22nd Aug 2008, 20:51

I doubt those that own businesses with the Mc Mansions locate 100 miles from work as typically they need to be close. It seems that 10 gallons = 10 gallons of fuel either a V8 or 4 cylinder. My reasoning is a family far out in the suburbs in not necessary a mansion buys the little car... yet burns 5 tanks of oil to my 3 in their home. But drive a 4 cylinder extremely far to justify the distance. I know as I work with quite a few. I am also seeing more on Motorcycles as well. Keep in mind most anyone can afford a car payment and that includes used Escalades... I prefer a more sedate vehicle but not anemic.

22nd Aug 2008, 22:30

Of course most V-8's get far worse mileage than most 4's. And NO, all 4's are not dog-slow and unresponsive. No matter how far you drive, whether 5 miles or 500 miles, you'll burn less gas with most 4's.

Two and a half decades ago a Mustang GT boasted a whopping 170 horsepower. Now 4-cylinder Fusions have that much, and the new V-6 Mustangs put out more power than the last generation V-8's did.

You don't have to give up performance in driving a 4-cylinder car, especially if you stick with the more reliable domestic 4's that require less repairs and less maintenance and produce respectable horsepower.

23rd Aug 2008, 08:03

Who cares if a 4-cylinder gets slightly better gas mileage on short trips to work? I drive an old V-8 to work, 10 miles, and get about 16 mpg in 1/3rd stop-and-go, 1/3rd flat interstate, and 1/3rd 12% uphill interstate. I put about 4,500 miles per year on the vehicle. Trading it on a new 4-cylinder would make no economic sense -- I would be better off making a donation to the Environmental Defense Fund rather than buying a new car in hopes of saving money by getting better gas mileage.

Even if a 4-cylinder gets 5 mpg better under those conditions, it just isn't worth it to trade to save 44 gallons of gas per year. Maybe that will change when gasoline reaches $6/gallon, or if I have to drive farther to work. Until then, I'll drive the car I have (and enjoy), and when it's time to park it or sell it or it gets hit by a semi, then maybe it will be time to look for a cheap commuter like a Focus, or something fun like a Caliber SRT4.

What I won't do is jump on the bandwagon that says everybody has to buy a Corolla just because gas prices have gone up a buck.

23rd Aug 2008, 10:46

Toyota bought Chevy Cavaliers, slapped their name on and sold them as the "Toyota Cavalier." Your argument is moot.

23rd Aug 2008, 23:00

No, I wouldn't buy a Corolla because they are bland, boring and don't come in any attractive colors. They are also very unreliable compared to domestics.

I WOULD buy (and DO drive) a sporty GM 4-cylinder compact, or the awesome Dodge Caliber SRT-4. These cars are economical, sporty, VERY fast (the SRT will leave many V-8's in the dust) and have a warranty that is really not needed (no new domestic is going to have a problem in less than 100,000 miles) but is a nice indication of the manufacturer's confidence in their product.

You'll notice Toyota still has a VERY poor warranty. That says volumes about their poor reliability.

My 4-cylinder compact with only minor engine upgrades does 0-60 in just over 7 seconds. That is not slow by any means. It also handles very well, gets GREAT fuel mileage and is extremely sporty. It is a very sporty bright red (which imports don't even offer).

I am very pleased with its performance and don't understand how I'd benefit by driving another gas guzzling V-8. My last V-8 muscle car got a whopping 15 mpg highway and did 0-60 ONE SECOND faster than my 4-cylinder GM compact. For ONE SECOND I should buy TWICE as much gas?? What's the point??

24th Aug 2008, 07:00

Talking economy and mpg is one thing, and performance and mpg is another.

The last thing I would recommend is buying a 6 cylinder Mustang, even convertible. I know 2 owners, one has even added Cobra wheels but why? I had a 75 Vette convertible with only 165 hp due to the wonderful smog requirement, and today with all the engineering advances, the horsepower has more than doubled and 28 mpg on the expressway.

I could move out to the suburbs and do a long commute. But then I am saving energy buying 2 less tanks (275 gallons x 2) fuel oil in my smaller home.

And back to my 75 Vette; even though the HP was the worse of any V8 model I ever owned, I sold it for $3000 more than it cost. The saving grace was it was a convertible that was not available again til mid 80's. Even selling for more than it cost new is not realistic when you factor in interest on a car loan, insurance, but it's nice having zero depreciation.

24th Aug 2008, 21:06

I question modifying a Datsun 210... the time work and when you sell what is it?

I had a 1982 Datsun 280ZX and it was a very stylish car in its day... I had the white 2 + 2 which looked nice with the dark glass T Tops.

Interesting enough it cost more to insure than our Corvette we owned at the same time. Even with the 2 + 2 (back seat with lower rates) Mine was pre Nissan it was still carrying the Datsun labels on the 280ZX at the time.

Pretty plush, but A/C totally failed at 50,000 miles, and even being only 4 years old at the time had rust!

Not a great performer or even very quick in non turbo form.

Ones I have seen have rusted badly lately, and they certainly depreciated heavily.

The diagnostic display was ahead of its time.

I switch back and forth domestics and imports. If it's stylish and fun I buy...

I drove a pretty bland 210 when my 280ZX was in the shop by the way. A very bland plain sedan but it got you there if that's all you expect. Even my full size truck is fun to drive, it's from coming from the sports cars.

25th Aug 2008, 16:08

That's a good truck. Of course it is; it's a Toyota, which means it's top of the line in 2002, or 1982, either way, it's a far cry better than any disposable Ford or Chevy.

And the '08 Tundra is Motor Trend's 'truck of the year', as it should be.

If you own a Ford or Chevy, and don't like Toyota's, no one cares. It still doesn't change the fact that Toyota's are better made.