200 MPG KUBOTA CAR - REALLY!

[ace10]

Random thoughts:

The car in the first post is barely a car by today's standards. It would be mowed down by scooters and moms pushing baby strollers.
I think many of us misremember the old days. Power, fuel efficiency, whatever. Call it a fondness for times gone by. I had an 89 Civic si. It had about 120hp. And returned ~30mpg on average. Today, you wouldn't be able to give that car away in a showroom.
Govt regulations have changed a lot in the past 30 years. Emissions and safety requirements have been piled on today's cars. Cars are heavier and are tested in a much more controlled manner by the EPA. Today's hoda civic is actually the size of an old Accord.
Regarding trucks. I'm sure everybody's "insert old truck with a massive V8" felt like the most powerful, best truck ever. Guess what... my Toyota Tundra will out accelerate, out tow, out comfort all of them. And it's not even on par with the best of the best on the market right now. 400/400 and 17 mpg on the highway? Rated to tow more than I'd ever hook to it's bumper? Yep. Pretty good times to own a truck.
I've got ampther car that rolled off the showroom floor last year with nearly 600 hp. Seats five with four doors. Goes to 60 in very low 3's. Could you imagine that back in the salad days? Sure, it guzzles premium fuel at an unimaginable rate, but that's the price one pays for stupid levels of performance.
Diesel is where it's at. We always have one in the driveway. The wife's 06 MB E diesel still gets 40 mpg on the highway, and it's a big car. Old school tech. No DEF. No particulate traps. Mash the skinny pedal and you get a big plume of black smoke. A new MB diesel gets worse mpg, but is silent. Clean. Smooth. That's just how it is.


$0.02 YMMV

 

[Renze]

Today's honda civic is actually the size of an old Accord.

Exactly !! The first VW Golf (or Rabbit in the US) weighed 810kg in 1974. Nowadays the Golf 6 weighs 1205kg. The smaller Polo weighed 685kg in 1975 and nowadays weighs 1050kg.
The VW Passat 1 weighed 880kg in 1973 and nowadays starts from 1440kg.

If you took a time machine to 1974 and offered a Polo 6 to someone that drove a new Passat 1, he would believe the Polo was a VW concept study to outclass Mercedes, stuffed with airbags, park sensors, passive safety (crumple zones and reinforced passenger cages) more and better soundproofing materials (is also weight, most cars back then had lots of uncovered steel surface inside the passenger cabin)

Lets be honest, would you be in a 1973 Passat for a 10 grand reward, in a head-on crash with a 2014 Polo at 40mph ? you might not live to tell us where the weight difference comes from....


...But on the other end, i do agree that fuel efficiency in offroad machinery peaked at the TIER 1 level, the first electronic engines. It plummeted when manufacturers retarded the injection timing to lower the NoX for TIER 2, went better when EGR was fitted to TIER 3A engines but never went back to that level. Oh yes, Deutz and Agco gets the fuel consumption right, but if you add the DEF consumption of a Fendt, it still cant touch the total consumption of a QSB5.9 back in the day.

 

[john_bud]

Actually (low) fuel consumption today is better than it ever has been. But you have to compare performance to performance. A new mustang v6 can best a 1960s big block mustang (stock to stock). Tho old got 8-12 mpg, new gets 25-30.

They could make more cars that get 50+ mpg or even better, but people want more than a stripped out micro mini matchbox car.

 

[Renze]

Actually (low) fuel consumption today is better than it ever has been. But you have to compare performance to performance. A new mustang v6 can best a 1960s big block mustang (stock to stock). Tho old got 8-12 mpg, new gets 25-30.

All right but American "muscle" was very crude technology compared to European standards. Not untill the American market was flooded with European imports in the late 60s followed by an oil crisis, American manufacturers started to care about input vs. output, instead of output no matter how much you put into the tank... A former co worker had a 5.9 Dodge saloon, from the beginning of the EPA era. it only put out a shy 180hp because the manufacturers had to rethink their development goals so radically that their short term solution was to cut down on power by 1/3 or more....

And still, a Chrysler Neon from the early 2000's couldnt touch the power vs fuel economy of Japanese or European cars... US auto manufacturers had a long way to come...

 

[blackd]

Renze, I believe you are mistaken about the efficiency of US technologies in the 2000s. The advent in the early 90s of efficient V6s actually beat the pants off most European and especially Japanese technologies. It was that era when much of Europe turned to diesel technologies. It you are comparing them to US gas engines then apples and oranges will never compare well.

Current US and European gas technologies are shared, and distinctions too muddled. Most US technologies are designed for US highways, which are distinctly different than European in that US travel points usually far exceed the distance of those in Europe. For these we have created the "land boat" phenomenon. Only a few prefer the European "sport sedan" for a long, long trip to grandmas. In these "land boat" configurations most US vehicles are both cheaper and at least if not more efficient than European equivalents.

 

[Renze]

Hmmm there is this fundamental difference of perspective... Europeans gave American cars the pet name of "land boat" not because of luxury, size or power, but because of their horrible handling, they actually drove like a boat: When you turn the steering wheel, the coach starts hanging over, and after 100 yards the car starts scratching behind its head, to begin making the turn another 300 yards later, and on a straight road they drift in the wind like a boat... Like my Canadian cousins Olds Roadmaster, they just make you seasick. My brothers 1983 Mercedes 300D gave the same feeling after breaking the sway bar at around 835.000km...

Really, "Land boat" is used by Europeans just as a pet name, not a name to honour assumed luxury...

About engine efficiency, chryslers first attempt on the European market in 1995 after selling Simca to Peugeot in 1979, Chrysler Europe - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia the Neon 1.8 made the journalists say that the Americans had some catching up to do after their 16 year absence, because the 1.8 had the 0-60 performance like a European or Jap 1.6 but had the fuel consumption of a 2.0

Oh wait, maybe you'll like the French Citroen with its hydropneumatic suspension... some like it, most hate it...