If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
2000 AD version of a 1976 Civic
One used car that passed through my hands years ago which would be
ideal for me now was a 1976 Honda Civic. I'm looking for a small, reliable hatchback and wonder what car maade five or so years ago woyuld fill the bill. The Civic hatchbacks around here got fitted with fart pipes and are not what I'm after. Any engine / tranny combo will do. Reliaility rates high as I live in a condo and noise / odor of repairs pe my garage. I've done a lot with my 1964 Studebaker, but it's all been quite repairs - no hammering. |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
2000 AD version of a 1976 Civic
I bought a 1977 Honda Civic in 1985 for $500. I was in college at the time and driving a 1968 Camaro. My Camaro got about 11mpg. Of course my lead foot didn't do anything to conserve fuel. The Civic was in perfect shape except for a minor tune up and new brake pads. All that cost me less than $25. It got 35mpg. That was great! I still say it was one of the best cars I've ever owned. I'd like to have one today but you never see those models anymore. I liked the primitive nature of the car. I'll try to think of a good economy car of more recent vintage. The probelem is, all the Jap cars of the '70s got bigger and more luxurious in the 80s and 90s. The fuel mileage went down into the low to mid 20s. My girlfriend's 1991 Toyota Camry gets about 23mpg on the highway. My 1956 Cadillac Coupe de Ville gets 18mpg on the highway. Believe me, the 5 mile per gallon difference is well worth the trade off on a trip to Florida. You cannot get comfortable in those little cars. Forrest |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
2000 AD version of a 1976 Civic
"Otto Skorzeny" > wrote in message ... > > I bought a 1977 Honda Civic in 1985 for $500. I was in college at the > time and driving a 1968 Camaro. My Camaro got about 11mpg. Of course > my lead foot didn't do anything to conserve fuel. > > The Civic was in perfect shape except for a minor tune up and new > brake pads. All that cost me less than $25. It got 35mpg. That was > great! I still say it was one of the best cars I've ever owned. I'd > like to have one today but you never see those models anymore. I liked > the primitive nature of the car. > > I'll try to think of a good economy car of more recent vintage. The > probelem is, all the Jap cars of the '70s got bigger and more > luxurious in the 80s and 90s. The fuel mileage went down into the low > to mid 20s. > > My girlfriend's 1991 Toyota Camry gets about 23mpg on the highway. My > 1956 Cadillac Coupe de Ville gets 18mpg on the highway. Believe me, > the 5 mile per gallon difference is well worth the trade off on a trip > to Florida. You cannot get comfortable in those little cars. > > Forrest My 1997 Saturn SW1 wagon averages 34 MPG, and it has been very reliable. I also had a 1998 Saturn SL1 sedan, with 5 speed manual tranny and manual steering, and it averaged about 38 MPG, and peaked at 46 MPG on a highway trip, but it got totaled by my drunk neighbor while it was parked in my driveway. I'm probably going to buy another used Saturn, as my SW1 has 176,000 miles and has multiple problems. I'll probably get an older model (1997-2001). I think newer ones (post 2nd Gulf War) succumbed to horsepower escalation and no longer get as good fuel economy. My "other car" is a 1989 Toyota 4WD pickup, which still gets about 23 MPG average. I can't understand why Detroit can't make new cars, trucks, and SUVs that do even better, unless they really are in cahoots with oil companies to use up fossil fuels as quickly as possible to boost profits. Even my big old 1966 Econoline van with a 1961 high compression 6 cylinder 200 CuIn Fairlane engine got over 20 MPG! Paul |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
2000 AD version of a 1976 Civic
Paul E. Schoen wrote:
> I can't understand why Detroit can't make new cars, trucks, and > SUVs that do even better, Oh, they can. The problem goes back a long way and is complicated, but it boils down to this. Improvements in efficiency have been made over the years, but the manufacturers have a vested interest in continuing to make the same engines they've been making. So, to go back a long way, instead of replacing the 302 CID V-8 with a more efficient engine, Ford elected to modify the 302 to make it more efficient. That gave you a V-8 which produced more power and burned about as much gas. So, marketing was tasked with the job of making Amercans want more power, not better economy. That has worked so well that you won't see a commercial that brags about fuel economy, but most brag about power (can you say "zoom-zoom"?). And you've got an SUV used primarily to carry kids to school that has more horsepower than the most powerful '66 Mustang had. Couple that with the fact that it has become uneconomical to offer customers much in the way of engine options, and the fact that American manufacturers dropped the lower powered engine options in this reduction, and you're stuck. The result is that, anytime the subject comes up, the spokespeople for American manufacturers start talking about the "next generation engines", which will do much better in 5 years or so. In fact, though, all they have to do is start pulling engines off the Escort line and sticking them in Econoline vans. Anyone who thinks that's silly should ponder the fact that the original E-100 came stock with 65 horsepower. And the owners liked that. (I owned one of these and wish I still had it.) But that's not going to happen. Ford, Chevy, and (especially) Dodge are locked into the paradigm of "more power." We can only hope that Toyota and their ilk go back to their roots. George Patterson Decisions are made by people who have time, not by people who have talent. Talented people are too busy fixing problems created by people who make decisions. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Pockets - Not all polos have pockets. Men's corporate polo shirtsusually come in a pocket version as well as a non-pocket version. Whicheveryou choose, you will find that there are tops out there that will provide youwith the options you need and fin | [email protected] | Technology | 0 | April 19th 08 09:32 PM |
2000 Civic battery | my name is | Honda | 5 | December 25th 06 03:05 PM |
2000 civic? | shawn | Honda | 9 | April 19th 06 07:20 AM |
2000 civic ex | teaka | Honda | 1 | September 25th 05 01:27 AM |
2000 Civic DX | BE | Honda | 5 | January 31st 05 11:28 PM |