Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Automotive News & Views How does gas at $4 and higher impact you?
2183 messages, Last post on Nov 21, 2009 at 5:13 PM
You are in the Automotive News & Views Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & claires
|
Replying to: mivadar (Oct 15, 2008 12:09 pm) I can think of a few reasons. First off, fuel economy in the US really only becomes a major concern whenever fuel gets expensive or scarce, or the economy is bad. But as soon as the times improve, and the fuel gets flowing again, at lower prices, people start flocking back to bigger, thirstier vehicles. We're just used to cheap gas. Also, American cars, until fairly recently, tended to not be very space-efficient. There's also a "small cars = small profits" mentality that the domestics have battled with for ages now, and just can't get out of their corporate heads, so they tend to not put their best efforts into them. So often you'd end up with a big American car that was not only more comfortable, better built, and more powerful, but also handled better and even got similar fuel economy to a smaller car. So the only real advantage the smaller car would give you would be that it's easier to maneuver in really tight spaces. And by and large, that's not as big of a deal in the US as it is in Europe. But the "normal" speed limit on the highways is around 65 mph - here that's the speed limit on country roads outside towns ... highways have at least 80 mph if they have a limit at all. Again I wonder, because distances in the US are much bigger - here that 10% doesn't make a difference ... there it does. Just curious if it has any particular technical reason ... Yes, there is a reason...American drivers suck! 
|
|
|
Replying to: lemko (Oct 15, 2008 12:55 pm) In most countries (including all of Europe and Australia) the "headline" octane rating, shown on the pump, is the RON, but in the United States, Canada and some other countries the headline number is the average of the RON and the MON, sometimes called the Anti-Knock Index (AKI), Road Octane Number (RdON), Pump Octane Number (PON), or (R+M)/2. Because of the 8 to 10 point difference noted above, the octane shown in the United States is 4 to 5 points lower than the same fuel elsewhere: 87 octane fuel, the "regular" gasoline in the US and Canada, is 91-92 in Europe. However most European pumps deliver 95 (RON) as "regular", equivalent to 90-91 US (R+M)/2, and some even deliver 98 (RON) or 100 (RON).[
|
|
While this board likes to bash the SUV, there are very logical reasons to own one. The obvious is comfort and roominess. Also the ease of getting in and out is much better than the average full size sedan. Forget the econobox which requires a masochistic contortion of the body to get in or out. Now the main reason. As our infrastructure in this country deteriorates as it currently is doing. If you travel off the main highways or Interstates you will find a lot of potholes and bad roads. The SUV is your best bet for our future roads. If you can afford a diesel SUV it will give you close to the same mileage as a small sedan. No doubt the econobox wins the prize for pure economy. That is one point for, 4 points against. A nice SUV is a no brainer, unless gas goes back up in price. Better get that SUV while they are being discounted heavily. They will be tough to find when the roads all go to hell. 
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: gagrice (Oct 15, 2008 3:52 pm)  Comfort = poor handling Roominess = limited maneuverability downtown My car requires nothing anything like a "masochistic contortion of the body to get in or out", and it's a subcompact. The other car is a compact, no masochism going on there either. So I think you have to agree your remarks are very POV-centric. Now you may have a point regarding the really awful roads we have in the States, especially in totally negligent California. But I'm not going to be buying something with all those disadvantages just so I don't have to drive around potholes. And I should add that I am most encouraged to see the massive project California has undertaken this year to repave almost every bad mile of I-80 between the Bay Area and the Nevada border. It has gone very quickly, and driving on the new pavement is like driving on glass. The resurfacing has not only gone very quickly, but has also been of high quality. Some of the parts over the Sierra are going to take longer to finish, but maybe they are going to turn this thing around in the next couple of years, and make all the roads passable again....
|
|
|
Replying to: nippononly (Oct 15, 2008 10:20 pm) Roominess = limited maneuverability downtown There are many SUVs that handle quite nicely. Even my porky Sequoia is better than our old Lexus. Much easier to get in and out of than the LS400 also. I will concede that parallel parking downtown is more of a challenge especially when I had the Suburban. If I was so unfortunate to be living in the city, I would probably buy a smaller car. Of all the small ones I have driven or ridden in the VW Jetta, Passat & Beetle have the best head room. The Civic was poor for headroom. We thought the older Scion Xb would be a good runabout and quite roomy. They were way over priced and the new one is just plain ugly. The Yaris was noisy and not at all comfortable. Maybe some EV will come along that I just have to have. Until then we will keep watching for a diesel SUV to fill all our desire for a cross country vehicle. Watch out for the potholes. |
|
|
- as Bob Marley said. I think there's some truth in the following. The message may be that NO ONE has a good grasp on what will happen next month or 3 months from now, but it's very unlikely that we're going to be in an extreme situation. http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/investors-rush-apocalypse/story.aspx?guid=- %7BD4A9135C%2D53B0%2D4048%2D8523%2D58849C6128FB%7D&dist=TNMostRead |
|
|
Replying to: mivadar (Oct 15, 2008 12:09 pm) I have no idea why you wouldn't! I wouldn't mind commuting on the bridge of the Enterprise or a SuperStarDestroyer!  Or maybe a Transformer (are they powered by anti-matter?) is more practical.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: gagrice (Oct 15, 2008 3:52 pm) With the soon to arrive $2 gas I may get two, one to go fill-up with super cheap gas and the other to just let idle in my driveway to help stop global cooling. Seriously though, if you want the best of both worlds get something like a Mitsu Outlander. Handles well and isn't too bad on gas. I'm not a SUV guy (would get a truck first) but if I was in the market I would be buying yesterday.
|
|
|
Replying to: oldfarmer50 (Oct 16, 2008 6:37 am) Large SUVs from MB and BMW are in positive territory. So I guess I am not alone in my vehicle preference. I will just keep my gas guzzling Sequoia if a suitable diesel does not suit my fancy.
|
|
|
Replying to: lemmer (Oct 15, 2008 1:39 pm) That explains a bit . In Europe mostly 95 (headline - RON apparently) is "regular" and 98 is "super" - some pumps deliver 99 or 100 as "super". There was 91 fuel in the late '80s, but 85-87 octane fuel I only knew as a legend from good ol' times when my dad used to fill it in our old East German Wartburg (until early '70s). Thus I was a bit confused. |
|
You are here:
Forums
Automotive News & Views How does gas at $4 and higher impact you?
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
