Something called emissions and safety regs. Make them tougher every so often so the common Americans can plow into each other with a cell phone in one hand, Big Mac in the other, and walk away unhurt.

I'm glad there are some new cars with 6-speed manuals to keep the highway RPM's down. And a slew of manuals coming here the next year or two.

I doubt safety/emissions has lowered gas mileage that much. Price, yeah, maybe a little. At least one of them will walk away unhurt in a wreck.

My '08 Cobalt XFE only cost like $13k and I get 40+ mpg highway and 50 mpg at 50 mph on side roads and I like the looks of it, though it could do to be lowered 1.5 inches. Dang thing looks like it wants some offroad tires for it.

I know that the old VXs got around that but emmissions and airbags and crumple zones and all that nice stuff makes the "compacts" fatties in comparison to compacts made 20 years ago.

But if you put a late '80s Nissan Sentra which was called a compact next to a Cobalt and an Aveo the Sentra would probably be closer in size to the Aveo which is considered a sub-compact.

In fact, let me research that a little bit....

My point is, what was once considered a compact is now considered a sub compact.
The late '80s Sentra 4 door was 168 inches long and weighed 2500 lbs, the 4 door Cobalt is 180 inches long and weighs 2750 lbs, while the sub-compact Chevrolet Aveo 4 door is 170 inches long and weighs 2544 lbs.

So now that we realise we need to compare apples to apples take what was considered a mid size car in the '80's.

How about the Toyota Camry from '86 - '90. It was 178 inches long (2 inches shy of the Cobalt) and weighed in at between 2,700 - 2,850 lbs (same ballpark as Cobalt). Now it's mpg rating were 22, 27, 24 mixed. The '09 Cobalt XFE is 25, 37, 30 mixed.

So there has been improvement.
Albeit less then there should have been.

Granted when some nub like me can with some coroplast and duct tape get an extra 2 or 3 mpg out of a car there is certainly a whole lot more the auto makers could do to improve mpg ratings on new cars.

As for build quality I personly think it's allways been as bad as it currently is. I just think people tend to look back fondly at their old cars.

My '08 Cobalt is a squeeky POS, so was my '97 Cavalier, as well as my '89 Sentra, and my '73 Plymouth Scamp had it's hood up on a monthly basis and still left me stranded several times.

So....
There were ugly cars in the past as there are now.

All cheap cars are cheap for a reason and start falling apart after 5 years (some less).

I believe average mpg for cars from the past and current of same size and weight has gone up but nowhere near what is possible.

...ah come on now, just come out and "say it" -- bigger butts need bigger cars!

I wondered the same thing. In fact, I saw just the car I wanted while on vacation in VA. I didn't get a picture, but it was a little Citroen AX. The plates on it said "Diplomat". The fender said that it had a 1.5 diesel in it. Here's a pic of one from Wiki:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi..._AX_red_hl.jpg

The one I saw was the same color as this one. They have plastic panels in non load bearing areas, a drag coefficient of 0.31, and a very light weight of just 1,411 lbs!

Wiki says they can achieve 80 mpg without hypermiling. [...per 153 ounce Imperial gallon, or about 65 miles on one of our 128 ounce gallons].

Perfect! Why can't I get one in the US?

so why dont cars have better drag coefficents? Seriously, with all this CAD design and low rolling tires and super efficient engines, we should be able to drive to the moon ona tank

since on subject, is there a site that lists car by drag coeffient? make ecomodding easier if I pick one that's a bit more aerodynamic.