#1 clunked car? The 1998 Ford Exploder!

[redrumloa]

Yes, #2 is the 1997 Ford Exploder, #3 is the 1996 For Exploder.

http://autos.yahoo.com/articles/autos_c ... RyYWRlcw--

 

[faethor]

Makes sense to me. Ford Explorer is one if the most popular vehicles sold. It lead the charge into the SUV popularity. Also, it's reliability is fairly good so likely would be able to be driven into the dealership. A requirement of a 'clunker'. Other popular cars of the late 90s -- the Accord and Camry for example, got more than 18MPG. As such they'd qualify for less or prehaps no rebate.

Cash for Clunkers has been a highly successful program. I wish there was a bigger rebate for those who'd buy an American car. GM has lots of cars that get over 28MPG, for example.

 

[redrumloa]

GM has lots of cars that get over 28MPG, for example.

GM, an American car?

Anyhow 28MPG is a joke in my book, VW has a model that gets 58MPG and it is not a hybrid. My VW gets 44MPG and it has balls.

 

[faethor]

GM has lots of cars that get over 28MPG, for example.

GM, an American car?

I agree what an American car is, is blurred. Fords are made in Canada and Mexico. GM makes quite a bit not in the USA. Where Honda and Toyota do quite a bit of US manufacturing for US sold vehicles. Subaru's US plant is supposedly one of the friendliest in the world. Though all those vehicles are foreign owned.

Anyhow 28MPG is a joke in my book, VW has a model that gets 58MPG and it is not a hybrid.

28MPG is a joke. The model T got 25MPG so that's 3MPG improvement in what 85 years? My understanding is that VW's Mexican plant is not receiving diesel parts for the next month or so. VW doesn't make many diesels and they're fairly popular with a small crowd. Due to these it's my understanding VW diesels will for all practical purposes miss out on the 'Cash for Clunkers' program.

My VW gets 44MPG and it has balls.

So do gay men. So what are you saying...

 

[ltstanfo]

My understanding is that VW's Mexican plant is not receiving diesel parts for the next month or so. VW doesn't make many diesels and they're fairly popular with a small crowd. Due to these it's my understanding VW diesels will for all practical purposes miss out on the 'Cash for Clunkers' program.

Sad but true. My local VW dealer is particpating in the program but they cannot get enough diesels. As fast as they get one, they sell it. I took my VW in for service this morning and a salesman tried to buy it from me while it was being inprocessed to the service bay!

Here's hoping that once the new VW plant in Tennessee (outside Chattanooga) is finished we will start to see more diesels in the US!

Regards,
Ltstanfo

 

[Glaucus]

GM has lots of cars that get over 28MPG, for example.

GM, an American car?

I agree what an American car is, is blurred. Fords are made in Canada and Mexico. GM makes quite a bit not in the USA. Where Honda and Toyota do quite a bit of US manufacturing for US sold vehicles. Subaru's US plant is supposedly one of the friendliest in the world. Though all those vehicles are foreign owned.

Ya, but does that matter? Like you said, buying a Toyota keeps American workers working. I think right now there's really no such thing as domestic or foreign, they're all global car makers. And the auto industry is so much more then the manufacturers, there's the marketing agencies, the after market market and the swarms of mechanics out there, not to mention the junk yards. All those industries feed their families just as well with "domestic" or "foreign" cars.

 

[redrumloa]

I took my VW in for service this morning and a salesman tried to buy it from me while it was being inprocessed to the service bay!

The exact same thing happened to me when I had my VW serviced at that same dealership! The guy was persistant, he was serious!

 

[faethor]

New cars purchased by Cash for Clunkers is the Ford Focus. Others rounding out the top are the Civic, Corolla, Camry, and Accord, as you may have guessed.

Ford Hybrid Escape appears to be on the top 10 purchased vehicle list.

 

[ilwrath]

28MPG is a joke. The model T got 25MPG so that's 3MPG improvement in what 85 years?

I'm sorry to take a tangent here, but this quote bugs the hell out of me. Have you even seen a Model T? It had (barely) 20 horsepower, safety features rivaling a pushbike, an unreachable published top speed of 45 mph (in reality, you'd be lucky to break 35), and weighed something around 1200 pounds, depending on configuration. Building a car today to those lofty performance specifications can net you over 100 mpg, easily.

The truth is, we demand a bit more out of our cars, though. There's things like safety regulations, practical speed and acceleration requirements, and modern comforts.

28 mpg is fairly easily attainable for a modern car, but it's far from a joke. Consider you'd need all required safety features, all modern comfort features (power steering, air conditioning, etc). This mandates a weight nearing 3000 pounds (approx 2.5x the model T). Then consider you'd need a published top speed of over 100 (around 2 to 2.5x the Model T) and a reality top speed over 80 mph (again, 2 to 2.5x the Model T).

So the Model T did well less than half the work of a modern car. And that isn't even taking into consideration things like wind resistance that force you to need a LOT more than twice the energy to reach 80 mph versus 40 mph.

(And, another side note, sure, turbo Diesels get great mileage. Of course, they also have an energy density bonus there. Take that away, and there's only about a 10 - 20% improvement. Not much different from a small turbo petrol engine, vs. a larger petrol naturally aspirated model. And have fun with the added costs and tolerances required to accommodate that extra cylinder pressure.)

 

[faethor]

28MPG is a joke. The model T got 25MPG so that's 3MPG improvement in what 85 years?

I'm sorry to take a tangent here, but this quote bugs the hell out of me. Have you even seen a Model T? It had (barely) 20 horsepower, safety features rivaling a pushbike, an unreachable published top speed of 45 mph (in reality, you'd be lucky to break 35), and weighed something around 1200 pounds, depending on configuration. Building a car today to those lofty performance specifications can net you over 100 mpg, easily.

While the Model T started out around 1200 it gained weight to 1500. So what would we compare it to today?

Smart car.. $12-$25K depending on configuration. 1600 pounds (100 lbs heavier) 70HP and 33/41MPG. Of course in an accident I'd choose the Smart over the Model T but I wouldn't want to be in either.

As for wind resistance the Smart is at a definite advantage to the Model T, block on wheels. The Model T would be about $3,200 in today's dollars. Which is about where a 20HP lawn mower is today.

 

[Glaucus]

According to Wikipedia, the Model-T had a fuel efficiency rating ranging from 13-21 MPG. It doesn't explain the reason for the range, but it may be just the difference between city & highway, OR different models. Either way, 25MPG seems rather generous.