You see, folks. We've already ben through a fuel crisis, and we went from big boat-like cars in the 60's, and early seventies, to gas eficient cars in the late 70's and early eighties. And then crept in the SUV. And it's popularity grew, and grew, until 911. Do you not see the cycle that the capitalists use to scare/sell 'new' products?
2007-07-29
15:45:58
·
9 answers
·
asked by
Anonymous
in
Politics & Government
➔ Other - Politics & Government
'buck' doesn't remember the VW 'Rabbit'?
2007-07-29
16:08:11 ·
update #1
Don't get me started!
I agree with you.
Have you seen the documentary film called "Who killed the electric car" ?
Check it out.
2007-07-29 15:54:13
·
answer #1
·
answered by Yam King 7 7
·
2⤊
0⤋
The simple fact is, there have been many generations of cars that could get 25 to 30 miles per gallon on the market in the US. My mother had a '61 VW beetle that could do that with ease.
The trick is getting enough people to stick to small engine vehicles and hybrid drivetrains instead of buying gas guzzling obscenities they don't need for any rational reason.
The upside to this new milage race is that we could get some really interesting cars and trucks in the process. I would love it if Nissan and Toyota would go back to their roots and build really light pickup trucks like they did in the 1970's. Ones that don't weigh 5000 pounds and get 14 MPG.
I bought a Honda Civic because I was sick of being screwed at the gas pump. Don't just sit around talking. Get out and vote with your dollars.
2007-07-29 15:54:59
·
answer #2
·
answered by Floyd G 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
The capitalists sell products that the market wants. If the consumers want fast cars with big engines, the auto companies will build them for them.
My parents had a '81 Honda that got 40 mpg. My friend had a Renault LeCar that got in the 40's.
If they really wanted to, they could build cars that get 50-60 mpg today. My VW Jetta diesel gets 45 mpg.
One thing that is different, with ethanol in gas today, you get less mpg.
2007-07-29 16:28:21
·
answer #3
·
answered by freedom_vs_slavery 3
·
1⤊
0⤋
Yep, I had several. One particular piece of crap...a 1976 ford pinto I bought brand new. It rusted out in the rocker panels in 3 years. My 1981 Plymouth Horizon was a bright spot, it had a 1.7 VW 4 cyl. and an Audi 4 speed manual trans. It got about 36 mpg. A great car.
We are shifting back, when gas gets cheap, cares get bigger and visa verse. I guarantee, my next vehicle will be a 4 cyl. again and possibly a hybrid.
2007-07-29 16:11:15
·
answer #4
·
answered by spookytooth 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
I know that. We still drive a 1980 Oldsmobile Cutlass Brougham. Not a speck of rust. As a matter of fact we have been offered in excess of $25,000 for it. There was also a time when compact cars were sold as all the rage with low gas consumption and economy back then and before. The simple fact is that when people buy some "fuel efficient" toy car today, what do they do? They drive more. "Hey! we're gettin' 40 miles to the gallon! Let's go here! Let's go there!" As far as the "capitalist" crap goes, what are you? Some "uber alles" Socialist geek, Closet Nazi, that thinks the peoples car is the only way to go? Maybe you should go ask MAMMA why she had to by a mini van to haul your butt to soccer practice all those years that you were never worth a turd about.
2007-07-29 16:16:13
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
3⤋
And did you know that most cars run just fine on 84 octane, but the lowest you can buy is 87??
The higher octanes are a scam!
2007-07-30 14:01:38
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
oh yeah.
the auto industry has become complacent and have no one but themselves to blame for the mess they are in.
about the only difference between cars now and then, is that now they are a little safer.
car technology stalled somewhere around 1969...
2007-07-29 15:50:00
·
answer #7
·
answered by nostradamus02012 7
·
2⤊
0⤋
I think you have your facts wrong.
http://www.dailyfueleconomytip.com/?p=195
Is anyone taking into account the loss of MPG caused by sitting in traffic jams? That kind of problem is far more severe now than it was 27 years ago.
2007-07-29 15:56:10
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
2⤋
uh...what? I lived through the 80's and your facts are wrong son......the only cars that did that were rice burners and maybe the "k" cars that caused Chryslers downfall
2007-07-29 16:06:20
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
2⤋