backtop


Print 79 comment(s) - last by Alexvrb.. on Aug 8 at 9:22 PM


2011 Hyundai Elantra

2011 Hyundai Sonata Hybrid

Hyundai Veloster Concept
Hyundai looks to expand its range of fuel efficient vehicles

The auto industry these days has its eyes on Hyundai. Hyundai has made great strides over the past two decades when it comes to improving its quality, reliability, and public image. Hyundai has gone from making the simply terrible Excel from the 80s to making credible luxury sedans like the Genesis and Equus today (along with a full stable of more mainstream vehicles).

Now, Hyundai is looking to make a huge leap in fuel efficiency for its vehicles according to Detroit News. Hyundai's North American CEO, John Krafcik, is looking to boost the fleet fuel efficiency average from a current level of 30.9 mpg (the industry's highest total) to a whopping 50 mpg within the next 15 years.

"We're committing today to a 50 mpg target by 2025," stated Krafcik. "We're all in. Let's go as far as we can. We don't know how to get there."

Hyundai will need to devote as much as 20 percent of its production to hybrid/plug-in hybrid vehicles and roughly 5 percent of production to electric vehicles to meet that lofty goal.

Hyundai is already well on its way to boosting fuel efficiency across the board with its mainstream vehicles. The Hyundai Sonata is among the most fuel efficient midsize family sedans available on the U.S. market with fuel economy ratings of 24/35 mpg city/highway with its standard 198 hp 2.4-liter four-cylinder engine. For those that crave more power, the 274 hp 2.0-liter turbo four-cylinder engine option beats its competitors' V6 offerings in power and fuel efficiency at 22/34 mpg.

The Sonata will also be available in a hybrid variant which will achieve EPA ratings of 37 mpg city and 39 mpg highway.

Next year, Hyundai is also bringing its 40 mpg Veloster which looks to upset Honda's hybrid-only CR-Z along with a subcompact Accent and compact Elantra which will both approach 40 mpg.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Hopefully
By Dr of crap on 8/5/2010 8:49:37 AM , Rating: 2
I only hope this will light a fire under other car makers to do the same. If their mid size is already at 35 mpg, maybe they're on to something.
I say this and I haven't even driven one. And some might say that they are under powered. I don't think they'd sell to many if that were the case. The US car buyers are to stuck on 6 or 8 cylinders. A 4 cylinder today is powerful enough to move your car down the road and merge into traffic.
Most drivers, including most of those that think they need 6 or 8 cylinder cars, don't know how to merge anyway, and take forever to get onto the freeway, and could do without the extra cylinders anyway.
All I can say is at least drive one before you knock it!




RE: Hopefully
By Brandon Hill (blog) on 8/5/2010 9:05:57 AM , Rating: 2
With the Sonata's turbo four putting out 274 hp and 269 lb-ft @ 1800 rpm, who needs a six? :)


RE: Hopefully
By Ristogod on 8/5/2010 9:42:46 AM , Rating: 2
I can't seem to find this option on the Hyundai website.


RE: Hopefully
By Brandon Hill (blog) on 8/5/2010 9:52:05 AM , Rating: 2
Both the turbo and hybrid are coming this fall. You can read Autoblog's first drive of the Sonata Turbo here:

http://www.autoblog.com/2010/07/12/first-drive-201...


RE: Hopefully
By Spuke on 8/5/2010 10:08:48 AM , Rating: 2
That's a good looking car. Look out for Hyundai.


RE: Hopefully
By Dr of crap on 8/5/2010 10:27:30 AM , Rating: 2
I've never rated any post on here, and don't quite understand the ratings game, but why would I get a zero, yet you'd respond to my post and add to it?
I stand on my first post!


RE: Hopefully
By theArchMichael on 8/5/2010 11:05:18 AM , Rating: 2
The "discount" brands really are making a run for it. KIA has come a long way in terms of quality too. The new optima hybrid is coming this fall as well.
I find with the discount brands offer a lot more base model features and upgrades at a lower price over Honda, Toyota, etc.. Like the microsoft SYNC system and stuff like that.

http://www.kia.com/#/upcoming/?fvVehicleID=optima&...


RE: Hopefully
By Brandon Hill (blog) on 8/5/2010 12:32:12 PM , Rating: 2
I just made the last payment on my Mazda on Tuesday... I know I should be saving/investing that money, but I REALLY want a fully loaded 2011 Kia Optima SX.


RE: Hopefully
By clovell on 8/5/2010 3:33:55 PM , Rating: 2
No way its turning out 274 hp @ 1800 rpm... Maybe add 5000 to that number...


RE: Hopefully
By YashBudini on 8/5/2010 6:10:49 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
With the Sonata's turbo four putting out 274 hp and 269 lb-ft @ 1800 rpm, who needs a six? :)


People who value civility and smoothness over crudeness and cost cutting? Small 4 bangers aren't too bad, but around 2.4 liters they become rather unpleasant. Yeah, the masses accept them, but then look at all the dumb people who insist on riding V-twin Harleys, no matter how much they shake.

I'd take a 2.5 liter Lexus V6 in an IS250 over any of the stuff circulating out there today. But hey, I eat Belgium, Swiss, Dagoba, and even Ghiradelli chocolate while living in a Hershey's world. So sorry if I don't want to dumb down to the global competitiveness level.


RE: Hopefully
By Spuke on 8/5/2010 7:04:54 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Small 4 bangers aren't too bad, but around 2.4 liters they become rather unpleasant.
I had a 2.5L Sentra, I didn't think it was that bad. I've driven some 2.4L Toyota's and they were much smoother. Not terrible IMO.


RE: Hopefully
By YashBudini on 8/5/2010 8:04:07 PM , Rating: 2
They are many variables, undersquare versus oversquare dimensions, as well as the tolerances for balancing engine parts, sometimes counter balancing shafts.

It can be made to work well, but they need to design the piss out of it. Literally and figuratively.


RE: Hopefully
By Brandon Hill (blog) on 8/5/2010 7:07:59 PM , Rating: 2
Heh, the 2.4-liter four-banger in the Hyundai puts out roughly the same HP/torque as that 2.5-liter V6 in the Lexus. The only reason why Lexus even manages to move examples of the IS250 is that people will:

1) Settle for such a craptastic base engine just to say they drive a RWD Lexus. I mean, even the ES gets a better engine.
2) Toyota is too damn cheap to drop in the 3.0 liter V6 from its other markets which produces around 230 hp and would make it comparable to the base engine from the BMW 328i.

As for dumbing down, if you like fine chocolate, why do you like the IS250 (Hershey's) versus the IS350 (Ghiradelli)?

;-)


RE: Hopefully
By YashBudini on 8/5/2010 7:58:01 PM , Rating: 2
For some reason the 2.5 is the only one offered with a stick. It's also the only one offered with AWD, I'm assuming some kind of HP limit on the AWD system. You can get the 3.5 liter 6 in the IS 350, it has more HP in the rear wheel drive vesion than the ES, probably because of a better exhaust system. You can't turn off the traction control on the 3.5, I think they're overdoing the safety thing here. In the mean time the 2.5 puts out appx 200 HP, about the same as the prior generation 3 liter 6. It is after all a base motor.

In the end it's the 3.5 that's the Hershey's, it's simply more and less refined. :-)
One good thing on all - no torque steer.

My 3 liter V6 is a great engine, even with 260,000 miles.

Porsche offered a 3 liter 4-banger a while back, egads what where they thinking? And Lotus was one of the first to try to sell a 4-banger for 50K. Refinement? Not really.


RE: Hopefully
By Alexvrb on 8/8/2010 9:22:02 PM , Rating: 2
What I've read about it's acceleration indicates that they achieved their high MPG through gear ratios, as well as engine tech. It has tons of power on paper, but it looks to be a tad slower than some of its "inferior" V6 competitors. That's why I hate it when people tout engine numbers, in a whole-car comparison.

Oh, and looking at the design of the new 2.0 turbo, compared to the old one, makes me think: Finally, they caught up to what other little turbo'd 4s were doing for years.


RE: Hopefully
By Mitch101 on 8/5/2010 9:35:59 AM , Rating: 2
I think its great and all but I hope gas prices dont increase to compensate but you know they will.

If gas prices increase this is a lot of hurt on the poor who generally cant afford to buy a newer more efficient car making them More broke if that's possible.


By dryloch on 8/5/2010 10:36:32 AM , Rating: 2
Kia design is being head up by an ex Audi deaigner.274 HP & 34 MPG HWY same as Sonata.
http://www.autoblog.com/2010/04/01/2011-kia-optima...
Interior is awesome with leather on the dash.
The wheels not so much. I am hoping they are not final.




By Brandon Hill (blog) on 8/5/2010 12:44:25 PM , Rating: 2
Yup, I'll take an SX model just like this (same color and all). The wheels don't even bother me when paired with this color:

http://i37.tinypic.com/2vhvq4y.jpg


By tng on 8/5/2010 1:45:39 PM , Rating: 2
Your right, the color makes the wheels look OK.

From that angle does it remind you of the Honda Accord 4 door?


Pretty amazing!
By Souka on 8/5/2010 6:02:06 PM , Rating: 2
50mpg for their fleet!

That's pretty amazing considering their line up of full sized trucks!

Oh wait...they don't make trucks... nevermind... ;)




RE: Pretty amazing!
By IcePickFreak on 8/5/2010 6:25:40 PM , Rating: 2
No doubt. They are like the smart asian kid in class that brown noses the teacher.

Truthfully though they do build some decent vehicles, just nothing that interests me.


Not Quite
By TerranMagistrate on 8/5/10, Rating: -1
RE: Not Quite
By MrTeal on 8/5/2010 10:08:43 AM , Rating: 3
There's also a long way to go before the base price of a Sonata is equal to that of an Accord or Camry.


RE: Not Quite
By TerranMagistrate on 8/5/2010 10:25:37 AM , Rating: 1
I guess the saying "you get what you pay for" applies here.


RE: Not Quite
By MrTeal on 8/5/2010 10:39:53 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
I guess the saying "you get what you pay for" applies here.


Heh. Doesn't it always?


RE: Not Quite
By Brandon Hill (blog) on 8/5/2010 10:43:57 AM , Rating: 2
Base MSRP

2011 Camry Base: $19,595
2010 Accord LX: $21,055
2011 Sonata GLS: $19,195


RE: Not Quite
By MrTeal on 8/5/2010 10:55:24 AM , Rating: 2
Strange. At least here in Canada, there's a GL trim level that's $4000Cdn less than the GLS.


RE: Not Quite
By Flunk on 8/8/2010 11:04:06 AM , Rating: 2
They don't sell the GL in the US. Most car manufacturers sell lower trim lines of their cars in Canada than the US. The base model is quite often a lower model.

For example, I own a 2010 Mazda 3 Hatchback with a 2.0 litre engine that you can't even buy in the US.


RE: Not Quite
By Kurz on 8/5/2010 10:13:35 AM , Rating: 2
What are you talking about...
Step in a Sonata step into a elantra to see what we mean.


RE: Not Quite
By Brandon Hill (blog) on 8/5/2010 10:27:08 AM , Rating: 5
quote:
Germany's Best Quality Car is... A Hyundai

http://www.theautochannel.com/news/2010/07/22/4883...


Or how about JD Power:

Hyundai right behind Honda and ahead of Toyota in Initial Quality
http://businesscenter.jdpower.com/news/pressreleas...

Hyundai right in the thick of things for Dependability (better than Subaru)
http://businesscenter.jdpower.com/news/pressreleas...


RE: Not Quite
By TerranMagistrate on 8/5/10, Rating: -1
RE: Not Quite
By Brandon Hill (blog) on 8/5/2010 10:50:06 AM , Rating: 2
Wait a minute. So you specifically point out that it isn't comparable in quality and reliability to the Japanese, and I counter with proof to the contrary from reputable sources...

Then you say overall quality doesn't matter and move the goal posts to switch the subject to resale value...

[Randy Marsh] Niiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiice! [/Randy Marsh]


RE: Not Quite
By TerranMagistrate on 8/5/2010 11:11:20 AM , Rating: 1
(Resale value .EQ. Overall Quality)

Initial quality estimates are nice to have, too.


RE: Not Quite
By bhieb on 8/5/2010 11:21:02 AM , Rating: 3
NO you are VERY VERY wrong, resale value = perceived value NOT quality (see below). A car's resale has nothing to do with how well it is made or how long it will last. It has EVERYTHING to do with how well the masses have been convinced that it is better (aka marketing).

If you can find me something that even remotely speaks to a Hyundai wearing out quicker, having higher maintenance costs, or ANYTHING that is actually related to a quality issue, you would have a point. However resale value is not an accurate measure of this.


RE: Not Quite
By clovell on 8/5/2010 3:36:34 PM , Rating: 2
it's a fools gambit to try to predict resale value on a car 5 years into the future that just went through a complete redesign.


RE: Not Quite
By bhieb on 8/5/2010 11:13:55 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
And yet I think resale value speaks far more about the overall quality than some rankings by a marketing research firm, that's just me though.

Resale value speaks to the consumer's ignorance more than quality. I suppose you think Apple's are worth the price too. They must be they sell for more?

Seriously JD power and others look to provide an unbiased 3rd party view to determine overall quality. Resale value is NOT a measure of quality, but merely perceived value (it is neither right or wrong simply what the masses believe).


RE: Not Quite
By TerranMagistrate on 8/5/2010 11:33:12 AM , Rating: 1
You suppose wrong, I think PCs running Apple software (Macs) are actually worth less.

But I'll cede the point that the Korean auto makers are not a "long" way off as I initially claimed. Times change, I guess.


RE: Not Quite
By acer905 on 8/5/2010 12:12:55 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
I think PCs running Apple software (Macs) are actually worthless


fixed that for ya


RE: Not Quite
By YashBudini on 8/5/2010 6:17:59 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Germany's Best Quality Car is... A Hyundai http://www.theautochannel.com/news/2010/07/22/4883...


Oh please, put a BMW next to anything H makes, wait, then see which one becomes a rust bucket.

JD Powers measures the success of instant gratification and little else.


RE: Not Quite
By Spuke on 8/5/2010 7:08:10 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
JD Powers measures the success of instant gratification and little else.
How so?


RE: Not Quite
By YashBudini on 8/5/2010 8:10:39 PM , Rating: 2
They typically look at 6 month satisfaction, I've never seen them address really long term stats.

Yes, some defects are right out of the factory doors, but other manifest themselves later. Take the struts on the Rabbit GTI from the early 80's. You could never get any more than 30K miles from the OEM ones. That's way too soon for struts.


RE: Not Quite
By YashBudini on 8/5/2010 8:12:39 PM , Rating: 2
Another example is tie rods on the Chrysler 300. Again at 30K miles and a very expensive repair.


RE: Not Quite
By bhieb on 8/5/2010 11:08:33 AM , Rating: 2
Yaaaaahhhhh, and Apple makes a better computer worth the premium.

Seriously quit buying into the Toyo, Honda marketing BS, and test drive one. They are easily on par, if not superior. Just because the consumer is ignorant of this, does not make it true.


RE: Not Quite
By niva on 8/5/2010 12:59:11 PM , Rating: 2
Hyundai came a long way from a few years ago, their new cars are seriously in the same category as the Hondas and the Toyotas. Their warranty is better. The dealers don't do as stupid markups over MSRP. They've actually proven themselves statistically more reliable than their competitors. Props to them for getting there, now people need to notice.


RE: Not Quite
By daar on 8/5/2010 2:45:48 PM , Rating: 2
Yeah, I was also skeptical of the claims for Hyundai and still had a bias towards Toyo/Honda till I rode a rental last year. I can say the hype is definitely warranted, and with Toyota's closet of skeletons coming out while Hyundai/Kia still pegging a 10 year warranty, they're now at the top of my list


Upping Fuel Economy?
By tng on 8/5/10, Rating: -1
RE: Upping Fuel Economy?
By Steve1981 on 8/5/2010 9:56:58 AM , Rating: 3
quote:
While I may be comparing apples to oranges here...


You think? You're comparing a 1980 Civic to a modern midsized sedan that is considerably larger, safer, and cleaner. And in spite of that, if you drove both mostly in the city, the Sonata would likely still come out ahead!


RE: Upping Fuel Economy?
By tng on 8/5/2010 12:14:51 PM , Rating: 1
Well it is just not mid sized sedans. I have a Ford Focus long term rental on the East coast (about a year and a half now) and with normal driving it is lucky to get 30mpg. Many other what I would consider compact cars out there that I have driven in similar situations are the same.


RE: Upping Fuel Economy?
By Steve1981 on 8/5/2010 12:55:56 PM , Rating: 3
Just so we compare apples to apples...

Once upon a time I owned a 2006 Honda Civic (more or less the current model). It netted me about 35mpg on the freeway and about 25mpg in the city. Why is it worse than your 1980 Civic?

Well, the current model is considerably heavier at 2800 pounds (EX w/ Automatic) due to size and safety increases and has considerably more in the way of emissions requirements placed on it. Its engine puts out 140 horsepower versus the 55 of the old Civic 1.3 liter, which means in spite of that weight gain, my newer Civic is appreciably faster than the 1980 model. Get the picture?


RE: Upping Fuel Economy?
By Samus on 8/6/2010 1:24:44 PM , Rating: 2
Personally, I find it incredible that the hybrid nets any improvement in fuel economy on the highway. It's essentially carrying heavy technology that does nothing to improve highway mileage, and should theoretically just weigh the car down causing decreased fuel economy.

The only reason the hybrid is probably getting 4MPG over its 2.4l non-hybrid variant is because it has a different tune or a weaker engine altogether.

Generally hybrids don't do well on the highway. Their technology is geared toward urban traffic.


RE: Upping Fuel Economy?
By YashBudini on 8/6/2010 2:14:11 PM , Rating: 2
It's also surprising that nobody has touted a hybrid's accomplishments or even measured them say in stop and go traffic that rarely exceeds 15 mph. Can you imagine being stuck in traffic for 2 hours and rarely having the ICE turn on?

Part of the reason hybrids have not done better on the highway has to do with design. They are all geared towards the same performance or better. Nobody is willing to create a hybrid where the gas engine works only uphill with moderate driving speeds on level ground. Many luxury models are simply touting high HP totals and 0-60 times. The big Lexus hybrid is a joke as far as economy is concerned. Nobody wants or expects the same performance as the original diesel rabbit, but clearly the deck is stacked more towards performance than economy.


RE: Upping Fuel Economy?
By FITCamaro on 8/5/2010 10:00:19 AM , Rating: 3
As safety standards and features have increased, weight has gone up driving fuel efficiency down.


RE: Upping Fuel Economy?
By YashBudini on 8/5/2010 9:46:28 PM , Rating: 2
Some of that extra weight is for sound absorption. They need a light weight replacement here. Nobody wants to feel like they're riding around inside an empty soda can.


RE: Upping Fuel Economy?
By Kurz on 8/5/2010 10:11:26 AM , Rating: 2
All you need to do is compare the safety and the weight of vehicle of days past to those of the present.

The reason for this is mostly government regulations.
Which pushed for safety and emissions before efficiency and fuel economy.

This led to a heavy gas guzzlers that are supposely safe and drink gasoline like an sailor on leave. (Supposely since I've seen people can't manage a vehicle of massive sizes). Which is funny since those ultra efficient vehicles with lean burn have higher concentrations of polutants though they produce less of them in their life time.


RE: Upping Fuel Economy?
By Spuke on 8/5/2010 10:18:28 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Which is funny since those ultra efficient vehicles
Which cars are these? Or are you talking about the Sonata?


RE: Upping Fuel Economy?
By clovell on 8/5/2010 2:27:52 PM , Rating: 2
2011 Sonata comes in a PZEV flavor.


RE: Upping Fuel Economy?
By Spuke on 8/5/2010 2:47:25 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
2011 Sonata comes in a PZEV flavor.
Thanks. I think I'll check out their website.


RE: Upping Fuel Economy?
By clovell on 8/5/2010 3:32:25 PM , Rating: 2
np - the Limited comes standard with the PZEV - although you loose 2 hp (198, instead of 200). They've managed to tweak the hell out of their 4-cylinder engine.

I bought a new car a month ago and it was between the 2011 Sonata Limited and a 2010 Fusion SES. The '11 Sonata was nice - better mileage, nicer sound system (dedicated Inifinity Sub), but the interior was a littler nicer for me on the Fusion, and so was the powerband. Add to that that the '11 Sonata had no incentives (the 2010's did, but the 211's were a complete redesign), and the mental boundary I had of paying ~$25k for a 4-cylinder vehicle... well, I went with the 6-cyl 2010 Fusion SES for less money.

The gas mileage is 22~23 combined driving, which edge out my 2001 Taurus - but I love Sync.

Still - I think the Sonata is a very nice car.


RE: Upping Fuel Economy?
By Spuke on 8/5/2010 4:42:25 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
np - the Limited comes standard with the PZEV - although you loose 2 hp
I'd probably go with the turbo Sonata if I was in the market. We're looking at buying a used BMW and considering that Hyundai is higher up on the JD Power Dependability Study, I'm questioning whether or not that's a good idea. The main seller on the BMW is the free maintenance although maintenance on the Hyundai is probably cheap. Anyone have recent dealership experience with Hyundai?


RE: Upping Fuel Economy?
By Brandon Hill (blog) on 8/5/2010 6:51:49 PM , Rating: 2
Yeah, the turbo variant seems like a no-brainer. You lose just 2 mpg in the city and 1 mpg on the highway but gain 74 hp. Can't go wrong there :)

As for Hyundai dealership experiences, I wish I could chime in there, but I'd hope they're improving at the rate the cars are.


RE: Upping Fuel Economy?
By Spuke on 8/5/2010 7:00:48 PM , Rating: 2
Wife likes the way it looks too. Hmmm. Who woulda thought? Cross shopping Bimmers and Hyundai's. Maybe I need to head down to the dealer when the turbo is released for a test drive. Big negative is the preliminary reviews say it's not sporty and that's a requirement.


RE: Upping Fuel Economy?
By Brandon Hill (blog) on 8/5/2010 7:12:14 PM , Rating: 2
If you're cross shopping, the Kia Optima SX may be a better fit (same platform/powertrain options as the Sonata). The Hyundai is more geared for comfort (think Lexus) while the Optima SX is more geared for sport (think BMW).

http://www.leftlanenews.com/kia-optima-2011.html

The only thing that worries me is that Kia is farther down the list in initial quality and dependability than Hyundai. Hyundai is improving at an alarming rate, and I guess it's taking Hyundai a little longer to get Kia to that same level.


RE: Upping Fuel Economy?
By Brandon Hill (blog) on 8/5/2010 7:13:26 PM , Rating: 2
RE: Upping Fuel Economy?
By Kurz on 8/5/2010 8:09:06 PM , Rating: 2
RE: Upping Fuel Economy?
By Spuke on 8/5/2010 10:13:20 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
While I may be comparing apples to oranges here... Why only 39mpg?
Sigh. There's always at least one idiot in these discussions. The reasons have already been stated in other threads and judging by your comment, you've read them. I think my IQ dropped 100 points reading your post.


RE: Upping Fuel Economy?
By tng on 8/5/10, Rating: -1
RE: Upping Fuel Economy?
By Yawgm0th on 8/5/2010 12:29:57 PM , Rating: 2
Weight. Weight, weight, weight.

If you Google "average fuel economy over time" or something similar. you will get an EPA PDF somewhere in there that shows you average vehicle weight and average fuel economy over time for different sectors. The fuel economy has barely changed since 1980, but weight has increased steadily.

If you extrapolate from the average efficiency in 1980 and the weight gain, it comes out to something ridiculous, like 50-60mpg average for cars. Safety features, market demand, and emission reductions have demanded cars continue to increase in weight. This is good overall, but yes, it has severely limited fuel efficiency over time.

I think hybrid technology will come down in price and the weight gain and size gain trend in vehicles will slow, and engine efficiency will continue to increase. Just give it five or ten years.


RE: Upping Fuel Economy?
By tng on 8/5/2010 12:45:35 PM , Rating: 2
OK I will buy that. I still wonder though how one of the SMART cars would fare in the same crash that my old Civic died in.

I have been waiting for the CR-X, but that new Hyundai Veloce (?) pictured at the bottom of the page looks nice. All my Japanese friends would disown me if I bought one though...


RE: Upping Fuel Economy?
By mellomonk on 8/5/2010 1:32:23 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
OK I will buy that. I still wonder though how one of the SMART cars would fare in the same crash that my old Civic died in.


The car would die, but you wouldn't. The Smart is light years safer then that old Civic, as is all modern cars. Smart actually markets the safety of their Triton Cage Frame design. There are numerous crash test vids on the net.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E_472L2kLp0


RE: Upping Fuel Economy?
By Reclaimer77 on 8/5/2010 10:40:40 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Weight. Weight, weight, weight.


Yup. Also average horsepower is now WAY UP. In the 80's a "sports" car would have horsepower in the 200's. We laugh at that now. Who doesn't have 200+ HP these days?


RE: Upping Fuel Economy?
By Spuke on 8/5/2010 2:09:18 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
While it is true that government regs on safety and emissions have played a large part in making the cars heavier, it still does not explain it.
Yes it does explain it!! A heavier car takes more power to move which lowers fuel economy. Today's emissions equipment along with fuel additives to reduce emissions reduce fuel efficiency. These are facts. An 1800 lb car is going to get better fuel economy than a 3600 lb one. One requires less energy to move than the other. Duh.

quote:
I will not comment on the status of your IQ, but clearly you missed the whole point of the post, so read into that what you want.
His point has been debated in every single fuel economy thread. It's old. He even alluded to already knowing the answer to his own question but asked it again. Hence he IS an idiot or just maybe insane.


RE: Upping Fuel Economy?
By clovell on 8/5/2010 3:26:31 PM , Rating: 2
Some folks seem to forget that weight is proportional to mass, which is just a fancy way to measure how hard it is to accelerate an object.

Harder to move = more energy required to move.

Can I get a QED?


RE: Upping Fuel Economy?
By tng on 8/5/2010 4:18:12 PM , Rating: 1
Wow, you are really an A$$ aren't you?

Do you get lessons somewhere to learn how to be so rude? Obviously you don't want to answer any questions, so is that your contribution here, to be rude?


RE: Upping Fuel Economy?
By Spuke on 8/5/2010 4:44:49 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Do you get lessons somewhere to learn how to be so rude? Obviously you don't want to answer any questions, so is that your contribution here, to be rude?
Your reading comprehension is poor. I gave you plenty of answers, you just choose not to believe them.


RE: Upping Fuel Economy?
By tng on 8/5/2010 5:00:47 PM , Rating: 1
I tend to quit reading when I see poor manners and insults, poor even for an online blog.....

I see it continues....


RE: Upping Fuel Economy?
By YashBudini on 8/5/2010 6:13:41 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
An 1800 lb car is going to get better fuel economy than a 3600 lb one. One requires less energy to move than the other. Duh.


Uh, you never had much exposure to the Chevette, have you?


RE: Upping Fuel Economy?
By Spuke on 8/5/2010 7:02:02 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Uh, you never had much exposure to the Chevette, have you?
My mistake, I was generalizing.


RE: Upping Fuel Economy?
By CharonPDX on 8/5/2010 4:54:34 PM , Rating: 2
Part of it is that the Sonata is larger than a Civic.

Part of it is that the way the EPA calculates mileage has changed, so that mileages now are lower than they had been. (For example, my 2004 Prius was advertised as "60 city, 51 highway", whereas the 2008, with the exact same powertrain, became "48 city, 45 highway" because of the EPA's change.) Your 96 Civic is now estimated at 28/35 rather than the 31/38 advertised when it was new.

(See http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/findacar.htm )


RE: Upping Fuel Economy?
By tng on 8/5/2010 5:03:29 PM , Rating: 2
Didn't know that, thanks for the link.


"I'm an Internet expert too. It's all right to wire the industrial zone only, but there are many problems if other regions of the North are wired." -- North Korean Supreme Commander Kim Jong-il














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki