Forget Hybrids – Buy a Cheapster!

Joined
Aug 31, 2007
Messages
117,615
Forget Hybrids – Buy a Cheapster!

Going back even further, you could find really excellent fuel economy in Ford Falcons.

Or, if not for government, you could have an 85 MPG diesel Ford Focus.


Forget Hybrids – Buy a Cheapster!

May 1, 2012

By eric

http://ericpetersautos.com/2012/05/01/forget-hybrids-buy-a-cheapster/

If you’re really serious about saving money on transportation, the very last thing you should do is buy a new car. Particularly a new hybrid car. It’s as counterproductive as trying to lose weight by ordering a diet Coke with your triple Angus Thickburger.
The car companies – like the fast-food places – don’t want you to realize this, of course. Their business model depends on you losing money (or gaining weight – or both).

Luckily, we’re not yet forced to buy new cars – or eat Thickburgers.

We still have the option to do something better – something smarter. And when it comes to cutting transportation costs, buying a cheapster is much smarter, money-wise, than buying a new hybrid.

What’s a cheapster? It’s a car like they ought to be making now but aren’t – for a variety of reasons, including government regulations that heavily compromise fuel efficiency for the sake of making them every more crashworthy (which typically means making them ever-more-heavy). Cars like the old Geo/Chevy Metro – made from circa 1989 through 2001. This car never had an engine bigger than 1.3 liters (many had a 1 liter engine) because it never weighed more than about 1,800 lbs. (early models weighed as little as 1,600 lbs.). As a result, it got 42 MPG – nearly as good as a new Toyota Prius (which weighs a beefy 3,042 lbs.).

A quick search of Auto Trader online ginned up two Metros for sale. The first, a ’97 with AC and only 45,000 miles, listed for $3,700 (see here) or about $20,000 less than the base price of a new Prius ($23,015).

I found another – a ’96 with 67k miles – for $2,495 (see here).
Think about this a minute. These cars cost almost nothing to buy – many people will be able to stroke a check for the whole amount, thereby eliminating the monthly payment. Meanwhile, had you bought a new Prius, you’d be paying about $400 a month for the next five years – and that’s assuming you bought one for sticker and pay zero interest. How much gas would you have to save to make up for what you just spent? Probably, you’d never reach break even. The difference in cost between the used Metros and a new Prius – about $20,000 – would buy roughly 5,000 gallons of unleaded regular at $4 per gallon. At an average 40 MPG, this is enough to keep the car going for 200,000 miles. Only then would a new Prius begin saving you money – assuming, of course, it’s still running by then.

Remember: The used Metro cost you zip per month. Your only fixed cost is fuel – and the Metro’s gas mileage is nearly as good as the real-world mileage of the Prius. (Doubters should check out a comparison test Car and Driver magazine did in 2008. A ’98 Metro hatchback was stacked up against a Honda Insight hybrid and a Toyota Prius. The Metro registered 42 MPG – right on the tailpipe of the then-new ’08 Prius’ 48 city, 45 highway.) The non-hybrid Metro is also a simple car – no battery packs or electric motors to sweat once the warranty expires. Even if the engine eventually requires work – including a complete rebuild – the work will not be cost-prohibitive. A new/rebuilt Metro engine and transmission would probably cost you around $4,000 for everything, done by a pro – and you’d be good to go for another 100,000-plus miles of 42 MPG.
That’s how you save money on transportation, folks.

Another potential cheapster is the Honda CRX, built from 1983-1991. Like the Geo/Chevy Metro, these cars had tiny engines (1.3-1.5 liters) because they had very low curb weights - 1,713 lbs. for the HF version. These cars, which also had more sophisticated engines than the Metro, were capable of 41 MPG in city driving and as much as 50 MPG on the highway.

Nothing that’s not a hybrid can match this performance today.

I looked at Auto Trader again and found this CRX. It’s a ’91 model with 50,000 miles. The asking price? $3,550.

These are just a few examples. There are other makes/models from that era – the mid-late 1980s through the early-mid 1990s – that would do about as well. Lightweight economy cars were abundant then, because the government hadn’t yet effectively outlawed them. Sure, they’re not as “safe” as a modern – and much heavier – compact (which by the standards of the ’80s and early ’90s would be upclassed to mid-sized). But that’s only an issue if you get into an accident – and most “accidents” aren’t. They’re the result of driver error – and so, to great extent avoidable. Back then, a buyer could decide that the higher everyday gas mileage of a 1,600 lb. compact was preferable to the theoretical safety advantage of a larger, heavier car. (Theoretical, because it only became a real factor in the event of an accident, which might never happen).

Today, new car buyers are denied that choice. The government has decided for you that gas mileage must take a back seat to “safety” – at your expense, of course.

Luckily, one can still do an end-run around all this by shopping for a high-mileage, low-cost cheapster instead of a mediocre mileage, high-priced “safety” car.
 
Another potential cheapster is the Honda CRX, built from 1983-1991. Like the Geo/Chevy Metro, these cars had tiny engines (1.3-1.5 liters) because they had very low curb weights - 1,713 lbs. for the HF version. These cars, which also had more sophisticated engines than the Metro, were capable of 41 MPG in city driving and as much as 50 MPG on the highway.

Gahhhh....loved my CRX. No power steering/brakes, but god damn--the gas mileage was fantastic and it handled so well. I was a dumbass to get rid of it. In comparison to something like the Metro, it was also quite substantial.
 
I bought two metros over the past few years. The 2000, 3 cyclinder purchased in 2010 is my regular drive at around 40 mpg combined (except when I use the air). Paid $1500 for the little sponge and slapped an $800 yellow paint job on her. The car looks nearly new and people are always asking me where I got it. Craigs List of course for folks who want to buy cheap and take their chances. The car had 123k when I bought and now is over 140k. No problems whatsoever and the boards say with good maintenance they routinely go 250k or more. I may move over to a new Chevy Spirit when they come out this summer. If I do, I'll probably end up selling the metro for more than I paid originally. Great little cars.
 
Since I have been traveling around 35k miles each year, I only buy used cars for under $1,500. I like bigger cars though as I sacrifice economy for comfort and speed. The last one was a 95 Cadillac STS that was getting around 28 MPG and up to 34 if I stayed out of the throttle (hard to do though). I payed $1,200 and sold it a year later for $1,100...lol
The car before that was a 98 Lumina. It looked like a police cruiser and got 30 mpg. Bought it for $1,200 and sold it 2 years later for $800
Before that was a 99 Bonneville with 80k miles that actually got 36 mpg. Payed $1,500 and drove it until it had 192k miles. Sold it for $600 with a bad transmission..lol

I have been doing this for the last 15 years.

Cars are like bic lighters...take the money you save and buy a motorcycle...lol
 
its not their safety that bars them. its their emissions. EPA is the problem with the lack of diesel options in the USA. Super duty trucks are exempt from emission standards which is why diesels dominate in the 3/4 ton and up truck category.
 
The auto industry is pathetic. If there was a real market, they would be selling us cheap cars for say $1,000-$2,000 that get at least hundreds of miles to the gallon. Obama should not be able to get away with saying he saved the auto industry. He should have done the exact opposite. He should have put Ford and GM out of business and eliminated most regulations.

Hybrids are a scam. First of all, the technology is nothing special. Its just a slightly more efficient car. Thats it. And you have to pay a lot extra to get it. Whats the point of paying a lot extra just to save a little? Seems stupid to me.
 
wytze-mk2jetta-1.jpg


hard to beat an old turbo diesel
 
hard to beat an old turbo diesel

This is true, especially if you're in a warm climate. The old vw diesels, you could hear them start a quarter mile away, but they just kept going. The newer ones are turbocharged and are much quieter. They easily match the mileage of these hybrids.
 
just for the record, my understanding is that how they measure that MPG rating is different than US. in US standards that is actually 65MPG.

That isn't a factory or government rating, that's what people have actually achieved.

Granted, it was an "economy rally" but still, 87 MPG from standard technology?

That's pretty impressive no matter what.

PUTTING economy driving into practise was the aim of a group of drivers who took part in a Wexford to Dublin charity challenge. The Charity Eco-Drive Challenge was won by a driver who achieved a fuel economy figure of 87 mpg while driving a Ford Focus 1.6 TDCi Style.

Organised in December by Ger Boland and Enda Newport from Ford dealer Boland’s of Ferrybank, Wexford, the Charity Eco-Drive Challenge saw six drivers tasked with driving from Wexford to Dublin (Stillorgan Park Hotel) and back to Wexford using as little fuel as possible.

Each driver’s fuel consumption was analysed and from the six drivers, Michael Forde of Curracloe, Co Wexford, came out on top with the most economic result of 87 mpg for the round trip. Among the six participants, the range of fuel consumption figures achieved went from Michael’s 87 mpg to 64 mpg.
To ensure fair play, each of the six participants drove the same route in identical Focus 1.6 TDCi models of the same age and similar mileage. The winning driver was given the option of nominating a charity to receive a donation of €1,000. Michael nominated the Wexford Women’s Refuge to receive an early Christmas present.

Speaking about his strategy for the challenge, Michael Forde said: “I wasn’t too concerned about maintaining a steady speed, the secret to eco-driving is engine revs.

“So long as I could keep the engine revs in the range of approximately 1500 to 1800, I knew that I would end up with a very respectable fuel consumption figure.”

Michael also highlighted tyre pressure as being another important element: “Most motorists don’t realise it but incorrect pressure settings mean more fuel used.”

The Ford Focus 1.6 TDCi Style with alloy wheels, air conditioning, fog lights and Bluetooth, is available for around €21,750 (about $28,000 at today's rate)

http://blog.fuelclinic.com/2010/01/03/87-mpg-while-driving-a-ford-focus/

Now, people, here is the key to a 100+ mpg vehicle:

“So long as I could keep the engine revs in the range of approximately 1500 to 1800, I knew that I would end up with a very respectable fuel consumption figure.”

A true diesel electric hybrid, meaning that no motive power to the driving wheels comes from the engine at all, could get 100 MPG or more, because a small diesel engine, running at maximum efficiency and RPM could be used to power a generator to deliver electric power to the drive wheels and charge back up batteries as well.
 
its not their safety that bars them. its their emissions. EPA is the problem with the lack of diesel options in the USA. Super duty trucks are exempt from emission standards which is why diesels dominate in the 3/4 ton and up truck category.

In the case of the UK Ford Diesel Focus, it is both.

EPA won't allow import or production due to emissions and NHTSA (Thanks a lot, Nader and Nixon) won't allow import or production due lack of required number, placement, and type of airbags and lack of 5 MPH collision bumpers.
 
Last edited:
The auto industry is pathetic. If there was a real market, they would be selling us cheap cars for say $1,000-$2,000 that get at least hundreds of miles to the gallon. Obama should not be able to get away with saying he saved the auto industry. He should have done the exact opposite. He should have put Ford and GM out of business and eliminated most regulations.

Hybrids are a scam. First of all, the technology is nothing special. Its just a slightly more efficient car. Thats it. And you have to pay a lot extra to get it. Whats the point of paying a lot extra just to save a little? Seems stupid to me.

Not Ford. It was Chevy and GM that got bailed out.
 
Not Ford. It was Chevy and GM that got bailed out.

I never said Ford got bailed out. I said we should get rid of them. Putting in place a system based on competition would easily drive them out of business.
 
Last edited:
I never said Ford got bailed out. I said we should get rid of them.

You said Obama should have put them out of business. I assumed you actually meant that he should have let the business cycle run a natural course, not that he should have used his almighty powers to quash them. My bad, I guess, and I disagree to boot.
 
You said Obama should have put them out of business. I assumed you actually meant that he should have let the business cycle run a natural course, not that he should have used his almighty powers to quash them. My bad, I guess, and I disagree to boot.

I edited my last post. He shouldn't give Ford the death penalty without just cause, however, if he put in place a system based on competition, Ford would go out of business.
 
I edited my last post. He shouldn't give Ford the death penalty without just cause, however, if he put in place a system based on competition, Ford would go out of business.

Without just cause? You think Obama should be able to shut down an industry?

And since Ford has improved, I'd actually want a Ford over most any other vehicle. They've surpassed Honda, Toyota and Volkswagen in many ways--styling, reliability, safety, etc. I don't buy new cars though, so I'd have to look at used when my Honda finally dies.
 
Back
Top